[Let me express] my personal appreciation for the work you do with P&R News. I find it very objective and informative. Thank you. I've just finished the Summer 1997 edition and want to express a growing concern I have for the direction of our denomination in relation to our historical roots. I noted with great interest on page 13 of the Presbytery news that Covenant presbytery (and the PCA in growing proportions it seems) appears to have no problem moving away from our historical profession inch by inch. Point in case is Covenant Presbytery's treatment of James Calderazzo's exception to the time span of creation while holding to a literal view of creation. It is not my intention to be critical of either Mr. Calderazzo or Covenant Presbytery. As their brother and fellow elder in the Lord I exhort both to seriously reconsider their position on this crucial matter.
Now, I know that some of the exceptions that people take are simply due to the inquisitive minds of generally young and inexperienced seminarians who by nature must find something to disagree with or they think they're not being intellectually honest with themselves. That's the nature of youth. Youthful skepticism nurtured throughout life creates a seasoned and
committed skeptic who believes in nothing except personal experience and (misinformed) consciences as the only rule of life. I also understand that sometimes we argue about words unnecessarily in order to make a point such as was noted in Mr. Calderazzo's acceptable exception to the Sabbath. His exception with the term "covenant of works" but agreeing with the concept raises an interesting question. Why the disagreement if you
accept the concept as defined behind the term "covenant of works"? (Am I missing something here?). However, when it comes to denying or doubting God's ability to create literally in 6, twenty four hour time periods and advance this point of view as an exception to the Standards which in turn is accepted as legitimate by other ordained PCA teaching and ruling elders is a slippery slope which only leads downward. You see, this is not a
denial of the Confession so much as it is a primary denial of God's Word first and foremost upon which the confession is predicated. To say that one agrees with everything else literally in the creation account but then says that scripture must be wrong (or the interpretation of this particular scripture) when it comes to six literal days because the general society of unbelieving science says so is a betrayal of reason and possibly faith. It's neo orthodoxy in its infancy. Has Mr. Calderazzo and Covenant presbytery ever considered the works of imminent Christian researchers such as Henry Morris, Ken Ham, Ian Taylor, Jon Covey, Gregory Hull, Donald Clark or Nancy Pearcy to name a few? These men and women and many others hold Ph.d.'s in disciplines from geology to genetics, from paleontology to
astronomy and all of them earned from leading universities throughout the world. They accept the ability of God to create as He gave an account of it in Genesis and they are scientists! They accept God's work sufficiently literal in regards to creation. Why can't our denomination hold this same conviction unequivocally and without exception?
A nagging and closing question? Where are we headed as a church? Why would a presbytery, any presbytery even consider such an exception as put forth by Mr. Calderazzo as valid? I recommend Dr. Morton H. Smith's Subscription to the Westminster Standards in the Presbyterian Church in America as an excellent source for historical perspective. As Dr. Smith so ably points out the only exceptions our forefathers had with the confession were articles 20 & 23 which dealt with the power of the Civil Magistrate over the church. Not so today, it seems.
In the Lamb,
Bob Wolf, Pastor
Westminster PCA, Boone, NC
Western Carolina Presbytery
Dear Brothers in Christ:
My name is Ramiro Araujo. I am a Presbyterian pastor, from Quito-Ecuador. After finishing school at RTS-Jackson I am returning to serve the Lord in my hometown. While I was here I have enjoyed reading your P&R News. I will like to know if it is possible for you to put me in your list and send me a copy of your News as they are published. . . . May the Lord bless you as you continue with your Ministry.
In Christ Jesus,
[Many of our readers may not be aware of the fact that we send each quarter about a thousand complimentary copies to the various seminaries which supply the PCA with prospective pastors. Perhaps one of our readers would like to help underwrite the expense of sending a gift subscription to this Ecuadorian pastor.-Ed.]
Thank you for sending Presbyterian and Reformed News. I find it so
informative and appreciate most issues. I get very little news from my Presbytery or from the GA meetings. Your newspaper is a great way to get caught up. Thanks for the subscription! Please note the change of address. . . .
Rev. David R. Kiewiet, Carindale, Queensland, Australia
[We always appreciate when folks help us save postage by letting us know ahead of time their change of address.-Ed.]