Protestant Reformed Churches

[satz]

What are your views on the PRC?

Are they orthodox?

I have heard quite a lot about them and seen links to their literature on other sites on the web. Are they worth checking out?

 

[CalsFarmer]

I googled it and came up with

http://www.prca.org

Check out the website and read their articles and make your own decision.

There is a long list of their articles. Some of which are interesting as the one about The Evil of Drama, where they discuss the 'doctrine of drama'. After reading several of the articles In my humble opinion after being a part of the OPC and having hands on experience with the church of Christ I would not go near them. But hey thats just me ......

 

[biblelighthouse]

From their website:

Beliefs and Practices

The PRC have as their creeds the "Three Forms of Unity" -- the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic confession, and the Canons of Dordt. The churches require that all officebearers subscribe to these Reformed confessions. The PRC confess and proclaim the doctrines of double predestination; limited, effectual atonement; total depravity; irresistible grace; and the perseverance of saints, as fundamental truths of the gospel of grace.
By their rejection of "common grace," they mean especially to deny that God is gracious in the preaching of the gospel to all who hear the external proclamation, holding that, although the gospel ought to be preached to all and although all ought to be confronted with the command to repent and believe, God is gracious in the preaching to the elect alone ("particular grace").

The biblical doctrine of the covenant is precious to these churches. They regard it as a truth that is central in Scripture and basic to the Reformed faith, even as it is fundamental to the life of the Reformed believer. The doctrine has been developed in the PRC. They conceive it, not as a contract mutually agreed upon by God and men and dependent upon the fulfillment of stipulated conditions by two parties, but as a living relationship of friendship between God in Christ and the elect church, established and maintained by the sovereign grace of God alone. They deny that faith is a condition to the covenant, holding rather that faith, the "gift of God' (Ephesians 2:8),is the means by which God realizes His covenant, as well as the means by which the elect enjoy the covenant and willingly carry out their part in the covenant.

Among the practical implications of this covenant view, in the thinking of the PRC, is the calling of the church to promote and defend marriage, the earthly symbol of the covenant between Christ and the Church (cf. Ephesians 5:22ff.), as a life-long unbreakable bond. On this basis, the church should, and can, oppose the evil of divorce and remarriage in her communion -- an evil that devastates Protestant churches today, angers God and disgusts godly men and women. Thus also, the family is safeguarded for the sake of the godly rearing of the children, who are included in the covenant (Malachi 2:14-16; Matthew 19:3-15).

Members of the PRC believe that good, Christian schools are a demand of the covenant. They, therefore, have established a number of Christian grade schools and high schools, maintaining them with no small amount of sacrifice. In areas where their own schools are not possible, parents use the existing Christian schools. Young people are encouraged to attend Christian colleges.

In their public worship on the Sabbath, these churches sing only the Psalms (with organ accompaniment) in keeping with article 69 of the Church Order adopted for the Reformed Churches by the Synod of Dordt (1618-1619). They use the King James Version of Holy Scripture, judging it to be the best English translation available, especially as regards the crucial matter of faithfulness to the inspired original.

The PRC note with alarm, if not horror, the widespread abandonment of the doctrine of the inerrant inspiration of Scripture by Reformed churches both in the United States and in Europe; the openness of reformed churches to the charismatic movement; the involvement of Reformed churches in ecumenicity that allies them with churches which are hostile to the distinctively Reformed doctrines, with churches which are theologically "liberal" (churches in the National and World Councils of Churches), and even Rome; and the sheer worldliness of life now tolerated, and in some cases promoted, by Reformed churches, contrary to what the Reformed churches once exhorted as the "antithesis" --the spiritual separation from the world of a holy life. (This last evil is what Francis A. Schaeffer deplored as the evangelical churches' "accommodation" to the world, in his The Great Evangelical Disaster.)

Not a whit less serious to the PRC is the threat of Arminianism. Despite the rejection of Arminianism as false doctrine by the Synod of Dordt, and the condemnation of it by the Westminster Standards, it makes deep inroads into the Reformed churches in the popular doctrines of a universal love of God for sinners revealed in the Gospel; of a death of Jesus for all men without exception, with appeal to John 3:16;and the dependency of God in salvation upon the decision of the sinner ("free will"). If free will is not openly espoused, all too often there is deep silence in the churches' preaching and confession with regard to predestination (election and reprobation) and the other doctrines of sovereign grace. The PRC believe themselves called, as a denomination of Reformed churches, stoutly to defend and enthusiastically to proclaim the historic, creedal, and distinctive doctrines of "Calvinism." They rejoice whenever they see men and women standing, not alone for "conservatism," but for the faith set down in the Canons of Dordt and in the Westminster Confession.

Sounds like a good doctrinal foundation.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

They have some good points, but they lean towards hyper-Calvinism and the denial of the free offer of the gospel. Their rejection of common grace is extremely problematic for me, personally. They sing the psalms exclusively (which I support) but with muscial accompaniment (which I don't support). I tend to stay away from their writings, but as with many churches, there is good along with the bad.

[Edited on 8-17-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Originally posted by joshua

Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot
They have some good points, but they lean towards hyper-Calvinism and the denial of the free offer of the gospel. Their rejection of common grace is extremely problematic for me, personally. They sing the psalms exclusively (good) but with muscial accompaniment (bad). I tend to stay away from their writings, but as with many churches, there is good along with the bad.

Do they deny the freeness of the Gospel, or do they just dislike the terminology "offer"? Where would A.W. Pink fall in on the free "offer"?

I can't speak to Pink, but this excerpt from A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism may be helpful regarding the Protestant Reformed Church:

If the hyper-Calvinists in England tend to be Baptists, in America the Presbyterian variety seems more common. The best-known American hyper-Calvinists are the Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC). They deny that there is any sort of "offer" (in the sense of a proffer or tender or proposal of mercy) in the gospel message. They also deny that they are hyper-Calvinists, because they insist that the only variety of hyper-Calvinism is that which denies the gospel call (Type-1 above).
The most articulate advocate of the PRC position is David Engelsma, whose book Hyper-Calvinism and the Call of the Gospel is an interesting but in my view terribly misleading study of the question of whether PRC theology properly qualifies as hyper-Calvinism. Engelsma does some selective quoting and interpretive gymnastics in order to argue that his view is mainstream Reformed theology. But a careful reading of his sources shows that he often quotes out of context, or ends a quote just before a qualifying statement that would totally negate the point he thinks he has made. Still, for those interested in these issues, I recommend his book, with a caution to read it very critically and with careful discernment.

 

[biblelighthouse]

They certainly do seem to agree that the Gospel should be preached to everyone. They are just making the distinction that the Gospel being preached is only *gracious* for the elect.

Look closely at this excerpt from my quote above:

By their rejection of "common grace," they mean especially to deny that God is gracious in the preaching of the gospel to all who hear the external proclamation, holding that, although the gospel ought to be preached to all and although all ought to be confronted with the command to repent and believe, God is gracious in the preaching to the elect alone ("particular grace").

I think that distinction and nuance is sound:

2 Corinthians 2
[15] For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
[16] To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

The Protestant Reformed Church has, in my opinion, done a good job of obfuscating their erroneous teachings concerning rejection of common grace and denial of the free offer of the gospel. By rejecting common grace and only accepting "particular grace" they negate the Reformed distinction between common grace and saving grace. Every orthodox Reformed church adheres to the idea that only saving grace saves (the elect who hear the gospel). But they mean more than that when they reject common grace and only affirm "particular grace."

But here is what Herman Hanko says:

This denial of the free offer of the gospel by the Protestant Reformed Churches has set them apart from almost every ecclesiastical fellowship. It is difficult to find today a denomination, whether of Reformed or Presbyterian persuasion, which has not committed itself, either officially or unofficially, to the idea of the free offer. The whole notion has not only been widely accepted but the charge of hyper-Calvinism has been hurled against those that deny it. The idea behind this charge is, of course, that true Calvinism includes in it the whole conception of the free offer of the gospel. Those who repudiate this conception are not faithful to the teachings of Calvin nor to the genius of Calvinism, so it is alleged.

The Protestant Reformed Church denies the charge of hyper-Calvinism, but they certainly veer in that direction by embracing principles consistent with hyper-Calvinism.

I find this article helpful in discerning the issues involved here.

 

[satz]

Originally posted by joshua
<MODERATOR's Note>

Please remember to place topics in appropriate forums. For example, this could go in Ecclesiology, but not General. Back to the conversation at hand.

Your friendly Obsessive Compulsive Moderator joshua

ahhh...sorry about that Josh...

I thought Ecclesiology was for discussion about church structure etc, and not for discussion on particular denominations, which was why i put it there. Thanks for moving it.

Thanks also everyone for the links