@GeorgeSayour@OrthodoxPC Westminster summarizes God’s Word on a magistrate’s duty. Dangerous to go beyond by prescribing HOW a magistrate is to obey.
Similarly, we can say what a father’s duty is toward his children, but it is dangerous to prescribe HOW he must obey in his peculiar circumstance.
@GeorgeSayour@OrthodoxPC Yes, that’s why I’m saying a committee report shouldn’t add to the Standards and cannot be adopted by the church (through GA) without risking altering the meaning of the Standards by adding an interpretation. The Standards are balanced and as clear as they need to be, IMO.
@GeorgeSayour@OrthodoxPC The worthier aspects of Christian Nationalism a discussion of how a person in government, especially a Christian magistrate, ought to apply the commands of Scripture in his vocation and in overseeing his subordinates and subjects and is thus very much a Rom. 14 conscience issue.
@GeorgeSayour@OrthodoxPC Any report addressing church-state relations should focus on the CHURCH’s duty toward the State.
Refereeing an interpretive debate regarding the state’s duty crosses into conscience issues and “intermeddl[ing] with civil affairs which concern the commonwealth.” (WCF 31.4)
@GeorgeSayour@ReallyOldLife I’m thankful the OPC doesn’t have a culture of online trolls and ecclesiology-by-social-media.
RE Hart is a rare exception. He’d do well to consider WLC 145 in his online discourse, particularly regarding “scoffing, reviling,”and “misconstructing intentions, words, and actions.”