# Walked Out of Church Today



## Mushroom (May 10, 2009)

The slow encroachment continues, and today reached a critical mass. We arrived to find microphones set up, and what now looks like a 'praise band' on the stage, with a young fellow belting out a loud and bluesy version of "I'll Fly Away". There were new amps set up and electrified instruments twanging.

All this is new, but has been steadily coming. More praise songs. The musicians moved from down on one side of the stage to center-stage and multiplied in number. Seems that after the Session fired the popular youth Pastor they have decided to appease the teens by surrendering the 'music ministry' to them.

So, awaiting with trepidation what this new setup portended, we sat through SS, then took our seats in the pew. The only mention of anything different in the bulletin was the curious interjection of the words "Special Music" between congregational prayer and the offering. As we sat preparing our hearts, prior to the call to worship, this same fellow begins an overwrought rendition of "I Saw The Light" with electric accompaniment. One retired Pastor came by and asked if I wanted to dance, to which I replied in the negative. I looked around the congregation and saw some folks clapping to the tune, some kids dancing in the aisle, some folks looking shocked, one beloved elderly sister holding her hands over her ears and her husband looking apoplectic with tears in his eyes.

The chaos and cacaphony was at that point more than I could bear, so I gathered up my family of 6 and departed, as did the elderly couple.

My daughter had been invited to play her viola with the orchestra last week, when she played some very nice hymns and one metric psalm, and was invited again this week which I forbade after hearing the rehearsal. Seemed kinda spider-webby to me.

Was I wrong? What would you folks recommend I do now?

My problem is not so much with the music, although I am not impressed with the lyrics of either of those songs, but with the flaunting of the Confession and the RPW. One Elder stepped down some months ago over the direction the music was taking, and had approached me last week about my position on EP, to which I responded that I was sympathetic to the idea, although not fully convinced, but that I was already driving 40 miles to attend the nearest nearly confessionally faithful Church I could find.

Why is this stuff happening in the PCA? And what's with always introducing these things prior to the call to worship, then migrating them into the service of worship, which occured with the praise songs some time back? 

What say my PB brethren? Pastors?


----------



## PresbyDane (May 10, 2009)

Sorry to hear this,


----------



## Knoxienne (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> The slow encroachment continues, and today reached a critical mass. We arrived to find microphones set up, and what now looks like a 'praise band' on the stage, with a young fellow belting out a loud and bluesy version of "I'll Fly Away". There were new amps set up and electrified instruments twanging.
> 
> All this is new, but has been steadily coming. More praise songs. The musicians moved from down on one side of the stage to center-stage and multiplied in number. Seems that after the Session fired the popular youth Pastor they have decided to appease the teens by surrendering the 'music ministry' to them.
> 
> ...



I would have walked out too. Praying for you and yours, Brad. 

I don't want to get in trouble here for expressing my opinion of a lot that's happening in the PCA and other reformed denominations. Just know that you're not alone, Brother.


----------



## OPC'n (May 10, 2009)

Are there any OPC churches near you?


----------



## Rich Koster (May 10, 2009)

About 7 years ago, a fellow elder and myself made a comment on the music getting "too showy" after a family left because of that. A few years later, it got to the point you mentioned....a performance. I was in the minority and was marginalized for that and other doctrinal points and the way the children's ministry was getting out of control too. It seems that the mindset is drifting from "what is pleasing to God", to "what is pleasing to the crowd".


----------



## Scott1 (May 10, 2009)

Biblically, its best to take these concerns to your Session.

Carefully and prayerfully sort out "preferences" from the "regulative principle" of worship. 

Be specific also so Session can understand the specific instances that appear to violate the regulative principle, not merely general complaint about style or music preference. Remember to pray for your deacons and elders regularly as they bear the authority and responsibility for setting "tone" and "practice."


----------



## Hamalas (May 10, 2009)




----------



## Mushroom (May 10, 2009)

> Biblically, its best to take these concerns to your Session.


Appreciate your counsel, brother. They are aware of my position on these matters, and my impression is that they consider it to be one of picayunery.


> Carefully and prayerfully sort out "preferences" from the "regulative principle" of worship.


Actually, both those songs have some level of endearment to me, being probably the first two 'Christian' songs I learned. My trepidation is with the continual introduction of more and more instrumentation, more and more amplification, the increasing centrality of the 'music ministry' to the service of worship, and now for the first time ever a vocal soloist. I am trying to check myself to be sure this is not a matter of taste, and have so far remained relatively acquiescent to the changes, but this appears to be a determined deconstruction of the RPW. I could be wrong... certainly would not be the first time.


> Be specific also so Session can understand the specific instances that appear to violate the regulative principle, not merely general complaint about style or music preference.


Would you consider what I have described to violate the RPW? And why or why not? Any counsel is greatly appreciated.


> Remember to pray for your deacons and elders regularly as they bear the authority and responsibility for setting "tone" and "practice."


We have been, but as with all such things, I find there is room for improvement.

Shall I simply submit to their decisions in this matter, or move to the nearest OPC, about 5 miles further in another direction?


----------



## Knoxienne (May 10, 2009)

I think you should go to the OPC 5 miles further away. My


----------



## Pergamum (May 10, 2009)

Why would a viola be okay but not a guitar?


----------



## Edward (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> What say my PB brethren?



At this point you have two options.

1) Walk. 

2) Confronting the session in a Biblical manner. Ask to speak with them at their next meeting, and ask them whether they are willing to discard current members in their quest to conform to the culture. Don't accept anything but a 'yes' or 'no' answer - don't let them wiggle. 

After exercising the second option, you'll probably have to do 1) anyway, although you could try to petition to force a congregational meeting on the issue. (See BCO 25-2) 
http://www.pcaac.org/BCO 2008/BCO 2008 Reprint for Web 7-3-08.pdf

Petition drives of this sort should not be lightly entered into, because it has a high likelihood of hardening positions, but it can, on occasion, cause a session to seriously consider what it has done to harm the body.


----------



## Ivan (May 10, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> Why would a viola be okay but not a guitar?



Amplification?

Tone and tenor?

Mood?

I'd prefer a viola.


----------



## Mushroom (May 10, 2009)

> Why would a viola be okay but not a guitar?


Did someone say a guitar would not be okay? In fact, there are 3 guitars, two violins, a banjo, a mandolin, a trumpet, piano, occasionally a tin whistle, and recently a drumset. Oh, and last week my daughter's viola.


----------



## Theognome (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> The slow encroachment continues, and today reached a critical mass. We arrived to find microphones set up, and what now looks like a 'praise band' on the stage, with a young fellow belting out a loud and bluesy version of "I'll Fly Away". There were new amps set up and electrified instruments twanging.
> 
> All this is new, but has been steadily coming. More praise songs. The musicians moved from down on one side of the stage to center-stage and multiplied in number. Seems that after the Session fired the popular youth Pastor they have decided to appease the teens by surrendering the 'music ministry' to them.
> 
> ...



I know all to well what it's like to be in a church that goes goofy on you. Unfortunately, going to the session is usually nothing more that a formality- unless they are truly Godly men, you will be dismissed as 'over the top'. I would still do so, in the hope that they will hear a biblical argument, but my own experience was that biblical arguments were irrelevant- pragmatism reigned supreme. 

I've been there. I feel your pain. Therefor, I encourage you to confront these elders with the Word and, if they repent, great! If they do not and give no _biblical_ defense for their actions, it is time to move on. Also, feel free to speak with other congregants about your challenges. Once a session crossed the line into error, there's no reason why you wouldn't 'bring others with you' in going to a new church- or finding a more TR denomination to sponsor a plant in your area. 

To conclude- do what Matthew 18 requires and go to them. But if they find biblically that you are in sin, submit to this. If they toss about a bunch of garbage with vague, out of context biblical references to justify foolishness, then check out the OPC nearby.

Theognome


----------



## Ivan (May 10, 2009)

BTW, although I wasn't there and therefore don't know exactly what I'd do, from your description I believe I would have walked too.


----------



## Mushroom (May 10, 2009)

Knoxienne said:


> I think you should go to the OPC 5 miles further away. My


If we decide to do that, then Ben (Hamalas) will have to make room for us on his pew....

Ready for us, Ben?


----------



## Knoxienne (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> Knoxienne said:
> 
> 
> > I think you should go to the OPC 5 miles further away. My
> ...



Well, great! The Lord is good.


----------



## Edward (May 10, 2009)

Scott1 said:


> Carefully and prayerfully sort out "preferences" from the "regulative principle" of worship.



A very important distinction and a point worthy of careful consideration.


----------



## Hamalas (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> Knoxienne said:
> 
> 
> > I think you should go to the OPC 5 miles further away. My
> ...



I'd hate to see another PCA congregation fall into unbiblical practices, but that would be a nice little silver lining to this cloud! You and yours are welcome anytime brother.


----------



## Pergamum (May 10, 2009)

Ivan said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Why would a viola be okay but not a guitar?
> ...




Any conflict with the church over these "worship wars" might devolve into a matter of preferences unless examples of clear violation of Scripture other than bad taste are brought forth. Once the permissibility of instrumentation is granted, whether a viola or a guitar is "proper' becomes somewhat siubjective.

However, dancing in the aisles seems odd and I would think there would need to be clear justification to do that.


----------



## py3ak (May 10, 2009)

In addition to other points, it might be as well to point out that they are imposing these things on Christians whose consciences are not comfortable. That means they need to have clear Scriptural warrant authorizing such practices, or they need to respect a fragile conscience. Clearly the elderly couple was not comfortable; are they to be entirely unconsidered?


----------



## Ivan (May 10, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> However, dancing in the aisles seems odd and I would think there would need to be clear justification to do that.



Actually, this is what I found most odd...and distasteful.


----------



## larryjf (May 10, 2009)

I would suggest much prayer and Scripture reading about the situation. Get all of your ducks in a row, so to speak.
Consider whether what you are considering is an element or circumstance of worship, whether the Scriptures are clear in supporting your view or the church's practice, and so on.
Then, after much prayer and Scripture set up a meeting with the Session to speak with them about your concerns. If you come to the conclusion that you are on solid biblical ground you need not worry about being a lone voice against the Session, remember...

_"A man with God is always in the majority."_ - John Knox

And if it comes down to you leaving the congregation, take heart in this...

_"...cost what it may, to separate ourselves from those who separate themselves from the truth of God is not alone our liberty, but our duty." _-C.H. Spurgeon


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 10, 2009)

This isn't about a difference over a circumstance, which I don't believe this was, but you will get different opinions on that. This is about trustworthy leadership; leadership that has to know how you handle things indifferent, if that is what this was. If these elders were this insensitive to allow this to go ahead to the point two families decided they had to walk out, _shame on them._ Find a church with elders who know how to handle such things biblically and with care and go there. I wouldn't question your walking out for one second more.


----------



## Scott1 (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> > Biblically, its best to take these concerns to your Session.
> 
> 
> Appreciate your counsel, brother. They are aware of my position on these matters, and my impression is that they consider it to be one of picayunery.
> ...



It's difficult. God will bless it, but the process is:

Go to the ones who have caused this. Your process might be, first go to one elder individually with specifics, God might win you an ally.

If nothing happens, then go to session as a whole.

Given the background and history and connection you relate here, it's best not to just leave "dissatisfied." Go through the biblical steps, ask God for grace, maybe He will send you someone who has this same conviction.

Commit to see this through with a humble attitude, for the Honor and Glory of our God.

(And, if you care to, let us know of steps you would like us to pray for you)


----------



## blhowes (May 10, 2009)

When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.


----------



## AThornquist (May 10, 2009)

blhowes said:


> When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. *I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.*




_Very_ good point. Thank you.


----------



## Hamalas (May 10, 2009)

blhowes said:


> When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.



What about God's "preferences"?


----------



## AThornquist (May 10, 2009)

Hamalas said:


> blhowes said:
> 
> 
> > When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.
> ...



Even though this basically is asking to debate the RPW and what is or is not acceptable, let me approach the statement in this way: even singing Psalms a capella involves human preferences.


----------



## Knoxienne (May 10, 2009)

AThornquist said:


> Hamalas said:
> 
> 
> > blhowes said:
> ...



True, a capella Psalm singing also can and may involve preferences, however there's a certain 'political'  element attended with praise bands/multiple instruments/dancing and that sort of thing that doesn't exist with more conservative worship styles, either a capella Psalm singing or hymnody to piano/organ accompaniment.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 10, 2009)

Somehow the image of a woman covering her ears in pain for the loudness of the backup band doesn't come to mind in discussing circumstantial matters or preferential differences that may arise between acapella psalmodists.


----------



## AThornquist (May 10, 2009)

Knoxienne said:


> True, a capella Psalm singing also can and may involve preferences, however there's a certain 'political'  element attended with praise bands/multiple instruments/dancing and that sort of thing that doesn't exist with more conservative worship styles, either a capella Psalm singing or hymnody to piano/organ accompaniment.



That's true


----------



## blhowes (May 10, 2009)

Hamalas said:


> What about God's "preferences"?


That should be our only concern.


----------



## Mindaboo (May 10, 2009)

> When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.



Maybe the other teens in the church want this kind of music, but I can tell you I know of two teens who don't. My two teens don't like it or think it is appropriate. We had a discussion on the way home and my son was upset. He said he felt like he was at a concert rather than a worship service. He actually got up while this was going on and asked me what was happening. He wanted to know why the music was going in this direction. 

The session has approached the teens in our church and asked them to list what they thought made a good church, (they were instructed to ask their parents too), and what they would like to see change. Music was one, they also wanted a swimming pool, and more "fun" activities. So, with that who would take them seriously? There were one or two kids who answered seriously, but for the most part it was a joke. 

I listen to Third Day, but it wouldn't be appropriate in a worship service. If these songs had been part of a get together on a different night or at a cook out there would be no objections at all. My elderly friends feel the same way. 

I am deeply saddened by today. I have a lot of respect for my pastor and even sat in on a SS class where he taught us about proper liturgy. At that point my impression was that he was opposed to the contemporary service. At that time we only sang from the hymnal. 

Thank you for all of your advice. Leaving a church is a painful experience that we have been a part of before. While we aren't attached to the people this go round it sure isn't something I am looking forward to doing again. We take our vows seriously, just stomping out doesn't seem right. I don't see us just leaving without trying to first work it out with our session.


----------



## blhowes (May 10, 2009)

Mindaboo said:


> > When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the other teens in the church want this kind of music, but I can tell you I know of two teens who don't. My two teens don't like it or think it is appropriate. We had a discussion on the way home and my son was upset. He said he felt like he was at a concert rather than a worship service. He actually got up while this was going on and asked me what was happening. He wanted to know why the music was going in this direction.


 That's really neat to hear.


----------



## Knoxienne (May 10, 2009)

Mindaboo said:


> > When I've been in similar situations, I've struggled to stay in my seat and not walk out of the service. I find it difficult to prepare my heart and keep it focused for worship. I wonder, though, if teens have the same struggle when they sit through music that I'm comfortable with. I've often wondered if my preferences were irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Mindy, your patience and long-suffering really are admirable, but if children in the congregation are being consulted about what they want in a church, that is a huge danger signal as to where the leadership's priorities are. Not even adults should be asked what they want in a church. It's what the Bible teaches is a good church that matters. That issue is a bigger deal even than contemporary music in the church in and of itself. If it were just you and Brad I'd say maybe you could afford to stay for a bit. But in my opinion, your children need to be in a congregation where the leadership thinks biblically about them and their role as covenant children in the Church. I hope what I said has not offended you and Brad. Please forgive me if I'm stepping on toes. I don't mean to. 

Praise the Lord for your wise children. Your post was so edifying!


----------



## CharlieJ (May 10, 2009)

This is a question more about Presbyterian church government than anything else. What role, if any, would the presbytery play in a situation such as this, where members were disturbed by the actions of their church?


----------



## Mindaboo (May 10, 2009)

> Mindy, your patience and long-suffering really are admirable, but if children in the congregation are being consulted about what they want in a church, that is a huge danger signal as to where the leadership's priorities are. That's a bigger deal even than contemporary music in the church in and of itself. If it were just you and Brad I'd say maybe you could afford to stay for a bit. But in my opinion, your children need to be in a congregation where the leadership thinks biblically about them and their role as covenant children in the Church. I hope what I said has not offended you and Brad. Please forgive me if I'm stepping on toes. I don't mean to.
> 
> Praise the Lord for your wise children. Your post was so edifying!



I am not offended in any way. Thank you for the reminder about my children. I have two more younger than they are and we do need to seriously consider how this church will care for them as well. The last time we left a church it broke Taylor's heart. Our life revolved around our church and they love our church now. I know if we were to leave they would adjust, but it wouldn't be easy. 

The elderly couple that was offended is dear to us. They have been the "grandparents" my children need, sincere friends to Brad and myself and a wonderful example of Christ love to us. It broke our hearts to see Jack looking at Helena with tears in his eyes. 

I spent some time reading about the OPC church this afternoon and think we will probably visit soon. It would actually be about the same distance and we have friends who attend there already. I just want to proceed with caution and honor the Lord with whatever we do. I don't want to act on emotion. I want to do what the Lord wants me to do.


----------



## TheocraticMonarchist (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> As we sat preparing our hearts, prior to the call to worship, this same fellow begins an overwrought rendition of "I Saw The Light" with electric accompaniment. *One retired Pastor came by and asked if I wanted to dance, to which I replied in the negative. I looked around the congregation and saw some folks clapping to the tune, some kids dancing in the aisle*, some folks looking shocked, one beloved elderly sister holding her hands over her ears and her husband looking apoplectic with tears in his eyes.



Could it be argued that brining the pop-culture into the church breeds irreverence?

This is terrible news. It sounds like many of the Assemblies of God churches that I have encountered. They have bought into the cultural relevancy argument, which in my experience only promotes sacrilege. I don’t think Paul would endorse the “dog and pony show” that so many churches put on today.


----------



## Classical Presbyterian (May 10, 2009)

I agree with the consensus--this was poor leadership and harmful mismanagement of the congregation. As a pastor I would concur that the pastor/s and elders damaged their standing and authority by the changing of worship without seeking to inform the congregation of their decisions.

You were entirely justified in walking out. It sounds more like an exhibition of hipness than the worship of a sovereign God.


----------



## ww (May 10, 2009)

Brad said:


> The slow encroachment continues, and today reached a critical mass. We arrived to find microphones set up, and what now looks like a 'praise band' on the stage, with a young fellow belting out a loud and bluesy version of "I'll Fly Away". There were new amps set up and electrified instruments twanging.
> 
> All this is new, but has been steadily coming. More praise songs. The musicians moved from down on one side of the stage to center-stage and multiplied in number. Seems that after the Session fired the popular youth Pastor they have decided to appease the teens by surrendering the 'music ministry' to them.
> 
> ...



Do what others have advised with regard to the Elders and Leadership of the Church but if your conscience is bound by Worship that is in violation of the RPW and they seem unsympathetic to your plight you may want to consider an alternative such as the OPC. After spending 10 years in the PCA I understand your plight brother and pray God will give you wisdom as to what course you and your family should take in this very difficult situation.


----------



## OPC'n (May 11, 2009)

Maybe someone has already said this, but I don't think it is appropriate for "young people" to lead the singing for worship. That should be the pastor's job.


----------



## Jim-Bob (May 11, 2009)

*Gotta Follow Your Conscience*

I'll add an amen for the advice from the PB-ers who recommend going to the Session to present your concern. The Session is accountable for the worship service. If they can't give scriptural reasons for the changes....the choices are to flee (attend elsewhere), fight (with formal appeals) or follow (accept the changes). Pray for wisdom, courage, and do everything in love.

For the record, I am not for Exclusive Psalmody, think electric guitars can be played worshipfully, and can accept spontaneous dance on extraordinary occasions ( as did King David)...but the circumstances you describe look like an attempt to force a form of worship on other's consciences. I don't blame you for walking out.


----------



## ww (May 11, 2009)

TranZ4MR said:


> Maybe someone has already said this, but I don't think it is appropriate for "young people" to lead the singing for worship. That should be the pastor's job.



It is amazing how one grows in Grace and the Knowledge of the Lord when one can be engaged in Worship without their conscience being burdened with violations of the RPW.


----------



## kalawine (May 11, 2009)

TheocraticMonarchist said:


> Brad said:
> 
> 
> > As we sat preparing our hearts, prior to the call to worship, this same fellow begins an overwrought rendition of "I Saw The Light" with electric accompaniment. *One retired Pastor came by and asked if I wanted to dance, to which I replied in the negative. I looked around the congregation and saw some folks clapping to the tune, some kids dancing in the aisle*, some folks looking shocked, one beloved elderly sister holding her hands over her ears and her husband looking apoplectic with tears in his eyes.
> ...



I agree Jonathan. You and I have both spent years in Pentecostal/Charismatic circles. I believe that many people who promote such "worship" don't really understand where a Church is headed in a situation like this unless they have had at least a little experience with it.

It seems to me that there are many honest Christian people that see their "dead" Church as a place that needs to "liven up." They visit other PCA Churches and see this sort of thing and want to bring it home. 

But these people have never had the experience of lying on the floor (after being "slain in the Spirit") next to a flakey man or woman that is "laughing in the Spirit" or giving birth "spiritually." (Yes... they actually get in position and push)

Am I over reacting? You can judge as you see fit. But in my experience it begins with "true worship" like "expressing youself" by raising hands (almost on cue every time - of course we all know what part of the song that we are to lift our hands) and eventually you are "dancing like David did." (To quote my good friend Seb, "Shall we get down to our undies?") 

Bottom line: Where did this begin and what is it leading to?


----------



## Zenas (May 11, 2009)

Approach the session. If that doesn't work, use a tazer.


----------



## kalawine (May 11, 2009)

Zenas said:


> Approach the session. If that doesn't work, use a tazer.


----------



## ww (May 11, 2009)

Zenas said:


> Approach the session. If that doesn't work, use a tazer.


----------



## Matthias (May 11, 2009)

One of the main reasons we have Elders is because they are supposed to be QUALIFIED to make proper Godly decisions. When these "Elders" turn over aspects of leadership to teens who are NEVER qualified to make decisions, they have turned Church order on its ears. It should be the Church Elders job to set Godly examples for these teens whether they like it or not, not give in to their every whim. 

I agree with Theognome and his suggestions. When that fails, make the extra 5 mile trip to the OPC.

Or better yet, find a RBC.....*wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge*


----------



## Tim (May 11, 2009)

Ask them to give you their understanding of the RPW. See if they even understand what it is. Serious suggestion.


----------



## Brian Withnell (May 11, 2009)

Our church a while back went through a long protracted study of worship in the Bible. The RPW first means that we know what God does require for worship, and then we implement that and that only.

There are several things I already knew. First, the kind of music (genre if you will) means nothing. The instruments mean nothing (sorry folks, I see God commanding the use of instruments in the OT, and I see no reason to state the particular kinds are anything other than circumstance). Lyrics do make a difference. What is hardest to keep is who are the "players" and who is the "audience."

The audience in worship is God. All our worship is to him and him alone. The RPW is not anything if it doesn't point to God as the persons to whom worship is directed. Nothing in worship is directed toward those that are not saved, or toward those that are in the congregation. All worship is worship of God, or it is not Christian worship at all.

That does not mean that worship cannot call those that are lost to repentance, but that is not the point of worship. Worship is *NOT* evangelism, even though the appropriate preaching of the word (God speaking to His people through a pastor) can and often does convict people of sin, and drives to Christ those outside the church. But that is not the point of worship.

If the audience is God, the idea that worship is "meaningful to me" becomes takes a different shape that what most think when they say those words. How worship effects us is secondary. Primarily, worship is toward God. How worship reaches to the congregation is of very little importance.

If the audience in worship is God, the players are the congregation. The easiest way I can describe if worship is being appropriately done, even if I cannot put a "this violates the RPW" label on it, is does the congregation even matter. In a rock concert, you might have people singing with the band, but that is totally incidental (unless the person next to you can't sing and doesn't know it <grin>) to the performance. The performance is the people "on stage" and they perform. If the congregation is incidental, the leadership in that church has lost sight of who worships, and who the audience is. It is the people (the congregation) that worships. All the rationalization of any part of worship in which the congregation of saints is superfluous is not worship. Even the sermon requires that the congregation of the saints hear. While "special music" might not be inappropriate (music in which the congregation listens and is moved to the ponder the attributes of God) it should not be the only music, and certainly the congregation ought to be the "players" in the music. If the music would be just as well "performed" with no congregation of saints, then it is not worship (God does not care about the worship of 10 people if it is the whole church that is supposed to be worshipping him).

Getting that right, is getting the RPW right. If you are worried about God being the audience, the congregation the players, and anyone else just helping the players in their worship, then the worship service will gravitate toward what is right (in a Biblical framework ... all bets are off if the Bible is not being preached and taught!)

If the questions being asked in setting up worship are justifications for what is being done rather than the finding what to do, the worship will be wrong. Asking with what will the congregation worship the God of the universe? How will they see God for who he is, themselves for who they are in relationship to God and respond to that? If those are the *first* questions, the rest will follow. If the questions are more "can we fit this into the RPW" and that is allowed to stand, the church is lost.


----------



## calgal (May 11, 2009)

I would ask my elder (note to self: ask about the horror known as praise dance) then ask the session what the logic used to decide the worship service was. And then scripturally state my objections. For what it's worth, "The music was horrible! We never want to hear that garbage again" will shut down discussion pretty quickly.


----------



## TimV (May 11, 2009)

Stage one is the dramatic exit, which serves to get people to consider the reasons and put the leadership on notice.

Stage two depends on whether your family is strong enough to go through the complaint process.

The PCA is probably the best Reformed denomination in the US. The "fringe" comes about when the few knowledgeable people in every congregation do nothing. And when they do nothing things get out of hand. But confronting the leadership has it's price, and not everyone has the *duty* to pay it. An OPC senior minister who posts here told me "NorCal has to be reformed, but you're not the man to do it". Kind of humbling, but necessary to hear.

So, look within yourself, talk to your wife and older kids and decide whether fight or flight is the best for your situation.


----------



## CDM (May 11, 2009)

> *The session has approached the teens in our church and asked them to list what they thought made a good church, (they were instructed to ask their parents too), and what they would like to see change.*



That about says it all.


----------



## wturri78 (May 11, 2009)

I sat through a service in the "conservative" PCUSA congregation where we used to attend, where the "children's sermon" involved having all the kiddies sit in the front while two people dressed in huge, Sesame Street knock-off costumes came out and danced to some song about Jesus loving us. I was in the OPC a week later and haven't looked back. At the time, from what little I knew of historic Reformed belief and practice, I thought the OPC was too...extreme?...and too old-fashioned. But the puppets convinced me that I'd rather sing hymns with stodgy old-schoolers than pretend that such nonsense was appropriate. Now I'm getting stodgy myself... 

At some point, somebody is bound to quote people from centuries past who complained about the "novelty" of the music of their day--wild new music by rebels like Isaac Watts, with tunes that smacked of worldly drivel, like Bach. I read some quote from Plato once, lamenting how the music of his day was ruining their youth. So some degree of perspective is important. I do not side with the EP position and although I do respect it, I've heard two people who are EP argue with each other about what's actually proper when singing acapella, and what "goes too far." So preferences and culture will _never_ cease to influence us. And, somebody's conscience will _always_ be offended by something that happens. We must respect the weaker brothers, but at some point it could become an impediment to others. 

If we point out that dancing in the aisles is too much, somebody will quote Psalm 150 about praising God with the dance. If we say that rock music and drumbeats are too secular, or sound too much like the "pagan" world around us and will hinder us from worshipping God properly, somebody will point out again that even classical music was novel once, and could just as easily hinder somebody who was used to that as secular music. 

I really don't know where to draw the lines. I really don't! But someone much earlier pointed out that teens don't necessarily flock to rock music and "me too!" worship services. There seems to be quite a current of young people who are realizing that popular culture is weak and shallow, and are fleeing in search of something deeper. Those churches that try to tag along with pop culture will just as quickly be "uncool" as they might have been "cool" when they brought in the bands. There seems to be no shortage of young people looking at Eastern Orthodoxy or the emergent stuff (which seems to want to be Eastern Orthodox-ish, only without the Christianity part!) simply because it represents a link to the past, and deep spirituality. 

And personally, I'd rather wear a robe and chant in Greek than listen to most of what passes for "praise music" in Evangelical churches...especially when dancing puppets are involved!


----------



## shackleton (May 11, 2009)

On one of the latest White Horse Inn's a similar topic was brought up, "Why Johnny Can't Preach." The issue of music came up and it was stated that music is everywhere and this is the kind of music they listen to so that is what they expect from church because that is all they know. Anywhere I go now there is loud pop music blaring, Sonic, the gas station, outdoor malls you name it and young people are always listening to something on their ipod. 

It was stated that if they hear classical or hymns or A Capella this is not what they are used to hearing so they do not like it. It is basically the music of a few generations back. 

White Horse Inn (Dr. Michael Horton) - Broadcast Archives
It was either "Why Johnny can't Preach", or "Culturally Relevant Preaching."


----------



## chbrooking (May 11, 2009)

While the session's actions may call into question the wisdom of this decision, I think we owe them -- by virtue of their office, if not simply by virtue of their profession -- an optimistic expectation. That is, I don't think going to your elders should be simply a formality, with no expectation of success. Aren't we to expect great things of those being transformed? So they made a bad decision perhaps. I would go to them with the humility and respect owed to the office, and I would make my case on the scriptures. Then I would trust that God's word would have its proper effect -- after all, these men are not only believers, but have been called to lead God's flock. 

All I'm saying is, don't pack your bags yet -- just assuming that they won't listen because they are all foolish and blind. If that is how you view the elders, you either need to pack your bags irrespective of this issue ... or you need to repent of that attitude. Not knowing your elders, I don't know which it is. 

I'd also like to urge caution to those disparaging the PCA. Few of us have broad enough exposure to any denomination to paint it with a broad brush. The OPC is rather small, but it has significant diversity. And I know very well that the PCA has an even greater diversity. It is a confessional denomination, and a good one. You may disagree with some of the positions the denomination has taken, and you may disagree with the actions of a particular local church in the denomination, but I think we ought to offer the denomination as an institution the same courtesy we would offer an individual -- focus on the issue and not the person/institution.


----------



## Marrow Man (May 11, 2009)

chbrooking said:


> I'd also like to urge caution to those disparaging the PCA. Few of us have broad enough exposure to any denomination to paint it with a broad brush. The OPC is rather small, but it has significant diversity. And I know very well that the PCA has an even greater diversity. It is a confessional denomination, and a good one. You may disagree with some of the positions the denomination has taken, and you may disagree with the actions of a particular local church in the denomination, but I think we ought to offer the denomination as an institution the same courtesy we would offer an individual -- focus on the issue and not the person/institution.


----------



## Pergamum (May 11, 2009)

Tim said:


> Ask them to give you their understanding of the RPW. See if they even understand what it is. Serious suggestion.



Sorry, I think this would backfire. It might sound know-it-allish or sarcastic for a layman to go to their elders and ask them, "Do you even know what the RPW is..." 

It would not go over well I think. 

Plus, the RPW is often like a wax nose which can be shaped to fit someone's needs and EPers will say that WE don't understand the RPW. 

To allow one form of instrumentation and not another is inconsistent...if violas are allowed then guitars are allowed, and clapping is allowed. I cannot see why one instrument is holy and another is worldy.

I am not sure that the RPW condemns music, or hand raising or even other very physical expressions of faith. 


The complainer could look like a real curmudgeon, and might in fact be a curmudgeon if their chief complaint was the style of music and not the poor way that these changes were enacted. 

If any complaint is made, the method of change and the giving over of the "worship" (i.e. music) of the service to teens would need to be the main focus and not the style of music.


----------



## LawrenceU (May 11, 2009)

What Clark posted,


> While the session's actions may call into question the wisdom of this decision, I think we owe them -- by virtue of their office, if not simply by virtue of their profession -- an optimistic expectation. That is, I don't think going to your elders should be simply a formality, with no expectation of success.


 is so critical that I want to highlight it.

One of the greatest difficulties I see among many reformed folks that are not elders is the attitude that they know better than the elders that God in his providence has put in place to lead and serve them. You may well know more, but all too often elders are approached with no respect for the grave position in which they serve. The writer of Hebrews has some pretty serious words pertaining to this.


> Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. (13.7)



I will agree that the scene described causes me to wonder what is going on, but the elders are not accountable to you ultimately. They are accountable to God. I have seen situations in which elders have made poor decisions and it was prayerfully and loving brought to their attention - and results were positive. More often, I have seen situations in which people approached elder offended, defensive, and full of accusations and the results have not been good. How often is serious prayer offered for the elders who keep watch over your souls? I'm not casting stones, just asking. From my experience all too often prayer for elders is not very high on most church members' list; especially if one disagrees with something they have said or done.


----------



## Romans922 (May 11, 2009)

What church is this? (You can pm me if you'd like)


----------



## Tim (May 11, 2009)

Pergamum said:


> Tim said:
> 
> 
> > Ask them to give you their understanding of the RPW. See if they even understand what it is. Serious suggestion.
> ...



Pergy, I understand your comment, but I still think this would be a worthwhile question. One could ask, 

"Just to see if we are on the same page, please tell me how you understand the RPW and if you agree with it. Perhaps we can see where we differ."

While I still do think that many do not understand the RPW, this questioning can be done in a way that is charitable.

For example, in a conversation with a local pastor here in Cape Town, I discovered that he really didn't understand the RPW, even though he said he did. I was initially surprised, but later learned that this is probably the rule, rather than the exception, sorry to say. 

An elder at another church in town hadn't even heard of the RPW, even though he was the one responsible to setting the order or worship and music!

These are churches that would identify themselves to be reformed.

If someone has truly studied the RPW, they should be able to tell you about Deut 12:32, Nadab & Abihu, the temple worship, Levites, ceremonies, Col. 3:16, Eph 5:19, etc. If they can't engage in a conversation on these things, then they really haven't studied the topic at all.

The key is to challenge people to actually study this stuff, without sounding pompous. It is difficult, but I think we should try to engage elders in this material. My suspicion is that things happen (such as in the original post) not because the elders have a different understanding of the RPW, but because the elders do not understand what the RPW is.


----------



## he beholds (May 11, 2009)

Wow--you guys got a lot of good advice here. Hope you can find peace and rest in God as you prayerfully determine how to glorify Him in this situation. 

I have been to a PCA church that does special music, and for them it is reserved for rare occasions. Perhaps this was like that--a once in a long while practice for Mother's Day or something? We do not like the special music, and I know for us it is both preference (it seems to always be cheesy almost-Romantic praise songs sung by a lady with a tape recorded piano in the background) and disagreement (we end up feeling like an audience). But at that same church, the preaching is great and the Pastor is a true Shepherd, and again, special music is a very rare thing. 

At our church, we had a violin playing once during the offertory and the musician had to hide beneath the church to play, as to be sure not to draw any attention to him/her self. (See, I don't even know who did it!) I think that was appropriate. When we had an elder who could play guitar (he's now in seminary) we would have RUF hymns (old reformed hymns, new tunes) and I love that. But since they are the same lyrics but with a different sound, it is easy for me to recognize that that is simply my preference, as I really enjoy singing alongside an acoustic guitar instead of piano. 

In your special music, was the congregation also singing, or were just the teens? I don't think it has to be bad that a teen is the one to _accompany_ the congregation's singing, if that's where the music talent lies, but I, too, would wonder about the church having teens perform for the congregation...but that is no different than the first PCA church that I mentioned that has cheesy special music on rare occasions. I think it is odd when anyone performs for the congregation. But if it is so very rare, I could personally put up with it (and I did at one time). 

What is most surprising to me is the session asking the opinions of the teens. This is such an incredible idea that I would doubt that it really happened, except that you have teens yourself so would know!!! That is simply crazy. Maybe they have a good excuse, though. (???)

From what I have heard, to quit a church, it has got to be basically apostate...I don't know if that is true or not.


----------



## Tim (May 11, 2009)

Pastor Underwood (three posts above) has given some good advice about what one must keep in mind as they approach their elders. Thanks for that, sir.


----------



## Scott1 (May 11, 2009)

One of the things I appreciate about Puritan Board is it causes me to study and become more familiar with and proficient in using the Confessions, Book of Church Order, etc.

Not knowing all the circumstances here, a few things might also be helpful in prayerfully assessing the right response:



> Vows members take in receiving their officers:
> 
> BCO 24-6(6)
> The ruling elder or deacon elect having answered in the affirmative,
> ...





> Vows taken for church membership (these are in an "advisory" section of our BCO, not required, but are often used or looked to):
> 
> BCO 57-5
> (All of) you being here present to make a public
> ...



Also, in an "advisory" section, you may find helpful the Directory for Public Worship, beginning Chapter 48 in our Book of Church Order. (Not suggesting you demand they following this exclusively, that is not required, only that it may help you better recommend specific practices that appear to or not be biblical.


----------



## he beholds (May 11, 2009)

I forgot to say, when we first moved, we visited a PCA church with a small band leading worship and that alone made us visit another PCA church (ours), so I do think these things matter supremely. 
It's just the-what-happens-when-you-have-already-taken-vows part that I don't know the answer to and that's what I hope you can determine with God's peace♥


----------



## Pergamum (May 11, 2009)

Tim said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Tim said:
> ...





Yep, good comments. 

It is difficult, however, to set one's self up as a subject matter expert before the elders and then expect them to answer to you regarding an oft-disputed area of church life. This is a situation which naturally breeds conflict...especially after you've walked out of their service.

If you can ask such questions without sounding pompous or like you are interrogating the elders, you have a much better manner than I do, especially if you believe that your job is to be their to rightly inform them of their errors.


Does John Frame understand the RPW? 

Many folks without any seminary education often say that he does not,and yet I am sure he understands it quite well...he just differs in what exactly it means.... like I said, the RPW often turns into a waxen nose which folks shape any way they wish. Some folks use much instrumentation and claim that they are faithful to the RPW, some use few instruments, and some use none and claim all the others violate the RPW.



Again, if this conversation becomes one of musical style or instrumentation, I see hardly any good in it. What must be addressed is the way that the changes were enacted.


----------



## Staphlobob (May 11, 2009)

Brad said:


> The chaos and cacaphony was at that point more than I could bear, so I gathered up my family of 6 and departed, as did the elderly couple.


 
After having read 2 pages of advice I am now more convinced than ever that you did the right thing.


----------



## Mushroom (May 11, 2009)

I am by no means qualified to teach my Elders anything, so I will not presume to do so. I want to submit to them. The reason I walked out prior to the call to worship was not out of protest, but because after several minutes of the song and seeing it's affect on the congregation, I thought that I'd probably not be able to maintain an attitude of worship while wrestling with an ungodly critical cast of mind.

I do have difficulties with the direction the Church has been taking, but am not up to any battle over it. It saddens and confuses me to see this all happening, and in particular pains me to see this dear elderly couple having to endure this in their waning years. They said yesterday that they probably would not return, but the husband very sorrowfully asked where could they go to worship now. They are in their 80's and deteriorating health.

So my love for this couple and my desire to protect them from harm may be coloring my reaction to it all, but I do believe that the music has moved from being God-focused to being man-focused, and that this is being done with disregard to those who would find that disturbing.

I've learned to ignore the 15' tall stained-glass shepherd image so as to submit to my Session, maybe I can learn to ignore this as well. As a layman with a plethora of other problems to deal with right now, I have no desire to engage in debate over the matter. I will leave that to those more able and qualified. I just need to try and determine what I should do with regards to myself and my own family. I don't want to be divisive, but I also don't want to endorse by my silence any unbiblical practice.

Thanks to everybody for your wise and kind advice. I will be mulling it all over prayerfully before making any decision about what to do.


----------



## Marrow Man (May 11, 2009)

It occurs to me, after another thread with regard to Mother's Day -- it seems odd that if the church went to such extremes with "praise and worship," there was nothing mentioned about Mother's Day. I'm guess that might have taken place afterward (after leaving), or perhaps it was simply not mentioned in the OP? Just curious.


----------



## R Harris (May 11, 2009)

This is a classic example of what happens when the RPW is abandoned.

If one rejects the teaching of the non-use of instruments, then where does one stop? Some like orchestras, some like rock bands, some like quartets, some like harps, some like traditional organs. The instrumentation used simply becomes human preference, nothing else. What was once used becomes irrelevant given the new preferences and moods of the existing makeup of the congregation. Take organs, for example. They are now so "50-100 years ago" and are thought to appeal only to the old fogies who haven't gotten with the program yet.

With that being the case, it is my opinion that an appeal to the Session would be an exercise in futility, as the above would be their reasoning. They would "regret" that you feel the way you do, but would say that you must do what you feel you have to do. 

If that is their positon, then good riddance.


----------



## jwithnell (May 11, 2009)

If you are in Winchester, you will find excellent churches in Purcellville (as mentioned), Leesburg, and Staunton. We have folks coming from your area to our church here in Leesburg.


----------



## Knoxienne (May 11, 2009)

R Harris said:


> This is a classic example of what happens when the RPW is abandoned.
> 
> If one rejects the teaching of the non-use of instruments, then where does one stop? Some like orchestras, some like rock bands, some like quartets, some like harps, some like traditional organs. The instrumentation used simply becomes human preference, nothing else. What was once used becomes irrelevant given the new preferences and moods of the existing makeup of the congregation. Take organs, for example. They are now so "50-100 years ago" and are thought to appeal only to the old fogies who haven't gotten with the program yet.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pergamum (May 11, 2009)

R Harris said:


> This is a classic example of what happens when the RPW is abandoned.
> 
> If one rejects the teaching of the non-use of instruments, then where does one stop? Some like orchestras, some like rock bands, some like quartets, some like harps, some like traditional organs. The instrumentation used simply becomes human preference, nothing else. What was once used becomes irrelevant given the new preferences and moods of the existing makeup of the congregation. Take organs, for example. They are now so "50-100 years ago" and are thought to appeal only to the old fogies who haven't gotten with the program yet.
> 
> ...



Being a Non-EPer I disagree with your position, but there is a certain logical beauty and consistency to the EP position I must admit!

Yes, if instumentation and variations in music are allowed, then this all might be a matter of taste and charges that this church is "unbiblical" might just be because of a clash of preferences. Rather than charging the church with sin over changing its preferences, the church might charge the dissenter with being divisive unless some real objections besides musical style can be fleshed out.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 11, 2009)

Let's not turn a request for advice into a debate over the meaning of the RPW, and certainly not EP or acapella singing which is restricted to the EP sub forum and to the two threads open there.

I agree any offense should be dealt with and removed, the elders met with, etc. The issue of the musical change itself I think is fruitless to pursue; move on in an orderly fashion.


----------



## Mindaboo (May 11, 2009)

> To allow one form of instrumentation and not another is inconsistent...if violas are allowed then guitars are allowed, and clapping is allowed. I cannot see why one instrument is holy and another is worldy.



Again, our problem is not with the guitars, it is not with violins, violas, etc. Nobody said the guitars are wordly. In fact we have gone to a PCA church in PA that did praise songs with more instruments than we have and the worship service was excellent. 

When we pulled up into the parking lot we could hear the music in our car while we were still in it. We thought someone was having a party in the neighborhood, seriously. When we got into the building we realized it was our worship team practicing. 

Our main concern is that there is a teen leading part of the singing and the songs are often shallow, lacking any form of doctrine; songs that speak of me, me, me, and not about who the Lord is. Read the words to Draw Me Close to You, we sing that often. We have stopped singing the songs that have no lyrical content or point us to worshipping ourselves rather than the Lord. There seems to be a push to captivate the teens in worship, to make them enjoy it. The elders can not please everyone, my children are not happy, but it appears the pastor's son is. I don't expect my session to try to please any man. They should be seeking to glorify God in our worship and I am not sure they are. I guess we'll find out after we speak to them. 

If we are in error I do hope our session has the backbone to rebuke us and lovingly help us overcome our error.


----------



## Pergamum (May 11, 2009)

I think Chris' (Naphtali Press) advice is wise. I have a busy day and need to get busy. It is hard not to let this thread devolve into a debate on EP.

I am praying for you and also this older couple, so that they may worship in a place that fits them and that all parties involved may be blessed by our gracious Saviour.


----------



## Rogerant (May 11, 2009)

No doubt this problem is running rampent in the Church today. But, I have found that once it has gotten to this point, that the clear preaching of law and Gospel and a focus on the atonement of Christ has already been abandoned long ago. The clear teaching on how we are to approach God has long gone by. Secondary issues that start to be divisive in the church are symptoms of a larger compromise the was snuck in the back door without anyones notice. Light can not compromise with darkness. It is either right or wrong. When right has to compromise with wrong, it can't be somewhat right, it is always wrong. No doubt this church has larger issues than this. One of the most important doctrines in the church is how we approach God. Abel brought a sacrafice of atonement as a gift to God, Cain brought a offering of thanksgiving without recognizing the requirement of proper reflection of his condition. One cannot approach God without a proper ascertation of who we are and what God has done for us. The hymns of the historical church have always focused on what God has done for us, (He has redeemed, He has atoned, He has ransomed us, He has reconciled us) Today's praise music focuses on what we are doing for God. (I will surrender, I will worship, I will praise, I will, I will, I will) Will worship, that is all it is.


----------



## KMK (May 11, 2009)

Your experience sounds like one my wife and I had about 8 years ago. One Sunday our church decided it was "Purpose Driven". Looking back, our anger, frustration and hurt feelings were not due to one particular thing but the fact that the church leadership just made a decision to radically change the way we worship without even a warning let alone a discussion. When elders change a church so radically and so abruptly it becomes a burden on people's consciences.

I am not saying that is what happened at your church, however. I am just speaking of my own experience.

All that to say, I feel your pain.


----------



## Albatross (May 11, 2009)

Hamalas said:


>



Side note: Out of curiosity, why did this reply receive 3 "Thanks"?


----------



## Craig (May 11, 2009)

chbrooking said:


> While the session's actions may call into question the wisdom of this decision, I think we owe them -- by virtue of their office, if not simply by virtue of their profession -- an optimistic expectation. That is, I don't think going to your elders should be simply a formality, with no expectation of success. Aren't we to expect great things of those being transformed? So they made a bad decision perhaps. I would go to them with the humility and respect owed to the office, and I would make my case on the scriptures. Then I would trust that God's word would have its proper effect -- after all, these men are not only believers, but have been called to lead God's flock.
> 
> All I'm saying is, don't pack your bags yet -- just assuming that they won't listen because they are all foolish and blind. If that is how you view the elders, you either need to pack your bags irrespective of this issue ... or you need to repent of that attitude. Not knowing your elders, I don't know which it is.
> 
> I'd also like to urge caution to those disparaging the PCA. Few of us have broad enough exposure to any denomination to paint it with a broad brush. The OPC is rather small, but it has significant diversity. And I know very well that the PCA has an even greater diversity. It is a confessional denomination, and a good one. You may disagree with some of the positions the denomination has taken, and you may disagree with the actions of a particular local church in the denomination, but I think we ought to offer the denomination as an institution the same courtesy we would offer an individual -- focus on the issue and not the person/institution.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (May 11, 2009)

Mindaboo said:


> I don't expect my session to try to please any man. They should be seeking to glorify God in our worship and I am not sure they are. I guess we'll find out after we speak to them.




I think this is the critical point, and it seems you and Brad have exactly the right attitude about this. I agree with others that the biggest problem here seems to come from poor leadership more than anything else: suddenly foisting a new style of worship on a congregation unaccustomed to it certainly does not seem prudent. 

I would also encourage you to carefully examine your own hearts on this through prayer and Scripture (as Larry also suggested) before approaching the Session. I'm not saying that your motives are wrong or that you were wrong for walking out yesterday. But I struggled for a long time with personal preference issues in worship, and realized that a lot of my views were hypocritical and frankly selfish in many ways. Again, I'm not saying you are struggling with this, but I would recommend very careful self-examination before taking this further.


----------



## reformedminister (May 11, 2009)

This type of worship has the possibility of invading any Reformed church, unless the session of a particular church, or the denomination itself takes a stand against it and refuses to let it come in. Obviously, your session open the door, and chaos has broken loose. I am very sorry to hear this. Worship is not to be a casual experience but a solemn encounter with God! I wonder what Calvin would think if he walked in?


----------



## AndyS (May 11, 2009)

py3ak said:


> In addition to other points, it might be as well to point out that they are imposing these things on Christians whose consciences are not comfortable. That means they need to have clear Scriptural warrant authorizing such practices, or they need to respect a fragile conscience. Clearly the elderly couple was not comfortable; are they to be entirely unconsidered?



It's just disheartening to see a PCA congregation seemingly acting just like any average evangelical (term loosely used) church. Becoming "seeker sensitive" now (just trying to fill the pews)?

And I guess the older members of the congregation don't matter as much - very sad & all too common in our culture, in my opinion.


----------



## Knoxienne (May 11, 2009)

> And I guess the older members of the congregation don't matter as much - very sad & all too common in our culture, in my opinion.



True.


----------



## AndyS (May 11, 2009)

Brad said:


> I've learned to ignore the 15' tall stained-glass shepherd image so as to submit to my Session, maybe I can learn to ignore this as well.



I was at a Prebytery Meeting a few years ago & they were asking some candidates to explain whatever exceptions they held to the Westminster Standards. The usual recreation clause to the Sabbath one came up, as well as one regarding the use of images (on the grounds that one may not be able to _not_ picture a person in his head when the Bible speaks of Jesus, especially in a Gospel narrative).

. . .all the while there was a huge banner with a picture/drawing of Jesus' face with a crown of thorns in the background of the church building where the meeting was being held. I wanted to say something, but I was just coming under care of the Presbytery that day myself & didn't want to speak out of turn. I just found it really ironic.

Sorry for the detour - we will now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.


----------



## py3ak (May 11, 2009)

Just a quick point. To those who are pastors/elders - if you saw two families, members of the church, walk out of a service, what would you do? Would you just say, "let them go" and make no effort at all?

If the answer is yes, is Ezekiel 34 still in your Bible?


----------



## AndyS (May 11, 2009)

CharlieJ said:


> This is a question more about Presbyterian church government than anything else. What role, if any, would the presbytery play in a situation such as this, where members were disturbed by the actions of their church?



The Session (elders) is the first "court" of the PCA. The Presbytery would be one step above that (a higher "court") and then the GA (General Assembly) after that.

Gotta go in order. If it cannot be handled at the Session level after having tried to do so, then it could go to Presbytery.

I'm sure that there are others here who know the finer details of the BCO better than I do. They could give you more info.


----------



## KMK (May 11, 2009)

py3ak said:


> Just a quick point. To those who are pastors/elders - if you saw two families, members of the church, walk out of a service, what would you do? Would you just say, "let them go" and make no effort at all?
> 
> If the answer is yes, is Ezekiel 34 still in your Bible?



The "Purpose Driven" model actually teaches a concept called 'blessed subtraction'. The idea is that those who don't buy in will leave and be replaced by many 'seekers'. Your church might shrink in the short term but will grow in the long as your church attracts more of the world. (Again, I don't know if that is what is going on in this case)


----------



## chbrooking (May 11, 2009)

Albatross said:


> Hamalas said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Hamalas must be quite the prayer warrior!


----------



## py3ak (May 11, 2009)

KMK said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > Just a quick point. To those who are pastors/elders - if you saw two families, members of the church, walk out of a service, what would you do? Would you just say, "let them go" and make no effort at all?
> ...



But though a real pastor may breathe a sigh of relief when a troublemaker packs up, it is not without preceding effort to seek those who are going astray. So while some subtractions can be blessed, pursuit of the flock is not really optional for a man of God. I know you know that - it just struck me that this is another facet of the situation.


----------



## Hamalas (May 11, 2009)

chbrooking said:


> Albatross said:
> 
> 
> > Hamalas said:
> ...



I wish! Maybe someday, Lord willing..................


----------



## puritanpilgrim (May 11, 2009)

I'm probably out of line, but I wouldn't have walked out. Unless the instruments were a big distraction or the lyrics were poor theology, it's unlikely I would say anything at all. Electricity doesn't freak me out. If it were seriously upsetting other members, such as making them cry, then I would speak out. If it's too loud for people with hearing aids, then it needs to be turned down.


----------



## Brian Withnell (May 11, 2009)

chbrooking said:


> I'd also like to urge caution to those disparaging the PCA. Few of us have broad enough exposure to any denomination to paint it with a broad brush. The OPC is rather small, but it has significant diversity. And I know very well that the PCA has an even greater diversity. It is a confessional denomination, and a good one. You may disagree with some of the positions the denomination has taken, and you may disagree with the actions of a particular local church in the denomination, but I think we ought to offer the denomination as an institution the same courtesy we would offer an individual -- focus on the issue and not the person/institution.



Amen.

I do think they made a huge mistake a few years ago when they told their seminary they had to "break even" instead of being supported. If the seminary has to break even, they have to make enough money that they can pay salaries, utilities, capital improvements and such. Asking that they stay broad enough theologically, and not sift those that are in their ranks to have only those that are truly qualified for the offices the degrees are designed to prepare them to fill. I truly believe that was a mistake that will have long term consequences in the life of that denomination. If a man graduates from a seminary with the "required" degree, and then is rejected by the presbyteries within the denomination based on a lack of proper understanding or incorrectly interpreting scripture, he would have a reason to complain about the lack of consistency between the denomination and their own seminary. The seminary is being held to be self-sustaining, they may have to lower their standards for academics and theology in order to maintain student population.

While I think that was a mistake, I have to believe there are presbyteries that will do their job and reject those that have not "passed muster" beyond what the seminary requires.


----------



## pepper (May 11, 2009)

Brad, 
You said that this has been coming for some time. My question is, why did you not speak with your leadership at that time? Would you be be against those old hymns that the band had put to modern tunes if they had used the original tunes? It seems to me that many people use the Regulative principle in a very subjective manner and then claim they are not doing so. That, I believe, is why there are those that claim the priciple in not using instruments and singing only Psalms. And please will someone show me where dancing in worship is against scripture. After all dancing is found to be used in worship in the Old Testament. My question is where in the New Testament is it forbiden. It is allow in the OT, and the last time I checked God has never forbiden it in the NT. Therefore it must still stand


----------



## Mushroom (May 11, 2009)

Somebody want to compose a nice, humble, letter for me to send to the Session asking about the issues of whose ear is the new music aimed to please, God's or man's, and that of what is appropriate in dealing with things indifferent (assuming they view it as indifferent)? Everytime I try, it just doesn't sound right.

Maybe I should let the whole problem go. I'm probably already thought of as a troublemaker over the shepherd image thing.

One former Elder said, not in a bad way, that he thought I was a 'stickler' for the second commandment. I almost asked if that meant I was lax on the other 9, but held my tongue.


----------



## KMK (May 11, 2009)

py3ak said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > py3ak said:
> ...



Except the PD model labels ANYONE who leaves as a 'blessed subtraction'. A family could be members in good standing for years, but if they leave it is a blessing because they would have prevented the church from becoming truly seeker sensitive. 

A church is more than a building. It is what goes on in that building. When you join a church, you are not joining a building. You are joining hands with what goes on in that building. Membership goes both ways. Elders cannot suddenly and radically change what is going on in that building. It is a breech of the membership contract, in my opinion.


----------



## Mushroom (May 11, 2009)

pepper said:


> Brad,
> You said that this has been coming for some time. My question is, why did you not speak with your leadership at that time? Would you be be against those old hymns that the band had put to modern tunes if they had used the original tunes? It seems to me that many people use the Regulative principle in a very subjective manner and then claim they are not doing so. That, I believe, is why there are those that claim the priciple in not using instruments and singing only Psalms. And please will someone show me where dancing in worship is against scripture. After all dancing is found to be used in worship in the Old Testament. My question is where in the New Testament is it forbiden. It is allow in the OT, and the last time I checked God has never forbiden it in the NT. Therefore it must still stand


Actually, the song was not done in a modern tune, but in a very twangy, slighty overwrought Hank Williams (author of the song) style. As I've said repeatedly in this thread, the issue was not style, content, or even especially the volume. It was the fact that the envelope has steadily been pushed towards directing the music to a human audience rather than God. The issue of personal preference is continually raised as a red herring in these discussions.

And I have made my perspective known to the Pastor previously on several occasions, not as complaint but as an expression of trepidation over where we were going. The instruments not new, electrification not new (although definitely expanded), but the idea of a solo was. And it was done in what appeared to be a very irreverent manner by an older teen who seemed bent on getting a reaction from the congregation rather than singing to God, and that he got.

The orchestra has migrated from off-stage and discreet to center-stage and in-your-face. That troubles me.


----------



## Edward (May 11, 2009)

TranZ4MR said:


> Maybe someone has already said this, but I don't think it is appropriate for "young people" to lead the singing for worship. That should be the pastor's job.



So only a teaching elder could lead congregational singing? You wouldn't allow for a ruling elder to lead?

Can someone who is tone deaf be ordained to the ministry?


----------



## Knoxienne (May 11, 2009)

Brad said:


> Somebody want to compose a nice, humble, letter for me to send to the Session asking about the issues of whose ear is the new music aimed to please, God's or man's, and that of what is appropriate in dealing with things indifferent (assuming they view it as indifferent)? Everytime I try, it just doesn't sound right.
> 
> Maybe I should let the whole problem go. I'm probably already thought of as a troublemaker over the shepherd image thing.
> 
> One former Elder said, not in a bad way, that he thought I was a 'stickler' for the second commandment. I almost asked if that meant I was lax on the other 9, but held my tongue.



I'm sure Bill would be glad to compose one for you/with you if you'd like. PM him if you're interested and I think he'd be only to glad to work on it with you. He's written to elders several times.  

And Brad, I've read your posts. You demonstrate a fine, humble, patient character, and *you are not *a troublemaker.


----------



## chbrooking (May 11, 2009)

Edward said:


> TranZ4MR said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe someone has already said this, but I don't think it is appropriate for "young people" to lead the singing for worship. That should be the pastor's job.
> ...



I hope others can lead. I'm not exactly tone deaf, but the tones I produce are unpleasant -- they make you wish YOU were deaf. What may be worse is that I have no rhythm. I was once ministering in a church that wanted me to lead. I had to have my wife (very musically gifted) sit in the front row and give me the beat discreetly with her hand, so that I could pass on that beat to the congregation.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 11, 2009)

See my post 75; posts broaching EP or acapella singing will be deleted. If you're missing a post this is probably the reason.


----------



## calgal (May 11, 2009)

chbrooking said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > TranZ4MR said:
> ...



I have the same problem. I did however explain that I WOULD LOVE to sing in the choir BUT Janet (the very very talented choir director) would have to figure out how to compensate for the second sopranos my off key singing would have thrown off key.  I was excused from choir thereafter!


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (May 11, 2009)

Brad said:


> The slow encroachment continues, and today reached a critical mass. We arrived to find microphones set up, and what now looks like a 'praise band' on the stage, with a young fellow belting out a loud and bluesy version of "I'll Fly Away". There were new amps set up and electrified instruments twanging.
> 
> All this is new, but has been steadily coming. More praise songs. The musicians moved from down on one side of the stage to center-stage and multiplied in number. Seems that after the Session fired the popular youth Pastor they have decided to appease the teens by surrendering the 'music ministry' to them.
> 
> ...


 
Sorry to hear that. We've done that very same thing with every chruch in driving distance up to three hours here. I know how you feel.

There are simply not enough ministers (real ones) to go around. That means there are going to be gaping holes all over the planet, as time goes on, in need to real pastors who preach, and real Christians who want to hear real preaching.


----------

