Our determination as a session was that we would supply facemasks for those who wanted to use them and be sure we didn’t judge one another in the use or non-use. In SC, we have not yet been in the position of receiving any order from the governor requiring masking. If we did receive such an order, we would again discuss it as a session.
The distinction here is that we have allowed freedom whereas Moscow has a) been hypocritical in allowing freedom or, b) has not really allowed freedom. They appear to be unwilling to consider whether there is any godliness in the church requiring conformity to an order of the civil magistrate.
If we received an order in SC, would it be wrong for our session to come to the conclusion that we show honor to whom honor is due by enforcing the request?
The mask-is-idolatry camp has no latitude. One must enforce a no sin in worship rule. They have elevated the issue to a top-tier confessional issue. Communion of Non-Masking Reformed Evangelical Churches. It’s time to begin excommunicating the masked.
Several of us have given public witness that we’ve worked with elders of churches and members who left good churches because of masks, but you here call for evidence.
Henry says we are misrepresenting Moscow. We have provided the sources and quotes. Henry says the Moscow men didn’t sting like a bee because later they floated like a butterfly. Henry doesn’t know the nature of schism and its abuse of rhetoric.
Finally, the personal exchanges here could lead some readers to think this is a personal matter between Doug and me. It’s not. What we have been discussing is ecclesiastical judgments made by Evangel Presbytery and the session of Trinity Reformed Church in Bloomington. Not every expression made here by Pastor Abu-Sara, Pastor Bayly, Pastor Dionne, and me is to be attributed in its substance or style to our presbytery or sessions. Nevertheless, taken as a whole, these judgments we are explaining are not our own, but those of our judicatories, and we speak from their authority.
I’m not sure what you are referring to, I wasn’t meaning to be nasty. The Missouri-Presbytery comment? If so, what I meant was simply a riff on your own criticism of Missouri Presbytery’s voluminous writings. That the vast volume of writing (not on masks per se, but that which was aimed at Moscow - I’d say the better portion of the entire covid corpus) seems to me to be protesting too much, and as though you’re trying too hard to make up for what is lacking in substance.
Before considering your charge that Doug is culpable for people leaving their churches, I’d appreciate if you would link to the public places which show the above is his settled opinion. And where this includes churches that are ‘otherwise faithful’. As you know, I’ve quoted to the contrary, and indicated there is much more in that vein. Once this is established, I can talk about your claims - I am not ignoring them.
I do see the difference, but I don’t understand the point being made.
I think I’m giving you at least as much charity as you are giving Moscow. And I’m happy to be shown otherwise regarding my quotations of Warhorn in the previous post. If it seems I am trying to deliberately be charitable towards Moscow it is only to make up for what I think is lacking here.
Listen to the charges you are making against Moscow:
‘sheap-stealing’
‘schismatics’
‘Avoid such men’
‘rebellion’
‘fomenting rebellion’
‘belligerent’
‘railing’
‘reviling authority’
‘throwing off the authority of… the civil magistrates’
etc.
These charges are of massive gravity, and warrant separating from them and treating them as unbelievers. And of all people you are applying them to Doug & Toby - rare men of courage and good Christian spirit. This is absurd. Forgive me for being slow to consent.
No. We are not deciding whether Doug Wilson or Toby Sumpter or anybody else is a heretic or not. We are deciding whether people need to be warned against what they are saying on this issue.
We judge that they do need to be warned. You disagree.
It’s not that we protest too much. It’s that we warn too much.
Either they are being schismatic or they aren’t. If they are, we are right to warn against their schism. Repeatedly.
And when we do, we speak from personal experience seeing their rhetoric being used to drive wedges between sheep and their faithful shepherds, between shepherds and their elders, between churches and sister churches. You refuse to believe this. But then, you don’t live in the USA, and you don’t have pastors calling you from around the country trying to figure out what to do about this schismatic teaching and the disastrous effects it’s having in their church. Or people visiting your church from other churches over only the issue of being asked to wear a mask, and citing 2 Cor 3 as the reason it would be disobedience to God for them to wear a mask in church—an argument directly from Doug’s writing.
Whatever title then men may hold, they are to be listened to only on the condition that they do not lead us away from obeying God. So we must examine all their traditions by the rule of the Word of God.