RPCNA Vs. URCNA?

[Andrew P.C.]

So, I'm curious. A URCNA congregation recently left the URC and went to the RPCNA. Now, I've heard of a minister changing denominations, but whole congregations? Usually that happens upon a church split due to disagreement theologically, E.G. CRCNA and URCNA. I'm wondering if anyone could give me a quick understanding of the difference between the two denominations? It might shed light into why this congregation did this.

 

[Marrow Man]

The RPCNA is exclusively psalmody and acapella in its worship. Instead of using the 3 Forms of Unity, they would use the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms as their confessional standards. Theologically, they would not be that much different. In our (ARP) presbytery, we have a former URC church plant that is now an organized church. In our own church, we have a URC family that recently moved down from Michigan that has been worshipping with us (no Dutch Reformed churches anywhere near, and they drive 1.5 hours to come to worship).

There isn't enough different between the 3FU and the WCF to matter; my guess would be that it was a matter of EP and a conviction about that. Of course, there are other reasons that you might not be privy to.

 

[Christlicher Soldat]

Could be covenanting and eschatology, as well--I mean, historically that's been the bigger distinguishing mark of Reformed Presbyterians. The URCNA's leadership is mostly Kuyperian and two-kingdoms amill, and they don't have many nice things to say about "transformationalists." The RPCNA, on the other hand, comes from a classical postmill background that emphasizes the importance of societies covenanting with God and recognizing Christ as King in the civil realm. I can kinda see this becoming an issue between the church and the URC's leadership a little bit easier than exclusive psalmody.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

Andrew:

Since you mentioned no church name or location, for whatever reason(s), what Bobby said in #3 (above) is a possibility. But I suspect not, particularly if it is the church that I think it is (in CA), it is decidedly two kingdom, strongly a-mil and not at all sympathetic to the historic civil approach of the covenanting movement. It would be, in fact, on the other end of the spectrum from that. It is, however, an EP congregation and probably strong enough in those convictions to leave the URCNA. But all this is guesswork since I am not certain that we are thinking of the same congregation. And it depends on that to know why they left.

Peace,
Alan

 

[Andrew P.C.]

Andrew:

Since you mentioned no church name or location, for whatever reason(s), what Bobby said in #3 (above) is a possibility. But I suspect not, particularly if it is the church that I think it is (in CA), it is decidedly two kingdom, strongly a-mil and not at all sympathetic to the historic civil approach of the covenanting movement. It would be, in fact, on the other end of the spectrum from that. It is, however, an EP congregation and probably strong enough in those convictions to leave the URCNA. But all this is guesswork since I am not certain that we are thinking of the same congregation. And it depends on that to know why they left.

Peace,
Alan

Prof. Strange,

The congregation is in Brea, Ca. All Saints Reformed Church and Rev. Sawtelle as their minister. I suppose I was just looking for the theological differences between the two denominations. However, the URCNA doesn't prohibit exclusive psalmody within a local congregation.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

Thanks, Andrew. The URCNA and the OPC have the same position on that: there's local option on the question of EP. However, if a congregation feels strongly enough about this, it would want to be in a denomination with others that feel the same way.

This is the congregation to which I thought you were referring. Another matter comes to mind: while Rev. Sawtelle is strongly two kingdom and would not resonate with the covenanting movement in its view of church and state, it is the case that folk in his circumstance might favor the WCF, since it has an explicit doctrine of the covenant of works. For those who favor the view that the covenant at Sinai is, in some sense, a republication of the covenant of works, it might be attractive to have the Westminster Standards rather than the TFU, the latter standards not even mentioning a covenant of works explicitly.

Peace,
Alan

 

[SolaGratia]

All Saints Reformed

Our Worship « All Saints Reformed


Calvin On Tap

 

[Andrew P.C.]

Thanks, Andrew. The URCNA and the OPC have the same position on that: there's local option on the question of EP. However, if a congregation feels strongly enough about this, it would want to be in a denomination with others that feel the same way.

This is the congregation to which I thought you were referring. Another matter comes to mind: while Rev. Sawtelle is strongly two kingdom and would not resonate with the covenanting movement in its view of church and state, it is the case that folk in his circumstance might favor the WCF, since it has an explicit doctrine of the covenant of works. For those who favor the view that the covenant at Sinai is, in some sense, a republication of the covenant of works, it might be attractive to have the Westminster Standards rather than the TFU, the latter standards not even mentioning a covenant of works explicitly.

Peace,
Alan

Prof Alan,

Thank you. It's interesting that you mention this. I appreciate the feedback.

 

[Andrew P.C.]

All Saints Reformed

Our Worship « All Saints Reformed


Calvin On Tap

Gil,

I am well familiar with his postings on his blog. However, there isn't a specific mention of the move. Unless I missed it, I just didn't see anything.

 

[SRoper]

Thanks, Andrew. The URCNA and the OPC have the same position on that: there's local option on the question of EP. However, if a congregation feels strongly enough about this, it would want to be in a denomination with others that feel the same way.

This is the congregation to which I thought you were referring. Another matter comes to mind: while Rev. Sawtelle is strongly two kingdom and would not resonate with the covenanting movement in its view of church and state, it is the case that folk in his circumstance might favor the WCF, since it has an explicit doctrine of the covenant of works. For those who favor the view that the covenant at Sinai is, in some sense, a republication of the covenant of works, it might be attractive to have the Westminster Standards rather than the TFU, the latter standards not even mentioning a covenant of works explicitly.

Peace,
Alan

This is very interesting. Are the distinctives of the RPCNA little more than EP these days?

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Hi Alan,

Rev. Sawtelle can speak for himself, of course, but as to facts, he was previously a minister in the RPCNA (Rochester, NY), where he affirmed the RP view of the mediatorial kingship of Christ. As I understand his views he still holds that position. Indeed, when I googled "mediatorial kingship" to check the spelling his blog came up near the top. Here's some audio that may be relevant (I haven't had a chance to listen yet).

As I understand the RPs, I don't think it would be possible to become a minister in the RPCNA and deny it. The first half of the RP view (as reflected in their testimony) is congenial to the historic doctrine of the spirituality of the church but the mediatorial kingship would be quite problematic from most 2K views.

According to my RP friends, the RPs are not actually, strictly "covenanting" any longer, but the MK remains a distinctive.

The Brea, CA congregation is an a cappella Psalm-singing congregation and I understand that they were attracted to the RPCNA for that reason too. I preached there a few years back and it was great joy to sing God's Word with them.

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Andrew,

did we meet Sun (was that you talking to Elko after church Sun PM)?

 

[Andrew P.C.]

Hi Alan,

Rev. Sawtelle can speak for himself, of course, but as to facts, he was previously a minister in the RPCNA (Rochester, NY), where he affirmed the RP view of the mediatorial kingship of Christ. As I understand his views he still holds that position. Indeed, when I googled "mediatorial kingship" to check the spelling his blog came up near the top.

As I understand the RPs, I don't think it would be possible to become a minister in the RPCNA and deny it. The first half of the RP view (as reflected in their testimony) is congenial to the historic doctrine of the spirituality of the church but the mediatorial kingship would be quite problematic from most 2K views.

According to my RP friends, the RPs are not actually, strictly "covenanting" any longer, but the MK remains a distinctive.

The Brea, CA congregation is an a cappella Psalm-singing congregation and I understand that they were attracted to the RPCNA for that reason too. I preached there a few years back and it was great joy to sing God's Word with them.

Dr. Clark,

Thank you for the clarification. My wife and I went to that church before my last deployment. It was interesting but yet refreshing.

Yes, that was my wife and I Sunday morning with Elko.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

Thanks, Scott. That is helpful. I assumed that since Rev. Sawtelle had become known for a strong 2K position that such might be at variance with the historic RPCNA view of Christ's mediatorial kingship (not with respect to a version of the spirituality of the church, of course, which would be, for them, part of the historic anti-Erastian concern). I was, at least partly, reflecting on some reasons that one might go from URCNA to RPCNA, other than EP, as well in speculating about the possible preference for the Westminster Standards for those favoring republication. BTW, the discussion at the URCNA Synod, where I was an OP fraternal delegate, was quite an interesting one with respect to relations with the RPCNA, with whom the URC did decide, by a narrow vote, to enter into a Phase II relationship (the debate centered on the RPCNA practice of women deacons).

We in the OPC look forward to working with you brothers in the URC on a Psalter-Hymnal. It's interesting, given our Scottish heritage of psalm-singing, how that has fallen into considerable disuse among us. It will be good to work with our continental brethren, who have retained a hearty use of psalm-singing, in recovering such for ourselves.

Peace,
Alan

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Alan,

What is it that makes you think that John is so committed to any version of a 2K analysis of Christ and culture?

The adoption of the OP project seems beneficial. May it be a an important step toward more Reformed worship. I hope that all our NAPARC churches will see the wisdom and benefit of singing God's inspired Word and be weaned from uninspired songs and even from the use of musical instruments in public worship.

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Hey there Andrew!

See you in church.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

The adoption of the OP project seems beneficial. May it be a an important step toward more Reformed worship. I hope that all our NAPARC churches will see the wisdom and benefit of singing God's inspired Word and be weaned from uninspired songs and even from the use of musical instruments in public worship.

Scott:

I agree with the first part but not with the last part (wrt, hymns and the use of instruments). But that's a whole argument in itself. I am thankful to work with you brothers on a Psalter-Hymnal. I believe that it will enhance the worship of both of our churches.

With respect to Rev. Sawtelle, I've heard and read things that pointed in that direction. But you know the situation there, so I gladly yield to your description(s). There are many fine covenanters here on the PB, I've been happy to learn. It's good that our traditions can enjoy fellowship, though we have some differences.

Peace,
Alan

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

http://www.allianceradio.org/EternityArticles/KingandKingdom.pdf

...These comparisons between the Kingdom of Christ, the regnum Christi, and the kingdoms of the world, the regna mundi, help to define the essentially "spiritual” nature of Christ’s Kingdom. They (as we shall see later) provide a base for the development of church=civil government relationships. These distinctions or differences do not necessitate separation. If some could misread these comparisons to mean “keep them separate because they are different”, then this doctrine of Christ’s Kingdom and Kingship would say “bring them together because they are different”. Christ’s spiritual Kingdom can and does include things that are physical and mundane. For example, when God converts a soul so that he becomes a spiritual person, He does not cease to have a physical body. So long as God maintains a visible, witnessing Church on earth, as one form of the Kingdom of Christ, it will involve the physical being part of the spiritual kingdom. Since Christ has told us He has “all power” and has been made head over “all things”, then we can know that in His (spiritual) Kingdom, there will be those things that are, in and of themselves, physical.

Even money, “dedicated” to the Lord becomes an important factor in Christ’s development of His spiritual kingdom. Anything which can, or can be made to have, a spiritual purpose can be seen to be part of Christ’s spiritual Kingdom. When Christ said, “My kingdom is not of this world”, He had no more thought of excluding physical things and political and social=family relationships than when He said to His disciples “ye are not of this world” (the Greek phrase is identical).

When we ask on behalf of the Christian businessman or the man in civil government or the father in a family, “but how can these physical things which occupy so much of my time ever be part of Christ’s spiritual Kingdom?”, we must know the question is caused by the statements in Scripture and so God will answer it.
The answer is to be found in the fact that whatever is connected with Christ’s Kingdom is connected in some way to Christ’s spiritual objectives–objectives that live beyond the time and space restraints in our world. It is the ultimate objective which determines the nature of a thing. When the businessman or man in government can see a direct relationship between his daily work and Jesus’ reason for dying for him on the Cross, then he will see how his physical job is part of Christ’s Spiritual Kingdom.

This booklet by Dr. Roy Blackwood is very good. I recommend reading it. It gives the RPC view of the Kingdom of Christ (Regnum Christi) and the Kingdom of the World (Regna Mundi).

The Reformation Socieities are built upon the principle of what is historically known as the Exercise. You can read about it here. The Exercise - Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, Inc

 

[Christlicher Soldat]

http://www.allianceradio.org/EternityArticles/KingandKingdom.pdf
This booklet by Dr. Roy Blackwood is very good. I recommend reading it. It gives the RPC view of the Kingdom of Christ (Regnum Christi) and the Kingdom of the World (Regna Mundi).

My profound thanks, Martin. I'll relish mining it for arguments to supplement my own.