My pastor had a pastor's response to the article when I sent it: "I get that public facilities present hurdles to overcome but that's not reason to argue the hurdle's case. I pray his mind changes over time."
Horrendous. Disgusting. Pick a word.
- Thread starter NaphtaliPress
- Start date
- Status
This link was bad. It can be found here.Dustin Messer's article arguing the contrary appears to have vanished from the site...
Logan
Puritan Board Graduate
Yes, that's all I'm saying. That's legitimate reason for critique, I'd critique that too, but it seems to me as everyone here is condemning what they think the article is about without even looking at it.
Polanus1561
Puritan Board Junior
I would be very surprised a NAPARC church does this. The author I presume is Southern Baptist?
retroGRAD3
Puritan Board Senior
I have a bad feeling that our evening service will barely have anyone at it. I hope to be proven wrong, but "holidays" seem to be very big in our congregation. Thankfully despite what the attendance will likely be there has been no talk of canceling the service.
Also though, I am not surprise to see something like this in TGC. I believe their only purpose these days is to get people comfortable with liberal/woke "christianity" and pushing people towards apostasy. Anyone see their "debates" where someone basically argued for being a "pro choice Christian".
Also though, I am not surprise to see something like this in TGC. I believe their only purpose these days is to get people comfortable with liberal/woke "christianity" and pushing people towards apostasy. Anyone see their "debates" where someone basically argued for being a "pro choice Christian".
I may be wrong, but the last time Dec 25 fell on a Lord's Day I seem to recall someone here, maybe on Facebook, saying they knew PCA churches changing up services to Saturday or something. I will say that my church since evening services resumed, this is the second such occurrence. The first time was not long after we restarted them and the custom was set not to have evening service the last week of the month because of the church dinner. Instead of a church dinner folks brought stuff for brunch between the SS hour and service, but evening still cancelled. This year it looks like we have decided to hold all services as usual, for which I'm thankful.
Yes; be thankful that the service is offered. If it were not there'd be no opportunity to change folks' habits. Set expectations for the long term.
retroGRAD3
Puritan Board Senior
I believe the other issue though is the pattern we see at TGC and the purpose of their articles. Articles like this are meant to be seen as "mostly harmless" and "understandable", but the question still remains, what is the point of posting it? In my opinion, it seems the goal is to get people comfortable with the idea of canceling service. It seems a better article would have been how to help your congregation have a higher view of the Lord's Day and that there is nothing more important on the day than the Lord's worship, and that canceling a service for any reason should be seen as a tragedy.
Edward
Puritanboard Commissioner
The problem with that "logic" is that if 80% of the congregation isn't going to be there, you only need to set up 20% of the chairs. And at that point, you don't need the sound system to be set up. Anyone that can't project to a gathering that small may not be called to be a preacher of the word.
Polanus1561
Puritan Board Junior
The age-old 'even if only your family turns up for evening service, go on preaching' is applicable here.
and for a church plant to neglect the day where statistically it is most likely people would just pop in out of nowhere boggles me
and for a church plant to neglect the day where statistically it is most likely people would just pop in out of nowhere boggles me
No Other Name
Puritan Board Sophomore
Wow. The wow emoji alone does not suffice.
Afterthought
Puritan Board Senior
"And Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams."
Parakaleo
Puritan Board Sophomore
If the true point of the article really is:
By the way, during a particularly bad week for sickness in our local church (Cornerstone FCC in Burlington, NC), I was called upon to preach both services. In our congregation of over 100 people, the only ones present were my family, an elderly couple, and a single man. Probably about 5% of the church body. We all appreciated the in-person services and fellowship together over lunch. Completely "worth it".
- We are aware of a Lord's day coming up where 80% of our people are going to be absent
- We have made the difficult decision to cancel our service because the remaining 20% of our people would be under a considerable strain to get things set up for the service
By the way, during a particularly bad week for sickness in our local church (Cornerstone FCC in Burlington, NC), I was called upon to preach both services. In our congregation of over 100 people, the only ones present were my family, an elderly couple, and a single man. Probably about 5% of the church body. We all appreciated the in-person services and fellowship together over lunch. Completely "worth it".
JP Wallace
Puritan Board Sophomore
The quote towards the end of the articule is actually one of the most remarkable things I have read in a long time. Remarkable for its ignorance of theology and Reformed doctrine and practice. Remarkable for its total lack of understanding of just what honouring the Lord means. Remarkable for its lack of understanding about what a Sunday is for. However the sad thing is that almost all avid Gospel Coalitions fans will agree with this.
He begins with "We all agree...." I would suggest that most of us should barely agree with anything in this paragraph. Here it is"
He begins with "We all agree...." I would suggest that most of us should barely agree with anything in this paragraph. Here it is"
"We all agree Christmas Day is a special day. It’s not “just another Sunday.” But whether your church decides to worship together on Christmas or not, honor the Lord in your decision."
- We do not all agree - that Christmas Day is a special day......
- We certainly do not agree that "Christimas Day" makes a Sunday a special Sunday when the two conicide.
- We do not agree with the language of "just another Sunday" as if Sunday are in any way ordinary, we admit we all too often treat Sabbath with a causalness that is unbecoming yet it is never an ordinary day.
- We do not agree that it is for the church to decide whether or not it worships together on Christmas Day.
- We do not agree that it is even possible to honour the Lord if we decide not to worship on the 25th December this year.
Jake
Puritan Board Senior
I did not check if this church is in the Southern Baptist Convention, but noticed the author is a graduate of SBTS. The language at the end reminds me of a change to the Baptist Faith & Message between the 1963 and 2000 versions (the last two major revisions):
1963:
The first day of the week is the Lord’s Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private, and by refraining from worldly amusements, and resting from secular employments, work of necessity and mercy only being excepted.
2000:
The first day of the week is the Lord’s Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should include exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private. Activities on the Lord’s Day should be commensurate with the Christian’s conscience under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
See the end -- the focus is on a vague "conscience" instead of showing the clear teaching of the Scripture on what the Lord's Day should look like.
That said, the earlier part would still contradict cancelling services on the Lord's Day because it also another "holiday."
(source on BF&M -- https://bfm.sbc.net/comparison-chart/ )
1963:
The first day of the week is the Lord’s Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private, and by refraining from worldly amusements, and resting from secular employments, work of necessity and mercy only being excepted.
2000:
The first day of the week is the Lord’s Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should include exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private. Activities on the Lord’s Day should be commensurate with the Christian’s conscience under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
See the end -- the focus is on a vague "conscience" instead of showing the clear teaching of the Scripture on what the Lord's Day should look like.
That said, the earlier part would still contradict cancelling services on the Lord's Day because it also another "holiday."
(source on BF&M -- https://bfm.sbc.net/comparison-chart/ )
TheInquirer
Puritan Board Junior
It always irritates me when Christian leaders make public arguments and leave out the Bible. Messer had no Scripture references whatsoever. If his whole argument is "It's important to be reminded of what Christmas is all about" someone easily counters that by saying "We can do that at home."
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
That is how many we have every Sunday (minus a few children as my wife and I only have two).
I could understand not having anyone present would require a service to be cancelled. Even if some are absent it may need to be put off - a few weeks ago our family was sick so we had no one to cover the pulpit. However, this article is just pragmatic from beginning to end and does not articulate any clear principles.
Last edited:
Polanus1561
Puritan Board Junior
My bigger question is why would he write all of this publicly?
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
Yes, I read it. I think that they were just making up excuses as self-atonement.
Logan
Puritan Board Graduate
I agree.
TheInquirer
Puritan Board Junior
It was a pragmatic argument but he did offer Scripture as justification for not meeting so counter-arguments need to deal with those passages to persuade those reading who actually care what the Bible says.
If it is any consolation, you all have had an influence on me and we will be attending on Sunday (unfortunately at another church in town).
If it is any consolation, you all have had an influence on me and we will be attending on Sunday (unfortunately at another church in town).
RobertPGH1981
Puritan Board Sophomore
My old church devalued the purpose of Lord's Day Worship. In my experience it comes from certain forms of Baptist Theology. It wasn't highly valued or understood in my old church which borrowed the Progressive Covenantlism of Wellum/Gentry. When you says things like,
"Every day is the Lords Day" or "The Sabbath was fulfilled in Christ" you make the day set apart no different than every other day. Theology matters! Overall, there is a gross misunderstanding of the purpose and meaning of worship throughout evangelical Christianity.
"Every day is the Lords Day" or "The Sabbath was fulfilled in Christ" you make the day set apart no different than every other day. Theology matters! Overall, there is a gross misunderstanding of the purpose and meaning of worship throughout evangelical Christianity.
Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
I thought much the same thing when I read the article. If there are only 20% of the congregation in attendance, then logistics should not be a huge problem, as there are 80% fewer seats to set out for people. I was also baffled about why someone would write an article defending cancelling a service if logistics and low attendances were really the reason for cancelling it. As I said earlier, these red herrings are being flagged up as self-atonement for disobeying the biblical command to gather on the Lord's Day. His argument that they are only doing it on this one, special occasion, therefore, they are not making a habit of forsaking meeting together is absurd. What if I decided to skip church one Sabbath because I could not be bothered going on that particular day? "Sure, it is just a one-off; I am not making a habit out of it!" I do not think that such an excuse would wash very well. Yet when the clergy decide to engage in such special pleading, they cry, "Don't judge me, love me!"
retroGRAD3
Puritan Board Senior
It would not be accurate to call TGC reformed. But when it comes to keeping the Sabbath in general, I would say you are correct in that it is becoming more and more an issue in all sectors.
Polanus1561
Puritan Board Junior
This was a SBC church no?
And do you have record of any NAPARC church doing this?
I just know that TGC has a wide readership among Reformed Christians, and if you dare to call them "not Reformed" or "liberal" people will get very angry at you.
Chad Hutson
Puritan Board Freshman
Yes, I read the article, but I remain unconvinced of their reasoning. With fewer attendees there should be less work. Bring your own chair, forego the sound equipment, make it even more intimate, imitate the persecuted churches gathering around the world...anything is preferable to canceling worship. Especially their argument that unbelievers are less likely to attend that day-who cares? Is a church not a gathering of the assembly of God, the saints, the body of Christ?
- Status
Similar threads
