Our dissent finds fault with the framing of the SJC’s Statement of the Issue, “Did the Complainant demonstrate…?” The Complaint was not dependent upon evidentiary sufficiency but on the Record of the Case (ROC). The correct Statement of the Issue would be: Does the Record of the Case show that the accused was guilty of holding and teaching views that are in conflict with the system of doctrine taught in the Westminster Standards, and further, did Pacific Northwest Presbytery err in rendering non-guilty verdicts on the accused?
…The question is not whether the Complainant provided sufficient evidence or proved his case; the question is rather whether the Record of the Case shows that Presbytery erred. The SJC has “the duty and authority to interpret and apply the Constitution of the Church according to its best abilities and understanding, regardless of the opinion of the lower court.” We dissent because we believe the SJC decision has failed to fulfill this duty. Read more»
TE Dominic Aquila RE Dave Haigler, “Dissenting Opinion in the SJC Leithart Case,” April 11, 2013
RESOURCES
- Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
- The Heidelblog Resource Page
- Heidelmedia Resources
- The Ecumenical Creeds
- The Reformed Confessions
- The Heidelberg Catechism
- Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
- Why I Am A Christian
- What Must A Christian Believe?
- Heidelblog Contributors
- Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to
Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization
Kudos to Elders Aquila and Haigler for the courage to dissent from the majority; the two concurring opinions read like straining gnats and swallowing camels.