os Angeles Presbytery
B y D r. S. H . Sutherland P r e sid en t, B ib le In stitu te o f Los A n g eles, Inc.
the doctrinal position of the Presby terian Church has changed^ This is tragic, but true. Dr. Bonnell Speaks It is indeed a sorry situation when a man like Dr. John Bonnell, who is pastor of the Fifth Avenue Presbyter ian Church, New York City, is al lowed apparently to speak for Pres byterians the country over, as he did in an article in Look Magazine, of March 23, 1954. In this article, en titled “What is a Presbyterian?” he states, “ Presbyterians do not believe in the literal inerrancy of the Scrip tures.” But in the Westminster Con fession of Faith, we read, concerning the Scriptures (Chapter I, Paragraph IV ), “ the authority of the Holy Scripture . . . dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God, the Author thereof; and therefore it is to be re ceived, because it is the Word of God.” When the Reverend Mr. Bonnell was ordained, as is the case with ev ery ordination in the Presbyterian Church, he answered in the affirma tive the very first question of his ordination vows which reads, “Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice?” And, the second question, which he solemnly an swered in the affirmative reads, “ Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith of your church as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures?” To day, Dr. Bonnell very lightly repudi ates these solemn vows which he took at the time of his ordination as a Pres byterian minister and, in effect, his article completely renounces the en tire Confession of ™ l Faith of the Pres- ^
shall be ordained in a Presbyterian Church who is not a graduate of a Presbyterian school, or at least a school which has the blessing of the Presbytery. But the significant part of the above quotation lies in the statement that, “ if graduates of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, Inc., and Talbot Theological Seminary ever come to occupy the majority of the pulpits in the Presbyterian Church, the spirit, doctrinal position and program of the church would be quite different from what they are today.” To this we would readily give as sent. However, if such were the case, “ the spirit, doctrinal position and program of the church” would not be any different whatever from the his toric position of the Presbyterian Church, because, on the Fundamen tals of the Faith, the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, Inc., stands exactly where the great Presbyterian Church, USA, has stood through the many years of its existence until within the past comparatively few years. There was a time when members of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles’ faculty could be members of the Los Angeles Presbytery and the fellow ship was quite cordial. In fact, there used to be many Presbyterian minis ters in Los Angeles Presbytery and throughout the denomination who fel- lowshipped quite intimately with the Bible Institute, on its faculty, in its board of administration^ in its radio program, with articles appearing in the King’s Business, and in financial support of the school. Let it be clearly understood that the doctrinal position of the Bible Institute has not changed one whit from that which has char acterized it through the years. It must be understood, therefore, that
the fact that the Presbytery itself, states that the Bible Institute of Los Angeles is one with the Talbot Theo logical Seminary, it seems rather strange that the gentlemen named above should now be condemned for teaching in the seminary. But such is the peculiar logic of those who are determined to have their way re gardless of the merits of their position. A Will To Hamper The climax comes further on in the statement: “ if one asks himself the all-important question, ‘what would happen in the Presbytery of Los Angeles to the peace, purity and unity of the Presbyterian Church, USA, and to the greater part of her program as administered through her Boards and Agencies, if graduates of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, Inc., and Talbot Theological Semi nary ever came to occupy a majority of the pulpits and pastorates in Los Angeles Presbytery?’ the answer is crystal clear: the spirit, doctrinal po sition and program of the church •would be quite different from what they are today. In the light of our judgment, the educational standards, the doctrinal statements,, the admin istrative procedures, and in some in stances the ethical implications in volved, all seem to constitute a ‘will to hamper’ the teaching, fellowship and service of the Presbyterian Church, USA.” The fears which are expressed by the Presbytery seem to be completely unfounded in view of the fact that the Presbytery of Los Angeles has already refused to .admit or ordain men who are graduates of the Bible Institute Theological Course and, by implication, of the Talbot Theologi cal Seminary. By official action, the Presbytery has ruled that no one
15
S E P T E M B E R , 1 9 5 4
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker