# Would it be sinful for me to attend a PCUSA church?



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Nov 8, 2005)

?


----------



## gwine (Nov 8, 2005)

Are all PC-USA churches fallen?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Nov 8, 2005)

Why would you have to?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> Are all PC-USA churches fallen?



But with a Presbyterian understanding of biblical ecclesiology, is this question even the one to ask? I would say no, but that the real issue is the PCUSA as a whole. And depending on the answer to that question, I think the easiest way to then get at an answer to Tim's question would be to ask what attending a false church would mean for a person's Sabbath-keeping on that particular Lord's Day.


----------



## Craig (Nov 8, 2005)

Why consider attending a PCUSA regularly? I'd rather have an unbiblical form of church gov't (which the PCUSA has, btw...they will force their will upon a session and rule against them...as evidenced by ordaining a man who denied Christ's divinity and virgin birth) with better doctrine. You would have to search really, really, really, really hard to find one PCUSA church that took the bible seriously, let alone believed it to be true.

They have allowed unbelievers in the pulpit for 80+ years...they ordain women, they don't bring up charges against homosexual clergy...they don't affirm anything particularly Christian in doctrine...are okay with abortion. Why even bother? Even if you found a pastor who was reformed in that denom, he's questionable. How could any pastor be able to allow their congregation to be part of a "church" subverting and perverting truth and undermining the faith? I would worship in a Wesleyan church before I would grace the door of a PCUSA. I would look at the LCMS before considering the PCUSA. I would consider the Southern Baptist church, for crying out loud, before I ever considered a PCUSA.

I have a very strong conviction on this, in case no one noticed.

Now: would it be sin to attend? Once? Na. Regularly? Yes. To know biblical truth and company with them, absolutely, that is sin.


----------



## gwine (Nov 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...



Perhaps my question made no sense, but I would have thought that if a particular PC-USA church was not apostate then what would be wrong with attending for a season especially if there were no other reformed churches around? But since Craig seems to think there are hardly, hardly, hardly, hardly any good ones, I will withdraw my question.


----------



## Puddleglum (Nov 8, 2005)

Hmm . . . some of the local PCUSAs where I'm at are more mainstream evangelical than pure liberal. In that case, I don't think it would be wrong to go, especially if you didn't have somewhere else to go to. But if they're liberal . . . I don't think going regularly is such a great idea.


----------



## cupotea (Nov 8, 2005)

How could it ever be wrong to go to church?!

Ok, I can think of only one example: my parents, Athiests, just moved to a new town and said they want to start going to church so that they can meet people and make friends. That is wrong because it's practically mocking the purpose of church. 

At the same time, maybe they're showing signs of grace that they don't even realize. I mean, since I became a Christian, I've wanted my parents to go to church, and now they're actually saying they will! Maybe if they pay attention to the service, they'll begin to learn and believe! So even _their_ going to church could be a good thing in the end.


----------



## Craig (Nov 8, 2005)

No one that I know of is saying it's wrong to go to church....I guess I wouldn't call walking into a building called the PCUSA, "Church".

Perhaps there are some generic evangelical ones out there...but folks: that is how they can appear, but that is superficial. Ironic, don't you think? Disappointment that they're superficially superficial, yet still superficial when you get down to it.

Seriously, look at the library in a PCUSA if you visit, and talk to a minister. Some of their Christianese echoes similarity, but the meaning is different.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Nov 8, 2005)

The PCUSA is apostate. I don't see how a church that officially denies the deity of Christ could be a good place to go to. There has to be a better church somewhere where you live to attend.


----------



## cupotea (Nov 8, 2005)

I see what you mean; a real church should celebrate baptism and the sacrament. Going to a place that doesn't do either of those would be wrong. But doesn't the PCUSA do that? Isn't it Presbyterian?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Craig_
> Now: would it be sin to attend? Once? Na.



But again, what implications does that have for someone's Sabbath-keeping on that particular Lord's Day? If the PCUSA is in fact a false church, how would attending it one week be any different than neglecting corporate worship altogether that week?



> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> ...



My point is that you _cannot_ meaningfully ask that about merely one particular congregation. If the PCUSA is a false church, then _all_ of its congregations are false churches; likewise, if the PCUSA's denial as a whole of salvation in Christ does not render it apostate, then that denial on the part of a specific congregation of theirs would not render that congregation apostate, either.

[Edited on 11-9-2005 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 8, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Cottonball_
> I see what you mean; a real church should celebrate baptism and the sacrament. Going to a place that doesn't do either of those would be wrong. But doesn't the PCUSA do that? Isn't it Presbyterian?



It is Presbyterian in name and ecclesiology (though even the ecclesiology is basically useless, since the PCUSA does not exercise 99% of the discipline it biblically should). But it has explicitly denied the Gospel itself, among other things.


----------



## gwine (Nov 8, 2005)

> If the PCUSA is a false church, then all of its congregations are false churches



I guess I had not thought of it that way. So you are saying that even if Sam Spade at First Presbyterian (PC-USA) is a reformed 5 point Calvinist minister, and his congregation is in agreement with him, but they are staying in the PC-USA hoping against hope to change her, that they are a false church? Maybe I am being too melodramatic here, but I would like to believe that it could happen. Such is my naivete.


----------



## Pilgrim (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> The PCUSA is apostate. I don't see how a church that officially denies the deity of Christ could be a good place to go to. There has to be a better church somewhere where you live to attend.




Do they officially deny the deity of Christ? Well, as a whole they certainly don't strongly affirm it, or anything else at this point. Ordaining those who deny it (which they've been doing since the '20's), the virgin birth and other truths could be seen as a tacit or de facto denial of these essential doctrines in the denomination. I think at the last GA they failed to affirm that Jesus is the only way to heaven. 

I too think that there would have to be a better church to attend, even an evangelical Arminian one, SBC, LCMS, "Bible" church, etc. Arguably the leadership of the PCUSA is worse than even the UMC in pushing the gay agenda, etc.


----------



## cupotea (Nov 9, 2005)

Ok, somehow I managed to completely miss Craig's first post. Now I can see your point.

However, I still can't entirely agree, simply because I live in Toronto. As I've ranted about before, the churches here have the gay flag up in their windows!! Not only do they allow homosexuals to marry in the churches, but they flaunt it!

I don't know about the Presbyterian church here, whether it does that. St. Paul's certainly doesn't. The church I'm attending in Toronto, Knox, certainly doesn't--although it did have a female preacher last week, which shocked the heck out of me. But then the minister this week said he didn't agree with her message. So hopefully they won't do that again! That was so random and out of the blue. Anyway, Knox is probably one of the most conservative churches in Toronto. So you can see how hopeless the situation can be in some places!


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > If the PCUSA is a false church, then all of its congregations are false churches
> ...



I think the determining factor would be whether the PCUSA is actually apostate, or merely in serious error. If the latter, I would agree with you on reform - but if it is an apostate institution, then if nothing else would not a body such as your example above essentially be accepting congregationalism for themselves by remaining within it? And even in that situation, the problem is that the PCUSA is _not_ a congregational institution, and hence that particular body would still inevitably be actively and fully identifying themselves with an apostate institution that is not a church.

Classic examples of that important but overlooked distinction are that the Reformers saw it necessary to separate from Rome as a synagogue of Satan, yet the Puritans stayed within the erring Church of England trying to reform it.


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...



Something that makes this sticky: with the sole exception of the BPC (I believe) the PCUSA has not been officially declared apostate (John Gerstner doesn't count).

We also have another potential problem: if it is apostate, then their baptisms are not valid. Every one of them. That would put most Presbyterians in the (unusual and uncomfortable) position of denying the baptism performed by a 5 point Calvinist in an evangelical church (they do exist) while allowing that of a Papist who hates the gospel.

I am also not sure as a matter of fact if the PCUSA can be considered Presbyterian, since they have cast off their creeds and confessions and have essentially congregational polity. They are more analogous to Congregational churches in my mind.

This is a difficult question.


----------



## Romans922 (Nov 9, 2005)

Despite what most people have said here, there are some good pcusa churches. 

Not all are liberal, some are right on. They just decided to not be separatists (maybe that is a fault), but it just depends on the church.

I know a few PCUSA attenders who are right on. So research the church and see how close they are to a Biblical Church, and how close they are to following the WCF. Don't think that all PCUSA churches are apostate, that is just ignorant of the situation.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Nov 9, 2005)

How is Rome not apostate if the PCUSA is???


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> How is Rome not apostate if the PCUSA is???



You got me Gabe.


----------



## cupotea (Nov 9, 2005)

I think that's also partially what I was trying to say.. There are a lot worse things than liberal Presbyterian!


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Nov 9, 2005)

So... what does it take to declare Rome apostate? Can we vote on that?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> Something that makes this sticky: with the sole exception of the BPC (I believe) the PCUSA has not been officially declared apostate (John Gerstner doesn't count).



I had thought of that, which is why I've still purposefully kept on qualifying my statements by saying _if_ it is apostate. As I of course do not yet have much experience watching how issues are handled over time in (Reformed) Presbyterian churches, I have no idea what to expect in terms of how or if such a declaration will even be made. Do you see it happening any time in the next several years, depending on where the PCUSA goes next? Out of curiosity, when is the last time mainstream Reformed, Presbyterian churches declared _any_ institutional church apostate?



> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> We also have another potential problem: if it is apostate, then their baptisms are not valid. Every one of them. That would put most Presbyterians in the (unusual and uncomfortable) position of denying the baptism performed by a 5 point Calvinist in an evangelical church (they do exist) while allowing that of a Papist who hates the gospel.



I am still undecided on the Papal baptism issue, largely because I have not studied it enough in light of the divergent views of historic Reformed theologians on the issue, though I personally have trouble seeing much validity in the view for accepting it. In any case, I certainly agree with you that this would be an extremely sticky issue if our churches were to officially declare the PCUSA apostate.

What do some of those here who accept Roman baptism think about this potential issue with the PCUSA, and how it is similar or different?



> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> I am also not sure as a matter of fact if the PCUSA can be considered Presbyterian, since they have cast off their creeds and confessions and have essentially congregational polity. They are more analogous to Congregational churches in my mind.
> 
> This is a difficult question.



That is interesting. Could you elaborate on their polity? Even though, as I mentioned above, they obviously do not exercise 99% of the discipline they biblically should anyway, do they not still have the same organizational structure and answering system?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Romans922_
> Don't think that all PCUSA churches are apostate, that is just ignorant of the situation.



I agree that there are some "good" PCUSA churches as you said, but that is a completely different issue than the question of being apostate or not. Even if it was officially declared apostate, there would still be some "good" churches in it for at least a time - but that would not in and of itself render them true churches.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Romans922_
> Despite what most people have said here, there are some good pcusa churches.
> 
> Not all are liberal, some are right on. They just decided to not be separatists (maybe that is a fault), but it just depends on the church.
> ...



Many attest to this, that some PCUSA churches look and act like confessional Presbyterian churches, but then we should ask, then why not just join a confessional denomination? The problem is not so much the church in her current state, but what is in place that will keep her that way. 

If someone joins a conservative PCUSA church and find that it is as orthodox as a PCA church, then great, BUT what do they do later, say two or five years down the road? What do they do when a liberal, pro-choice speaker, approved by the PCUSA, is asked to address the congregation? What happens when a woman is ordained as a ruling elder? Then before long a gay pastor is ordained and speaks at your church?

Do you change your theology for the sake of comfort? Certainly you will have established relationships that you do not want to break.


----------



## gwine (Nov 9, 2005)

> Many attest to this, that some PCUSA churches look and act like confessional Presbyterian churches, but then we should ask, then why not just join a confessional denomination?



I agree completely, but the original question was whether it is a sin to attend a PC-USA church. I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that there was no other reformed church around and it was only a temporary situation.



> If someone joins a conservative PCUSA church and find that it is as orthodox as a PCA church, then great, BUT what do they do later, say two or five years down the road?



Which is why we did not join the EFC church in our area. The pastor is reformed (John Piper style) but because it is congregational and, as you say, who knows 5 years from now what the situation would be? Of course you could say the same for the OPC church I belong to now, but at least I have the WCF to back me up.


----------



## AdamM (Nov 9, 2005)

> Something that makes this sticky: with the sole exception of the BPC (I believe) the PCUSA has not been officially declared apostate (John Gerstner doesn't count).
> 
> We also have another potential problem: if it is apostate, then their baptisms are not valid. Every one of them. That would put most Presbyterians in the (unusual and uncomfortable) position of denying the baptism performed by a 5 point Calvinist in an evangelical church (they do exist) while allowing that of a Papist who hates the gospel.
> 
> ...



Agreed.

While vacationing when there was no local PCA or OPC congregation, I have on occasion worshipped in PCUSA churches and found them to be quite a mixed lot. In some you'll get a save the whales approach while I have found others to be little different then most PCA or EPC churches. As far as apostasy goes, I don't think they have officially modified their standards (If I recall correctly, they use several that elders can subscribe) to incorporate any heretical positions yet. There is little doubt that they don't enforce discipline in a consistent, biblical manner and the ordination of women to the office of teaching elder reflects their weak view of scripture, but I don't think those issues while they are admittedly very problematic make the PCUSA heretical. I also think that there is a legitimate distinction between a sick, unhealthy church and one that has become apostate. in my opinion, if we are going to make declarations that without exception cover an entire church, that can only be based upon the official standards of that church. 

For what it's worth, I would hold out Grove City college as an example that not everything associated with the PCUSA is bad news.

[Edited on 11-9-2005 by AdamM]


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Nov 9, 2005)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > Many attest to this, that some PCUSA churches look and act like confessional Presbyterian churches, but then we should ask, then why not just join a confessional denomination?
> ...



I probably was not as clear as I could have been. If a PCUSA looks and smells like a PCA, then one must ask why does this church not break away from the PCUSA and join the PCA? The reason for remaining in the PCUSA may reveal a lot about some of the heart issues despite the fact that the church looks and smells confessional.



> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > If someone joins a conservative PCUSA church and find that it is as orthodox as a PCA church, then great, BUT what do they do later, say two or five years down the road?
> ...



The accountability is crucial. Is the church being held accountable to an orthodox standard or an unorthodox standard?


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Nov 9, 2005)

As some have noted, unless one's denomination/federation has declared a another to be apostate, we should be careful about such language. I am no fan of the PCUSA. I have, however, come to realize that some of my anger toward them was grounded in political (not cultural, but ecclesiastical) frustration over what they did to heroes in the 1920's (namely Machen). The ecclesiastical politics of that period were really nasty. 

Things have changed in some respects. Fuller has sent many grads into the PCUSA in recent years. This will not likely lead them back to pre-1929 theology (which was, in many respects not good - the PCUSA should need to retreat to the Old School assembly or even to the Old Side to suit me!) Nevertheless, this presbytery (San Diego) has some very "conservative" churches (including the big steeple in the city).

I am a committed "sideliner" (as opposed to "mainliner"). The PCUSA is deeply corrupt has been losing members at an astounding rate. Where it is not gone overtly liberal it has gone fundamentalist or broadly evangelical. That said, I have come to know some in the confessing church movement who are more Reformed and committed to the WCF than one might expect. The CC movement is diverse and more tolerant on women in office than I. 

Still there remain in the PCUSA confessional congregations. I have a dear friend who is as staunch a confessionalist as I who fills a PCUSA pulpit every Sabbath. Those dear old folks are glad to have him. 

In other congregations, there are thousands of souls in pews across America who have not heard the gospel preached without equivocation for a very long time. They really are lambs being led...

The confessional status of the PCUSA is murky at best. The Confession of 1967 has official precedence over the WCF. The '67 is Barthian. 

Could one worship in a given PCUSA? It depends on the circumstance. Are there no confessionally Reformed churches? Are there no independent/congregational churches that has the marks of a true church.

Given those circumstances, and given that a local PCUSA is orthodox (i.e., it practically ignores the GA and Confession of '67 - in which case one wonders why they're still in the PCUSA, but I digress) then one might worship there until one can get a church planted for a NAPARC group. Join? Hard to imagine. Could one take membership vows to "submit to the government of this church" (if they still use this vow) or the like? I couldn't.

Can I sit in judgment of those who do? Not any more. I'm not angry at the PCUSA anymore, just sad.

rsc


----------



## wsw201 (Nov 9, 2005)

As a former member of a PCUSA church and office holder, though the PCUSA has a book of Confessions that is part of its Constitution (it includes 11 confessions), ordination vows do not include subscription. The vows regarding the Book of Confessions is that it is there for "guidance". Back in the mid 1990's the theme was "Theology Matters". When a resolution was brought to the floor of GA attempting to codify some basic theological doctrines, it was determined that, based on a resolution passed in the late 1920's or early 1930's, that the PCUSA could not promote any specific theology. This is why you will find a wide variety of theological positions within the PCUSA from old style liberalism, neo-liberalism, neo-orthodoxy, existentialism (Bultmann style), liberation theology and one, two, three, four and even some five point calvinists.

One of the primary reasons that most conservative PCUSA churches don't leave is because they would lose their property. All church properties are owned by the Presbytery. So if you leave, say goodbye to your buildings. Another reason for not leaving is that there would be no place to go. Because they are not confessional churches, and they will all have women officers (its required!), they would never fit into the PCA or the OPC. Maybe the EPC?


----------



## beej6 (Apr 11, 2006)

I agree with Professor Clark. 

The plain answer to the topic is, no. I also assume that "attend" means for a season, or one off, rather than "join" as in "become a member," which raises the discussion to the level reached above.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Apr 11, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Me Died Blue_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Craig_
> ...



As a member of the PCA, since the PCA has never declared the PCUSA apostate, it would not be wrong for me to attend any individual PCUSA sabbath day worship, even on a regular basis. There may be individual circumstances of worship that I may find offensive, but then I would also be able to find offensive elements in some PCA churches.

We happen to have a number of PCUSA churches in our area that are quite evangelical and rather vocally opposed to the decisions of the higher courts and agencies of the denomination. I've become pretty good friends with one PCUSA pastor as we work together in our motorcycle ministry. I have no reason to doubt his genuine stand for Christ's gospel.

Let's not forget that many godly men never left the PCUSA or PCUS when other bodies spilt off. We may not agree with their decision, but we must honor their trust in the Almighty God who does all things right.


----------

