# Terry Johnson On the Problems Facing Us in Worship



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 7, 2011)

Vacationland PCA


While Dr. Johnson focuses on PCA churches I think it is safe to say he highlights a problem facing all of our churches when it comes to Worship. Worthwhile read.

This quote is emblematic of the piece:



> Here’s my basic observation: the PCA is first and foremost a land of liturgical mediocrity. It is Vanillaville; a jar of mayonnaise. Some of us are doing the praise band thing, but not nearly so well as the mega-churches. Others are doing the high-church thing, but without the historic continuity and liturgical excellence of the Anglicans. Others are looking an awful lot like charismatics, but without the uninhibited exuberance of neo-pentecostalism. Still others are blending in a bit of this and a bit of that, but without the creativity of the Emergents.
> 
> Blending seems to be the predominant mode, which all but guarantees that no two of our churches will look alike. Most of us are oafishly aping traditions whose strengths we are incompetent to duplicate. While aiming to look like the latest everything that’s hip our mediocrity guarantees that we look like nothing that is excellent, distinctive, or worthwhile. Is it any wonder that we languish?


----------



## LawrenceU (Sep 7, 2011)

That is well said. What is not said is that within those other camps there is a great deal of 'oafish aping' going on as well. It is part and parcel of churches that stray from the simple worship laid out for us in Scripture. It is a tragedy that we do not trust the Lord to call his own, to create his own 'atmosphere of reverence', to minister to the real needs of hearts. No, we must come up with some 'worship strategy' to do those things.


----------



## Wayne (Sep 7, 2011)

For readers who may not be aware, the author of the referenced article, Dr. Terry Johnson, has been a strong proponent in the PCA in favor of the singing of psalms in worship. His book, _Leading in Worship_ is still used with great profit by many pastors.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 7, 2011)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> > Others are doing the high-church thing, but without the historic continuity and liturgical excellence of the Anglicans.



Has he been to BadVestments.com? Excellence can be in just as short supply by those who have picked a worship style and gone all out in pursuit of it. This is one problem with turning aesthetics into an element of worship: good taste is in very, very short supply.


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 7, 2011)

I don't really get the quote. What's his solution? What's wrong with vanilla? If we don't oafishly ape, then do we innovate and create new stuff? If so, how are we not following this fad, too? 

What is he reacting against and proposing? Exclusive psalmodry?

---------- Post added at 04:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:02 PM ----------




> The PCA is a land of liturgical anarchy driven by a Trotyskesque philosophy of perpetual liturgical revolution and accelerated by the rapid mutations of popular culture to which it is pegged and with which our ecclesiastical trendsetters feel duty-bound to keep pace.




Come on, yikes! Let's give this author a valium. THE PCA is Trotsky-esque? Liturgical anarchy? A little much I think.....


For the record: If I ever go Pedo I am joining the PCA!


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 7, 2011)

Ah, thanks Joshua! 

That is a lot clearer. 

Do you think he's supportive of EP?

I guess I need to go review what the PCA believes on intinction and kneeling, etc...


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 7, 2011)

I don't believe he is EP; but he would I think be in favor of lots more psalm singing than the norm.


----------



## JML (Sep 7, 2011)

Acapella EP would solve the music issue along with the contemporary v. traditional service stuff. Just sayin'.


----------



## Marrow Man (Sep 7, 2011)

Having worshiped at the church he pastor, Independent Presbyterian Church (Savannah, GA), the service is not EP. If I recall correctly, they use the Trinity Hymnal and Psalter and make sure to sing at least one psalm during worship.


----------



## M21195 (Sep 7, 2011)

What is EP?


----------



## JML (Sep 7, 2011)

M21195 said:


> What is EP?



Exclusive Psalmody


For some articles on the subject you can check out this website:

http://exclusivepsalmody.com/


----------



## M21195 (Sep 7, 2011)

John Lanier said:


> M21195 said:
> 
> 
> > What is EP?
> ...



Thanks for the link, looks like I won't get any work done today...

War Eagle!


----------



## R Harris (Sep 7, 2011)

Of course, this is the very heart of the regulative principle discussion. You either accept what God has said in His Word regarding what is acceptable worship; or you accept the Lutheran principle that whatever is not expressly forbidden in Scripture is acceptable. These are really the only two positions one can hold.

The problem with Mr. Johnson and others who did not accept the RP at face value is that when you start interpreting the RP to mean what he or others _think_ that it means is when they start to run into the very problems that he is bemoaning.

It astounds me that so many learned people have such a difficult time with the expression "explicitly commanded" in the RP.


----------



## M21195 (Sep 7, 2011)

R Harris said:


> Of course, this is the very heart of the regulative principle discussion. You either accept what God has said in His Word regarding what is acceptable worship; or you accept the Lutheran principle that whatever is not expressly forbidden in Scripture is acceptable. These are really the only two positions one can hold.
> 
> The problem with Mr. Johnson and others who did not accept the RP at face value is that when you start interpreting the RP to mean what he or others _think_ that it means is when they start to run into the very problems that he is bemoaning.
> 
> It astounds me that so many learned people have such a difficult time with the expression "explicitly commanded" in the RP.



Any suggestions for a good RP reference?


----------



## JML (Sep 7, 2011)

M21195 said:


> Any suggestions for a good RP reference?



If you want to take care of 2 birds with one stone, this book covers both the Regulative Principle and Exclusive Psalmody and I highly recommend it.

Songs of Zion: A Contemporary Case for Exclusive Psalmody

Sorry for taking this thread off course. Continue on.


----------



## M21195 (Sep 7, 2011)

John Lanier said:


> M21195 said:
> 
> 
> > Any suggestions for a good RP reference?
> ...



Great! Thanks


----------



## Brother John (Sep 8, 2011)

R Harris said:


> Of course, this is the very heart of the regulative principle discussion. You either accept what God has said in His Word regarding what is acceptable worship; or you accept the Lutheran principle that whatever is not expressly forbidden in Scripture is acceptable. These are really the only two positions one can hold.
> 
> The problem with Mr. Johnson and others who did not accept the RP at face value is that when you start interpreting the RP to mean what he or others _think_ that it means is when they start to run into the very problems that he is bemoaning.
> 
> It astounds me that so many learned people have such a difficult time with the expression "explicitly commanded" in the RP.



Randy what is "explicitly commanded" in the RP in regards to worship?


----------



## Marrow Man (Sep 8, 2011)

> I. The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all; is good, and doeth good unto all; and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served with all the hearth, and with all the soul, and with all the might. *But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture.*
> 
> II. Religious worship is to be given to God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and to him alone: not to angels, saints, or any other creature: and since the Fall, not without a Mediator; nor in the mediation of any other but of Christ alone.
> 
> ...



Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 21


----------



## R Harris (Sep 8, 2011)

Thanks Tim, I haven't been able to respond to his question until now, but that does it perfectly.


----------



## TimV (Sep 8, 2011)

The PCA's got to start practicing their own Book of Church Order before they start even getting more strict. Bringing about more uniformity in PCA worship services would be like starting health care reform in the US by demanding hospitals use a specific flavor of Jello in meals.


----------



## Wayne (Sep 8, 2011)

Again, while Dr. Johnson might not be EP, he was the compiler and editor of the Trinity Psalter, published in 1994 by Crown & Covenant. 
Give him some credit.

Moreover, so that you would have all the facts in front of you, 

In 1992, Central Georgia Presbytery brought Overture 8 before the 20th General Assembly of the PCA, 
seeking the establishment of a Study Committee to Encourage Psalm Singing. 
Dr. Johnson is listed in the Minutes as the convener of the Presbytery committee bringing that overture.

The Committee's report before the 21st GA in 1993 is posted here: http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/psalmody.html

From that report, largely authored by Dr. Johnson, you will best determine something of his theology of worship.


----------



## Romans922 (Sep 8, 2011)

Josh, 

I do know of PCA churches that practice intinction and coming forward for the Lord's Supper (even standing as families partaking together as individual families). However, I am unaware of any that kneel, though I wouldn't doubt it, especially given the FV congregations in the PCA.


----------



## Romans922 (Sep 8, 2011)

I understood, I was just expressing my agreement with Dr. Johnson on what you quoted based on my experience.


----------



## Wayne (Sep 8, 2011)

Thanks, Josh, for clarifying that. As to the article, I have a real problem with giving examples like that yet without substantiation and thus incapable of examination or refutation.


----------



## Wayne (Sep 8, 2011)

Didn't see it as admonishment, Josh. 

"You just wait till I gets to admonishing. You'll know when I starts to admonishing, son! Won't be no doubt."


----------



## KMK (Sep 8, 2011)

This is my concern with polemics of this nature. They don't name any names but speak in vague generalizations. For my own part, being the pastor of a church prohibits me from visiting that many churches. I would assume the same is true for other pastors. How then can pastors make such generalizations? The PCA is pretty big. How does he know so much about what is going on in other churches? Maybe he is more of a PCA itinerant preacher?


----------



## Kevin (Sep 8, 2011)

Really, standing & coming forward are not part of our traditional practice?

Standing was the first "protestant" "protest" against kneeling. And coming forward was the universal practice of Presbyterians (and remains so in many places) except in the Southern USA.

As far as intinction goes does anyone read the entire context of the words of institution any more? There was definitively some dipping going on at the last supper.

There is plenty to criticize about our church. But let us not blame people for not adopting all of the Southern Presbyterian foibles.


----------



## Romans922 (Sep 8, 2011)

Kevin said:


> As far as intinction goes does anyone read the entire context of the words of institution any more? There was definitively some dipping going on at the last supper.



Would you mind backing up what you are saying here with proofs, scripture, something?


----------



## Wayne (Sep 8, 2011)

> Maybe he is more of a PCA itinerant preacher?



Johnson pastors the Independent Presbyterian Church in Savannah, GA. That church is over 250 years old and has never been a part of any denomination. Prior to the formation of the PCA, IPC typically called its pastors from the PCUS [aka, Southern Presbyterian Church]. Since 1973, most of their pastors have come from among the PCA.


----------



## Kevin (Sep 8, 2011)

Romans922 said:


> Kevin said:
> 
> 
> > As far as intinction goes does anyone read the entire context of the words of institution any more? There was definitively some dipping going on at the last supper.
> ...



c'mon Andrew, did you never notice that Jesus mentioned "dipping" the bread as a means of identifying the betrayer? The practice of dipping bread into a beverage, or a sauce is universal in all grain cultures. And it was common in the time of Jesus & it was his practice on the night that he was betrayed.


----------



## Romans922 (Sep 8, 2011)

Kevin, most people here are not going to agree with intinction. Instead of being frustrated with me, which is indicated by your first two words of response, why don't you give me the text of Scripture you are referring to specifically and make a good argument to what you are seeing so we can interact like gentlemen instead of just assuming everyone here including me can see what you see.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 8, 2011)

George Gillespie argues against putting the chronology of the Lord's supper such that Judas partook (hence the sop was given before and the sacrament did not begin till after he went out). 
See here.


----------



## sdesocio (Sep 8, 2011)

I read that article and I really think its way off. The problem is that Dr. Johnson perspective on reformation worship is very specific. I might argue he struggles from historic snobbery but also has a view that says that newer is better. His take on worship comes from a very specific point in the Reformation. Now some might argue that small section was where Scottish Presbyterianism came from, and so nothing else should be found in Presbyterian churches. But the line of thoughts that says the church can go back to is a very small spot in ecclesiastical history seems to be the opposite of the reformed view of the church.


----------



## wtleaver (Sep 9, 2011)

Romans922 said:


> Kevin, most people here are not going to agree with intinction.


 
Being newly reformed, I'd like to know a little bit more about why intinction, (a word to which I must admit having just been introduced in this thread), is frowned upon?

My PCA church practices "coming forward" communion and intinction. (No kneeling though.)

We visited the church as Baptists one Sunday when we were running late. The Baptist church we had been regularly attending was much farther away, and we decided since we weren't going to make it there, we'd stop and visit this PCA church near where we were at the time. We never went back to the Baptist church, nor have we been to any other church since that first visit. The entire worship service was extraordinary, including communion, and it led me to investigate reformed theology, make the difficult transition, and eventually join the church with my family.

So now I'm curious why intinction is raising hackles? (Not that I wish to hijack the thread.)

---------- Post added at 11:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:20 PM ----------

Okay, so I should have searched the forums for intinction *before* I posted. I have plenty of information to pour through now...


----------



## Kevin (Sep 9, 2011)

Sorry Andrew, I am not frustrated. With you or anyone else, and no "bible code" kind of exegesis is my operational worldview. No person that has read the New Testament could be unfamiliar with the words of our Saviour on the night of his betrayal. To pretend that you are unfamiliar with that text, and to ask for a Talmudic citation is more than a bit confusing.

The point of my post was to remind us that "going forward" or "standing" to receive the sacrament is vanilla, white bread, Geneva, Westminster, Presbyterianism. Oh, and by-the-way when Our Saviour celebrated the supper he dipped.

If you really are unfamiliar with the NT text then pm me & I will send you the reference.

---------- Post added at 06:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:04 AM ----------




wtleaver said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin, most people here are not going to agree with intinction.
> ...



God Bless you Brother, and welcome to the PB.

A love of the Word Preached & Administered is a hallmark of pca congregations. I am so encouraged to hear that your heart responded to the liturgy on that first visit. We often disagree among ourselves on how to best to honour & worship our God. But we all agree that he is Holy,& that he loves us.

Glad to have you aboard.


----------



## Romans922 (Sep 9, 2011)

Kevin said:


> Sorry Andrew, I am not frustrated. With you or anyone else, and no "bible code" kind of exegesis is my operational worldview. No person that has read the New Testament could be unfamiliar with the words of our Saviour on the night of his betrayal. To pretend that you are unfamiliar with that text, and to ask for a Talmudic citation is more than a bit confusing.
> 
> The point of my post was to remind us that "going forward" or "standing" to receive the sacrament is vanilla, white bread, Geneva, Westminster, Presbyterianism. Oh, and by-the-way when Our Saviour celebrated the supper he dipped.



Kevin,

"Bible code"? Exegesis is done in the Bible not in thin air by making random statements. All I wanted for you was to make a Biblical argument for why Jesus celebrated the Last Supper by intinction (or even the possibility that he did) instead of just assuming we can all see it (when most of us don't agree with it).

Matthew 26 (similar to Mark 14) states, "21And as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” 22And they were very sorrowful and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?” 23*He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me will betray me.* 24The Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” 25Judas, who would betray him, answered, “Is it I, Rabbi?” He said to him, “You have said so.” 26Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” 30And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives."

The way you have communicated to me you would assume that what you were talking about the dipping was the actual institution of the Lord's Supper, but if you are referring to verse 23 (I am not sure) then it is not during the actual institution of the Lord's Supper but during the meal prior to the institution (during the time Jesus desires for them to examine themselves). Also, if we are to think of the institution of the Lord's Supper, Jesus gave bread to eat and wine to drink. He commanded that two different things be done with two different elements at two different times. The basic command at the table (during the institution) is "Do _this_." That is, we are to do what Jesus did. In both Matthew and Mark texts of this account, the dipping is into a dish, whereas the Scripture strongly emphasizes "cup" when it comes to the wine. He doesn't say he took the bowl/dish. He doesn't even say He dips the bread into the cup (which would be what is needed) or the dish during the actual institution. Even further, the dipping into the dishes was during the meal, but the cup isn't instituted until after the meal (Luke 22:20, "And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.").

Not to mention your PCA constitution shows the bread and cup distinct from each other in the distribution of it in BCO 58-5


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 9, 2011)

People are creative and they like to bring their creativity into worship. This is how things like intinction develop. People need to be reminded that God doesn't want creativity in this context.

This is another problem with musical instruments and hymns in the gathered and formal worship of God's people - they give a very broad scope to creativity being brought into worship. Before we know it, we don't know how much we're worshipping our own creativity and how much we're worshipping the Lord.


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Sep 9, 2011)

I believe the scriptures to be pretty clear that the bread and cup are to be administered seperately. However, my conviction about intinction being non-scriptural pales before my conviction against those little, stark white, shiney, styrofoam looking, styrofoam tasting, and styrofoam textured "communion wafers" with a cross "stamped" into them. Those things CREEP ME OUT, when all we need is a basic unsliced loaf of wheat/oat bread. Off soapbox, exiting stage left.


----------



## Wayne (Sep 9, 2011)

Some blessed saint at The Covenant Presbyterian Church here in St. Louis prepares a sort of shortbread that is used for the Lord's Table.
Turns out that was an old Scottish practice as well.


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 10, 2011)

> Some blessed saint at The Covenant Presbyterian Church here in St. Louis prepares a sort of shortbread that is used for the Lord's Table.
> Turns out that was an old Scottish practice as well.



Never heard of it on this side of the pond! I think every (?) Scottish Presbyterian would be surprised to be presented with shortbread at the communion table - much as they might like shortbread, but usually with a cup of tea. 

Some degree of native Scottish Roman Catholicism survived the Reformation in parts of Argyll, Lochaber, South Uist and Barra  Maybe the old dear got her lines crossed.


----------



## Wayne (Sep 10, 2011)

Now I have to go back and dig up my info on that.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Sep 10, 2011)

Wayne said:


> Some blessed saint at The Covenant Presbyterian Church here in St. Louis prepares a sort of shortbread that is used for the Lord's Table.
> Turns out that was an old Scottish practice as well.



A number of RP Churches use something like this as well. Our recipe goes back to the 1890s when we were just a mission church! Others have similar recipes.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Sep 10, 2011)

We also use an old shortbread recipe. The lady who makes it got the recipe out of a Scottish cookbook that called it "Communion Bread".


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 10, 2011)

Here's some brief history on the subject. My suspicion would be this was some later innovation; it sure seems inappropriate to make "special" bread for communion rather than using ordinary every day bread common to one's culture. However, if this is subject is of interest, it surely needs its own thread.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 10, 2011)

I should add that the author's citing of Pardovan is important as it was sort of the BCO of the church from 1708 for a long time and it would indicate ordinary wheat bread was the practice of that day and up to Pardovan's time.


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 10, 2011)

"Shortbread" in Scotland at least is a light coloured, crunchy and sweet biscuit sometimes covered in sugar. 

The best shortbread - like that made by my mother - melts in the mouth.

Shortbread - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Sep 10, 2011)

Like Richard I have never seen shortbread used at a communion service in Scotland. White bread, wheat bread and unleavened bread have been used in some of the places I have been.
Wayne, that is very interesting. Anytime I have been at a Communion service in Covenant Pres in St Louis I have always wondered where the unusual bread came from and why. Now I know.


----------



## sdesocio (Sep 12, 2011)

I think some PCA folks need to bring an overture forbidding this wicked and unreformed shortbread


----------



## Wayne (Sep 12, 2011)

> Anytime I have been at a Communion service in Covenant Pres in St Louis I have always wondered where the unusual bread came from and why. Now I know.



Donnie:

My working theory is that Covenant's practice may have its origin with Dr. Robert Rayburn, who was quite taken with all things Scottish.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Sep 12, 2011)

Wayne,
Thanks for the info. Ah, I never doubted that Dr R was a good man. That might explain also the tartan at CTS.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Sep 12, 2011)

John Lanier said:


> Acapella EP would solve the music issue along with the contemporary v. traditional service stuff. Just sayin'.


 
If the church would adopt rock 'n roll as the standard, the debates would go away as well.

Your statement does not prove anything.


----------



## JML (Sep 13, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> John Lanier said:
> 
> 
> > Acapella EP would solve the music issue along with the contemporary v. traditional service stuff. Just sayin'.
> ...



Except for the fact that acapella EP was the standard for centuries in the church.

Just answering his statement. Not trying to get the thread off topic.

Continue on...


----------

