Complaint

To Dr. Roy Taylor, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America.

And now, this fourteenth day of May, A.D. 2012, comes RE Gerald Hedman and complains against the action of Pacific Northwest Presbytery on April 27, 2012 in denying the complaint of October 18, 2011, RE Wesley Witt versus Pacific Northwest Presbytery, in connection with the trial of TE Peter Leithart on June 3-4, 2011, and in support of said complaint sets forth the following reasons:

• Whereas it is the obligation of teaching elders to uphold in their teaching the system of doctrine taught in the Westminster Standards (BCO 21-5.2), and;
• Whereas presbyteries are charged to “condemn erroneous opinions which injure the purity or peace of the Church” (BCO 13-9.f), and;
• Whereas, the same or similar views taught by Pelagius and Celestius on final justification, on perseverance, on law and grace, and on the imputation of sin and righteousness were condemned as heresy by the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., and;
• Whereas, the same or similar views were opposed by the Protestant Reformers when taught by the Roman Catholic Church and denominated as Pelagianism by Calvin, Luther, Melancthon and other Reformers in the sixteenth century, and;
• Whereas, the same or similar views when taught by Albert Barnes, Charles Finney and others in the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America in the nineteenth century resulted in heresy trials denominated as the “Pelagian” trials, and;
• Whereas the Standing Judicial Commission of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America ruled on March 5, 2010 that PNWP erred “in its handling of the Reports of the PNWP Study Committee appointed to examine Leithart’s fitness to continue as a PCA teaching elder” and sustained the complaint which was brought against the presbytery, and;
• Whereas the Standing Judicial Commission further directed Pacific Northwest Presbytery in March of 2010 that they may counsel TE Leithart “that the views set forth above constitute error that is injurious to the peace and purity of the church”; that they may offer him “pastoral advice on how to recant or make reparations for those views”; that they may counsel him that “he is free to take timely steps toward affiliation with some other branch of the visible church that is consistent with his views”; or, that failing any of the above, they “shall take steps to comply with its obligation under BCO 31-2”, and;
• Whereas PNWP did not counsel TE Leithart that this views “constitute error that is injurious to the peace and purity of the church”, and;
• Whereas TE Leithart at the October 2010 meeting of PNWP declined to recant of his views or make reparations for them, and;
• Whereas TE Leithart at the October 2010 meeting of PNWP informed the body that he would not transfer his credentials out of the PCA, and;
• Whereas PNWP indicted TE Leithart on January 17, 2011; received his not guilty plea on January 31, 2011; and conducted a trial on June 3-4, 2011 (the results were sealed until October 7, 2011) which resulted in a judgment that he was innocent of all charges, and;
• Whereas, PNWP’s Standing Judicial Commission deliberated upon and denied the complaint of October 18, 2011, and;
• Whereas, Pacific Northwest Presbytery upheld the court’s Standing Judicial Commission’s decision on April 27, 2012, and;
• Whereas TE Leithart continues to promiscuously teach and publish doctrines in flagrant contradiction of the Westminster Standards, to wit:

Read more»