Archive for January, 2010

Rob Rayburn’s SJC Brief

You need to read Rob Rayburn’s defense of his presbytery to the PCA SJC (Standing Judicial Committee). If you’ve been out of the loop on this, that’s okay. But what has happened in the last few years is that people have made accusations against Peter Leithart, and in response the Pacific Northwest Presbytery has investigated Peter’s views with two separate committees. Each time Peter has been exonerated. But now someone has appealed to SJC. A committee of the SJC met in Atlanta last fall and Rob was there. The SJC has produced a tentative report that is still to be voted on by the whole commission in March. Click here to download that document.

After he witnessed the proceedings in Atlanta, Rob wrote this response. It is worth reading a couple of times. He nails it. He nails the SJC. But will he be heard? Will anyone in the PCA care? Those are the big questions.


Judicial Case 2009-6
Pacific Northwest Presbytery
Robert S. Rayburn

Presbytery has received the Proposed Decision of the SJC Panel in Case 2009-6 and respectfully offers this supplemental brief in protest of the decision and its reasoning. To be frank the respondent offers this brief with no expectation of it being read with sympathy. At no point in this process has there been any indication of an intention to give Dr. Leithart or the Presbytery of the Pacific Northwest a sympathetic evaluation, to examine his statements in context, or really to enter into the exploration of the issues raised in this discussion. Nor has there been any acknowledgement that Scripture provides us with data for which the Standards provide us no specific explanations and that is it chiefly this material that comes to the fore in Dr. Leithart’s explorations. I regret to say this brief is offered more as an effort to satisfy the demands of conscience than in any expectation of provoking serious reflection upon the part of the SJC. To that end I protest the decision of the panel and plead with the entire SJC to think again on the following grounds.


Read Full Post »