Does the RPW allow the pastor to read (and expound) a paragraph of the WCF/LBCF as a part of the liturgy?

[pgwolv]

I have read the older threads on the RPW and the use of confessions of faith as a part of the liturgy. Many of the comments were aimed at recitation by congregants. Do the arguments change at all if it is only being read (and usually explained) by the pastor?

Context: I have found it to be very beneficial as so many people don't bother with reading it for themselves. For membership in our church, there is a short, basic confession of faith to which one must old, not the entire LBCF. But the church itself as a corporate entity adheres to the LBCF, members are not allowed to openly talk against it, and church officers have to subscribe to it in full.

However, I know that the RPW does not allow for pragmatism. Please give me some input on this. I considered setting up a poll, but realised that numbers do not have a bearing on my question.

 

[Afterthought]

We have catechism and confession classes on the Lord's day. On Wednesdays, our pastor is going through the Shorter Catechism (preaching on the texts that support the doctrine and explaining and applying the doctrine as stated in our Catechisms). We have membership classes that give people an opportunity to learn the main things we believe and have an opportunity to ask questions before they join.

 

[Zach]

It would seem like the historical practice of the Dutch Reformed churches having catechetical preaching and teaching in the afternoon or evening service make it hard to argue that reading and explaining part of the church's confession during the worship service was a violation of the regulative principle.

More importantly, Scripture makes clear that teaching is an essential responsibility of the church and ministers and elders, without stipulating exactly how it is carried out. It seems to me what you describe is clearly appropriate under that calling and command.

 

[Polanus1561]

I don't see it as any different as what a Reformed minister does during the administration of the Supper. Both are Scripture-regulated language adapted for corporate use and confession?

 

[pgwolv]

We have catechism and confession classes on the Lord's day. On Wednesdays, our pastor is going through the Shorter Catechism (preaching on the texts that support the doctrine and explaining and applying the doctrine as stated in our Catechisms). We have membership classes that give people an opportunity to learn the main things we believe and have an opportunity to ask questions before they join.

We have adult Bible classes before the morning service, and currently we are going through the LBCF. However, less than 20% of the congregants attend those classes. We have similar membership classes, but they are only two sessions per member.

 

[pgwolv]

Scripture makes clear that teaching is an essential responsibility of the church and ministers and elders, without stipulating exactly how it is carried out. It seems to me what you describe is clearly appropriate under that calling and command.

This is my feeling, as well. Thanks for the input

 

[Howard the Reformer]

We use the WCF Larger Catechism as a responsive reading during our worship service. The worship leader (RE) reads the question and the congregation responds with the answer. I see nothing in the RPW that would prohibit that.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Many congregations strongly favoring and upholding the RPW from the days of the Reformation have included in the liturgy statements of faith like the Apostles' Creed. I think this would include Geneva, but someone might correct me. Presbyterianism in Scotland seems to have tried an even more stringent RPW application, doing away with creedal statements and unison recitation of the Lord's Prayer. Again, if my memory is misplaced, I own it and apologize.

Over centuries other congregations/churches have implemented more or less strict application of the RPW, all in good faith attempts to maintain purity of worship. My takeaway from these examples is to note that the principle is simple and sound enough, distinguishable from other principles and lack of principle. There was and is a spectrum or a window of conformity, with various arguments offered and appeal made to Scripture for justification of a particular practice when the RPW retains its place at the foundation of worship practice.

For my part, I have made justification for use of creed/confession on the elemental ground (re. "elements of worship" as the WCF uses the term) of oaths and vows. But, because we as a group are always contending for accuracy and truth, we may oppose what we consider the misuse or slight of the RPW by its confessed friends, and ours. Hopefully, we do so in a true spirit of brotherly love and dedication to the truth, not putting off faithful allies as if enemies.

 

[Logan]

I see nothing in the RPW that would prohibit that.

I've hesitated to weigh in but the RPW is about what is commanded, not what is not prohibited.

I don't speak for the RPCNA (which has varied practices) but as I see it, we are commanded to do certain things:

• Reading of the Word
• Preaching of the Word
• Prayer
• Singing of psalms
• The Sacraments

These constitute our worship order. Responsive readings, creeds, or catechisms are wonderful things, just not part of commanded worship. I have been in many congregations that do these and they like them and find benefit in them, but my question has always been "is it commanded as worship"? As the OP said, the RPW does not allow for pragmatism.

The Directory for Publick Worship from the Westminster Standards did not contain reading of creeds (it's own or others) or teaching from confessions or catechisms, despite an enormous plethora of them being available and being promoted widely. I think that's a decent argument that they didn't believe it was a commanded element of worship, and therefore not to be added.

Perhaps here is another way of asking the question: would we be sinning by not teaching confessions or reciting creeds during worship? Since the answer is no (as far as I know), then it must not an element of worship, but could at the very most be only a subset of "preaching of the word".

 

[Alan D. Strange]

@Logan

No "Singing of Psalms?" Is that a mere oversight or was it for some reason omitted?

Peace,
Alan

 

[Howard the Reformer]

I've hesitated to weigh in but the RPW is about what is commanded, not what is not prohibited.

I don't speak for the RPCNA (which has varied practices) but as I see it, we are commanded to do certain things:

• Reading of the Word
• Preaching of the Word
• Prayer
• The Sacraments

These constitute our worship order. Responsive readings, creeds, or catechisms are wonderful things, just not part of commanded worship. I have been in many congregations that do these and they like them and find benefit in them, but my question has always been "is it commanded as worship"? As the OP said, the RPW does not allow for pragmatism.

The Directory for Publick Worship from the Westminster Standards did not contain reading of creeds (it's own or others) or teaching from confessions or catechisms, despite an enormous plethora of them being available and being promoted widely. I think that's a decent argument that they didn't believe it was a commanded element of worship, and therefore not to be added.

Perhaps here is another way of asking the question: would we be sinning by not teaching confessions or reciting creeds during worship? Since the answer is no (as far as I know), then it must not an element of worship, but could at the very most be only a subset of "preaching of the word".

While I do not disagree on your points, I would include congregational singing in the RPW as required.

I would not accuse you of this, but is not the principle behind the RPW is to "Glorify God"? Worship just that, a means of grace given to God's people to give back to God the worship he deserves, demands and requires. The counter to what you stated is, that while I understand you have the view of the RPW and nothing else added to worship, I would hold to the view that I agree that the RPW be observed and anything else from God's Word we use including our beliefs and statements thereof are not forbidden are allowed in worship. I do not want to start a "what if" that would take away from the RPW, but I do find other examples in scripture used in the OT and NT for worship can be acceptable also.

I have observed many people around the world worshipping God in many forms and traditions. Can we truly say they are wrong?

I meant no disrespect or if you find this a criticism then I apologize.

 

[Logan]

@Logan

No "Singing of Psalms?" Is that a mere oversight or was it for some reason omitted?

Peace,
Alan

That was my mistake. I had it typed out but edited to stick it in bullet points and must have overlooked it.

 

[Claudiu]

I've hesitated to weigh in but the RPW is about what is commanded, not what is not prohibited.

I don't speak for the RPCNA (which has varied practices) but as I see it, we are commanded to do certain things:

• Reading of the Word
• Preaching of the Word
• Prayer
• Singing of psalms
• The Sacraments

These constitute our worship order. Responsive readings, creeds, or catechisms are wonderful things, just not part of commanded worship. I have been in many congregations that do these and they like them and find benefit in them, but my question has always been "is it commanded as worship"? As the OP said, the RPW does not allow for pragmatism.

The Directory for Publick Worship from the Westminster Standards did not contain reading of creeds (it's own or others) or teaching from confessions or catechisms, despite an enormous plethora of them being available and being promoted widely. I think that's a decent argument that they didn't believe it was a commanded element of worship, and therefore not to be added.

Perhaps here is another way of asking the question: would we be sinning by not teaching confessions or reciting creeds during worship? Since the answer is no (as far as I know), then it must not an element of worship, but could at the very most be only a subset of "preaching of the word".

Does your church take communion every Lord's Day? If not, are they sinning by not having communion during worship every Sunday? Does "Since the answer is no (as far as I know), then it must not an element of worship"... still apply then?

 

[pgwolv]

Does your church take communion every Lord's Day? If not, are they sinning by not having communion during worship every Sunday? Does "Since the answer is no (as far as I know), then it must not an element of worship"... still apply then?

At first I was in agreement with your logic, but now I think the Confession issue is a yes/no item whereas the Communion issue is a frequency item. So Logan would probably the say the command is to celebrate the Lord's Table frequently, not at every service.

 

[Logan]

At first I was in agreement with your logic, but now I think the Confession issue is a yes/no item whereas the Communion issue is a frequency item. So Logan would probably the say the command is to celebrate the Lord's Table frequently, not at every service.

That is correct. We do not baptize every week either. There surely is a difference between something that is an element (yet the frequency is not commanded or is variable) and something that is not an element altogether.

If you did not celebrate the Lord's Supper or baptize at all, that would be a problem. If you did not recite creeds at all, that would not be a problem (again, as far as I know anyone would say).

So one has to prove either creeds/catechisms, etc. are an element of worship in themselves, or that they are a part of some other element of worship (the only candidate I see being "preaching the Word"). Otherwise we're into the normative principle realm (i.e., it's just that it's not forbidden).

That is just for the pastor "preaching" through the confessional documents. Congregational recitation or response I would find an even harder time seeing as part of some other element, even Bruce's categorization as oaths and vows.

 

[Claudiu]

That is correct. We do not baptize every week either. There surely is a difference between something that is an element (yet the frequency is not commanded or is variable) and something that is not an element altogether.

If you did not celebrate the Lord's Supper or baptize at all, that would be a problem. If you did not recite creeds at all, that would not be a problem (again, as far as I know anyone would say).

So one has to prove either creeds/catechisms, etc. are an element of worship in themselves, or that they are a part of some other element of worship (the only candidate I see being "preaching the Word"). Otherwise we're into the normative principle realm (i.e., it's just that it's not forbidden).

That is just for the pastor "preaching" through the confessional documents. Congregational recitation or response I would find an even harder time seeing as part of some other element, even Bruce's categorization as oaths and vows.

Got it.

So,

Perhaps here is another way of asking the question: would we be sinning by not teaching confessions or reciting creeds during worship? Since the answer is no (as far as I know), then it must not an element of worship, but could at the very most be only a subset of "preaching of the word".

is to be taken as in toto. I was reading it instead as particular and figured that's not what you truly meant. (That is, on any given Sunday if a church does not partake in a certain element then it is sin). Instead, you meant: if a church never does "x", and it's not a sin, then "x" is not required and therefore not part of the RPW.

 

[pgwolv]

For my part, I have made justification for use of creed/confession on the elemental ground (re. "elements of worship" as the WCF uses the term) of oaths and vows.

Rev. Buchanan, would you please share how you made this justification? And then, how do you move from "special occasions" to "every worship service"? I always appreciate reading your lived experience as a shepherd of your flock.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Rev. Buchanan, would you please share how you made this justification? And then, how do you move from "special occasions" to "every worship service"? I always appreciate reading your lived experience as a shepherd of your flock.

People make profession of faith in our worship services, often only by statement of "Yes" or "I do," the content of their affirmation is read out by the pastor. Other churches may do differently. The ancient church used the Apostles' Creed as the basis for baptism. The Lord's Prayer is, according to our Standards, as much a statement of faith concerning prayer, as it is a prayer in itself; would that we knew in full with each petition what we were professing.

The profession of faith is an "occasional" oath. The Standards seem to think of all such things as irregular, as to time employed; but to some extent the sacraments are also, and in the case of the Scots the communion season came for each parish once in a twelvemonth. I think it would not be out of accord with the Standards to have the Lord's Supper weekly, or practically every service, without insisting on any frequency prescribed.

So, it does not strike me as misapplied to think of the creed or catechism or confessional excerpt as occasional, even if one congregation tends to repeat the practice more frequently or regularly (even weekly) than do others.