Walked Out of Church Today

[Romans922]

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

 

[Tim]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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,
the minister shall address to the members of the church the following
question:

Do you, the members of this church, acknowledge and
receive this brother as a ruling elder (or deacon), and do you
promise to yield him all that honor, encouragement and
obedience in the Lord to which his office, according to the Word
of God and the Constitution of this Church, entitles him?

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
profession of faith, are to assent to the following declarations and
promises, by which you enter into a solemn covenant with God
and His Church.

1. Do you acknowledge yourselves to be sinners in the sight of
God, justly deserving His displeasure, and without hope save
in His sovereign mercy?
2. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God,
and Savior of sinners, and do you receive and rest upon Him
alone for salvation as He is offered in the Gospel?
3. Do you now resolve and promise, in humble reliance upon
the grace of the Holy Spirit, that you will endeavor to live as
becomes the followers of Christ?
4. Do you promise to support the Church in its worship and
work to the best of your ability?
5. Do you submit yourselves to the government and discipline
of the Church, and promise to study its purity and peace?

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]

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Pergamum]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[Craig]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

Hamalas must be quite the prayer warrior!