Jesuits are not impressive

I like to focus on Peter Leithart and Doug Wilson because I know, from other arenas, their type. Unregenerate intellectuals who approach God's Word with all the vain, wet arrogance of the Academy. Struggling to understand biblical doctrine - when you've yet to be given the Spirit - is OK, if you are doing it humbly and honestly. Leithart and Wilson refuse to humble themselves to the Word and the Spirit, but worse, they choose to mock the Word and the Spirit in their very approach and decision to teach and revise and do so in the rankest undergraduate post-modern rhetorically sophistical manner. They grin and give each other high-fives at each little victory they score in annoying God's people.

Look at this little ridiculously ignorant and dishonest recent blog post by Leithart:

Judgment by works
[Theology - Soteriology | Link | Print]
Of all the declarations of the PCA FV Study Report, the most mystifying is the one that reaffirms justification by faith and rejects final justification according to works. This became the central issue in the "debate" on the floor of GA, and this was likely the reason for the resounding support for the report.

It's mystifying first because, RC Sproul to the contrary, justification by faith is not being challenged.

It's also mystifying because the Confession clearly teaches judgment according to works (33.1): "In which day, not only the apostate angels shall be judged, but likewise all persons that have lived upon earth shall appear before the tribunal of Christ, to give an account of their thoughts, words, and deeds; and to receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil."

The committee, by contrast, says, "The view that justification is in any way based on our works, or that the so-called 'final verdict of justification' is based on anything other than the perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ received through faith alone, is contrary to the Westminster Standards."

These two statements are, to put it delicately, hard to square with each other. Perhaps the committee is using "justification" or "final verdict of justification" in a sense different from how I understand those. When anyone associated with the FV says "final verdict of justification," they mean "final judgment."

It appears that the committee condemns the very view that WCF 33.1 articulates, since the Confession says explicitly that what we receive at the final judgment will be "according to what they have done," which is clearly something other than the "perfect obedience and satisfaction of Christ received through faith alone."

posted by Peter J. Leithart on Friday, June 15, 2007 at 02:38 PM

It's dishonest because Leithart knows God's justified elect are judged regarding their thoughts, words, and deeds only in the context of degree of reward. Those very thoughts, words, and deeds, when they have fallen short of the glory of God post-regeneration are what have been forgiven by the blood of Christ and faith in Christ just as all sin in the life of the believer, pre- and post-regeneration has been forgiven.

Notice, by the way, Leithart's second paragraph above. Justification by faith is "not" being challenged by Federal Visionaries. No. Because he just stated it. Notice he states it as if it's some kind of universally-agreed upon given. He quickly moves on. As well the little devil should.

Leithart and Wilson (Wilson extravagantly so) are Jesuits currently wearing Protestant garb. I suspect, though, that Leithart is more hamstrung by his juvenile intellectual pretensions than Wilson who is more a classic and conscious Romanist attempting to defile the truth from within camps still holding to the truth.