An individual with the username “dgwired” with an IP address from Hillsdale, MI left the following comment under my post where I review D.G. Hart’s chapter from Engaging With Keller.
|Mr. Wells, would you think it odd for a Republican official to help a Democrat get elected? How about a Starbuck’s employee (in uniform) persuading potential customers to take their business to Caribou? I bet you would. So why do you not find it odd for Tim Keller not to show greater loyalty to his own denomination, one that greatly assisted financially the start of Redeemer NYC. If you understood Presbyterianism, you might have a better understanding of objections to Keller’s and your nonchalance about Presbyterian convictions. If you don’t think Presbyterianism is important, fine. Why someone who has taken vows (before God, akin to marriage vows) would not think Presbyterianism important is strange. I’m sure your wife would not be happy if you were that indifferent to the promises you made at your wedding. To explain that you were really only vowing to be faithful to “marriage” in the abstract, would probably not help.|
I am not sure if this is D.G. Hart or not, but the tone and content of the comment, along with the username and IP address seem to suggest this is Hart or someone pretending to be him.
Part of me doesn’t know how to respond to this comment, and some would say it doesn’t deserve a response. However, I would tell this commenter to consider two things.
First, is there not a commitment we make to the universal body of Christ when we are united to Christ? I know Hart and I would disagree on the debate of ordo salutis and union, but I think the question is an important one. I raised the issue in my review of Hart’s chapter as to whether he was a true ‘Apostles Creed’ Christian.
Second, wouldn’t a ‘true Presbyterian’ inform a TE’s presbytery if they feared he was breaking vows? Instead of writing snarky blogs and chapters to books, wouldn’t churchmanship require communicating this issue in a ‘Presbyterian’ manner?
I would also direct all my readers to my review of Hart’s chapter. I don’t think my concerns were answered by this commenter.