After doing some more reading and seeing some developments on this topic, I need to bring a correction and update.

But first, the story so far…
As I talked about in my last post on the Federal Vision controversy, in October the Standing Judicial Commission of the Presbyterian Church in America delivered two rulings concerning Louisiana Presbytery and their examination of the Rev. Steve Wilkins concerning his adherence to the Westminster Standards.  Specifically, they found that while they conducted the required examination by the correct procedure, they did not judge Rev. Wilkins by the right standard.  Both rulings can be found in posts on Puritan Board.

In my last post I had left it there and said that I did not find in the decisions what the next step would be.  Well, I did not read carefully enough and was looking too closely at the second decision and should have been looking at the first.  There it is, after a reference to the second case that threw me off:

Amends – Pursuant to BCO
40-5 the Standing Judicial Commission hereby cites Louisiana Presbytery
to appear “to show what it has done or failed to do in the case in
question.” To implement this process, RE Samuel J. Duncan is hereby
appointed to: a) serve as prosecutor in this matter and conduct the
case, which is designated as Case 2007-14;…

And additional notes about the case including preparing an indictment, Louisiana Presbytery entering a plea by February 1, 2008, and going to trial March 5, 2008 if they plead “not guilty.”  It is important to note here that it is Louisiana Presbytery that is on trial here not Rev. Wilkins directly.

So that is my new findings and update there, but I also wanted to point out that one great source of information on the Federal Vision controversy, particularly thoughtful criticism, is the Rev. Lane Keister and his blog Green Baggins.  Well, Rev. Keister has been asked to be an assistant prosecutor on the case and therefore must now recuse himself from the discussion of the Federal Vision controversy.  So he has brought on board a set of equally eloquent interim bloggers and changed the name of the blog to Green Bagginses.  Because of the focus on Lane as an assistant prosecutor this is now a great source for information on the polity and procedure of the PCA SJC which might be of interest to other GA Junkies, whether or not you are following the Federal Vision controversy.  I would highlight Lane’s last post “ Major change to Green Baggins” where he announces he will be an assistant prosecutor and others will be filling in.  I would also recommend two posts on the process, “ Lane as assistant prosecutor: Good, Bad or Ugly?” and “ The PCA SJC Process in Brief.”  Happy reading.