Thursday, June 25, 2009

Is Doug Wilson a heretic?

I liked this comment I saw on You-Tube:

So the OPC, PCA, and RPCUS declared Doug Wilson a heretic (even if it's not true on all fronts, bear with me). This means that 3 denominations comprising a total of  roughly 385,000 members think Doug Wilson's views are heretical. In a world with 2,100,000,000 Christians, this means that effectively .018 % of the Church has excommunicated Wilson. A Great Ecumenical Council to be sure, but I'll wait to hear from the other 99.982% of of the Church. I'll post when they give me a call.


Good point even if you don't buy the numbers!

3 comments:

Dave W said...

Although...

His side-kick Dr Leithart bemoans our failure as Christians to recognise the discipline of other presbytaries and churches in Against Christianity. He sees this as an example of schism.

The view is pertinant given the lack of such ecumenical councils happening.

There was for example no ecmenical council to determine the status of Steve Chalk. Just an inconclusive get together at LST. So were New Word Alive right to split off from Spring Harvest?

Which isn't to say that he is a heretic but is to say that if we were judging FV by the standards they want us to judge by then they would be in a a whole lot of trouble!

Paul said...

Dave W - I may be wrong but I believe that only a handful of ministers have been condemned as heretics by the PCA and the like, and those that have gone onto CREC involvement have been re-examined before being allowed to pastor.

So I think they actually have respected other churches' discipline. And those PCAers who've come out to CREC were driven out, they didn't split for fun.

-- the above is all from my very limited understanding of the situation.

Dave W said...

Paul,

My point in reaction to Marc's quote isn't so much to do with what CRE do but with what we do. Whether re-examining for yourself counts as respecting discipine would be a seperate and interesting debate -and it would be interesting for Dr Leitrhart to enlarge on his view.

My point is that others (be it independents, Anglicans, Baptists, other Presbytarians) on my understanding of Leithart, should AT LEAST be doing that reexamnining both of individuals and of groupings that admit them.