BaylyBlog: Out of our minds, too...

All the pretty language: Redeemer ordains women

David & Tim Bayly — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:24:33 -0500

(David) The brazen nature of Tim Keller's revolt against PCA polity, never mind Scriptural teaching, is on clear display in this video of an "ordination" ceremony for deacons/deaconesses in May of this year.

Thanks to Andrew Barnes of Tchula PCA for finding this video and for locating the following within it:

(0:03) Male and female deacons installed together

(0:13) Deb, elected a female deacon, is used to represent further deacons being installed later that morning. Pastor states: "Deb is assuming the Diaconal Role this morning."

(0:20) Nominated by members of Redeemer just as other elders and deacons

(0:28) Extensive Training Process

(0:35) Interviewed by other officers of the Church

(0:41) Elected by vote of congregation

(1:17) Deaconess for Deb is an extraordinary calling

(1:34) She is charged

(4:26) Six Ordination Questions are asked to the woman

(5:09) The Pastor clearly uses the word 'ordination' in regard to what is going on

(6:02) The members of Redeemer promise and covenant to yield obedience to her

What are we to conclude in the face of such explicit evidence of Pastor Keller's inability to conform practice to rhetoric?

Nine months prior to the service recorded in the video above Keller wrote in ByFaith, the PCA's denominational magazine, "(I)s the biblical evidence...enough to make a case for women tobe ordained to the diaconate in the PCA? I would say no. I affirm and support the PCA’s belief in male headship in the home and church. I would never want to see our denomination compromise its support of this biblical complementarianism."

Yet eight months later--and just one month before his "debate" with Ligon Duncan over the ordination of deaconesses at the 2009 General Assembly of the PCA--Keller's church ordains, rather than commissions, women deacons.

Keller writes in ByFaith, "I believe--like the RPCNA--that biblically, deacons are appointed to service, not to juridical authority."

Yet Redeemer expects her members to "yield authority" to women deacons, the same commitment made in the installation vows for a pastor or ruling elder.

The issue here is not merely one of polity and biblical offices, it's one of honesty. Either Tim Keller doesn't know what his church is doing or he's misrepresenting his practices and position.

Why same-sex intimacy is sin...

David & Tim Bayly — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:32:59 -0500

(Tim) This evening I received the following e-mail from a reader of the post, "Christianity Left Behind." Although I sent an initial brief response to my correspondent covering several matters, I also told him I would post his e-mail here asking our other readers to assist with the work. Would you, dear readers, please help by posting responses to the questions here asked, with loving clarity pointing this lost soul to the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ? I'd be grateful.

I'm not as convinced as you are that the Scriptures unequivocally condemn homosexuality, but I think your position has a practical problem that nobody on your side of the argument is addressing.

With sins like adultery and greed, it's readily apparent from the harm they do why God says not to do them. It takes no intelligence whatsoever to see that a society in which murder or theft were acceptable would not long survive.

That's not true of homosexuality...

If you take the Bible out of it, there is absolutely no reason why the tiny minority of men who are attracted to other men shouldn't seek the same happiness that comes from sexual relationships as do men who are attracted to women. Practiced responsibly, homosexuality does no more harm than responsibly-practiced heterosexuality.

And people know this. At this point probably everyone has gay friends, relatives, classmates, co-workers or neighbors who are decent, honorable people, and they can't for the life of them figure out why those gay people they know and love aren't entitled to the same pursuit of happiness as they themselves.

So here's what it comes down to: You believe the Bible condemns homosexuality and so for you it's a doctrinal issue. The problem is that your doctrine has no obvious supporting rational basis. In fact, it's absurd on its face. And the reason you're losing the culture war on this issue is that your side is making what, apart from your Scriptural interpretation, is a completely ludicrous argument. It's a tactical and practical problem your side really needs to address.

Sincerely,

"Once you've lost that clientele"...

David & Tim Bayly — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:54:30 -0500

(Tim, w/thanks to DC) Ted Haggard is welcomed into a pulpit. Tragically, note this view of Gospel ministry unbelievers are left with:

"You could make a career out of your reformed fallen Christian life," said David Edward Harrell, a retired Auburn University history professor who studies charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity. "What you can't do is go back and do the same thing. Once you've lost that clientele, it's lost."

Semper reformanda: the next step...

David & Tim Bayly — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:58:04 -0500

(Tim: This from Rev. Andrew Webb) After two meetings of debate, yesterday (Oct. 27, 2009) Central Carolina Presbytery passed the following overture to the 38th General Assembly by a twenty-eight vote margin:

Overture to the 38th Presbyterian Church in America General Assembly
Amend Book of Church Order 9-7

1. Whereas the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) is grateful to God for the outstanding and selfless work done by the women of PCA congregations and freely acknowledges that the ability of the church to minister to a lost and dying world depends in large part on the self-sacrificing volunteer spirit of our female members; and

2. Whereas the PCA also believes that, the officers of the Church, by whom all its powers are administered, are, according to the Scriptures, teaching and ruling elders and deacons (Book of Church Order 1-5) and that in accord with Scripture, these offices are open to men only (BCO 7-2); and

3. Whereas the PCA believes that scripture teaches that the officers of the church are to be ordained not commissioned. (BCO 17,12-5, 8-6); and...

4. Whereas while some Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod (RPCES) congregations had women on their diaconates, the RPCES resolved as part of the joining and receiving agreement with the PCA to "Amend the existing doctrinal standards and Form of Government of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod, by substituting for them the doctrinal standards and Book of Church Order of the Presbyterian Church in America" * ; and

5. Whereas several churches in the PCA currently elect and commission women to the office of deacon and call them by the title deacon or deaconess and allow them to serve on the diaconate; and

6. Whereas BCO 9-7, which states that women may be selected and appointed by the session of a church to serve as assistants to the deacons, is often cited as pretext for this practice of electing and commissioning female deacons; and

Therefore, Central Carolina Presbytery hereby overtures the 38th General Assembly to amend BCO Chapter 9-7 by adding the words

"These assistants to the deacons shall not be referred to as deacons or deaconesses, nor are they to be elected by the congregation nor formally commissioned, ordained, or installed as though they were office bearers in the church."

So that the revised version would read:

9-7. It is often expedient that the Session of a church should select and appoint godly men and women of the congregation to assist the deacons in caring for the sick, the widows, the orphans, the prisoners, and others who may be in any distress or need. These assistants to the deacons shall not be referred to as deacons or deaconesses, nor are they to be elected by the congregation nor formally commissioned, ordained, or installed as though they were office bearers in the church.

* Documents of Synod: Study Papers and Actions of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod--1965 to 1982, pp.476-477

* * *

(Pastor Andrew Webb continues)

As you are all probably well aware, BCO 9-7 is currently being used as a loophole by churches to create their own office of deaconess. These "deaconesses" are in most cases indistinguishable from deacons and often serve as the "Chief Deacons" or heads of the diaconate. In several churches the majority of deacons are now women and in a few, like Redeemer NYC, they are doing things most of us would feel uncomfortable having ordained male deacons do (such as membership interviews, being the people who speak with inquirers after the service, etc.)

Rather than becoming less common, the practice is spreading, and as Bryan Chapell hinted in his recent article in byFaith the next generation of ministers tend to be very sympathetic to this practice. In the vote on this overture in Central Carolina Presbytery, yesterday, this was starkly illustrated by the fact that the overwhelming majority of ministers under fifty spoke in favor of commissioned deaconesses and voted against the overture. Without older TE's (pastors) and RE's (elders) being present, it would have failed.

I'd also encourage you to read this web page from The City's Gate Presbyterian Church's website (City's Gate is a congregation of the PCA located in Harrisburg, PA) were they openly discuss their deaconesses as well as their belief that what they refer to as this "more biblical" practice is going to spread.

Either we stop the practice soon, or in my opinion we won't have the support necessary to do so in the future. In a few years, the frog will have been thoroughly boiled. All we have to do in order to end up with female ordination is nothing at all.

What we need now is for several other Presbyteries to send the same, or a similar overture to the 38th GA, because without a significant number of "co-sponsors" I seriously doubt this overture will make it out of the Overtures Committee alive. It is going to get a huge amount of resistance from the administration as it is. We sent this overture forward early specifically because we wanted as many other presbyteries as possible to get on board.

Thanks for your consideration.

Your Servant in Christ,

Teaching Elder Andy Webb

Redeemer plays deek-a-boo...

David & Tim Bayly — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:23:29 -0500

(Tim) This e-mail just went out to the members of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City over the signature of the church's pastor, Tim Keller. The e-mail's purpose is to solicit nominations of men and women for church office. Nominations are to be sent to Jenny Chang, Redeemer's Director of the Diaconate. And for those not keeping track, Tim Keller is the main proponent of woman officers in the Presbyterian Church in America.

What's written here is one more indication of a promotion and practice of woman officers at Redeemer that's contrary both to Scripture and to our denomination's Constitution.

If anyone's still lost in wishful thinking that the practice of woman officers by Redeemer and her sister churches is nothing more than the implementation of deaconesses defended by Calvin and Warfield, please repeat after me: Deeks. Deeks. Deeks...

Reading this to my wife just now, she thought I'd made the word up. Then, I arrived at Tim Keller's e-mail below and, with shock and disbelief, she exclaimed, "I thought you were making it up. That's astounding!"

Indeed.

New words are hard to learn, aren't they? Speaking only for myself, it took forever to get the hang of 'waiter' for 'waitress' and 'actor' for 'actress'. So I'm not looking forward to the next half a year learning to avoid 'deacon' and 'deaconess', trading them in for the gender-neutered 'deek.'

But hey, Redeemer's hip...

and who wants to be Left Behind?

On the other hand, how will we ever know which deek has been ordained and which hasn't?

Things fall apart, don't they?

* * *

From: Tim Keller [mailto: _______@redeemer.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 ____ PM
To: (Redeemer's members)
Subject: November is Officer Nomination Month

November 2, 2009

Dear Redeemer Member:

As you probably know, November is Redeemer’s officer nomination month. Once a year members have the privilege and opportunity to recommend other members for the offices of elder, deacon and deaconess.

As we enter an exciting chapter in our ministry in NYC through the RENEW Campaign, there are more opportunities to serve than ever before. Identifying new leaders within our congregation has always been a priority at Redeemer, and we need your help to find members who have the right gifts and experience to serve on the Session and the Diaconate.

There are 49 men and women currently serving on the Diaconate and 20 men serving on the Session as ruling elders. These men and women have been elected by the congregation and have gone through theological and practical training to master the skills and the information necessary for these positions.

Elders are men who serve on the Session and provide spiritual and administrative leadership to the congregation through oversight of Redeemer ministries, leaders, and members. 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9.

The primary work of the Diaconate is practical deeds of mercy. Deacons and deaconesses (deeks) [sic] minister to those in our church family who find themselves in distress, crisis or emergency situations caused by illness, job loss, long-term unemployment, or other immediate physical, material, spiritual or emotional needs. Deeks also assist elders with membership interviews, and deaconesses provide input and support to elders working on complicated shepherding situations. Acts 6:1-4 and 1 Timothy 3:8-13.

Your faithful giving to the Mercy Fund over the years enables the Diaconate to care for our congregants during this economic recession. In addition to nominating deek candidates, you can help this ministry by encouraging congregants facing hardship to call the Diaconate Helpline – 212-726-1334.

Accepted nominees will begin training in January of 2010. We are looking for men and women who are members of Redeemer and willing to co-labor with us in these ministries. Please read the description and qualifications of the offices of elder, deacon and deaconess on this pdf or online.

Please prayerfully consider your elder, deacon and deaconess nominations and place a nomination form, with your signature, in the offering basket at any service during the month of November or mail/fax to:

Redeemer Presbyterian Church
Jenny Chang, Diaconate Director
1359 Broadway, 4th floor
New York, NY 10018
Fax 646-572-0020

You may also submit a nomination online.

May God give you discernment as you consider those who may be qualified to serve in these vital roles.

Sincerely,

Dr. Timothy J. Keller
Senior Pastor

Christianity left behind...

David & Tim Bayly — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:23:51 -0500

(Tim, w/thanks to several readers) A prominent evangelical magazine just did a piece on the complaint by Calvin College faculty reps that Calvin's board has issued policy barring members of their faculty from promoting sodomy. The article starts this way:

The homosexuality debate that has torn apart mainline denominations is fanning faculty and student protests at Calvin College, and highlights a growing issue facing evangelical schools.

The magazine, published in Wheaton, continues:

The case is being watched with interest by other (evangelical) schools struggling to balance compassion and doctrine in their policies on gays.

"Struggling to balance compassion and doctrine?" What on earth are they saying?

Well of course, the point is that the evangelical world today is moving toward the normalization of sodomy and the rubric under which it's being done is the silencing of Scripture's denunciation of sodomy as an abomination before the Lord. Other abominations such as fornication, unbiblical divorce and remarriage, and adultery have already been normalized, and now it's sodomy's turn.

The path to normalization is cleared by much talk of compassion with only an occasional tip of the hat to sin and righteousness and judgment. Which is to say that the Holy Spirit is nowhere present in such discussions since "When He comes, He will convict the world of sin and righteousness and judgment."

There's no conviction of sin going on--none at all. Instead, we're busy balancing compassion and doctrine. Wheaton College's "sexuality scholar," Stan Jones, puts it like this...

"I think it's a symptom of the growing lack of consensus about this issue," said Stanton Jones, provost at Wheaton College and a sexuality scholar. "The debates that once were contained within the mainline denominations are spilling over into the evangelical denominations."

Actually it would be better to say that the denial of Scripture formerly reserved for mainline liberals has made much progress among evangelicals. Most evangelicals are liberals, now, although they're lulled to sleep by weekly rest stops in pews where they hear reassuring talk of being "born again" and having "a personal relationship with Jesus." There's no doctrine, though; no membership and submission to elders, no fencing the Lord's Table, no preaching, no repentance; and thus, no Christian faith.

The Christianity of Machen's Christianity and Liberalism has been left behind.

Evangelicalism has become an emotive community, a community of experience and sentiment. It's no longer the Household of Faith, the Church of the Living God, the Pillar and Foundation of the Truth. Balancing compassion and doctrine is really newspeak for killing both compassion and doctrine for the sake of pluralism, inclusivity, diversity and all the other goodies guaranteed to win us acceptance by those on the broad path that leads to destruction.

(Jones of Wheaton College) added that young evangelicals increasingly see homosexuality "not as an issue of sexual morality but as an issue of justice, dignity, or tolerance."

These young evangelicals have been abandoned by their shepherds who were called by God to guard them. They're wandering out on the moors and night is falling, but there's no one who has compassion on them; no one who loves and will give up his life to protect them. The wolves are howling in anticipation of their kill and no man is standing in the gap. Certainly not these professors paid by pious Christian parents who thought if they'd send their precious sons and daughters to their alma mater, they'd be guarded and protected and fed and sanctified.

Instead, these professors are furious that they're being banned from professing sodomy. It's all about academic freedom and intellectual integrity--stuff like that.

For Calvin faculty, the debate goes beyond policy positions to the very mission of the college.

"They are more unified on this than I've seen them unified on anything for a long time," said Karin Maag, vice chair of the Faculty Senate.

Professors wonder why trustees singled out the gay issue, Maag said, adding, "There is a worry among some colleagues that this is the thin edge of the wedge. Will the board of trustees start making statements about other issues?"

Don't worry your little tiny brains, dead consciences, and hardened hearts one bit, precious professors. Your rebellion will do the trick. The trustees will back down, with due consideration to saving face in the process. Then, chastened for their godly leadership, they'll give up the ship. Al Mohler at Southern is the exception that proves the rule.

Dear ones, you have absolutely nothing to fear. There's no Paige Patterson left in the CRC.

Still, as a purely academic exercise, let's ask what "other issues" might have been addressed by godly trustees?

Adultery? Euthanasia? Egalitarian feminism? Greed? Infanticide? Rebellion against authority? Bestiality? Abortion? Fornication? Incest? Can you imagine Calvin's trustees having the temerity to deny their faculty members the privilege of promoting the rebellion of wives against their husbands or fathers having sex with their little daughters?

"Oh my goodness, don't worry about that" says the bad Calvin faculty member. "We're not asking for intellectual integrity and academic freedom to be extended to the promotion of things like bestiality and incest. Just sodomy."

Well, what happens when good CRC men confess to their counselors that their sexual predilection, their orientation is to children--always has been and always will be. That they've tried to repent of it many times, and with tears, but they're the same year in, year out, and they've never known anything else. That God made them differently and their daughter says herself that she wants Daddy's love.

"Here, listen to her for yourself! It's a beautiful thing we have, the two of us."

Good reader, you think this is unfair? You think it would never happen?

Think again. Calvin's professors are already loose among the sheep, devouring souls with their bared fangs of feminism, and they do it with the full knowledge and approval of the shepherds of the sheep. Some good shepherds tried to stop it, tried to warn parents about what these professors were doing to their precious children, but they were silenced and have long since abandoned the ship of the CRC.

Truth is, we all know what's coming. There's just a conspiracy not to mention it among polite company.

Sex between adults and children will be normalized here as it's being normalized right now in Europe. Age of consent is being lowered in Europe and soon it'll be lowered here. Incest, pedophilia, and pederasty are on the agenda and their day will soon come.

But like Hezekiah, most of the shepherds are counting on being dead by then.

The (Calvin) board considered the (faculty) senate's request in late October as members of the Calvin community re-examine what it means to pursue truth at the 4,000-student college owned by the Christian Reformed Church (CRC).

Yes, the CRC does truly "own" all of this at Calvin College and Calvin Seminary--just as the PCA will own a similar mess at Covenant College and Covenant Seminary after woman officers have been normalized across the PCA.

Conversations were catalyzed at Calvin, Wheaton, and other schools in recent years by visits from Soulforce, a national gay advocacy group that toured dozens of Christian colleges.

After Soulforce visited (evangelical) Gordon College in Wenham, Massachusetts, in 2007, students published a volume of stories by gay and lesbian students about their struggles. Gordon encouraged its students to talk with Soulforce but vowed the college would not veer from its policy prohibiting sex outside of male-female marriage.

"Gay and lesbian students?" Will adulterers and pederasts tell their stories next? Will Tony Campolo be invited to give the spiritual emphasis week chapel messages calling faculty and students to confess their pedophobia and bestiaphobia?

...Following the 2007 Soulforce visit, more controversy came to Calvin with Seven Passages, a play about gay Christians conceived and directed by Calvin drama professor Stephanie Sandberg and performed at a Grand Rapids community theater. Drawn from 127 interviews and questioning traditional interpretations of Scripture, it was also performed at the 2008 Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops.

"Gay Christians?" Is this something like polyamorous Christians or incestuous Christians? Are idolatrous Christians and apostate Christians next?

The board's memo affirms the CRC's position that homosexual orientation is not sinful but homosexual practice is. Though alternative views may be aired, it reads, "The position of the church and the college should be clearly and sympathetically presented."

Yes, of course; homosexual orientation is not sin. Sounds great, doesn't it?

But what about incestuous orientation? What about man's wandering lustful eye syndrome--is it a sin? Woman's rebellious orientation--what about that? Pastor's cowardice orientation?

Let's look at this more closely. What is being said when we talk about homosexual orientation not being sin? Is there any other abomination we want to split these hairs over? A man loves murder, thinks of himself as a murderer, dresses like a murderer, identifies himself to others by a murderer's clothing and body gestures, and what he says and how he says it glorifies murder.

The man's identity is bound up with murder and he's known as the fellow who has been made by God with a unique murderer orientation. What about that man? Is he given a pass on everything else as long as he doesn't actually do what he loves, as long as he doesn't commit the abomination at the very heart of his identity?

Brothers and sisters, concepts such as homophobia and homosexual orientation are simply the way false shepherds wink at sodomy and browbeat sincere Christians into silence. It's all so confusing. Who's fool enough to open his mouth and run the risk of having the man with the terminal degree sitting across from him in the Sunday school class accuse him of homophobia or patronize him with a long explanation of the critical distinction between homosexual orientation and homosexual action? Then, he finished his pedantic lecture with a flourish, quoting that most-esteemed church father, Augustine, who said we are to hate the sin, but love the sinner.

It's all so smutty.

(Calvin's) Administrators say they honor that tradition but walk a tightrope between church doctrine and welcoming gay students.

"Parents continually ask, 'Is my gay son or daughter going to be safe here at Calvin?' " said provost Claudia Beversluis...

Oh yes, your child will be as safe at Calvin College as he was safe at your home and church where he was abandoned to homosexual orientation while being cautioned not to have unprotected sex.

Yes, of course he'll be safe--from any call to repentance, that is. Safe from any loving leadership helping him to change his way of speaking, his choice of clothing, his friendships and method of conversation, his reading matter and taste in movies... Yes, if he's a believer he'll be safe from any help with the hard grace of sanctification.

He'll be safe.

Anna, a bisexual Calvin student who asked that her last name not be used, said she fears a chilling effect.

"This memo silences discussion," she said. "You can't deal with the issue unless you're talking about it."

Next year, on its application form Calvin will be asking applicants to check one of three boxes:

Gay.

Bi.

Straight.

"(Calvin College) has been the envy of every other conservative Christian college in the nation," said Nicholas Wolterstorff, a retired philosopher at Calvin and Yale Divinity School.

Yes, and Las Vegas' slot machines are the envy of every deacon collecting the Sunday morning offering plates.

George Marsden, a retired historian at Calvin and the University of Notre Dame, cautioned against making lists of positions faculty may not advocate. Militarism and abortion could also be considered confessional issues, he said.

"There are too many possible issues," Marsden said. "You're stirring up controversy you don't have to have...."

Thank you, friend George. That's just what we needed from the wise old owl--in the face of the promotion of sodomy, a calm, cool, voice of moderation.

"My sense is we ought to have a broadly based discussion of … the relationship between being a confessional college and academic freedom," Byker said.

Yes, yes; always more discussion.

No firings. No terminations. No repudiation of tenure. Only more discussions.

While our precious children are being led to Hell--the place where discussions of abominations have no end.

Director of Planned Parenthood abortuary flees for her life and angels rejoice...

David & Tim Bayly — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:36:00 -0500

(Tim: This post is by Bill Mouser) At first, I thought I was seeing things. On an obscure blog, an entry was headlined “Planned Parenthood Director Leaves, Has Change of Heart.” Clicking on the link brought me to a page at the web site for KBTX, a television station in the Bryan/College Station area of Texas where Texas A&M has its campus. The headline was still ambiguous, but the story certainly was not: Abby Johnson, who worked for Planned Parenthood for eight years, the last two as the director of the Planned Parenthood abortuary, had resigned her post on October 8, because she found herself participating in an ultra-sound assisted abortion in the Planned Parenthood “clinic.”

The story has been growing some legs for a while. For several hours it was featured on the front page of the Drudge Report, which linked to a video report archived at Breitbart.com. Breitbart's headline was far less ambiguous: “Planned Parenthood Leader Resigns After Watching Ultrasound of Abortion Procedure.” As of mid-afternoon on November 3, Google News had archived 65 versions of the story.

Two things are prominent in the story of Abby Johnson's change of heart...

First, Planned Parenthood is a business financed by abortions. In the KXTB report, “[Abby Johnson] said she thought the nonprofit was changing its business model because it took a hit in the rough economy. 'The money wasn't in family planning, the money wasn't in prevention, the money was in abortion and so I had a problem with that,' said Johnson. Johnson says she was told to focus on getting more abortions in the door, something she recently became convicted about.”

Fox News' reported that “without a doctor in residence, [Johnson] said, her clinic offered abortions only two days a month, but the doctor could perform 30 to 40 procedures on each day he was there. Johnson estimated that each abortion could net the branch about $350, adding up to more than $10,000 a month.”

Second, Abby Johnson's testimony of her conversion turns on the authentic humanity of the baby who is murdered. What sealed Abby Johnson's changed conviction was an unexpected participation in an ultra-sound assisted abortion. The abortuary was short on staff that day, and she was recruited to join a physician from Austin by holding an ultra-sound wand on the pregnant woman's belly to assist the physician in the abortion. Abby was able to watch what was happening on the ultrasound screen; and what she saw was a baby struggling to get away from the doctor's instruments which were tearing his body into small pieces.

As soon as the murder of the baby was completed, Abby left the clinic and went immediately across the street to the office of the Brazos Valley Coaltion for Life where she broke down in tears.

Planned Parenthood has filed temporary restraining orders against both Johnson and the Coalition for Life. A prepared statement released by Planned Parenthood says “We regret being forced to turn to the courts to protect the safety and confidentiality of our clients and staff, however, in this instance it is absolutely necessary.” Note the ironic claim of victimhood by an organization which daily murders and disposes of hundreds of baby boys and girls. A hearing on the TRO is set for November 10

In the midst of life we are in death...

David & Tim Bayly — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:41:52 -0400

(Tim) Please pray for David and Cathron Dodrill and their children as they mourn the loss of their oldest son, Stephen Dodrill, who died in an ATV accident late this afternoon.

Thou knowest, Lord, the secrets of our hearts. Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on us.

From the Book of Common Prayer:

When they come to the Grave while the Corpse is made ready to be laid into the Earth, the Minister shall say, or the Minister and Clerks shall sing.

Man, that is born of a woman, hath but a short time to live, and is full of misery. He cometh up, and is cut down, like a flower; he fleeth as it were a shadow, and never continueth in one stay.

In the midst of life we are in death: of whom may we seek for succour, but of thee, O Lord, who for our sins art justly displeased?

Yet, O Lord God most holy, O Lord most mighty, O holy and most merciful Saviour, deliver us not into the bitter pains of eternal death.

Thou knowest, Lord, the secrets of our hearts, shut not thy merciful ears to our prayer; but spare us, Lord most holy, O God most mighty, O holy and merciful Saviour, thou most worthy Judge eternal, suffer us not, at our last hour, for any pains of death, to fall from thee.

Historical markers along the path of sexual perversion...

David & Tim Bayly — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:23:00 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to James) Thinking beyond the obvious, those who have trained themselves in discernment will see where the wickedness of our culture will lead us and our children in the coming years. Seeing the mile markers that have flashed by, the trajectory before us will be clear.

First, the church embraced fornication; then it was on to divorce and sinful remarriage. Next came the weekly consumption of soft pornographic television shows in our families' living rooms, followed by the ubiquitous secret viewing of internet pornography by the church's sons and husbands.

On the other side of the sexual divide, women wanted relationships and children so we stopped blushing at the mention of artificial insemination and single parent adoption. It became perfectly respectable for women with little prospect of marriage to choose to become mothers...

Some of the children they bore themselves, but an increasing number of these fatherless little ones were purchased by women who, in our terribly modern world, had more than enough money and discipline to get what they wanted.

It wasn't all about fleshly lusts and mother-hunger, though. Words came into play, also. The deconstruction of "sex" was followed by the embracing of its replacement--what all of us now refer to as "gender." Being oh-so-gentle in our Christian witness, when haters of our Heavenly Father denounced the hard binary reality of man or woman, male or female, husband or wife which directed our attention to hard biological realities--to genitals, actually--we proved our sensitivity and compassion by tipping our hat to the new constitution.

'Sex' was out and 'gender' was in. Sex was binary and hard, while gender was a continuum and infinitely plastic, submitting to each man doing what was right in his own eyes. Everyone was free to choose the point on the continuum where he, she, or it felt most comfortable.

Cold hearted orb who rules the night,

removes the colors from our sight;

red is gray and yellow white,

but we decide which is right, and which is an illusion.

So now, we're in the middle of the gentrification of sodomy--that sin that God Almighty calls "an abomination" (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Deuteronomy 22:5).

There's little question where we'll go next.

An apology, plus a note on comments in the black hole...

David & Tim Bayly — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:16:53 -0400

(Tim) Good readers, I apologize for two posts that were auto-posted this morning before they were complete. Andrew Henry's been in the trunk line for way too long and I was excited to see he had completed his post, only to see that, actually, he hadn't (as some of you noted in the comments). I'd set dates on many incomplete posts many months ago and when that date rolled around--October 31st, today--the posts went up automatically. Sorry. Shut up. My brain hurts. Sorry...

Andrew's promised he'll be back with his finished post, along with pics of his craftmanship (custom basses) very soon. We wait with baited breath.

The second post that went up unintentionally was "Historical markers..." In this case, though, I'm going to leave it up hoping readers will bring it to completion.

Finally, some (regrettably including the eminent Bill Mouser) continue to have problems with their comments getting pulled aside by TypePad's spaminator...

Sorry, but there's nothing I can do about it. And because I'm not on the blog all the time, I won't necessarily catch the mistake. So please tell me about it. If you post a comment and, after fifteen minutes or so, you don't see it up, please send me an e-mail. When you let me know, I'll check to see if it's in the spaminator queue. If so, I can override it and post it myself.

The one problem with that is that it will be posted according to the time you wrote it, originally, rather than the time I do the override. This means it will be up the line a bit from the latest comments and may not even appear on the home page list of comments. The fix for this?

Get my attention, then post the comment once more. Likely the spaminator will eat your comment again, but this time I'll be watching and approve it immediately, making your pearls appear as the latest and bestest.

Thanks for your patience.

Calvin's best and brightest: bestiality, sodomy, and cannibalism...

David & Tim Bayly — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:37:09 -0400

(Tim) What do you say when Calvin College's confessional Protestant and Reformed faculty members have a hissy fit over their trustees' adoption of a policy barring them from advocating sodomy? What about bestiality--would these magnificent minds object to a policy barring them from advocating sex with animals? And cannibalism--would it be an infringement on academic freedom if they were barred from advocating the haute cuisine of the raft of the Medusa?

One of these is just like the others.

Keep in mind every Calvin faculty member promises, as a condition of his employment, that he will...

live and teach "in fidelity to the Word of God as interpreted in the ecumenical creeds and the Reformed confessions. And that the Handbook for Teaching Faculty states: "Calvin College faculty members are required to sign a synodically approved Form of Subscription in which they affirm the three forms of unity - the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dort - and pledge to teach, speak, and write in harmony with the confessions."

As I said before, Calvin should fire all the faculty members who feel it's a violation of their academic freedom to be barred from advocating sodomy. Let them take it to the AAUP and see what real liberals have to say about it. My guess is only CRC members could be this blind to the plain meaning of Scripture and the Three Forms of Unity.

Kamilla notes that Steve Hutchens gets it right.

The dangers of insomnia...

David & Tim Bayly — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:56:44 -0400

(Tim: This post by our dear sister, Kamilla Ludwig.)

So, here I am at something past 5 am with insomnia for the third night running. I never know what to do, but it seems the best solution is to get out of bed and out of my bedroom for a while. I usually come downstairs to surf the internet. It's amazing the number of people who are voluntarily up at this hour on a regular basis! So, tonight (this morning, rather), with all the news and gossip about the Vatican's offer to disaffected Anglicans, I checked on an AMiA-related blog I hadn't read in a while to see what was going there.

AAAAARRRGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They aren't discussing married Anglican priests becoming RC priests and how this is the end for clerical celibacy -- nooooo sirreee Bobby. They're discussing Mark Driscoll and Doug Wilson (now isn't that an interesting pairing?) and how evil complementarians are for encouraging -- or, alternatively -- ignoring wife abuse. The blogmaster is making a valiant effort to keep them honest (God bless him!), but it seems to be the lie which simply will not die...

[Now, this is interesting! When I tried to google who said, "If you tell a big enough lie often enough . . ." one of the first links to come up was a blog about false memory syndrome. Just hold that thought for a moment and the connection will make sense.]

And then, there she was. A woman I have encountered before who tells the story of an horrifically controlling husband before they both discovered the wonders of Egalitarianism. She makes it sound as if Complementarianism made him do it. Now, please, please, please don't go misconstruing me, again (you know who you are). The first time I heard this woman's story, I did have quite a bit of sympathy for her. But now, I've run across her telling it so many times in so many different places, I have to wonder if it has become her schtick, her calling card, her bid for another sympathy fix.

And that's when the danger really started. That's when I started thinking about how often this really happens. OK, so I get it. I know Egalitarians think Complementarianism is a set up for abuse, that pastors know this and they refuse to do anything about it for fear of losing their precious places of honor. Don't you deny it, we've all seen those claims too often to believe your denials. Now here's the thing. Have you ever wondered where these Egalitarians find all these horrible pastors and husbands? Scratch the surface of an Egal and you'll find a woman who has experienced abuse at the hands of a male authority figure (father, brother, husband, pastor). And sometimes the abuse is genuine. My point is not to deny that.

Now here comes the other side of the equation, so to speak. Is there something inside Egalitarians which makes them seek out these abusers? Is that how they justify turning their backs on what the Church has always taught? And then, do some Egalitarians seeing this abuse industry spring up around them begin to believe their father who might have been a bit too harsh for their tastes was actually abusive? Or maybe it was their pastor who (they say) knew abuse was going on in their marriage but refused to deal with it?

I don't know, but the tales of past abuse coming out of the Egalitarian camp begin to look suspicious for their frequency. Ask an Egalitarian and I'll bet you'll find a tale of some sort of past abuse. Go ahead, try it. Hang around with any half dozen of them long enough and seven of them will tell you how mean their father was or how controlling their husband was or how their pastor ignored their cries for help. Go ahead, prove me wrong.

Michael Jackson, hip-hop, and slam poets...

David & Tim Bayly — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:57:31 -0400

(Tim) Gospel rappers/preachers like shai linne have their roots in slam poetry. From the "Poetry Slam" Wikipedia entry:

In a poetry slam, members of the audience are chosen by an M.C. or host to act as judges for the event. After each poet performs, each judge awards a score to that poem. ...Poetry slams can feature a broad range of voices, styles, cultural traditions, and approaches to writing and performance. Some poets are closely associated with the vocal delivery style found in hip-hop music.... One of the goals of a poetry slam is to challenge the authority of anyone who claims absolute authority over literary value. No poet is beyond critique, as everyone is dependent upon the goodwill of the audience. Since only the poets with the best cumulative scores advance to the final round of the night, the structure assures that the audience gets to choose from whom they will hear more poetry.... Bob Holman ...once called the movement "the democratization of verse."

Who's critical of slam poetry?

Academic responses to slam have varied. In an interview published in the Paris Review, literary critic Harold Bloom called the movement "the death of art." In response, poet and critic Victor D. Infante wrote...: [The death of art] is a big onus to place on anybody, but Bloom has always had a propensity for (reactionary) generalizations and burying his bigotries beneath 'aesthetics'...

Ah, yes; "burying his bigotries beneath 'aesthetics.' That's a big one in the world of the truly reformed...

I like to put it this way: "All an Englishman's prejudices are a matter of principle!" Hitting the table with your fist when you say "principle" brings clarity to the meaning.

Then, there's this:

In a 2005 interview, one of slam's best known poets Saul Williams praised the youth poetry slam movement, explaining: "[H]ip-hop filled a tremendous void for me and my friends growing up... The only thing that prevented all the young boys in the black community from turning into Michael Jackson, from all of us bleaching our skin, from all of us losing it, just losing it, was hip-hop. That was the only counter-existence in the mainstream media. That was essential, and in that same way I think poetry fills a very huge void today [among] youth."

Never liked hip-hop. Reading that paragraph just now changed my mind.

I-mean-like-you-know preaching...

David & Tim Bayly — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:17:44 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to Lucas, Joseph, Michael...) Lucas and Hannah and Joseph and Heidi were together earlier this evening and sent me a link to this comedy club clip by Taylor Mali. Watching it brought on that sickness that always comes when I'm forced to face what men do in the pulpit today.

I'm lacking the vernacular to adequately capture His glory...

David & Tim Bayly — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:23:37 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to Mike, Jake, Jody, and Phil) If you want to see one fulfillment in our own time of Jesus' promise that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church, listen to this proclamation of the Gospel. Makes my heart sing for joy.

CRC schoolmen join the parade...

David & Tim Bayly — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:41:20 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to Andy) Readers may have noted my mention of Grand Rapids in the post on False Shepherd Rob Bell. It was purposeful. When a community committed to confessing the most Biblical doctrine turns its back on God's Word in as flagrant a way as the Christian Reformed Church has turned her back on the Creation order of sexuality, God's future judgment will be as severe as His past blessing. To whom much is given, much shall be required.

For clear signs of that judgment, watch the present history of both the mother country, Holland, and the mother institution of the CRC here in these United States, Calvin College and Seminary.

For instance, the Chronicle of Higher Education reports that Calvin's schoolmen are all in a huff over their trustees forbidding the promotion of sodomy and sodomite marriage by Calvin's faculty members. So Faculty Senate (thanks for the correction, Sue) members took a vote...

and announced their rebellion by the clear majority of 36 in favor, 4 against. In other words, 36 Faculty Senate members think the trustee action barring their faculty from promoting sodomy is an infringement on their academic freedom, and only 4 think the trustees' action is OK.

Check out the comments under another Chronicle news item on Calvin's controversy, particularly this from sabbybabyboy:

As an alumnus of Gordon College, a conservative evangelical Protestant institution in Massachusetts, we went through similar controversies a generation ago over the prospect of Roman Catholic professors! It takes courage to stand up against trustees and an entrenched college administration. I applaud those faculty members at Calvin who are stretching the meaning and practice of academic freedom at their institution. Perhaps change is possible, over time, even at Calvin College; then too, only with a struggle!

Sabbybabyboy is referring to the firing of Elisabeth Elliot's brother, Tom Howard, from his faculty position at Gordon College following his conversion to the Roman Catholic heresy. Readers interested in the justification of Howard's release written by Gordon's Faculty Senate may find it down the page a bit in this post.

We wait expectantly for Covenant College schoolmen to issue prophetic condemnations, clear notes from their bugles, against their corrupt colleagues at their sister institution.

So what's to be done? Well, I'm no expert in these things, but I've read enough history to know poverty is a wonderful institutional cleansing agent. Right now, poverty is Covenant's glory and riches Wheaton's and Calvin's shame.

Observing the accumulation of wealth in Wheaton and Grand Rapids during my lifetime, I'm reminded of Luther's observation:"So our Lord God commonly gives riches to those gross asses to whom He vouchsafes nothing else."

Just one more savage wolf...

David & Tim Bayly — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:20:24 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to David L.) What if a pastor were to take seriously the Apostle Paul's warning to the Ephesian elders:

Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood?

What if he were to read the Apostle Paul's prediction concerning what was about to happen in the church of Ephesus and assume this is also happening in his church right now?

I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears. (Acts 20:28-31)

Would he test himself? Would he ask the Holy Spirit to reveal whether he himself is a hireling, or a good shepherd? Would he be on the alert? Would he look around for savage wolves? For false shepherds speaking perverse things in order to draw away disciples for themselves?

Would he wonder whether anyone in his own congregation could fairly describe his ministry as a "night and day" work of ceaselessly admonishing each of his sheep with tears?

Brothers, the church has always been under attack from both savage wolves and hirelings. And it's the failure of hirelings not to think about who the savage wolves are...

If by accident the hireling finds himself thinking about it, he quickly banishes the thought from his mind lest he find himself up late at night in some parishioner's home shedding tears as he admonishes the precious soul concerning how to recognize and flee from the savage wolf.

What savage wolf?

Well, dear pastors and elders, you tell me. How on earth can we be on guard for ourselves and the blood-bought flock of God if we haven't a clue who the savage wolves are? But if you stop to think about it, isn't it quite convenient that we can't name any names? After all, where there are no names, there's no admonishment needed. And no danger to our work.

There; that's right on the money. No danger to our work.

The bestest way to understand the work of the pastorate today is the avoidance of danger. We flee anything that might jeopardize our 501c3 status, our invitation to give a pre-Assembly workshop, or our selection to be the man who dialogs with our denomination's superstar pastor concerning his promotion of woman officers. We run from any controversy that might get mud on our pants or blood on our shirts. We're clean machines working for the next big thing that might come along. A tall steeple church would be nice.

Well, speaking only for myself, you know, let me name one savage wolf who is not sparing the flock, who is speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after himself. And I simply cannot stop warning my congregants away from him. I do it day and night, with tears.

This savage wolf is Rob Bell and I warn you against him.

His video, Bullhorn Guy, is all anyone should ever need to cause us to flee his smooth, flattering tongue, but those who need more could check out this interview.

Asked what an evangelical is, Bell responds:

I embrace the term evangelical, if by that we mean a belief that we together can actually work for change in the world, caring for the environment, extending to the poor generosity and kindness, a hopeful outlook. That’s a beautiful sort of thing.

No, Rob; evangelical is not a political term. It isn't spiritual shorthand for a card-carrying member of the more numinous part of the Democratic Party. And godly men don't embrace evangelicalism; they confess it knowing the world will hate them for it, and that their confession will be perceived by those who are perishing as a bad smell, a stink, the stench of death. A very ugly thing.

It's apparent Bell hasn't read Lloyd-Jones' What Is an Evangelical? Particularly his statement that evangelicals are Christians who say "no." Bell is incapable of saying "no" to anything or anyone.

Except, of course, those who say "no" to something or someone--particularly if that "no" is said in the Name of Jesus.

Then, there's this:

...there’s a dimension to the sermon in which it’s a kind of performance art. Over the years, I’ve realized that I have as much in common with the performance artist, the standup comedian, the screenwriter, as I do with the theologian. I’m in an odd world where I make things and share them with people.

What spirit is this that has his grasp on Bell? The Spirit of our Lord Jesus Christ? The Holy Spirit? The Spirit that led the Apostle Paul? The Spirit that inspired Jude? Would any of us want our son or daughter to give themselves to Bell as one of his flock? And if not, why isn't our nation filled with shepherds warning the weak and easily deceived away from him?

Instead, churches across our communities are slavishly buying his videos and feeding his wickedness to their small groups, their junior high and high school students. The savage wolf is invited into the sheepfold the better to devour the lambs Christ bought with His Own blood.

Then this:

I think we have enough religious people who are going around trying to convert people.

Bell is against conversion to anyone other than himself. He wants sycophants, not disciples of Christ.

To exist in multicultural America today, let alone to thrive in it as a great spiritual leader, a man must forswear proselytizing. Evangelization used to be at the heart of evangelicalism, but then missional came along and ushered us into...

What? Ushered us into what?

The numinous side of the Democratic Party led there by those two savage wolves, Brian McLaren and Rob Bell. (And don't read this as politically motivated. As Johnson said, all schemes of political improvement are laughable things--Republican and Libertarian as well as Democratic.)

According to Bell then, what is the Gospel? Read on.

I would hope that the Jesus message would come through, hopefully through a full humanity.

Not to get theological on you, but Bell is selling the moral influence view of the Atonement--not the penal substitution taught by God's Word.

Bell is just another flaming liberal cloaking himself in the pastor's robe and collar so he can fleece the sheep without risking danger to himself. Standup comedians have to deal with the whole getting hired thing each week, and then there are the belligerent drunks who insult you. Who needs it when you can stand in front of thousands of sober, clean, middle class, complacent, Grand Rapids whitebreads taking in millions each month? And don't overlook the video royalties, stellar book advances, and honoraria from speaking engagements totaling millions more.

How about the little perks like watching election returns while hanging out with a group of friends in the Caribbean.

In the comments, one man has it wrong and another quite right. First, the wrong:

Nobody rips the Globe more than I do but pieces like this go a long way to providing balance. For too long our media have created this myth about church-going, conservative Republicans being knuckle-dragging neaderthals who don't believe in evolution, are anti-science, racist, etc. People like Bell prove this is not true and we here in the northeast need to be better informed.

Next, the quite right:

Rob Bell has discovered that it is easier to preach like "performance art" and "stand-up comedy" than to reprove, rebuke, and exhort people about their sins. Every generation since Paul has had these kinds of guys who hear the call to scratch people's itching ears instead of telling them the truth of the Gospel. Like all the others, he will some day stand before the Judge with all the people he duped into a false understanding of the truth.

The truth is not only that Rob Bell will soon stand before the Judge of All the Earth and give account for his ministry, but so will I. And you. And every man set apart by the laying on of hands and prayer to the calling of shepherding God's flock.

So, dear brother, are you warning your sheep against the savage wolves seeking to devour them? Are you doing it from house to house? Ceaselessly? Day and night?

With tears?

This is a post of faith--faith in the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling and using men called to the eldership and pastorate as we take up our crosses and do the work of the ministry. I believe in the holy Catholic Church...

Praise God the PCA is not the PC(USA)...

David & Tim Bayly — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:30:50 -0400

(Tim) While we're on church signs, last night Mary Lee and I had dinner with our dear friends, Kent and Sue Scudder in Edmonds, Washington. Just a few blocks from their home we saw this sign out in front of the local PC(USA) congregation. Here's a congregation affiliated with the denomination that, for several decades, now, has officially declared that "abortion can be an act of faithfulness before God," and they dare to claim they stand in a two-thousand year line of submission to the Lord Jesus Christ?

And with the PC(USA)--which I remind readers was my denomination until 1992--this official declaration endorsing the slaughter of unborn children is just the tip of the iceberg of its rebellion against our Lord Jesus Christ.

We did a quick U-turn and drove into the church parking lot to take a this pic. Then we saw the other side of the sign...

and the irony of the thing was too much. Apparently, someone at the Louisville headquarters had neglected to send out the memo informing this congregation of their denomination's endorsement of child-slaughter.

And no, I mean no ill-will to this particular congregation. But ideas have consequences and there's the PC(USA) logo in all its horror of association, prominent on both sides of the sign.

St. Matthews Institutional Baptist Church...

David & Tim Bayly — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:07:48 -0400

(Tim) Mary Lee and I were driving down the street when we saw this sign. I took a pic thinking it must be the world's only church so named, but come to find out there's a new denomination called the Institutional Missionary Baptist Conference of America. You learn something every day.

Can't help wondering: if a denomination starts out institutional, what will decay look like?

Christ Church Ministerial Conference: Elijah's mantle...

David & Tim Bayly — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:37:02 -0400

(Tim) Stephen and Sebra Baker and Mary Lee and I had an excellent time at the Christ Church Ministerial Conference last Thursday and Friday. The conference's subject was "Sexual Orthodoxy" and the MP3s should soon be available from Canon Press.

Make sure you listen to Doug on "The Politics of Fruitfulness" and his son-in-law, Ben Merkle, on "Sentimentalism and the Feminine Ethos." Doug does a good survey of the growing, worldwide birth dearth, following up with the Scriptural doctrine that children are a blessing from the Lord. This cultural critique is needed across the Reformed church, today, where money and degrees are chosen over children. Ben's talk is a helpful reminder of the necessity of letting boys be boys so they may grow up to be leaders (with a particular emphasis on the church). I found all the talks helpful, but thought these two were standouts.

Everything in Moscow isn't the life of the mind, though, and our meals with Doug and Nancy, their children and grandchildren, were a great joy as we see God providing for the leadership of the Church through coming generations. Like the rest of Doug and Nancy's progeny, keep your eyes on Ben. He's a young man married to a strong and prudent wife, Bekah; their children are well-disciplined and happy; and it's obvious God has given him great wisdom. At this point, Ben's plans are to serve in the Academy (meaning New St. Andrews). Spending time with Ben and Bekah, though, I found myself jealous for their gifts to be used in the pastorate.

Then again, what do I know, anyhow?

Summing up, every time we have an opportunity to spend time in Moscow, with Doug and Nancy, their children and grandchildren, and the other members of the CREC/Christ Church/Canon Press/New St. Andrews team, we're reminded our Savior's rule is "by their fruit ye shall know them." Godly homes and families? Living faith? Biblical discernment? Humility? The complete absence of materialism or chest-thumping?

Honestly...

the fruit speaks for itself. I've watched Doug's work for over twenty years, now, and during that time I've found him the most encouraging sign of God's mercy to His Bride in these United States of America.

No, I don't agree with everything Doug's said and done. But have you ever noticed how that statement, that caveat, is used today only for real men who stand for God?

I can't think of a higher compliment than men without chests beginning every statement about me with the words, "You've gotta watch out for that man--he's dangerous!" or "I take strong exception to some of the things he's written..."

Been around long enough to know this hatred for things-Doug didn't start with the Federal Vision. It started when Doug wrote as if lives and souls depended upon his fulfilling his calling with a clearnote and zeal. Right at the gaps in the wall. Like the prophets of old.

For instance, a decade ago I got a ten-page letter from a certain man who will remain nameless ripping Doug's Reforming Marriage to shreds. Or so he thought. At the time, I was the Exec. Director of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and I'd planned to promote Reforming Marriage in CBMW's publications. With the receipt of this letter and being forbidden to recommend or distribute Reforming Marriage, I realized I had to choose between Doug and all CBMW's grand poobahs. It was an easy choice and that day I began to prepare for my resignation.

Still today, the Reformed world is filled with men who demand David and I choose.

Him or me

What's it gonna be?

Here's our answer: in Doug Wilson we recognize the spirit of Dad, Edwards, Knox, Luther, Waldo (Peter), Athanasius, the Apostles, and Elijah. Note. The spirit--not the living embodiment. And shouldn't this spirit be recognizable in every man called to shepherd God's flock?

So now that I've put the fox amongst the chickens, I'm back on the road again. See you all in a few hours...

That hopey-changey thing...

David & Tim Bayly — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:07:32 -0400

(Tim) Thought you might get a kick out of Doug's bumper sticker...

The PCA should have resigned from the NAE a long time ago...

David & Tim Bayly — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:07:01 -0400

(Tim) Earlier this afternoon as a member of Ohio Valley Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America, I received the following letter from the stated clerk of our denomination, Dr. Roy Taylor. As background to the present controversy, readers should know that a number of PCA pastors and elders are not pleased with our denomination holding membership in the National Association of Evangelicals due to the increasingly liberal commitments of its leaders and their high profile public policy statements.

Here at Baylyblog, we've been careful to document this drift: see here, here, here, here, and here. Now, once more, the NAE is flexing its muscle in Washington D.C.--purportedly in our behalf. But this time, it's our own Roy Taylor who is largely claiming responsibility for the statement.

Compared to our readers here at Baylyblog, I'm guessing that I tend to be more liberal than most of you on the issue of immigration.

Still, I repeat: it's time for the PCA to resign membership in the NAE.

Here then is Roy's response to the criticisms he's received for what he and his NAE friends said to the civil authority in our name on this subject of immigration. Yes, I doubt Roy would agree that's what happened...

but it's how I see it having heard the same clarifications for many years while watching the declarations of Biblical justice emanating from the Washington office of my former denomination, the Presbyterian Church (USA).

* * *

Roy Taylor Elaborates on NAE Immigration Resolution

By L. Roy Taylor

On October 8, 2009, the board of directors of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) adopted a resolution on immigration. That was the result of study and discussion by evangelical scholars, churchmen, and ministry practitioners over a period of about 18 months. Shortly after the release of the document, reports from several sources circulated via the Internet asserted that: (1) the NAE advocates open borders, (2) the NAE advocates blanket amnesty, and (3) every denomination that is a member of the NAE endorses open borders and blanket amnesty. These assertions are incorrect.

The PCA is a member of the NAE. As the stated clerk of the General Assembly of the PCA, I am a member of the NAE board of directors. Since October of 2006, I have been serving as the chair of the board and of the executive committee. I chaired the board meeting of October 8, 2009. So I have some insight on the NAE in general and the resolution in particular.

The NAE seeks to model biblical-theological reflection and “civil discourse” on matters Christians face in our ever-changing culture. Immigration is one of those issues. The task of theological reflection is to bring the Holy Scriptures in their explicit teaching and properly derived principles (see Westminster Confession I-6) to bear on matters of faith and life. The NAE Immigration Resolution seeks to combine the compassion toward immigrants required in Mosaic Law and obedience to just laws of civil government required in Romans 13 in our present situation.

The NAE Immigration Resolution of 2009, in my view, is a biblically-based, theologically reflective, carefully balanced, concise document. The Immigration Resolution has a discussion section, an action-steps section, and a listing of resources for study. Those who wish to make an informed decision may find the document on the NAE web site.

In response to the three incorrect assertions:

The Immigration Resolution does not call for open borders; it calls for secure borders with an enforcement that is efficient and respectful of human dignity.
The Immigration Resolution does not call for blanket amnesty; it calls for earned citizenship.
The member denominations of the NAE have not endorsed open borders and blanket amnesty.

With regard to border security and enforcement, the resolution urges, “National borders must be safeguarded with efficiency and respect for human dignity.” That is not advocacy of open borders. It is a call for the efficient and humane enforcement of the law.

Concerning the allegation that the NAE advocates blanket amnesty, the resolution urges, “There must be a sound, equitable process for currently undocumented immigrants who wish to assume the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship to earn legal status.” That is not saying that each and every immigrant now residing in the United States, no matter how he or she arrived here, should be given citizenship unconditionally. Nor is it a statement that all immigrants who entered this country improperly should be rounded up and immediately jailed or deported. It is what it says—a call for earned citizenship through a sound and equitable process.

Concerning the claim that member denominations have endorsed open borders and blanket amnesty, several things need to be said. First, the Immigration Resolution does not advocate open borders and blanket amnesty. Second, no resolution of the NAE becomes the official policy of any member denomination, unless that denomination, through its own denominational polity, takes action to endorse an NAE resolution. Several (though not all) NAE member denominations have endorsed the resolution.

Third, the NAE Immigration Resolution of 2009 has not become the PCA position on immigration. In accordance with our Presbyterian polity, for any matter to become an official position of the denomination there would have to be either (1) an amendment to our constitution (the Westminster Confession, Larger and Shorter Catechisms, and the Book of Church Order), (2) an action of a General Assembly speaking to a specific issue, which action our Book of Church Order [BCO] calls “deliverances, resolutions, or overtures,” or (3) a judicial decision (BCO 14-7). The strongest action would be an amendment to the Constitution (BCO 26-2; 26-3). “Deliverances, resolutions, or overtures” adopted by a General Assembly reflect the opinion of a majority of commissioners to that particular General Assembly on a specific issue at that time. Judicial decisions of the Standing Judicial Commission of the General Assembly are binding on the parties to specific cases. Both “deliverances, resolutions, or overtures” and judicial decisions “are to be given due and serious consideration by the Church and its lower courts when deliberating matters related to such action” (BCO 14-7). Neither “deliverances, resolutions or overtures,” nor judicial decisions amend the Constitution of the Church. Neither would have the force of a constitutional amendment. There is no proposal to amend the PCA Constitution in light of any resolution of the NAE (or any other interchurch body of which the PCA is a member). The NAE’s adoption of the Immigration Resolution does not of itself put the issue before the General Assembly. There is no judicial case that involves the Immigration Resolution. Therefore, the NAE Immigration Resolution of 2009 has not become the PCA position on immigration.

Internet exchanges cannot always be characterized as “civil discourse.” Moreover, emotionally laden issues, such as immigration, are subject to the emotion-trumps-logic phenomenon. I hope that this response contributes to “civil discourse,” gives factual input, and defuses some of the emotion of the issue.

Derek's home page links to...

David & Tim Bayly — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:57:50 -0400

(Tim) Well, followed a link and check out this screen shot of Derek Webb's home page. Bottom right corner, folks.

Snicker, snicker.

Derek Webb again...

David & Tim Bayly — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:15:55 -0400

(Tim) By the way, yesterday Herr Professor Doctor Jürgen von Hagen brought us the Word of God at Church of the Good Shepherd. His text was the Rich Fool and it's context, Luke 12:16-34. Concerning the statements there, "he began reasoning to himself" and "I will say to my soul," Juergen made the point that Scripture does not commend a man talking to himself.

This occurred to me watching Derek. Eyes closed, all alone, singing. He appears to be completely entranced with his own music and himself.

* * *

By the way, the sermon is well worth your time. If you're within driving distance, we have a number of men who would be delighted to preach for you--including Pastor von Hagen. Just send me an e-mail with your location and proposed date.

Derek Webb goes with the flow... like, finally...

David & Tim Bayly — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:20:26 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to Craig) So Derek's trying to say something about something, and he's feeling quite self-righteous about what it is, precisely, he's trying to say. Thing is, when Dylan had his Christian phase, you didn't need a degree in jive talk to get it. His words were clear.

To get Derek's message, though, you might have to do peyote or sniff glue.

On the other hand, we could try just assuming that what Derek's trying to get across is the same kind of crowd-pleasing rhetoric daily featured on the oped pages of the New York Times. Derek is tired of going against the grain and has decided to turn and go with the flow, instead.

My friend Craig says Derek's video is "self-involved," bearing a message of "sexual sedition." I think he's right and that's how Combat Queer Online took it. Reporting on what they saw as Derek's new direction, Christianity Today said...

"Webb's exodus to hip-hop isn't merely a matter of preference. A folk artist at heart, he says hip-hop is the new folk—the only genre speaking to the needs of the people or protesting the status quo. In Webb's case, the status quo represents—at least to him—staunch right-wing conservatives and intolerant evangelicals with little compassion for those disenfranchised by the faith community."

If any more evidence were needed, Brian McLaren loves Derek's latest stuff. He tells us Derek's finally saying what he's been saying himself all along.

* * *

WHAT MATTERS MORE TO YOU?

You say you always treat people like you'd like to be
I guess you love being hated for your sexuality
You love when people put words in your mouth
About what you believe, make you sound like a freak

'Cause if you really believe what you say you believe
You wouldn't be so damn reckless with the words you speak
Wouldn't silence your concern when the liars speak
Denying all the dying or the remedy

Tell me, brother, what matters more to you?
Tell me, sister, what matters more to you?

If I can tell what's in your heart by what comes out of your mouth
Then it sure looks to me like being straights is all it's all about
Yeah, it looks like being hated for all the wrong things
And chasing the wind while the pendulum swings

We can talk and debate it till we're blue in the face
About the language and tradition that He's coming to save
Meanwhile we sit just like we don't give a shit
About fifty-thousand people who are dying today

Tell me, brother, what matters more to you?
Tell me, sister, what matters more to you?

Brother, what matters more to you?
Tell me, sister, what matters more to you?

Tell me, what matters more to you?
Tell me, brother, what matters more to you?

Rick Phillips reviews Tim Keller reviewing Bill Hybels...

David & Tim Bayly — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:54:45 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to our Redeemer Manhattanite correspondent) Pastor Rick Phillips recently did a post critical of a review of Willow Creek written by the Rev. Dr. Tim Keller. Rick was apologetic as he got started:

Our poor friend Tim Keller suffers the fate of having his every word parsed over a thousand times... For this reason, I try to avoid such parsing...

But fortunately, truth got the better of Rick and he quickly hit his stride. Check it out.

The PCA's byFaith cracks the door open, with great trepidation...

David & Tim Bayly — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:33:10 -0400

(Tim) Our brother Andy Webb who serves as pastor of Providence Presbyterian Church (PCA) of Fayetteville, North Carolina, succeeded in getting the PCA's byFaith magazine to run an article he submitted titled, "Those Who Want to Revisit Women's Roles Have Been Heard and Some Are Concerned About What They're Saying."

At this point, the piece is only on byFaith's web site. But readers' comments are calling byFaith to run the piece in the next print version, also. This would make some slight dent in the flood tide of stuff by bigwigs in favor of (and other bigwigs with no heart for opposing) certain feminist tweaking of PCA polity.

So kudos to Andy. Kudos also to those who got byFaith to allow the other side of the dialog to let out a peep.

Our baby-slaughter President gets the Nobel Peace Prize...

David & Tim Bayly — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:42:44 -0400

(Tim, w/thanks to David L.) For the sake of unborn generations, let the electrons permanently record here on Baylyblog that there were some citizens of these United States who, long before the the Peace Prize was awarded to President Obama, already knew the Nobel had become a joke. President Obama a peacemaker? This man of blood?

Back in 1979 when a Nobel still meant something, Mother Teresa won the Peace Prize and had this to say...

in her acceptance speech:

...I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing - direct murder by the mother herself. And we read in the Scripture, for God says very clearly: Even if a mother could forget her child - I will not forget you - I have carved you in the palm of my hand. We are carved in the palm of His hand, so close to Him that unborn child has been carved in the hand of God. And that is what strikes me most, the beginning of that sentence, that even if a mother could forget something impossible - but even if she could forget - I will not forget you.

And today the greatest means - the greatest destroyer of peace is abortion.

And we who are standing here - our parents wanted us. We would not be here if our parents would do that to us. Our children, we want them, we love them, but what of the millions. Many people are very, very concerned with the children in India, with the children in Africa where quite a number die, maybe of malnutrition, of hunger and so on, but millions are dying deliberately by the will of the mother. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today. Because if a mother can kill her own child - what is left for me to kill you and you kill me - there is nothing between.

Shame on these Norwegians for their hypocrisy. Shame on President Obama for being the world's leading advocate of baby slaughter.

And shame on you if you voted for him.

A question of style?

David & Tim Bayly — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:42:17 -0400

(David) I want to say something that will strike some as unfair and ad hominem. So be it. I accept the risk because I see the connection and perceive the logic. If others don't, blessings on them.

My thought and question is this: why do those who promote the idea of a color-blind Church culturally--of the Church as a spiritual kingdom divorced from worldly affectations, power and attractiveness--so often seem to be men who appear personally committed to the pursuit of style and cool?

Why do those who shout "Down doggie," the loudest in opposing those who believe in and preach a Church societally powerful and attractive so often affect the preppiest clothing, the funkiest glasses, the coolest soul patches personally? Why all the personal style and color among those who deny the Church any aspirations to societal cred?

I'm simply saying that if the church should divorce herself from aspirations to cultural relevance and power, so too should her officers. Or perhaps advocates of a radical two-kingdom theology think what is impermissible and undesirable in the corporate whole is permissible and desirable in Christ's vicars personally?

Honestly, it seems neither consistent nor appropriate that men who would dress the Church in cultural rags seem so enamored of cultural cool personally. Why is it, I ask myself, that Douglas Wilson, the great advocate of a Church triumphant and victorious on earth dresses like a frumpy bookkeeper--or a classy farmer--while his two-kingdom opponents so often look like they've stepped from the pages of Brooks Brothers or Rolling Stone?

You know, men, if the church is a voice only in the wilderness, shouldn't we be dressing and living like wilderness men in hair shirts and plain pants? Shouldn't we give not one rip for the status symbols of culture personally if such are our convictions about the Church we serve? Academic pedigrees, personal style, cultural cool seem unaccountably important to those who refuse the Church cultural power. Yet, ironically, to their foes the personal style of John the Baptist seems to come rather naturally.