1) Not enough REs understanding the nature of these things*, and,
2) Not enough TEs taking the time to explain these things to them.
** Things: how confessions work in ecclesiology, how sin/Savior/salvation works in ontology, and how the present cultural moment at work amongst is woefully inconsistent with both of these.
In general, our standards "cover all the bases". But so did the Apostle's Creed. Notwithstanding that, the relentless push for falsehood, via ignorance and equivocation, yielded the necessity of Athanasius, Hilary, etc., to step up and do the churchmen work that yielded to doctrinal development of the first 4 ecumenical councils.
We are facing a similar moment today, with experience-driven identity and a therapeutic ministry model denying the need for further development of our standards, because they already cover these things. FWIW
A confession is only as good as the men willing to enforce it.
I view the defeat of Overture 15 with mild discouragement. The only reason I'm not more discouraged is that I never thought Overture 15 was strictly necessary to begin with. Don't get me wrong, I'd have voted for it if I had the opportunity. Anything that might plausibly give presbyters the intestinal fortitude to do what the Confession clearly requires is no bad thing.
But the Confession already says everything necessary for a church that was serious about its confessional commitments to have done something decisive about Revoice, the National Partnership, and bad faith subscription years ago. That Overture 15 failed is, to me, just more evidence that the optimists are all talk. Or, at best, that there just aren't enough presbyters with the courage of their convictions to make a difference.
Possibly:
1) Not enough REs understanding the nature of these things*, and,
2) Not enough TEs taking the time to explain these things to them.
** Things: how confessions work in ecclesiology, how sin/Savior/salvation works in ontology, and how the present cultural moment at work amongst is woefully inconsistent with both of these.
In general, our standards "cover all the bases". But so did the Apostle's Creed. Notwithstanding that, the relentless push for falsehood, via ignorance and equivocation, yielded the necessity of Athanasius, Hilary, etc., to step up and do the churchmen work that yielded to doctrinal development of the first 4 ecumenical councils.
We are facing a similar moment today, with experience-driven identity and a therapeutic ministry model denying the need for further development of our standards, because they already cover these things. FWIW
A confession is only as good as the men willing to enforce it.
I view the defeat of Overture 15 with mild discouragement. The only reason I'm not more discouraged is that I never thought Overture 15 was strictly necessary to begin with. Don't get me wrong, I'd have voted for it if I had the opportunity. Anything that might plausibly give presbyters the intestinal fortitude to do what the Confession clearly requires is no bad thing.
But the Confession already says everything necessary for a church that was serious about its confessional commitments to have done something decisive about Revoice, the National Partnership, and bad faith subscription years ago. That Overture 15 failed is, to me, just more evidence that the optimists are all talk. Or, at best, that there just aren't enough presbyters with the courage of their convictions to make a difference.
Change my mind.