“But if the watchman
see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if
the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his
iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand.” [Ezekiel 33:6]
“For we wrestle not against
flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers
of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
[Ephesians 6:12]
Presbyterians Week Headlines
[2] Church
of Jailed Pastor Charged Again for Refusing to Turn People Away
[5] Critical Race Theory vs. the
Bible
[6] Scottish
Ministers ‘Crossed Line’ by Criminalising Public Worship Court Told
---
Next week, the California
Department of Education will vote on a new statewide ethnic studies curriculum
that advocates for the “decolonization” of American society and elevates Aztec
religious symbolism—all in the service of a left-wing political ideology…
https://www.city-journal.org/calif-ethnic-studies-curriculum-accuses-christianity-of-theocide
+ City Journal, 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New
York, New York 10017, 212-599-7000, questions@city-journal.org
[2] Church
of Jailed Pastor Charged Again for Refusing to Turn People Away
The Royal Canadian Mounted
Police again charged GraceLife Church in
Alberta on Wednesday for refusing to close their doors to congregants and
members of the public.
According to the Edmonton
Journal, on March 4, 2021 the legal counsel for the church was served with
a summons to attend Stony Plain provincial court on May 5, 2021.
The church was charged for
exceeding fifteen percent allowable capacity for services held on February 21
and 28, 2021 in defiance of the Public Health Act, the Journal noted.
Read More:
https://caldronpool.com/church-of-jailed-pastor-charged-again-for-refusing-to-turn-people-away/
[Editor’s Note: It was
announced today, 14 March 2021, that GraceLife
Church Pastor James Coates has had all but one charge dropped, and has been
released from the maximum security prison where he has been held since his
original arrest.]
+ Edmonton
Journal, 10006 – 101 Street, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
T5J 0S1, 780-498-5500, Contact
Page
Revelation 3: 14-19 “14And
unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the
Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15I
know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or
hot. 16So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with
goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and
miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18I counsel thee to buy
of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that
thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and
anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. 19As
many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.”
The Vision 2020 Team was
formed by RCA General Synod 2018, tasked with exploring future scenarios for
the RCA in light of significant divisions among RCA congregants and
congregations mostly concerning toleration and affirmation of unbiblical sexual
practices.
The team initially looked
into three future scenarios for the RCA: staying together, radical restructure,
and grace-filled separation. After thousands of hours of research, discernment,
and feedback, they arrived at a combination of the three.
The team released its report
and recommendations on June 30, 2020. Read
the report.
The Vision 2020 report is now
scheduled to be considered at the 2021 RCA General Synod (GS) meeting scheduled
for October 2021. In preparation for the upcoming report consideration, the GLCC
is preparing an overture regarding the report, and the following letter was
issued to GLCC members on 12 March 2021 by GLCC President Dan Sewell:
An
Important Message from the GLCC President,
I
must apologize that as we’ve been working on the details and quickly
disseminating information beforehand, we sent out a “cold” document containing
a potential overture to the October GS meeting without a “warm” preface. The
plan was to flesh out this overture at our training and prayer gathering on
March 16th and then solicit questions prior to actual discussion and potential
voting at the official business meeting on the 23rd. This has created some
immediate reaction and confusion that I’d like to address in a personal and
practical way.
We’re
simply asking that you prayerfully process and approach this Overture with an
open mind. I recognize that in this long period of conflict we’ve become quick
to fall into “labeling” everything that comes out as being about “right and
left.” I’d suggest we try to avoid assigning the conservative, moderate,
liberal, and progressive labels that are so general and often inaccurate. These
are “hot” labels that mirror the political landscape we live in. We can better
listen to one another and perhaps build trust with one another if we
acknowledge that we ourselves resent being labeled, and should therefore be
hesitant to label others and their ideas quickly.
I
will attempt to lay out the rationale for this proposal and what it hopes to
accomplish. We’ve seen so many plans and proposals coming from the extreme ends
of the conflict that we might miss that this re-visioning of R1 from the 2020
report is not meant to be either divisive or an appeal to the fringes. This is
for the middle: People who don’t want their churches voting on human sexuality
and wish to retain the current standards and principles of the RCA with
integrity.
The
Overture - an overview:
This
can be accomplished without a BCO change: Broadly speaking, the formation of Regional Synods is an administrative
power of the General Synod. The formation and arrangements of classes is an
administrative power of the Regional Synod. We do not need a 2/3 majority or
years of wrangling to get this done. It seems unlikely any of the other 2020
recommendations in their current form could get passed.
This
invites the vast majority in the “Middle Ground” to simply stay put: There is strong evidence that the vast majority of
our churches concur with the current RCA standards, creeds and confessions, and
statement on human sexuality . Let me be frank: Short of solemnizing same sex
marriages and issues of ordination, these standards provide wide latitude for
grace filled ministry to broken people by recognizing this means everyone. I’d
add that our reformed understanding of Truth and Grace is prohibitive of
judgment as we humbly pursue salvation by faith in Christ with all, encouraging
them to seek his will in every aspect of life.
For
GLCC churches who concur with these current standards, no congregational poll,
vote, or declaration will become necessary. Unless a church finds itself at odds with these standards and wishes to
function in ways inconsistent with current RCA polity, no action is necessary.
This
restores integrity to those on both sides of the issue: In the present environment, those churches who have
decided differently on these issues and reside in a classis that is supportive
of their practices in terms of marriage and ordination simply function in
discord with the RCA’s ecclesiastical polity. Others may find themselves in
conflict with their own classis in these issues. These would at least be
afforded the opportunity to regain integrity within a regional synod that has
established an affinity with their theological perception and practice.
This
would in effect take the R1 concept of affinity classes to its logical
conclusion and remove an additional layer of conflict, as each classes would be
in a regional synod that is in agreement. For those who concur with RCA polity
and those who wish to modify it, each would be afforded the opportunity to
pursue their mission with this same level of integrity
This
is better than 3 Regional Synods. Our
Canadian siblings must necessarily remain distinct for legal and practical
reasons. But some will ask why we wouldn’t create more affinity synods? Why not
3 or 4? Maybe partition right from center-right, from center-left from left?
Not only is this more divisive, you suddenly do need a slew of congregational
votes. Whether or not we are able to entice the polar opposites to remain, this
split is simply between current RCA policy and those who can no longer agree
with it as it stands.
While
I would suggest the advantages for the disagreeing churches is a lessening of
conflict and a return to the integrity of having staled polity, this is most
intended as an attractive solution for the many in the middle who wish to turn
their attention from this conflict, remain reformed under all of our current
standards and confessions, and get back to fruitful mission without complex
political procedures.
The
reality is this split is occurring already. Unmanaged, it will splinter us.
This recommendation is to approach it like cutting a diamond in hopes of
producing jewels of great value. The other way will be much like smashing a
rock, leaving behind only rubble.
I do
not resonate with the inference in the 2020 report that we need to let churches
thinking about leaving leave, and then have a conversation as as family. I find
that picture tragic and counter intuitive to the Gospel. This is meant to
provide a means to have a reasonable conversation about a viable means to
remain “Defined and connected” that may offer hope to some who would decide to
remain among us.
Friends,
I get it! I don't want this. But I refuse to accept the fatal diagnosis for the
RCA without pursuing a therapeutic solution. And I personally never want my
congregation to be forced to vote on some declaration one way or another to
leave or stay or throw down on these issues. Nothing! Period. The goal is to
have this administrated with minimal need for legislation and with isolated
drama.
This
will not resolve all the issues of human sexuality, but this truly is a
prayerfully crafted solution for moving forward in the good order of the
church, and a way to love others through our differences as we turn our
attention from the conflict, remain reformed in this best fashion, and get back
to fruitful mission.
I
thank you for your care and concerns for Christ’s mission, and pray that we can
arrive at the “win-win” that has been so elusive. What’s not elusive is the
victory in Christ that is the result of our faith alone. In this, we all agree.
God
Bless,
Dan
Sewell 2020-21 President of the GLCC
If the proposed overture or a
similar one is adapted by GLCC and the RCA, rather than being a “victory in
Christ” described in the letter’s conclusion will actually be the lukewarmness
that Christ’s promises to “spue…out of [His] mouth,” that will make the
RCA “wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.”
Christ instead commands his
church to “buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and
white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness
do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.”
+ Reformed Church in America,
4500 60th Street Southeast, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49512, 800-968-6065, questions@rca.org
+ Great Lakes City Classis, 616-541-0846, office@glcclassis.org
Few of us understand how
truly evil and tyrannical public officials can become in their efforts to
appease the LGBT movement’s unbridled obsession with pushing their agenda on
children. Unfortunately, most people don’t contemplate that previously
unimaginable excesses by the state (as writers like Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn warned us) are never too far
away.
The government of Canada has
decided that if a parent does not cooperate with his minor child’s decision to
have a sex-change operation, he will face criminal punishment – including
prison time…
https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/21a/Rob-Hoogland-facing-jail/index.html
+ Mass Resistance, Post Office Box
1612, Waltham, Massachusetts 02454
781-890-6001, Contact
Page
[5] Critical Race Theory vs. the
Bible
Critical race theory is a
Marxist philosophy and program to tear down all existing biblically-influenced
societal, political, and government structures and to replace them with the
“new man,” a mythical ideal society. It is “critical” in that it aims to
criticize all existing structures. It is a “race” theory in that it divides men
into “races” and claims that certain races, particularly the white “race” and
those who are aligned with the white “race,” are inherently evil. It is a
theory in that it is not a fact. It should be called Critical Race Hypothesis,
because a theory at least has some basis in fact, whereas Critical Race Theory
has none. A chief tactic is divide and conquer, but it uses any tactic that is
effective, including lies, slander, ridicule, theft, threat, repression,
terrorism, and murder.
It respects no law. It has no
love. It takes many forms so as to infiltrate and deceive. It is Black Lives
Matter. It is Antifa. It is the 1619 Project. It is leftist college courses. It
is historical revisionism in the public schools. It seeks to pit females
against males, blacks against whites, mothers against fathers, children against
parents, teachers against parents, singles against married, Democrats against
Republicans, young against old. It seeks to legalize and empower
unrighteousness and moral filthiness. It hates the Bible. It seeks to destroy
the traditional family, the New Testament church, home schooling and private
education, the Bill of Rights, personal liberty, a stable government of law and
order, Republicanism, capitalism, economic stability. Anything that corrupts,
harms, or destroys these things is considered good, because that is the
immediate goal. It is arrogant and domineering. Critical Race Theory is being
taught in Southern Baptist seminaries (“Former ERLC Scholar Says,” Capstone
Report, March 13, 2020). Yet Critical Race Theory is contrary to the Bible’s
teaching and therefore must be rejected by every Bible believer. The Bible is
not a theory; it is the infallible Word of God. Following are some of the
biblical truths that contradict Critical Race Theory: All men have one father,
Adam; there is only one “race” of men (Acts 17:26). All men are equally sinners
before God; none are righteous; none are superior (Romans 3:10-18, 23). God
made man male and female (Genesis 1:27). It is an unchangeable biological fact.
Homosexuality is a perversion of God’s plan and is destructive to individuals
and society (Romans 1:26-28). Men are to respect laws and obey authority (1
Peter 2:13-17). God forbids dishonor of parents, murder, adultery, stealing,
lying, and covetousness (Exodus 20:1-17). Men are to love God and love other
men as neighbors (Matthew 22:37-40).
+ Way of Life Literature, Post Office Box 610368, Port
Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
[6] Scottish
Ministers ‘Crossed Line’ by Criminalising Public Worship Court Told
A judge has heard on the
first day of a full judicial review hearing that Scottish Ministers ‘crossed
a line’ when they made the decision to criminalise public worship and
give police maximum powers to enforce it.
Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, 27 Scottish church leaders, from a
range of Christian denominations, have brought the action stating that the
closures are unlawful and continue to breach Human Rights law and the Scottish
constitutional law.
Janys Scott QC, representing the church leaders who
have brought the claim, argued in her submissions that ‘irreparable
damage’ had been done to the church leaders and congregations, which
is growing in seriousness each day the regulations are in place.
Scott QC described it as a ‘rather alarming proposition’ that: ‘Were
the church to assemble, it could be required to disperse. Were any members of a
congregation to resist, they could potentially be forcibly removed to their
homes.’
She described the powers given to the police to enforce these measures as a ‘maximalist
approach’ which has violated their human rights and trespassed on the
clear separation of powers between the church and state in the Scottish
constitution.
The line between civil and spiritual has been crossed, she argued, and the
state has exceeded its constitutional authority.
She argued that this interference is unlawful, and that the Scottish Ministers
lack the constitutional power to make them cease to worship.
The freedom of the church to manage its own affairs, as explicitly outlined in
Scotland’s constitutional law, she argued means that the:
‘Coronavirus Act 2020 cannot authorise regulations which relate to matters
within the exclusive jurisdiction of the church, and the Local Levels
Regulations and the Closure Regulations are unlawful, in so far as they purport
to require the closure of places of worship. By completely preventing the
church carrying out essential spiritual and ecclesiastical functions in the
form of assembly, communion, baptism and congregational ministry, they trespass
into matters that are in law, the sole province of the church.’
Making the argument that Covid-19 affects all parts of the United Kingdom, Mrs.
Scott QC pinpointed that no other part of the United Kingdom ‘currently
requires places of worship to close. No other part of the United Kingdom
criminalises the opening of a place of worship for the purpose of worship,
or the attendance at the place of worship for the purpose of worshipping
together with others.’
Furthermore, she cited a number of successful international cases from the past
year which have upheld the right to communal worship, even in the middle of a
pandemic.
She argued that there is a growing international jurisprudence that banning
public worship is disproportionate, unlawful and represents clear government
overreach.
Despite Nicola Sturgeon announcing this week that gathered worship would be
allowed with restrictions from March 26, Mrs. Scott QC argued that there have
been no assurances or guarantees that similar restrictions will not be enacted
in the future.
As a result, in closing her submissions, she called on the court to provide a
‘principle’ judgment in the case. She stated that especially during times of
crisis there is a duty to hold governments to their constitutions.
She concluded that if a church cannot meet in assembly, it ceases to exist, and
called on the court to provide immediate relief.
The church leaders seek a declarator that the closure of churches in Scotland
are unlawful, that church closure regulations must be reversed, and that a
person may lawfully leave their home to attend a place of worship without fear
of prosecution.
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: “The
church leaders’ case raises a paramount constitutional issue of the church
liberties and independence from the state. Never before this pandemic did
secular authorities assume the power to ban or permit church services and
sacraments. This constitutional principle must be protected for the benefit of
present and future generations.
“Until this point the Scottish Ministers have had no answers to justify
banning church worship. There has been no understanding of what it means to be
a Christian. The Scottish Ministers regulations have placed the church in
the same category as a social service and sees it as no different from a
betting shop.
“This blanket ban must be justified, as currently the reasons are vague,
speculative and disproportionate. We look forward to hearing the Scottish
government’s submissions tomorrow.”
+ Christian Concern,
