Last week I did an interview with the extremely patient guys from the Reformed Podcast Radio Show “Christ the Center” on the subject of Building Old School Churches.
If you can persevere past the point where “my mouth runneth over” in the beginning, it’s not a bad interview.
One of the most frequently debated questions amongst pastors in denominations that seem to trending ever more liberal is when they should leave. What is the straw that finally breaks the camel’s back? While some conservative men have been willing to stay in liberal denominations until they were forced out is such a policy really wise or biblical?
Before I attempt to tackle this question, let me state in the clearest possible terms that Pastors should deplore schism and not be seeking an excuse to abandon their denomination. Of all Christians, it should be the elders of the church who are least likely to be changing denominations like socks. If the government and constitution of their church remains the same as it was when they were first ordained, and their own beliefs remain the same then there are very few circumstances that should cause them to leave.
Let’s start the discussion by listing reasons that we should not leave our present denomination. Too many men have in Christian history have left their denominations or in a few cases refused to join themselves to any denomination merely because there are wolves within the sheepfold (Acts 20:29-31). When men do this they are failing to take into account that the visible church has always had a mixture of wheat and tares within her gates, and indeed that it is impossible to find an entirely pure church this side of glory. The church in every age, including that of the Apostles, has been afflicted with heretics and heresies, and yet God has always providentially preserved both His word and a godly remnant that has not “bowed the knee to Baal.” We have His assurance that death and Hell will never prevail over His church, but though she is “by schisms rent asunder and by heresies distressed,” she will ultimately triumph through Jesus Christ her Lord (Mat. 16:18).
The Elements of Public Worship Part VIII
Occasional Elements of Worship:
Religious Oaths, Vows, Solemn Fastings, and Thanksgivings Upon Special Occasions
“Stated festival-days, commonly called holy-days, have no warrant in the Word of God; but a day may be set apart, by competent authority, for fasting or thanksgiving, when extraordinary dispensations of Providence administer cause for them. When judgments are threatened or inflicted, or when some special blessing is to be sought and obtained, fasting is eminently seasonable. When some remarkable mercy or deliverance has been received, there is a special call to thanksgiving.” - Robert Shaw, The Reformed Faith
As we have been examining Old School Presbyterian worship our attention in previous installments has been focused on the ordinary elements of worship. That is, those elements that we are taught in the Bible to regularly observe in Lord’s Day services, regardless of what is going on in the world around us. Now, we turn our attention to those elements in our worship that are occasional. These are elements warranted in the Word of God, but which are only observed on special occasions dictated by God’s providence.
Introduction: Many of you will recognize Carl Bogue’s name. Carl has been a pastor in the PCA almost since it’s formation, and was for many years a stalwart defender of old school principles in that denomination. In addition to lecturing and teaching, Carl’s work has been published in a number of different venues and I have always been impressed by his grasp of Reformed history and biblical theology. I’m also glad that Carl has never hesitated to speak the truth about developments in the church, even when doing so made him decidedly unpopular. In that sense, Carl is an “Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!”
The following article by Pastor Bogue dealing with critical question of calling to the ministry and the problems associated with those who serve without having been genuinely called has been out of print for some time now, but when I heard about it in connection to online discussion of this post I recognized that the material in it was more relevant than ever and asked for his permission to reprint it, which he graciously granted, even going so far as to entirely retype it as it was first produced in the era of the typewriter!
Carl W. Bogue
“I did not send these prophets,
But they ran.
I did not speak to them,
But they prophesied.”
Jeremiah 23:21
Throughout the Scriptures there is a continuing theme of what we generally refer to as the doctrine of the call to the gospel ministry. Some were called and sent; others were not. For those called there was a promise of blessing. Judgment and lack of blessing were promised to those who ran unsent.
While many OSP churches have come round to using wine in the Lord’s Supper, there is a common misunderstanding among many churches that the kind of bread we use in communion should be unleavened. The biblical data does not support this position however, and the Old School Presbyterian consensus was always that the common leavened bread of our every-day use was the element we should be using at the Lord’s Supper.
Leaven itself is not sinful, even in the Old Testament it was used in the worship of the Lord. In Lev. 7:13 and Lev. 23:16-17 worshippers were commanded to bring sacrifices of leavened bread to the Temple. In the New Testament, leaven was used as an analogy for the gospel and the spread of the kingdom (Matt. 13:33, Luke 13:21) Although the Apostles were instructed by Christ to avoid the leaven of the Pharisees, Herodians, and Saducess, which was a reference to their doctrine and hypocrisy (Matthew 16:11-12, Mark 8:15, Luke 12:1), nowhere in the NT are believers instructed to avoid the leaven of bread or observe the Passover. The ceremonial avoidance of leaven in the Passover was one of the signs and shadows of the Old Testament and a part of the ceremonial law which Jesus fulfilled. It is bread and wine as ordinary elements that have an abiding value on earth and in heaven.
For those of you who may have read the On Deciding Whether A Child is Ready to Receive the Lord’s Supper and Contra Schenck posts and who are now looking for further resources on the status of the children of believers, I’d like to recommend the following audio resource:
Children of the Covenant - What is the Status of the Children of Believers?
This is a lecture given by Dr. Mark Herzer at the “Signs of Redemption” conference at Providence PCA in 2005. The conference discussed the Old School Presbyterian view of the sacraments and in so doing discussed a host of associated subjects including the status of Covenant Children, Paedocommunion, etc. I wish I had printed versions of the lectures to share, but unfortunately none are available.
In April of 1916, his ship Endurance crushed by ice, Ernest Shackleton, the Antarctic explorer left the majority of his crew on a bleak and barren rock called Elephant Island. Vowing to return and save them, he set out with 5 men in a tiny lifeboat to attempt the 800 mile journey to the whaling station on South Georgia. When he left, most of their provisions were running out, and the only prospect for food lay in the few Penguins on the island. Amazingly, Shackleton succeeded in making the perilous journey through the savage seas of the South Atlantic and landed on the wrong side of South Georgia. Never the one to give up, Shackleton then crossed over the mountains of the island, something no one else had ever done, and finally arrived at the whaling station a little over a month after he had set out. Unfortunately, the terrible Antarctic weather made the immediate rescue of his stranded crew on Elephant Island impossible. His men had to endure alone on Elephant Island for four more months, their hopes of rescue dwindling with their strength, until the day when Shackleton was finally able to make good on his vow and return to rescue them.
When Shackleton left his men, all he could offer them was a promise to try his hardest to return with help. They suffered terribly in the months while he was gone, having only what meager resources they had brought and what they could scrape from the rock they were stranded upon to survive on. That Shackleton made it to South Georgia and came back at all was only by the grace of God, and had he tarried much longer, it is certain that the men he was coming back for would have all died.
When Jesus Christ ascended into heaven He too was no longer bodily present with his followers, but Christ did not leave the church in the same manner that Shackleton was compelled to leave his men.
One of the questions that should concern pastors, Old School Presbyterian or not, is “what is the status of the children of believers or ‘Covenant Children’?” That question, after all, will dramatically affect the way in which we preach and teach and what we say when we baptize the children of believing parents and often it will be the make or break question that determines whether we press the youngest members to “close with Christ” and exercise their own personal faith in the Lord Jesus.
There are some excellent books that discuss this subject from an OSP point of view such as B.M. Palmer’s excellent work The Family. However, one of the books addressing the subject of covenant children, that is being recommended on that subject more and more often these days is The Presbyterian Doctrine of Children in the Covenant originally published as an article in Christendom in 1940, and subsequently reprinted by Wipf and Stock and now being reprinted by P&R. The fact that this work has come into vogue and is being reprinted by a Reformed publishing house and recommended by Reformed theologians is rather alarming for a number of reasons, not the least of which being how little people generally know about it’s author and the actual Presbyterian doctrine (as opposed to substance of Schenck’s thesis.) Let me try to briefly explain what I mean.
Intro: A little while ago, I asked Dr. Nick Willborn of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary (GPTS) if he would mind writing something for the Building Old School Churches Blog on the critical subject of Theological education. He graciously consented to do so, and sent the following essay, which I hope you will find thought provoking.
Thoughts on Ministerial Education and Preparation
by Dr. C.N. Willborn
Everyone knows you can’t put into a man what God has left out. (I know; a gargantuan assumption in a day of low churchism.) Namely, I mean, ministerial gifts and supernatural calling can’t be put into a man. That seems to be a lost concept today—that God calls and gifts the men of his choosing to be his mouthpieces, his shepherds, his rulers, in his church. To illustrate, let me recount some comments I heard from a seminary professor friend of mine a few years ago. “A lot of the divinity students,” he said, “are here [at the seminary] because a job in their degree field didn’t pan out immediately upon graduation from university. Let me explain: a fellow graduates from college and doesn’t find a job right away. He sits down with his campus minister [probably not his pastor and elders as he ought] and laments his predicament. The campus minister says something like this: ‘you always liked coming to the weekly meetings and helping with activities, maybe you ought to go to seminary.’ The young fellow takes this word from the campus minister as divine revelation and heads off for seminary. Three or four years later, he finishes a M.Div. and now he is almost certain to come into the ordained ministry even if the gifts and calling are not there.” That’s what I call coming into the gospel ministry through the back door.
One of the responsibilities of sessions is determining whether a non-communing child is now ready to receive the Lord’s Supper. Over the years, it has become the custom in many Reformed churches, even Old School Presbyterian (OSP) ones, to assume that member children will be ready to come to the table at around the age of 13, and often it is the case that when they reach that age, they will simply be run through a communicants class and admitted to the table. In those circumstances, the process often becomes more of an age related right-of-passage - a Christian Bar Mitzvah if you will - than a serious inquiry into the actual spiritual condition of the child. And while it is sometimes the case that 13 will indeed be the age when a child comes to the table, the truth is that there is no magical age at which they are suddenly “ready.” Rather, children should be admitted to the table based on their own spiritual development and maturity. Our session, for instance, has interviewed and admitted six year olds whom we judged to be ready, and turned away older children whom we did not feel were ready to come.
The Elements of Public Worship Part VII
The Due Administration and Right Receiving of the Sacraments Instituted by Christ
Pt. 2 of 2
“Q 169: How hath Christ appointed bread and wine to be given and received in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper?
A 169: Christ hath appointed the ministers of His Word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, to set apart the bread and wine from common use, by the word of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer; to take and break the bread, and to give both the bread and the wine to the communicants: who are, by the same appointment, to take and eat the bread, and to drink the wine, in thankful remembrance that the body of Christ was broken and given, and His blood shed, for them.” - The Westminster Larger Catechism Q&A 169
Previously we discussed what a sacrament is, and, in particular, we looked at the Sacrament of Baptism. Now we will be examining the other Sacrament that Christ gave to the Church: the Lord’s Supper.
Sean Lucas of Covenant Theological Seminary has posted an excellent article on his blog on the essential incompatibility of Sola Scriptura and the Regulative Principle with the practice of observing invented Holy Days in the worship of church.
Lucas notes in his article, “While I am aware that some would make a biblical argument for using the church calendar based on the OT development of sacrifical feast days (an argument that is not convincing to me), I would suggest that what we have for our place in the redemptive, biblical drama is actually a rhythym of 52 feasts days a year–the Lord’s Day in which Word, Sacraments, and prayer constitute the heart of the church’s “calendar.” “
His comment regarding the specious argument that the commanded Old Testament holy days provide the pretext for the invention of New Testament Holy Days reminded me of the comments of several Puritan divines, such as Thomas Watson, who dealt with the same argument as it was advanced by Roman Catholics and Anglicans in their own day. Watson answered:
“The ceremonies of the law, which God himself ordained, are now abrogated, and out of date. Christ the substance being come, the shadows fly away; and therefore the apostle calls the legal ceremonies carnal rites. Heb 9: 10. If we may not use those Jewish ceremonies which God once appointed, then not those which he never appointed.”
The Due Administration and Right Receiving of the Sacraments Instituted by Christ
Pt. 1 of 2
Q92: What is a sacrament?
A92: A sacrament is an holy ordinance instituted by Christ, wherein, by sensible signs, Christ, and the benefits of the new covenant, are represented, sealed, and applied to believers.” – The Westminster Shorter Catechism Q&A 92
“For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you…” (1 Cor. 11:23)
During His earthly ministry The Lord Jesus Christ, instituted two Sacraments to be perpetually observed in the worship of the church until his return. These sacraments are Baptism (Matthew 28:19) and the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:23). Each of these sacraments plays a vital role in the life and worship of the church.
If you aren’t familiar with Pastor Mark Dever’s “Nine Marks” organization, you should be. Nine Marks exists to:
“cultivate and encourage churches characterized by these nine marks: Expositional Preaching, Biblical Theology, Biblical Understanding of the Good News, Biblical Understanding of Conversion, Biblical Understanding of Evangelism, Biblical Understanding of Membership, Biblical Church Discipline, Promotion of Christian Discipleship and Growth, Biblical Understanding of Leadership”
so there are many places where the mission of Nine Marks and the mission of this Blog overlap.
Recently Nine Marks sent out their 2007 Report Card, and on the first page of the Report Card itself was a quote from Dever that I found intriguing and perhaps one that most modern evangelical churches should give some consideration to:
I want to recommend a wonderful resource being made available by Immanuel Presbyterian Church, an Old School Presbyterian congregation in Norfolk, VA. Immanuel is making the entire Westminster Shorter Catechism available for download in high quality MP3 format. While this is not the first time the WSC has been recorded, this is the most professional version of it I have heard to date. This is a wonderful resource to make available to the members of your congregation, particularly so they can practice the catechism as they drive to and from work.
Also available for download on Immanuel’s “resources” page, are Pastor Bill Harrell’s “Minister’s Letters” in PDF format. I have been reading these for several years now and have often used them as meditations for prayer meetings, etc. I would commend them to you, especially as they give us a “pattern of sound words” that will go a long way in teaching young pastors how to write to their congregations.
BTW - Speaking of the Westminster Shorter Catechism, if you are ever looking for resources exegeting and explaining any of its questions and answers, do take a look at the Westminster Shorter Catechism Project of the Bible Presbyterian Church.
Intro: Admittedly this has only a tenuous connection to the subject of building Old School Churches, but today is 34th Anniversary of one of the darkest days in American history, the anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade Supreme court decision of January 22, 1973. Because the simple phrase “34th Anniversary” doesn’t really carry the weight it should Here are some comparative statistics that should put the effects of that decision in a more stark light:
Population of Iraq: 26,074,906
Population of Afghanistan: 29,928,987
Population of Canada: 31,006,347
Population of California (the most populous US state 
35,484,453
Total Number of Legal Abortions in the USA since 1973: 48,589,993
If abortions continue at anything like their current rate, in less than a decade we will have topped the death toll for the costliest conflict in human history, the Second World War, which killed 54 million people. Americans, will have legally conducted the greatest bloodletting in human history at home in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.
So to mark this sad anniversary, I’m publishing the text of a sermon I preached on the subject 2 years and 3 million lost lives ago on 1/23/2005 entitled Pleading for the Defenseless. I’ve updated the dates and stats to reflect the current situation:
Pleading for the Defenseless
Prov. 31:8 “Open your mouth for the speechless, In the cause of all who are appointed to die.”
There are many anniversaries that are observed with fond memories, such as weddings, graduations, and there are some anniversaries that while they involved loss are observed with pride, the anniversary of D-Day for instance. Some anniversaries are observed with sorrow, but are accompanied with renewed resolve and a determination that their like not be repeated – 9/11 for instance.
There are, however, a few events in history that should be a cause for national shame. August 24, 1572 for instance. On that day throughout the nation of France, without warning French soldiers and Roman Catholic mobs fell upon unarmed French Protestants, and slaughtered over 100,000 men, women, and children. It was said that the rivers were so choked with bodies that no one ate fish for many months. The St. Bartholomew’s day Massacre, as it came to be called, was greeted with jubilation in Rome and the Pope Gregory XIII had a medal struck to honor the occasion of the massacre of French Christians.
But as terrible as the anniversary of St. Bartholomew’s day is, it actually pales in comparison with one our nation just observed. Today, January 22nd, is the 34th Anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, in which the Supreme Court of the United States in a 7-2 decision officially removed all legal protection from babies in the womb. As of January 22, 1973 the person-hood of the unborn was legally revoked, and their killing for whatever reason was sanctioned.
In First Corinthians the apostle Paul wrote what was probably one of the most difficult letters of his life, he was writing to a church that was in crisis, in every sense. There was no unity and mutual love in the church, instead they were breaking up into individual cliques and parties. Theologically, on several issues they were in danger of leaving the faith once for all delivered to the saints and becoming heretical, morally they were fostering a spirit of permissiveness that was causing them to tolerate gross immorality. In terms of their worship, they were becoming addicted to excitement and showy sign gifts, and were turning up their noses at the solid preaching and teaching of Christ crucified. They were showing themselves to be desperately immature, not able to absorb the solid meat that they should have been craving. They were a sensual people addicted to sensation, and showed themselves to be carnal and not spiritual. Paul lamented: “And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able; for you are still carnal.”
It’s almost like Paul was writing to the church today rather than in the first century! I hope that if we learn anything from the eerie similarities between the church then and now it will be that the problems of modern evangelicalism are nothing new, and that the answer to the problems of the Corinthian church are also the answers that we desperately need to be applying today.
Intro: Over the years as I’ve spoken to members of Reformed churches, I’ve noticed that far too many don’t know what to do when the door-bell rings and they find themselves face to face with Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormons. In most cases they simply try their hardest to get them to go away as quickly as possible, and a few have admitted to me that they will pretend they aren’t home instead of opening the door.
In doing this we are missing an opportunity to witness for Christ to people who are in the most pitiable of situations; they think they have entered via the narrow gate and are on their way to salvation, but are in fact following blind guides down the broad path that leads to destruction. Witnessing to cultists is far from easy, but I would argue that it falls under the calling of all Christians to “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15)
Accordingly, I’ve put together this brief guide designed for laymen and those with no prior experience on how to begin the process of “witnessing to the (false) witnesses.” Rather than reinventing the wheel, I’ve also included links to the profiles and beliefs of the JWs and Mormons provided online by CARM (Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry).
Also OSP pastors and planters take note, if your congregation members can’t/won’t defend or present their faith to cultists, chances are very poor that they will be willing to do so with friends, relatives, and coworkers as those confrontations are actually in many respects more difficult because those confrontations are far more personal. It’s one thing to tell someone you’ve never met before and quite possibly never will again that you think they are going to hell, but it’s another thing entirely to say that to grandma or the coworker they see every day.
The Elements of Public Worship Part VI
Public Confession of Our Faith
“The first part of 1 Timothy 3:16 runs: “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion’ (R.S.V). The Apostle then proceeds to quote the hymn in which the mystery of the Gospel is enshrined – a wonderful truth about the Person and place of Jesus Christ, formerly kept secret but now fully revealed by God – and, in this way, to trace the career of the Church’s Lord from His pre-existence, through His incarnate life upon earth, His resurrection and ascension, to His final glory in the Father’s presence.
But his Specimen of Christian hymnody is much more than a canticle, composed to fill a place in services of worship: the hymn of 1 Timothy 3:16 is a clear instance of an early confession of faith by which the Church gave expression to the fundamental facts and truths of the Gospel. The first words, which are quoted above, tell us explicitly: ‘Great indeed, we confess…’ At this point hymns and creeds meet and overlap.” - Ralph P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church
Hi All,
A while back I said the following in a comment:
I should stress that the commonalities between Dutch Reformed, Presbyterian, and Baptists of the Puritan or “Root and Branch Reformation” type far, far, outweigh the differences. The differences between say A’Brakel and Watson are so small as to be almost insignificant. That’s why on the Blog I’m comfortable quoting Baptists like Broadus and Spurgeon or Dutch Reformed like Bavinck. Many of our readers are URCNA, Reformed Baptist and so on, and my favorite conference of the year (the Banner of Truth Minister’s conference) has that central unifying theme of Puritan experimental Calvinism that brings all of these movements together. I dare say as an Old School Presbyterian I have FAR more in common with say a conservative from the URCNA than an Anglo-Catholic or Emerging “Presbyterian” from my own denomination.
and because of that I was highly encouraged to see that our Reformed brothers in the URCNA have started blogs dedicated to planting the continental equivalents of OSP churches. For instance Kevin Efflandt’s “Planting Confessional Churches” site . Along those lines I would also recommend URCNA Pastor Mike Brown’s recent article on rethinking the purpose of the “Cry Room.”
May their tribe increase!
I wanted to share something brief and unpolished that I hope will be of service to Old School Presbyterian church planters and Pastors as they seek to persuade their members that they play a critical role in the process of growing the church and reaching the lost.
I remember that over ten years ago when I began seminary in Philadelphia, Joy and I visited 13 Presbyterian churches in that area – I’m not exaggerating, I counted them after we finally decided which church we were going to go to. There are a lot of PCA and OPC churches in the Philadelphia area both because it is close to a Presbyterian seminary, and because it is one of the historic centers of Presbyterianism. We found that in most churches, the preaching ranged from o.k. to excellent, and that many if not most of the churches had what one might call fairly traditional worship, I think that only a few churches were decisively knocked out of the running for us because of either the preaching or the worship. I recall that one large church had a full orchestra - wind and brass - and when they were all playing you literally couldn’t hear yourself sing, that some churches had deaconesses, and that there were churches where the preaching was watered down enough that I knew I wasn’t going to be challenged or pushed out of my comfort zone (and the last thing I need is to be tickled or pumped-up every Sunday, my head is big enough as it is.) But with most of the churches we visited the thing that we noticed was how closed and cliquish they were. Now I can virtually guarantee you that most of the members of those churches didn’t realize that and probably would have been shocked if someone told them. But in most of those churches, we didn’t actually feel noticed. In some churches, no one except perhaps the people who were “official greeters” actually spoke to visitors and in a few churches, literally no one spoke to us - we walked in we sat down, we worshiped and walked out without actually having interacted with anyone.
I was considering calling this post “equip the chickens!” after a comment from a conversation I had with a church planter some time ago. We were discussing ways of growing an Old School Presbyterian church plant and I mentioned that while having a good website and being in the phonebook were both important, that the primary means of growth was going to be via word of mouth as members of the church evangelized the lost and invited the unchurched. This provoked a rather disheartened sigh from the other pastor and the comment, “I’m afraid that most our people are too chicken to do any personal evangelism” to which I responded, “well how have you equipped and encouraged your chickens for battle?” He laughed but confessed he hadn’t done anything along those lines and didn’t really even know where to start. I had two suggestions for him, first beginning a simple program of evangelism training and second, producing a gospel tract with a gospel presentation, and information about the church. I’ll discuss methods of going about training your congregation to “always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have… with gentleness and respect” in a follow-on posting, but for now I wanted to discuss how to go about preparing a simple tract. I’ll be using as an example one we are currently handing out:
If you aren’t familiar with John Piper, you really should be. Piper is a Baptist Pastor, and Reformed, and he has written some amazingly insightful books. He has quite an ability to draw out and write on the experiential or heart issues of the Christian faith. Normally he writes for Christian laypeople, but in 2002 he brought out a book intended specifically for Pastors that caused quite a stir, frankly I wish it had caused more of a stir than it did, it was entitled – Brothers, We are Not Professionals.
The reason why it caused such a stir was that Piper was going directly against the dominant model for pastors and for churches; the business model. In the business model, the church is just another business peddling products and services, and the pastor as a professional, a manager and salesman in that organization.
The Elements of Public Worship Part V
The Singing of Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs with Grace in the Heart
Part 2 of 2
“IT is the duty of Christians to praise God publickly, by singing of psalms together in the congregation, and also privately in the family. In singing of psalms, the voice is to be tunably and gravely ordered; but the chief care must be to sing with understanding, and with grace in the heart, making melody unto the Lord.” – The Directory for the Publick Worship of God
Previously we discussed why it is our scriptural duty and privilege to sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs in the public worship of God. Now we will discuss how we should go about singing them.
One of the questions that comes up frequently when Presbyterian churches are getting started or later after they have grown in size is whether or not there should be “rotating” or “term eldership.” Under this system, ruling elders (but interestingly, not teaching elders) spend a period of time as active members of the session, and then become “inactive” for a while during which time they continue to hold the title of “elder” but do not perform any of the duties of the office. In some churches they must once again receive an affirmative vote from the congregation in order to return to active status, so on occasion “term eldership” effectively becomes term limits for ruling elders. I plan on addressing this subject at length in following articles, but for the moment, let me just reaffirm what I said in a response to a question regarding term eldership, namely that I don’t think it fits well with Old School Presbyterian ecclesiology, and more importantly for people concerned with being as true to the scriptures as possible in their church government, it has no support in the scriptures.
Many years ago John Murray wrote an article addressing this subject and arguing against the institution of term eldership, here is a summary of Murray’s arguments against Term Eldership which was originally printed in the Presbyterian Guardian and is included as chapter 29 of volume 2 of his collected works:
The Elements of Public Worship Part V
The Singing of Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs with Grace in the Heart
Part 1 of 2
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.” (Col. 3:16)
The singing of praise unto the Lord is a vitally important element in the scriptural worship of God. Throughout the Bible we read that the people of God throughout the ages have responded to his self-revelation and mighty acts of redemption on their behalf with an outpouring of songs of praise. For instance, after the parting of the Red Sea when the people of God where miraculously delivered from danger and the armies of Pharaoh destroyed, we read that Moses and the sons of Israel sang a song of praise to the Lord celebrating his mercy and their deliverance (Exodus 15:1).
The Book of Psalms, which contains songs, meditations, and prayers, is a wonderful source of divinely inspired hymns of praise. It has provided the church in all the ages with a rich compendium of theologically impeccable and spiritually edifying songs for use in its worship.
PREACHERS AND POLITICS
By Robert L. Dabney
From “Political Preachers,” The Texas Presbyterian (May 4, 1894): 1 and “The Gospel Idea of Preaching,” Presbyterial Critic 1:7 (July 1855): 315-319.
The appropriate mission of the minister is to preach the gospel for the salvation of souls. The servant who, by diverging into some other project not especially enjoined on him, nor essential for him to perform, precludes himself from his allotted task, is clearly guilty of disobedience to his master, if not of treason to his charge.
Now, questions of politics must ever divide the minds of men; for they are not decided by any recognized standards of truth, but by the competitions of interest and passion. Hence, it is inevitable that he who embarks publicly in the discussion of these questions must become the object of party animosities and obnoxious to those whom he opposes. How then can he successfully approach them as the messenger of redemption? By thus transcending his proper functions, he criminally prejudices his appointed work with half the community, for the whole of which he should affectionately labour.
God has reserved for our spiritual concerns one day out of seven, and has appointed one place into which nothing shall enter, except the things of eternity, and has ordained an order of officers, whose sole charge is to remind their fellow-men of their duty to God. Surely, it is a tribute small enough to pay the transcendent weight of eternal things, to reserve the season and the place sacredly to them, which God has set apart for hem. This surely is not too much for resisting the tendencies of man toward the sensuous and toward forgetfulness of the spiritual life. But when the world sees a portion or the whole of this sacred season abstracted from spiritual concerns, and given to secular agitations, and that by the appointed guardians of sacred things, it is the most emphatic possible disclosure of unbelief. It says to men, “Eternity is not of more moment than time; heaven is not better than earth; a man is profited if he gains the world and loses his soul, for do you not see that we postpone eternity to time, and heaven to earth, and redemption to political triumph—we who are the professed guardians of the former?” One great source, therefore, of political preaching may always be found in the practical unbelief of [the preacher] himself; as one of its sure fruits is infidelity among the people. He is not feeling the worth of souls, nor the “powers of the world to come,” nor “the constraining love of Christ” as he should; if he were, no sense of the temporal importance of his favorite political measures, however urgent, would cause the wish to abstract an hour from the few allowed him for saving souls. We solemnly protest to every minister who feels the impulse to introduce the secular into his pulpit, that he thereby betrays a decadent faith and spiritual life in his own breast. Let him take care! He is taking the first steps toward backsliding, apostasy, damnation.
Unless you have been vacationing in an Amish community for the last few months, you will have noticed that America is once again gearing up for a Presidential election, and inevitably questions regarding the nature of the relationship between the church and the political process will be raised. Inevitably many churches, both liberal and conservative, will do all they can to see that a party or a candidate is elected, including handing out voter guides, preaching blatantly political messages, or even inviting candidates to occupy their pulpits. Some denominations have become so politicized that the docket of their General Assemblies reads more like the agenda of a political party than a court of the church. But is this right?
The following is a rambling post intended to cover multiple topics, none of which are necessarily related. With that disclaimer out of the way:
1. Andy, I hope you really enjoyed your vacation. I was born in Hawaii (lived there until I was 2, so no childhood memories to speak of, though there is one involving a plate of spinach, but I will save that for another time). I have visited the Islands a handful of times with my parents growing up (you haven’t seen the big island until you have done it squeezed into a camper trailer with two younger siblings). Also, thanks to my parents and their time-share membership, I was able to honeymoon on the big Island and celebrate my 10th wedding anniversary on Maui. It is one of may favorite places in all the world (after Texas of course…no better place than Texas…can I get an “amen”!) Anyway, all that to say, that I hope you found a lot to enjoy, a nice time of relaxing and many happy memories, welcome back brother!
2. I would like to ask the “powers that be”, the other contributors to this blog (and that includes the ones who have yet to contribute…hint, hint, Fred!) if it would be acceptable to broaden the scope of the blog. The justification of it would be that I would like to write about or comment on various things related to an OSP perspective. So it wouldn’t always have to be explicitly about planting an OSP church. I think I could find more to write about and comment on if that would be possible. However, if that would dilute the real purpose of this blog beyond what would be good for it, then I humbly submit and will strive to find something to write about related to OSP churches. (talk amongst yourselves, but also please eventually chime in on what you think about a somewhat broader scope to the blog…I am speaking to the other contributors here primarily).
3. Speaking of OSP issues, I have been doing some thinking (and need to find some time to do more reading) about the spirituality of the church. What is the church supposed to devote itself to? With a presidential election on the horizon and talk everywhere about the church’s mission, and its need to be concerned with justice and mercy, what is the answer from an OSP perspective. Just in outline form for now, I have been thinking that our job as the church is to “gather and perfect the saints”. And that what I am to do as an individual Christian is related to, but different from what the church is to do. I, as a Christian, should promote (as far as my station in life allows) justice and mercy in my nation and in my neighborhood and relationships. But what I do as an individual Christian is not synonymous with what the Church is to do. I am to vote as a citizen of my nation, but the church is not to tell me who to vote for. The church teaches me God’s word and God’s standards, but I am to apply those truths as an individual citizen in my exercise of my right to vote. I use this as an illustration (though it may be a poor one) of the difference between what I am to do as an individual Christian versus what the church, as the church, is to do. There is a relationship between the two, but it is not one for one. Besides we no longer live in a theocratic kingdom, like OT Israel, so that what was one (church and state issues) is now distinct. Anyway, I need to read and think more, but it has been on my mind and I post it here with the other stuff to introduce it and perhaps talk more about it in a future post. I am very open, by the way, to correction and being taught. I may be a contributor to this blog, but I am by no means an authority on these things. For me, this is more like thinking out loud (through my fingers as I type…bad metaphor, eh?). It is meant to express my thoughts and hopefully draw good comments so that as iron sharpens iron, we can sharpen each other.
4. And finally, I want to put in a plug for a book. John Piper has written a book as a response to N.T. Wright and his particular take on Paul. I am about half way through with it and must say that it is one of the best books, dealing with this topic (of the NPP) that I have ever read. If this topic concerns you in the least (either pro or con), you need to get and read this book. You can read more and order it here: http://www.gnpcb.org/product/9781581349641
I now return you to your regularly scheduled program.
mark
“Working without resting, being busy without ever taking a vacation, performing all the arduous duties pertaining to ministerial or missionary activity and not making a retreat for relaxation, discussion, prayer, and meditation, will never do. Even Jesus, because of the heavy burden he had taken upon himself, needed periods of withdrawal (Luke 4:42). So did the disciples. It was for this reason that he invited them to come away with him to a remote place, where they would be able to rest up.” - William Hendriksen
Even OSP Pastors need to take a vacation once in a while, I’m going on mine tomorrow. This will be the first time in seven years my wife and I have been away together without the children, as well as the first time we’ve ever been to Hawaii. So, probably little or no posting from me during the next ten days. Expect more when I get back, D.V.!
