Christ spoke with righteous anger to the Pharisees and to those making a mockery of the temple. There is a place for strong words and rebuke. The truth is important and shouldn’t be withheld, but the manner in which it is spoken can be the difference between war and peace. Next time we open our mouths to speak or move our fingers to tweet, an honest evaluation of our own heart and the possible outcomes should be our opening move.

It’s doubtfully a surprise to anyone to say that we live in an age of increasing division and polarization. This fact seems to accentuate the need for each of us to use wisdom in how we speak and engage with one another. It’s likely that each of us can look back at times in our lives when, in hindsight, we realize we should have kept our mouth shut, or perhaps we should have spoken up instead of remaining silent. This will probably be a lifelong struggle for many of us, but God has not left us to our own devices, trying to figure it out on our own. As with all the important aspects of life, He’s given us instruction in His Word, and in this specific case, true and perfect wisdom which we can utilize to tread this thorny path.
When seeking practical instruction about various aspects of life, Proverbs is always a great place to begin. One of the more famous proverbs comes in chapter 26. In verse 4, Solomon says “do not answer a fool according to his folly.” In a beautiful twist, immediately afterward in verse 5 he says, “answer a fool according to his folly.” This is not Solomon contradicting himself, but rather he is showing the wonderful intricacies of life in a fallen world. There are times when wisdom dictates that we speak up, but there are also times when wisdom dictates that we remain silent. The role of godly wisdom is to know the difference between the two, to accurately evaluate the situation one finds themselves in and know which path is the right one. It’s not an easy task, to be sure. Solomon adds weight to the dilemma just two verses later when he says that even the right message delivered in the wrong way is like cutting off your own feet. It’s not only counterproductive, but harmful to oneself.
More could be gleaned from Proverbs, but perhaps the clearest instruction on our speech comes in James 3. It is in this famous chapter that the epistle writer and brother of Christ Himself tells us about the dangers of the tongue. James uses some vivid analogies to show not only the power of the tongue, but the danger of it as well.
Read More

Written by Terry L. Johnson |
Thursday, July 7, 2022
We all know that process can be manipulated. The Pharisees were masters of external conformity combined with internal corruption. Somehow the work of the SJC must take into account the destruction that can be wrought in the life of a church by a determined minority circularizing the congregation with defamatory information while misusing and manipulating the judicial process.

In reviewing the Standing Judicial Commission’s (SJC) handling of case 2021-13, Dudt v. Northwest Georgia Presbytery, I was dismayed with the way the SJC handled the case. In its decision, the SJC reversed the unanimous decision of Northwest Georgia Presbytery which had rejected all forty allegations of error in the complaint, and behind that a majority decision of the Session of Midway Presbyterian Church. To its credit, the SJC did deny twenty-six of the forty alleged errors, but failed to deny all forty. I have carefully read the SJC decision and my dismay has deepened. My disappointment falls into four categories.
First, I wonder if the SJC is capable of recognizing the larger context within which this complaint was made. The SJC decision seems to have been made in a contextual vacuum. Was the SJC aware of how long the contentious minority that had filed the complaint had been battling with the will of the majority? Was the SJC aware of the damage that has been done to the ministry of the church as the majority must contend with the public attacks of the minority? What may seem like a premature decision by the majority seems to have been preceded by destructive behavior by the minority with whom the said elder is associated, patiently tolerated by the majority for months. Not every detail may be found in the ROC requiring that the SJC pay more attention by further investigation to the larger context.
Second, the SJC made important appeals to the lack of evidence in the Record of the Case (ROC) (e.g., p. 2169, line 6, line 8, line 30). Arguments from silence are indulged in specifications 4, 5, 6, 14, and 24. As with the previous point, additional investigation should follow when the majority affirms that which the SJC thinks it ought to see in the ROC. The benefit of the doubt, or shall we say, the presumption of innocence, should be given to the majority in the local lower courts.
Third, technical errors of process (specifications 23, 25, 30, 31, 33, 34) should not be given undue weight, particularly in light of the larger context. The “weightier matters” of church unity and peace trump minor details of process.
Fourth, the SJC failed to deal adequately with the problem of officers and members circularizing the congregation. The concurring decision recognizes this problem and explicitly raises it twice:
It would be unfortunate for anyone to conclude, that because this Appeal was sustained, it is appropriate for a Session member to email his congregation expressing disagreement with a Session decision. Such conduct would rarely be wise or appropriate (p. 2182, lines 16-18). There are few things that disturb the peace and unity of a church more than individual elders bringing to public attention their disagreements with Session decisions (p. 2182, lines 46-47).
This is the heart of the issue. The church has a process by which minority opinions can be voiced. An elder has the right to submit a minority report from the session to the congregation. He does not have the right to send private communication without the knowledge of the session, especially one which contradicts, and in the contradiction denigrates the session. I fear that the SJC has unleased the furies of division and conflict throughout the PCA by its failure to deal with the bigger picture of the factionalism and schism that appeared to be on the Midway session.
Moreover, the SJC decision has seriously injured the ministry of a veteran, faithful and devout minister. He has sustained constant, false, and destructive attacks, from an organized and determined minority. At the foundation of their bitter opposition was an orderly process whereby the session voted to nominate assistant minsters to serve as associate ministers, and the congregation voted to concur with the recommendation to call the assistant ministers as associates. The minority did not like the decisions or the processes, though both were in order. They simply refused to submit to the majority. Among this hostile minority are those who have published online “The Midway Guardian,” continually attacking the minister, session, and members of Midway.
We all know that process can be manipulated. The Pharisees were masters of external conformity combined with internal corruption. Somehow the work of the SJC must take into account the destruction that can be wrought in the life of a church by a determined minority circularizing the congregation with defamatory information while misusing and manipulating the judicial process.
Terry Johnson is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is Pastor of Independent Presbyterian Church in Savannah, Ga.
Related Posts:

Written by Darrell B. Harrison |
Friday, November 5, 2021
I believe it to be no disservice to the memory and legacy of Lemuel Haynes to say that the words of W. H. Morse are applicable also in describing what the Reformation accomplished—and is still accomplishing—in that it “revealed the Lord” to many from whom he had beforehand been hidden because of heretical teachings. But praise be to God that, as the apostle Paul declared in 2 Corinthians 3:16, “whenever a person turns the Lord, the veil is taken away” (NASB).

I am a first-generation Reformed Christian. Having been raised in the ecclesiastical tradition commonly referred to as the Black Church, terms such as reformed theology and doctrines of grace were never mentioned. Nor were such names as John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, or Jonathan Edwards referenced or cited. Puritans theologians such Thomas Watson, John Owen, and John Bunyan were equally absent from the preaching I sat under. And the only Martin Luther that I ever knew was the noted civil rights activist Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who, interestingly, had his birth name (Michael) changed to Martin by his father in honor of the great sixteenth-century German reformer.1
Notwithstanding the supernatural role the sovereignty of God played in providentially exposing me to Reformed theology in 2009, it was faithful men like John MacArthur and the late R. C. Sproul who were instrumental in my coming to embrace Reformed theology. But of the five Solas that comprise the doctrines of grace—Sola Gratia (grace alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (glory of God alone)—it was the doctrine of Sola Gratia that was especially life-changing for me as God used that doctrine to free me from the erroneous doctrine of salvation by works that I had been taught for many years, a doctrine Charles H. Spurgeon described as “criminal.”2
As an historic event, the Protestant Reformation may very well have been ignited on October 31, 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five theses to the church doors in Wittenberg, Germany. But today, more than five centuries later, the Reformation has become much more to me than a date in history. For me, the Protestant Reformation isn’t simply an occasion to be marked annually on a calendar, but is something very personal, because it is the Reformation that led to my own spiritual reformation; it was the doctrines of grace that God used to remove a veil of ignorance that had for decades blinded me to the truth.
Read More