Split P Soup?

Status
Not open for further replies.
MChase said:
Some of said denominations are in NAPARC.
Click to expand...
Some? I see one, with 5 US groups. One of which has loaned REs because it appears to have none, Another has no pastor and no REs, but does have a Deacon per the denominational website.

MChase said:
I wonder if you’d have told John Murray he was perpetuating the problem of micro-presbyterianism and sectarianism.
Click to expand...
It was my understanding that Murray was OPC. Is that incorrect? Was he ordained in one of the Micros?
 
Edward said:
Some? I see one, with 5 US groups. One of which has loaned REs because it appears to have none, Another has no pastor and no REs, but does have a Deacon per the denominational website.


It was my understanding that Murray was OPC. Is that incorrect? Was he ordained in one of the Micros?
Click to expand...
Murray was instrumental in founding the PRC. I’m not sure what exactly the point is about assessor elders and congregations without a minister. The OPC has the practice of elders within the presbytery working on other sessions in the absence of ruling elders on the ground.

What is the goal of your post? To disparage groups seeking to uphold the confession and stand for fidelity to Presbyterianism? Where do you suggest the PRC go? We don’t sing hymns, so the PCA and OPC won’t have us. (One OPC minister has gone so far as to say a psalm singer wouldn’t even be allowed to be a member in his congregation.) We have been in talks with the FCC US presbytery for some time, but joining denominations isn’t something that happens over night. In the US, the PRC and FCC are the only groups that hold to the confession without exception.
 
In the US, the PRC and FCC are the only groups that hold to the confession without exception.
Click to expand...

Now that's arguable, of course, and I'm new around here but I bet the point has been debated ad nauseum for many years, so I'm not asking for nor encouraging further debate on exclusive psalmody, but I do have a question:

Does the Regulative Principle of Worship say, "Whatever is not explicitly commanded in the New Testament is forbidden?" If that is your interpretation, then perhaps you've got the paedobaptism thing wrong. If you baptize covenant children of believers - not explicitly commanded in so many words in the New Testament (but arrived at by good and necessary consequence), then you violate your own understanding of the RPW, don't you?

Mind you, I'm new, recently "converted" to Westminster (WCF) from London (LBCF), so treat me as one who asks a sincere question, not rhetorically.
 
MChase said:
In the US, the PRC and FCC are the only groups that hold to the confession without exception.
Click to expand...

Minor point, there is also 1 FPCOS congregation in the US (in Santa Fe, Texas), as well as 2 congregations in Canada. FPCOS also hold to the Westminster Standards without exception and to a capella exclusive psalmody.
 
Christopher Robin said:
Now that's arguable, of course, and I'm new around here but I bet the point has been debated ad nauseum for many years, so I'm not asking for nor encouraging further debate on exclusive psalmody, but I do have a question:

Does the Regulative Principle of Worship say, "Whatever is not explicitly commanded in the New Testament is forbidden?" If that is your interpretation, then perhaps you've got the paedobaptism thing wrong. If you baptize covenant children of believers - not explicitly commanded in so many words in the New Testament (but arrived at by good and necessary consequence), then you violate your own understanding of the RPW, don't you?

Mind you, I'm new, recently "converted" to Westminster (WCF) from London (LBCF), so treat me as one who asks a sincere question, not rhetorically.
Click to expand...
Moderating: Brother Christopher that is a good question, but please start a new thread in the worship forum if you wish to discuss. This thread should stick to the OP!
 
Jeri Tanner said:
Moderating: Brother Christopher that is a good question, but please start a new thread in the worship forum if you wish to discuss. This thread should stick to the OP!
Click to expand...
And that's another question: how do some people have the attention span to stick to the OP? I never have. :think:
 
Andrew35 said:
But how do you explain to someone that, for example, the Presbyterian Church in America can't really be in e.g. Australia,
Click to expand...
I was focused on other issues the other day, and didn't address this.

Why not? The PCA has a couple of presbyteries in Canada, and Southeast Alabama presbytery has several congregations in Germany, one in Norway, and it looks like they have works underway in Guam and Okinawa now. Why not Australia. And a couple of the Scottish (now, looks like 3, I missed one) denominations have active works in the US. Our Sunday School class even has regular attenders in the Middle East.

And with the largest PCA church being Korean, one might suspect that it wasn't the language that was the problem for the Francophone congregations in Canada that split. And in Australia they even speak a form of English.
 
Edward said:
To list out the Presbyterian bodies in the US. Along with some key issues of some of them. And I consider a "take my ball and go home" attitude to be an issue.
Click to expand...
There are disadvantages to small size; and it is especially a factor in governance and discipline, just as there are advantages to more immediately draw tighter adherence to orthodoxy. And it is certainly possible there is more of a separatist thinking and unbiblical impatience to some micros that have formed. But on taking the ball and leaving generally, it seems to me the only difference between those larger groups that left heterodoxy for orthodoxy like the PCA and OPC and some micros, is the size of the teams and where the red line was. They've all decided to leave something and refuse to join anything existing at the time.
 
NaphtaliPress said:
, it seems to me the only difference between those larger groups that left heterodoxy for orthodoxy like the PCA and OPC and some micros, is the size of the teams and where the red line was.
Click to expand...
Valid point as to the PCA. Perhaps the OPC as well, although I can't think of any really viable merger partners for them at the time. Maybe the PCUS? ARP?

And the PCA - RPC,ES joinder certainly shows that mergers aren't without their own problems
 
Edward said:
Valid point as to the PCA. Perhaps the OPC as well, although I can't think of any really viable merger partners for them at the time. Maybe the PCUS? ARP?

And the PCA - RPC,ES joinder certainly shows that mergers aren't without their own problems
Click to expand...
Not sure of any other, but certainly the ARPs and RPs were around, though the ARP might have been yet to fight off its liberal slide.
 
MChase said:
Where do you suggest the PRC go? We don’t sing hymns, so the PCA and OPC won’t have us.
Click to expand...
So your saying the PCA would not embrace you singing Psalms only? Why do you say this? The PCAs DOPW is not binding and you would certainly be free to be an EP body in the PCA and likely even the OPC, as far as I know. Of course you may be privy to some official response that I do not have. It may not be the “ideal” denomination, but I do agree with Edward that there are too many micro splits and we need more consolidation. There ARE lines to divide over, but sometimes hairs are being split while meekness and unity are being laid aside tooooo early. To be transparent I am EP/AO myself and I do see this as extremely important. That being said, there seems to be several EP/AO denominations that should combine. I do know of an OPC congregation that is EP.
 
Last edited:
I always remember Brakel’s below comment when thinking about separation (TCRS, Vol. 1, pg. lxviii):
“Who would not weep when he thinks upon Zion and perceives that the Lord is departing from her?” Yet, departure from a church which is that corrupt is not permitted! “May we say that she is no longer the church of Christ due to her corruption? Shall we despise her? Shall we walk away from her? No, that is foolishness. It is certain that a corrupt church is nevertheless a church and that from the beginning until the present God has always permitted His church to be filled with many corruptions. Therefore, he who despises a church for its corruption acts contrary to God‟s Word and all experience, thereby denying her to be a church.”
Click to expand...

Separation can be necessary, but I think it happens way too often and I think many reformed bodies need to be consolidated. Really this can be applied internally and externally regarding larger & smaller denominations. Some inter-denominational church “plants” should more honestly be categorized as “splits”.
 
Last edited:
Grant said:
So your saying the PCA would not embrace you singing Psalms only? Why do you say this? The PCAs DOPW is not binding and you would certainly be free to be an EP body in the PCA and likely even the OPC, as far as I know. Of course you may be privy to some official response that I do not have. It may not be the “ideal” denomination, but I do agree with Edward that there are too many micro splits and we need more consolidation. There ARE lines to divide over, but sometimes hairs are being split while meekness and unity are being laid aside tooooo early. To be transparent I am EP/AO myself and I do see this as extremely important. That being said, there seems to be several EP/AO denominations that should combine. I do know of an OPC congregation that is EP.
Click to expand...

I am not terribly sure about the PCA’s position on the matter, though I would assume it would be quite similar in many ways to the OPC to which I am more familiar, having formerly been a member. As far as I can tell, certain presbyteries EP is tolerated. I can think of New Jersey and San Francisco as a couple of examples. However, as far as I can tell the allowance for EP seems to be only insofar as a minister or congregation comes to such conclusions after having been in the OPC. I have it on pretty good authority that a man holding both EP and the establishment principle would have quite the time getting ordained in the OPC.

I don’t know of anyone denying that there is a duty to minimize and eliminate schism. The big question is what path to go forward on. I don’t think these are particularly easy questions. However, I do not think that giving up principles that I and others hold quite dearly for the sake of perceived unity is the right path. I think the Westminster standards are a wonderful thing, and I am not ready to give them up for external unity. I would be overjoyed around external and visible unity on the constitutional basis of the standards.

My last point is somewhat related to the point Chris made. The PRC has been around longer than the PCA. Is size the only thing that makes the PRC schismatic and makes the PCA a-okay? What about the OPC? Why didn’t they give up their hymn singing and wine and join the RPCNA back in the day? To single out groups because of an arbitrary limit on size is well arbitrary. Let’s keep things in perspective. My parents attend a church in Dallas with enough members to make up multiple presbyteries in any NAPARC denomination. Why is a denom of 10 congregations schismatic, but a denom of 100 not?

Just a note: not specifically replying to you, but the first part of my response was seeking to be an answer to what you were asking.
 
MChase said:
My parents attend a church in Dallas with enough members to make up multiple presbyteries in any NAPARC denomination.
Click to expand...
Doesn't narrow down things much. But a related question could be debated. Are the multi-campus megachurches really presbyteries? Some of them have campus counts that would classify them as micro denominations if they were Presbyterians.
 
Edward said:
Doesn't narrow down things much. But a related question could be debated. Are the multi-campus megachurches really presbyteries? Some of them have campus counts that would classify them as micro denominations if they were Presbyterians.
Click to expand...

No, not functionally or in principle. When you have 2 (maybe 3) elders for 5-7k souls, you’re not a Presbyterian. They are congregational in principle. However, I think someone like Mark Dever dismantles this sort of pseudo-congregationalism quite ably.
 
Why are Presbyterians so prone to splits? I agree that the system of presbyterial government is founded on and agreeable to the word of God, but you do wonder what causes such fragmentation.
 
Reformed Covenanter said:
Why are Presbyterians so prone to splits? I agree that the system of presbyterial government is founded on and agreeable to the word of God, but you do wonder what causes such fragmentation.
Click to expand...
Obviously answering this question poses no risk of opening a can of worms!

I think it's worth questioning whether Presbyterians are, pound for pound, more likely to split than Baptists or other groups. But whatever a good comparative study might reveal, a proneness to division in any group arises from a combination of several factors. Obviously one large and correct answer is "sin," but more than that can be said.

1. Wherever there are decided convictions about a multitude of matters, there will be that many more demands on charity and patience. In an environment where no one cares about details of doctrine, or worship practices, or government, many of those occasions for disagreement pass by unnoticed. The lack of conflict or division there doesn't necessarily arise from greater holiness, but simply from obliviousness.

2. Agreement about distinctives sometimes masks defects of character. If another fellow and I are both zealous for many of the same points, and yet one or both of us is just contentious, we will find something to contend about eventually. I think this is one reason why very "like-minded" groups sometimes blow up suddenly.

3. A strong emphasis on the distinctiveness of Presbyterianism (or any variety) can lead to general principles of Christianity and indeed of common sense being overlooked or neglected. Then the reality of a broader context with some really important shared commitments and some genuine good to be grateful for is missing.

4. Idealists in temperament have to deal with continual frustration about reality, and that wears people down over time unless they learn to walk by faith and trust that God will bring about an ideal end through what seems like a very imperfect process.

When I speak in this way, I can anticipate that some readers may get the perception that I think the solution is to care less for precision and correctness, to dilute zeal, and to be more pragmatic. But that isn't what I mean at all. Instead, I think the prescription is that we need to expand our convictions and zeal to include all that the Lord teaches. It's true that many don't have any zeal for some of the Bible's content; but the answer is not for us to focus our zeal exclusively on those neglected portions of Scripture. If I am as zealous for humility and charity as I am for my distinctive doctrine and practice, then what division happens is more likely to be truly necessary.

Now there are some factors that may add pressure in Presbyterian circles (though they will apply in many other circles as well).

5. Presbyterianism gives something to split from--you can find someone to blame.
6. Presbyterianism keeps congregations involved in one another's affairs, which gives interfering busybodies an opportunity to ply their trade.
7. Presbyterianism has mechanisms to resolve differences, but then disagreements about the implementation of the mechanisms can lead to fresh waves of conflict.

This also is not to attack Presbyterianism as a system of church government. If Scripture can be wrested to our own destruction, so can practices commanded in Scripture.
 
Reformed Covenanter said:
Why are Presbyterians so prone to splits? I agree that the system of presbyterial government is founded on and agreeable to the word of God, but you do wonder what causes such fragmentation.
Click to expand...

As a former Baptist, there can be deeply-felt fragments amongst otherwise doctrinally-similar yet independent churches. They just don't get put down on paper.
 
Only God can, and will, cause his ministers to see eye-to-eye (Isaiah 52:8). How we need to pray for this!
"Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice; with the voice together shall they sing: for they shall see eye to eye, when the LORD shall bring again Zion."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

larryjf
  • Locked
Starting a Soup Kitchen
Replies
0
Views
1K
larryjf
larryjf
C
  • Locked
Would EPC split
Replies
28
Views
3K
NaphtaliPress
NaphtaliPress
brianeschen
  • Locked
Presbyterian Split in 1741-45
Replies
10
Views
3K
brianeschen
brianeschen
Quatchu
  • Locked
The Coming Evangelical Split?
Replies
7
Views
2K
kvanlaan
kvanlaan
Phil D.
  • Locked
United Methodist Church to Split
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
wcf_linux
wcf_linux
Back
Top