# Distinctives of URC



## RandPhoenix (May 13, 2010)

Hi,

Can anyone tell me what some of the distinctives of URC churches as opposed to say, Presbyterian churches? Other than the 3FUs, I mean... Thanks. I appreciate it.


----------



## mvdm (May 13, 2010)

This site with its different links, including a FAQ section, should assist you:

Covenant United Reformed Church - Kalamazoo, Michigan - United Reformed Churches

If you could be more specific in what particular area you are inquiring about {church governance, history, worship, etc.} I could venture some answers for you.


----------



## RandPhoenix (May 13, 2010)

Well, ok... How about church governance? I've heard that URC is more congregational than PCA. Is this true?


----------



## mvdm (May 13, 2010)

I wouldn't say "congregational" but rather "consistorial". The Church Order places emphasis on the direct ruling authority by the consistory over the affairs of each congregation. There is very little, if any, structural heirarchy in the URC outside the local consistory. The classis {which would correspond to the presbytery} does not have original authority and is not a continuing body, but rather is more accurately described as a "meeting" of local consistories coming together to conduct matters assigned to it. 

Currently, there is a new Church Order being proposed {in the context of serving as a joint church order if the URC and CanRef. were to merge} that would change some of this, but that will be debated at the upcoming Synod in July.


----------



## RandPhoenix (May 14, 2010)

Thanks for the information. Would it be something like the ARBC, then? Or more closely knit than that?


----------



## mvdm (May 14, 2010)

RandPhoenix said:


> Thanks for the information. Would it be something like the ARBC, then? Or more closely knit than that?


 
I'm not familiar with the ARBC, so I can't help with the comparison.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (May 14, 2010)

mvdm said:


> RandPhoenix said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the information. Would it be something like the ARBC, then? Or more closely knit than that?
> ...



Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America?

ARBCA...Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America [url=http://www.arbca.com/]Welcome to the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches[/URL]


----------



## Willem van Oranje (May 14, 2010)

RandPhoenix said:


> Thanks for the information. Would it be something like the ARBC, then? Or more closely knit than that?


 
The URC seems to be a pretty diverse bunch. The majority tend to be favoring the conservative side of Reformed liturgy and theology. There are many among them who are traditionally orthodox in the Reformed sense, but there are also the Michael Horton types among them who deny the continuing validity of the fourth commandment, in other words Klineans, some of whom tend also (not coincidentally in my opinion) to lean toward looser views of worship.


----------



## Blue Tick (May 14, 2010)

Willem van Oranje said:


> RandPhoenix said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the information. Would it be something like the ARBC, then? Or more closely knit than that?
> ...



Not to mention that a majority of URC churches (if not all) are highly anti-theonomic.


----------



## Willem van Oranje (May 14, 2010)

Blue Tick said:


> Willem van Oranje said:
> 
> 
> > RandPhoenix said:
> ...


 
I have even less tolerance for anti-theonomists than I do for theonomists.


----------



## Dearly Bought (May 14, 2010)

Willem van Oranje said:


> The URC seems to be a pretty diverse bunch. The majority tend to be favoring the conservative side of Reformed liturgy and theology. There are many among them who are traditionally orthodox in the Reformed sense, but there are also the Michael Horton types among them who deny the continuing validity of the fourth commandment, in other words Klineans, some of whom tend also (not coincidentally in my opinion) to lean toward looser views of worship.


 
Although Horton's earlier book, _The Law of Perfect Freedom_, was deficient in its presentation of the Fourth Commandment, Michael Horton now holds to the orthodox Reformed view. Horton is certainly indebted to Kline's thought, but his theology is not identical. Read Mark Karlberg's review of God of Promise for what might be described as a Klinean critique of Horton.


----------



## mvdm (May 14, 2010)

Willem van Oranje said:


> Blue Tick said:
> 
> 
> > Willem van Oranje said:
> ...



As I've said on another thread, it would be a mistake to think that Horton/ Clark's R2k theology and hatred of theonomy is a mainstream distinctive of the URC. No doubt R2k proponents' marketing campaign could lead one to think it is the URC's accepted position, but it isn't.


----------



## Poimen (May 15, 2010)

mvdm said:


> As I've said on another thread, it would be a mistake to think that Horton/ Clark's R2k theology and hatred of theonomy is a mainstream distinctive of the URC. No doubt R2k proponents' marketing campaign could lead one to think it is the URC's accepted position, but it isn't.



Certainly there are different views in the URC re: the relationship between church and state but I don't know anyone in our federation who _hates _theonomy.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (May 15, 2010)

I would venture to say that given Dr. Clark's vitriolic attacks on Theonomic men like Dr. Rushdoony and Dr. Bahnsen as well as his incessant attempts at linking Theonomy and Federal Vision theology it would bea safe assumption that Dr. Clark "hates" Theonomy.


----------



## yeutter (May 15, 2010)

I am interested in how the URC and the Canadian Reformed can move forward toward closer fellowship given their distinctives. Some of the URC men, [Horton, Clark ect.] have done us a favor by showing clearly how federal vision view of the covenant is really at odds with the reformed doctrine of justification. The Rev. John Barach seemed to be a supporter and advocate for ideas that sound like federal vision thinking to me. He was forced out of the URC over those issues. Barach argued for Paedocommunion saying that all baptized who are baptized are really in the covenant. 
I think Schilder and the Canadian Reformed would also say that all who are baptized are really in [not just presumptively in] the covenant. They then come to a different conclusion with regard to paedocommunion. 
Is the URC concerned with the covenant view of the Canadian Reformed?


----------



## mvdm (May 15, 2010)

yeutter said:


> I am interested in how the URC and the Canadian Reformed can move forward toward closer fellowship given their distinctives. Some of the URC men, [Horton, Clark ect.] have done us a favor by showing clearly how federal vision view of the covenant is really at odds with the reformed doctrine of justification. The Rev. John Barach seemed to be a supporter and advocate for ideas that sound like federal vision thinking to me. He was forced out of the URC over those issues. Barach argued for Paedocommunion saying that all baptized who are baptized are really in the covenant.
> I think Schilder and the Canadian Reformed would also say that all who are baptized are really in [not just presumptively in] the covenant. They then come to a different conclusion with regard to paedocommunion.
> Is the URC concerned with the covenant view of the Canadian Reformed?



There has been ongoing dialogue between the ecumenical committees and in other settings over the CanRef's covenant theology. The majority consensus is that CanRef is a faithful sister church, and posits a mainstream Reformed covenant theolgoy. Nonetheless, it still may take more time for the two federations to get to know each other better before deciding to merge. There have been suggestions the CanRef is sympathetic to the FV, but these largely are the result of some fevered imagination. The CanRef. also has some serious questions about different strains of theology within the URC. So I definitely look forward to the discussion of the issue at our Synod this July.

Further, I'd note that both the URC and CanRef {and all Reformed, for that matter} would say that baptized children ARE in the covenant of grace-- however this is an "external" vs. an "internal" relationship to the covenant. Schilder likewise distinguishes this relationship as "legal" vs. "vital".

Neither the URC nor the CanRef endorse paedocommunion. Not sure of the reason for mentioning Barach, but he is long out of the URC and he is not in the CanRef.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (May 15, 2010)

As an aside are there Schilder resources in English?


----------



## kvanlaan (May 15, 2010)

> I am interested in how the URC and the Canadian Reformed can move forward toward closer fellowship given their distinctives. Some of the URC men, [Horton, Clark ect.] have done us a favor by showing clearly how federal vision view of the covenant is really at odds with the reformed doctrine of justification. The Rev. John Barach seemed to be a supporter and advocate for ideas that sound like federal vision thinking to me. He was forced out of the URC over those issues. Barach argued for Paedocommunion saying that all baptized who are baptized are really in the covenant.
> 
> I think Schilder and the Canadian Reformed would also say that all who are baptized are really in [not just presumptively in] the covenant. They then come to a different conclusion with regard to paedocommunion.



I think the other thing that plays in heavily here is the demographic of current URC congregations. We are a collection of refugees in Sheffield, mostly from the CRC, but also the FRC and CanRef. Also, there are some CanRef overtures that are making URC congregations a little wary. I was told of one that would limit the pulpit supply/exchange of the URC to only CanRef and URC, nothing more. I don't think I can abide that - we've had great Presbyterian pastors on our pulpit, but would not be able to if this unification went through (as I understand it).

Also, I think that Horton and Clark may speak for certain portions of the URC, but not all of it. Where we live here, the URC is very Dutch and very conservative, while the California URC folks are likely less "Dutch" and less conservative.


----------

