Thoughts on the Siouxlands Presbytery Federal Vision Controversy « Green Baggins

Thoughts on the Siouxlands Presbytery Federal Vision Controversy « Green Baggins

See Green Baggins for the embedded URL's. We dare not lessen our committment to justification by faith alone.

Thoughts on the Siouxlands Presbytery Federal Vision Controversy
March 4, 2010 at 11:21 pm (Uncategorized)

Posted by Wes White

The Federal Vision controversy in the Siouxlands Presbytery has garnered a lot of attention around the web. I thought I would try to assemble in one place the various articles that have been posted.

1. The Aquila Report – you can read the objective news reports here.

a. Here’s the report on the 87th meeting where TE Lawrence was exonerated and TE Moon gave the speech that TE Keister critiqued on this site.

b. This is the report about the Called Meeting in October where Siouxlands erected a new committee to re-investigate TE Lawrence and exonerated TE Moon.

c. Here is my report on the January meeting, described by one observer as shenaniganism. But I did not describe it that way in this objective report.

2. Johannes Weslianus – certainly the most penetrating analysis you will find on the web.;)

a. I’ve provided a chronological overview of the entire Siouxlands Federal Vision controversy.

b. This is the Siouxlands Federal Vision Report adopted in 2007.

c. My editorial on the January meeting.

3. Steve Carr of Beholding the Beauty, who attended the January meeting, provided his analysis of the Siouxlands Federal Vision controversy here. He also started this thread on the Puritan Board.

4. Speaking of the Puritan Board, one member of it started a thread on Siouxlands entitled Leithart Redux.

5. Mark Horne has also weighed in on the Siouxlands controversy.

a. He comments here on my protest.

b. He replies here to the “pogram against the Federal Vision.”

c. Here’s more on pogroms.

d. He also comments on the Presbytery committee for public safety.

6. Heidelblog. R. Scott Clark has weighed in on this controversy.

a. Here is his editorial on the January meeting.

b. Dr. Clark has also commented on and recommended Lane Keister’s refutation of TE Moon.

7. Joshua Judges Ruth – TE Sarafolean weighed in after the January meeting.

a. He had questions about the meeting.

b. He also commented on the posting of TE Joshua Moon’s speech in defense of TE Lawrence.

8. Steve Salyards at the GA Junkie wrote about the process of discipline in two PCA Presbyteries, including Siouxlands.

9. Sean Gerety from God’s Hammer has posted quite a few comments on the Federal Vision controversy in the Siouxlands. His comments are so controversial that linking to his comments has actually been a controversy in Siouxlands.

a. His first and most controversial post was entitled, “Siouxlands Schizophrenia.”

b. His second post was written after the January meeting.

10. Though there are others, I will leave you with the Protestant Reformed perspective. That should keep you busy until Lane gets back into the groove next week.

Posted by Wes White