White Horse Inn Blog

Know what you believe and why you believe it

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

A Review of the Manhattan Declaration

Posted by on in General
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 182
  • 37 Comments
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print
The Manhattan Declaration, released November 20, 2009, firmly yet winsomely takes the stand in defense of truths that are increasingly undermined in contemporary Western societies, including our own.  Drafted by Princeton law professor Robert George and evangelical leaders Chuck Colson and Timothy George, this declaration focuses on three issues: (1) the inherent dignity and rights of each human life (including the unborn) by virtue of being created in God’s image; (2) the integrity of marriage as a union of one man and one woman, and (3) religious liberty, also anchored in the image of God.

There is a lot of wisdom in this document.  For one, it does not breathe the vitriol that is often too common on the religious right and left.  In this declaration one will find more light than heat, yet a sense of personal concern for the humaneness of the common culture, even for those who are pursuing antithetical agendas.  May this more thoughtful approach to public engagement become more characteristic!

The framers wisely appeal to natural law as well as to Scripture and its revealed doctrines.  After all, these three issues are grounded in creation.  They are deliverances of the law that God inscribed on every human conscience, not of the gospel that God announced beforehand through his prophets and fulfilled in his incarnate Son’s life, death, and resurrection.

However, it is just for that reason that I stumbled over a few references to the gospel in this declaration.  It took me back to the old days of “Evangelicals and Catholics Together,” when I joined others in raising concerns with Chuck Colson, Richard John Neuhaus, J. I. Packer, and others that this 1996 document announced agreement on the gospel while recognizing remaining disagreement over justification, merit, and the like. Many true and wonderful things were affirmed in that ECT document, but the gospel without “justification through faith alone apart from works” is, as I said then, like chocolate chip cookies without the chips.

This declaration continues this tendency to define “the gospel” as something other than the specific announcement of the forgiveness of sins and declaration of righteousness solely by Christ’s merits.  The document recites a host of Christian contributions to Western culture, adding, “Like those who have gone before us in the faith, Christians today are called to proclaim the Gospel of costly grace, to protect the intrinsic dignity of the human person and to stand for the common good.  In being true to its own calling, the call to discipleship, the church through service to others can make a profound contribution to the public good." The declaration concludes, “It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season. May God help us not to fail in that duty.”  In an interview, Mr. Colson repeatedly referred to this document as a defense of the gospel and the duty of defending these truths as our common proclamation of the gospel as Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and evangelicals.

Having participated in conversations with Mr. Colson over this issue, I can assure readers that this is not an oversight.  He shares with Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI the conviction that defending the unborn is a form of proclaiming the gospel.  Although these impressive figures point to general revelation, natural law, and creation in order to justify the inherent dignity of life, marriage, and liberty, they insist on making this interchangeable with the gospel.

The error at this point is not marginal.  It goes to the heart of the more general confusion among Christians of every denominational stripe today, on the left and the right.  The law is indeed the common property of all human beings, by virtue of their creation in God’s image.  As Paul says in Romans 1 and 2, unbelievers may suppress the truth in unrighteousness, but the fact that they know this revelation makes them accountable to God.  However, in chapter 3, Paul explains that a different revelation of God’s righteousness has appeared from heaven: God’s justification of the ungodly through faith alone in Christ alone.

When we confuse the law and the gospel, there is inevitably a confusion of Christ and culture, and there is considerable evidence in Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and evangelical histories to demonstrate the real dangers of this confusion.  In this otherwise helpful declaration, the confusion is evident once more.  Alongside the theological claims that witness to the dignity of all people created in God’s image, Christianity seems to be defended as a major stake-holder in Western culture and society.  By tending to confuse the gospel with the law, special revelation with general revelation, and Christianity with Western civilization, the document actually undermines its own objective—namely, to defend the dignity of human life as a universal moral imperative.  Not only Christians, but non-Christians, are recipients of this general revelation.

The church has a responsibility to proclaim the gospel of free justification in Christ and to witness to God’s universal rights over humanity in his law.  This law is sufficient to arraign us all before God’s court, pronouncing every one of us guilty for failing to love God and our neighbor, and it remains the rule for all duties and responsibilities that we have to contribute to the flourishing of our culture and the good of our neighbors.  Yet the gospel itself is the testimony to God’s act of redemption in Jesus Christ, which delivers us from guilt, condemnation, and the tyranny of sin.  The commands of the law, both natural and clarified in Scripture, ring in the conscience of everyone, but the gospel is the only “power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes…” (Romans 1:16).

-Mike Horton
0

Overall Rating (0)

0 out of 5 stars

Leave your comments

Post comment as a guest

0
Your comments are subjected to administrator's moderation.
terms and condition.

People in this conversation

Load Previous Comments
  • Guest - Gregory

    Babies are being killed by the thousands daily. the right to speak out against homosexuality is threatened. And what do we do, Christians? We argue about the soldiers' different uniforms! How petty! Think clearly. Would Jesus Christ be more concerned about the people attending or the ones in need of healing? The Bible is clear on this issue. Jesus protected the innocent, healed the sick and admonished the sinner. He did not mind if His followers were of varying degrees of understanding the Gospel. He taught them all. He healed them all. Why must we squabble about which version of the Gospel might or might not be mentioned, while babies die and we lose our rights to speak openly about our faith.
    THis is what is wrong with Protestantism- it refuses to embrace anyone except those that agree with each new doctrine it creates. This is why the only way to unite Christians is to bring them back to the shepherd and faith they left so long ago. Protestantism has failed. It's time to swim the Tiber before it is too late. I did so 15 years ago and am so glad to finally be home. You see, our shepherd warns us about the dangers- like contraception that led to the mass killings of unborn children. Christ left us the Church; it's time to humble ourselves and accept His way, not our own failed methods.

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Beau McKinley Boyd

    "THis is what is wrong with Protestantism- it refuses to embrace anyone except those that agree with each new doctrine it creates. This is why the only way to unite Christians is to bring them back to the shepherd and faith they left so long ago. Protestantism has failed."

    He's right, guys, we are clearly not as embracing as he is of those who disagree with us....
    =)

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Beau McKinley Boyd

    Interesting side note for us Protestants who aren't united under the Romanist "shepherd" we left:

    Quite a few of these unified Romanists voted for.... dun dun dun: Obama. Hmmm, "Babies are being killed by the thousands daily. the right to speak out against homosexuality is threatened," so Catholics unite under the Protestan's lost Shepherd and vote in favor of these things!! Yeah, it's only the Protestants who aren't united boys. Guess we'd better pack up our uniforms and swim the Tiber back to Trent. Good thing that good old Avignon Papacy issue cleared up all the confusion! Gerry Matatics is definitely confirmation of the unification of Rome!

    http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2008/11/barack-obama-how-religions-voted.html

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Yarb

    I appreciate the article and the comments. I heard James White (on Dec 17 2009 podcast) give a very good response to comments by Dr.Ligon Duncan on signing. While being enriched by the ministries of many of the evangelicals who signed, I can't help but wonder if this is a creeping, slow seduction to, if not to 'cross the Tiber', then at least to get signers' feet wet, thereby paralyzing their witness to the Gospel.
    One cannot fight for the benefits of the Gospel by allying with those who don't have the Gospel.It is the salt that preserves.
    I can't imagine what I would say to Jesus if I had to tell Him "I was trying to save the things that pass away by giving up the thing that saves!"

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - Beau McKinley Boyd

    Yarb, I think you hit the nail right on the head. That is exactly why the reformed are opposing this. James White is a personal friend of mine and I think both he and Dr. Horton have done a great service to the Kingdom by exposing this Tiber-foot-watering that COlson and the others are trying to pawn off as "gospel." I loved your last comment about answering Jesus, Bro! It makes me proud to know that I share the Gospel with others who actually care about our Lord and His Kingdom and aren't willing to paddle around in the Tiber as if social Gospel issues were at stake here. Lord bless you, Bro!

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • Guest - FNF

    Excellent article. I wonder if you are aware that others have taken a similar stance. Pastor and author Ted Weiland of MissionToIsrael.org recently preached a similar sermon called "Why I’m Not Signing the Manhattan Declaration" - 'Why, in light of 2 Corinthians 6:14-18, I refuse to sign The Manhattan Declaration, despite its excellent points.'
    If interested one can hear it at:
    http://www.kingdompromises.org/kingdompromises_audio/836.mp3

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] Michael Horton [...]

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] the entire statements from R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, Alistair Begg, Michael Horton, and James White on why they would NOT sign The Manhattan [...]

    Like 0 Short URL:
  • [...] • Michael Horton [...]

    Like 0 Short URL: