Why?

[LadyFlynt]

I would like an honest discussion on this...

Why don't Presbyterian churches take stands on some of these issues? It'd make it easier to find a church. The only church I've been able to find that takes these kinds of stands is the FPC...but they won't take a stand on baptism...

Various churches take a stand and then you can be with likeminded believers...but Presbyterian churches have a wide range within a church. I know this happened within the RCC also. I can see pros and cons to both sides...but when raising a family it is nice to have some support. The only Reformed ppl I find support from on certain issues that are important to me is online. They are spread throughout the country. The other ppl I find support from are not Reformed. It's like a no-win situation. The pros to not taking a stand is christian liberty (and bigger churches if you are of that mindset). The pros to taking a stand is knowing the beliefs of the pastor and what is going to be taught.

Advice...comments...debate...

 

[ReformedWretch]

What issues?

 

[LadyFlynt]

Oh, Creation, Modesty, Roles of Males and Females (this one they do to an extent), Christian education (along with providing a way for all families), etc.

 

[ReformedWretch]

Hmmm

Modesty is a tough one because so few have the courage to directly confront it. Fear of losing members is often a sin we cannot over come. Christian education is also tough because some honestly don't have time (if you're talking about home scholing). The Church has a long way to go in order to support its self and it's members before we can take hard stances there. At least In my humble opinion

 

[BJClark]

LadyFlynt,

Christian education (along with providing a way for all families), etc.

Not meaning to take away from what your asking, but how would you define a "Christian" Education?

I mean, most schools teach, even those who teach Science and History from a Biblical perspective also teach secular things such as math, english, phyiscal education, and the like.

So what, in your opinion would make it a strictly "Christian Education" that you are looking for or refering to?

Would it be a Christian Education by virtue of the fact the school is located or supported financially in some way by a local Church? Or because they add Bible verses to the lesson plans?

[Edited on 9-13-2006 by BJClark]

 

[LadyFlynt]

I'm not talking about homeschooling...and modesty, I'm talking about general modesty, not capedress mentality.

I know of a church that takes stands on these things (not reformed). They have a church school for those that can't or won't homeschool. They offer scholarships for members that can't afford tuition or a work/tuition type situation where it can apply. The church also takes a stand on modesty. The church leaves certain things to discretion (makeup, jewelry, music, etc)...but they speak on it in the sense of caution and making wise choices. They aren't afraid to speak about how we live. Unfortunately this is also where we come under scrutiny when reaching armenians. "Oh, you say this and this and this...but we don't see a change in this, this, or this. Your behaviour (read., how you live) looks the same as that pagan down there" (these are things I get to hear about the churches I've been to).

When speaking with the children's ministry leader, I found the church won't even take a stand on HALLOWEEN! They don't encourage it, but they won't say anything neg about it either...afraid to offend the members that practice it. THAT was a shocker because even the Missouri Synod takes a stand on that one! The Christmas tree issue is one thing...Halloween should be a no-brainer.

I'm just a bit baffled. Most churches are known for their stands. The Reformed church is only known for it's stand on TULIP...and lack of stands elsewhere. KWIM?

 

[LadyFlynt]

BJ, that the school is provided by and for the church (other option being homeschooling).

And no, I'm not refering to "one disciple + two disciples equal three disciples".

I'm speaking of science, history, sociology, adult living, etc being taught with a Christian foundation and emphasis. There is curriculum that does this. Not letting Jo-Schmo teach your child that it's okay to have two mommies, relativism, evolutionary science, that the Christian church beat down everyone and we are evil, would you like a free condom and if that doesn't work we'll take you to the clinic without your parents' knowing, etc.

[Edited on 9-13-2006 by LadyFlynt]

 

[LadyFlynt]

BTW, the question isn't specifically about any of these particular issues...it's about taking a stand or setting a standard period. You can take a stand and there can still be room for the congregation to differ within that stand.

I just remembered another reformed church that did this. Some ppl found eachother through the Vision Forum links and started another church (RCjr came and did the ordinations...yeah, I know, another egg to fry...but hey, that's how I got to meet him). They looked for eachother based on their theology and living practices...seeing the two as being cohesive.

 

[BJClark]

LadyFlynt,

Okay.

See, I guess my understanding is that parents are to teach those things to their children, not necessarily in a Homeschool education enviroment but in general.

I know I do, the church covers those things in Sunday School and in Youth Group.

When they teach from Genesis they are teaching Creation Science, when they teach lessons from various Books of the Bible and Discipleship, they are teaching how to live their lives in a Christian manner.

When they teach from Romans it teaches same sex partnerships are a sin, and they in turn are going out into the Mission Field (public schools) and taking a stand against those things with their friends.

I teach my kids about Gods intention for sex within marriage, and the Church also teaches that, again during Sunday School and during the Sermons. And again, when they go to their Mission Field they take that with them.

I guess the way I see it could be best explained that I am trying to teach them to be disciples in the world in which they live now, not teaching them to remove themselves from the world, but to live within it from God's perspective.

I guess I have come to believe if I shelter them to much from what the world teaches, when they actually do leave home, they won't know how to really relate to those who are of the world. I have seen many children who only went to Church Schools and/or were home schooled and when they went away to college or into the work force, they went wild seeing all the things the world has to offer and it really made them begin to question what THEY really believed, and not just because it's what their parents taught them.

My kids see it now, they know what the world offers and they know what God offers, they see Both sides, and are learning to make choices now while still at home with my guidance. And they are learning now to take a Stand for Christ, that will make it easier for them (I believe) when they are faced with different but yet similiar choices later in life.

They see school as their mission field and not just a place to learn about worldly things.

I'm speaking of science, history, sociology, adult living, etc being taught with a Christian foundation and emphasis. There is curriculum that does this. Not letting Jo-Schmo teach your child that it's okay to have two mommies, relativism, evolutionary science, that the Christian church beat down everyone and we are evil, would you like a free condom and if that doesn't work we'll take you to the clinic without your parents' knowing, etc.

[Edited on 9-13-2006 by BJClark]

 

[LadyFlynt]

Well, I guess that would help IF the church actually took a stand on those things.

I don't shelter my children. I do have standards for them. The church doesn't seem to really support those standards. The few of us that hold them have to "find" eachother.

 

[jaybird0827]

Originally posted by LadyFlynt
Oh, Creation, Modesty, Roles of Males and Females (this one they do to an extent), Christian education (along with providing a way for all families), etc.

Click on either of the two hyperlinks in my signature. No, not perfect, not without problems - but it's the closest thing to consistency I've ever seen.

 

[a mere housewife]

Colleen,

I am not at all sure that it is the church's responsibility to provide education or to 'support' from the pulpit or the Sunday School classes every position of the parents. Certainly children are to be taught to obey their parents even if their parents are wrong: but the fact is that many times they are, and the church has the obligation to teach the Bible according to whatever confession they have adopted (which presumably is the one the elders and the members believe to be most Biblical). For instance my husband was a Sunday School teacher at our former church. There were times when he had to contradict the parents (because the children would make statements to the rest of the class like, it is sinful to eat sugary snacks). He had to tell them, that is not the what the Bible says. But the Bible does say to obey your parents: your parents don't allow you to have sugary snacks, then don't have them. But what the Bible actually teaches is that you cannot bind any other children to that standard, that they have the freedom of conscience (under obedience to their parents) to eat things suary. -The sin of eating sugary snacks was no part of truth my husband was bound to teach; and in fact went directly against it.

I don't believe at all that is how far you would want the church to go in supporting your standards, which are probably not so extreme. But the church is bound to uphold its confession of Biblical teaching in its services and its Sunday Schools, and it is not bound to go beyond that (in fact it would probably be in violation to do so). That is not to say that application should not be made as the passages bring things into focus, such as modesty, etc. But that is not the focus of the church any more than it is the focus of the Bible. In other words I don't think it is the job of the church to go through basically a Bill Gothard type thing in Sunday School: going through 1 Kings is much more in line with the church's mission to our children.

As far as the FPC: I have been a member of the Indianapolis FPC for almost 13 years (we are still under their supervision). They have indeed taken a position on baptism: the position that families should be allowed to practice and teach according to conscience, and it should not divide the church. I am a 'reformed baptist' as far as my own baptistic convictions go. But to think of telling someone like you for whom I have the deepest respect as a fellow believer and as a godly woman that you couldn't be a member-- basically that we wouldn't officially recognize you as part of the body of Christ-- simply because you believe differently in an area where stellar people on both sides have found good reason to disagree, is unthinkable to me. Why would I refuse you as much participation as myself in a good church? I would in fact trust you with more. Practically everyone in the FPC has a position: and the church has the position that unity of believers in worship, and freedom of conscience to baptize one's children or not is more important than whatever might be gained by declaring one way or the other for all the members. I can understand if you disagree with that, but it is a position.

Unfortunately they undermine this desire for unity by their stance on other things, in which, if their logic were consistently applied, they would have to change their positions (a big area of disagreement for us, though we have had an excellent experience with our church, and still continue to). So as members of the church we for instance avoided teaching about alcohol completely: because as members we were bound by that in teaching the children of other members. But we were not bound by 'The Maker's Diet' or any other extra confessional beliefs of the parents.

 

[MW]

Creation is a biblical teaching, and therefore to be maintained by the church; as long as by "creation" is not meant "scientific creationism."

Modesty and gender roles are moral issues, which therefore come under the oversight of the church to a certain extent.

Education is a different matter again, because it falls into the "wise" category as far as personal Christian living is concerned. I am not sure how a church can monitor such things. On issues of wisdom I have found the following two verses helpful to meditate upon:

Prov. 9:12, "If thou be wise, thou shalt be wise for thyself: but if thou scornest, thou alone shalt bear it."

Eccl. 7:16, "neither make thyself over wise."

 

[a mere housewife]

PS Colleen: if your church holds to the Westminster Confession then surely it is bound to teach six day creationism? Isn't that the stand it is bound to take from the pulpits and Sunday Schools, simply by subscribing, and asking members to subscribe, to that confession?

 

[LadyFlynt]

We've actually been looking for a church...we haven't settled yet. The one we were attending, we loved, but there wasn't regular fellowship because of distance....only once a week. Hubby also would like to be involved somehow in an outreach ministry...the members of that particular congregation were mostly older and settled as were. We've tried the FPC, but for the very reasons you stated, Heidi, on the inconsistancy...though we did 'click' with several members there also.


Heidi, I think you and Rev Winzer came the closest to understanding what I am trying to say. I'm not meaning a church that dictates everything. But most churches are known for their stands or standards or lack thereof. We got to talk with an OPC minister and professor at WTS in Philly. He had visited the OPC that we had first attended when moving and he admitted that it was "progressive". He himself said that he would like to see some standard set for the church on such issues (modesty was the one we were discussing)...not a dictatorial type thing...but some encouragement towards it and bringing it to attention and for ppl to think on.


On Creationism: Heidi, apparently not. And the OPC minister also leaned toward framework....though they did have a class on 24/6 creationism. I'm understanding that framework/day age is being taught in the seminaries (?)

Jay, we unfortunately don't have any of those around here. We have A bunch of PCA, a couple of OPC, an FPC...all about 20-30min...and an RPCNA about 45min if you count the traffic issues. I want to settle soon. So does hubby. The pastor at the last church wants us to settle also.

BTW, classes tonight went well. I know it's going to be a little harder to find my nitch and that is not easy. I just feel a bit out of place. You know, I felt that way at another PCA in IL and I wish I had stayed there. Guess I need to get over myself, eh? I just want my daughters to follow my lead.

 

[jaybird0827]

Originally posted by LadyFlynt
Jay, we unfortunately don't have any of those around here. We have A bunch of PCA, a couple of OPC, an FPC...all about 20-30min...and an RPCNA about 45min if you count the traffic issues. I want to settle soon. So does hubby. The pastor at the last church wants us to settle also.

I understand that, Colleen. Actually what you're describing is not bad for PA. We lived near York, where there is a dearth of Reformed work. As for the two PCA churches actually in York, both are New Life types. Most of that area is either Methodist, Brethren, or RCC. We looked in vain for likeminded people who would be interested in getting our communion to start a preaching station in the area.

My job in that area was winding down and how much longer it would last was an open question. We were driving 2 1/2 hours one way to get to the Presbyterian Reformed Church of Northern VA. We did that twice a month. On the in-betweens we attended another out-of-town congregation where we weren't really comfortable and that became increasingly difficult.

It was either move to northern VA (unaffordable), IN (no jobs), or here. So here we are.

 

[a mere housewife]

Colleen, I just wanted to add that I will definitely be praying about your church situation, that God would make it very clear where He wants you, where you can be most useful to Him and what things you can and can't put up with in the long term (which sometimes it seems to me is what a decision like this comes down to), and where He will provide for your family. We found we could deal with inconsistencies in the FPC for ourselves all things considered, but can't impose them on others. I'm very glad you enjoyed this evening. Do please keep us updated.

(And that does seem wrong, that they teach or preach from the pulpit differently than what they would ask you to subscribe to as a member....)

 

[johnny_redeemed]

Originally posted by LadyFlynt
Oh, Creation, Modesty, Roles of Males and Females (this one they do to an extent), Christian education (along with providing a way for all families), etc.

Here is my



I think Churches do not take stands on Modesty because you cannot say for sure that this is and this is not modest. I mean how short can a dress get before it becomes immodest? Or how tight can a blouse get before it is immodest. I think this is an issue that is between the believer and God. Don't get me wrong there are times when things are clearly immodest, but when the line is crossed no one knows.

 

[LadyFlynt]

No, but there is a line that can be drawn somewhere for guidance...and more and more there's becoming a need to offer that guidance.

 

[BJClark]

johnny_redeemed,

I think Churches do not take stands on Modesty because you cannot say for sure that this is and this is not modest. I mean how short can a dress get before it becomes immodest? Or how tight can a blouse get before it is immodest. I think this is an issue that is between the believer and God. Don't get me wrong there are times when things are clearly immodest, but when the line is crossed no one knows.

but they can teach it, buy asking what would be your impression of someone else who wore such an outfit?

Or even, Would you feel uncomfortable in that outfit if you were going out on a date with Christ?

Thats how I taught my daughter, who is in turn passing it on..

When my daughters were younger I would pick out clothes I liked and then allowed them to choose the one they liked the most of the ones I showed them.

When my oldest daughter when she was in elementary school, she came home asking why all the girls who dress 'sexy' have all the boyfriends, and I took the time and talked about what those 'boyfriends' were really like, and asked her to watch how they treat her friends who dress like that, and to decide if she really wants to have a relationship with someone like that. She watched and learned and determined she doesn't want that for herself.

One day a couple years ago when I took them shopping and I overheard my now 14 year old asking her now 18 yr old sister "how do you determine if it's sleezy or not?"

And she told her, "Think about what your first impression would be about someone else if you seen them wear the outfit, if your first impression is that it comes across that they are trying to draw a bad boys attention to themselves, then it would look the same way on me. And I ask myself, is that the impression I want others to have of me? And since I don't, I find something else."

A then few months ago, when my 13 year old step-daughter went shopping with us, I overheard my 14 year old share the same advice with her. And she added, you know all those boys you keep complaining about following you around, if you want that to stop, you need to stop dressing to attract them.

but I learned I can trust my daughters to go shopping with friends, and not come home with something inappropriate, and I have even heard from their friends parents that they like the clothes their own daughters pick out when they go shopping with my daughters. So they are apparently sharing that advice with them while shopping as well.

I know my kids aren't perfect, but it's heartwarming to me to know they are listening to some of the things I've told them over the years, for which I praise God.



[Edited on 9-14-2006 by BJClark]

 

[LadyFlynt]

Bobbie, I love the means you've used A friend and I have been having the same conversations with our daughters.

 

[BJClark]

LadyFlynt,

A sort of change of topic--

I can remember as a teenager, before I became a Christian, I was listening to two friends (who were raised in Christians homes) talking about a date one of them was going on, and the one girl was complaining...

The conversation went something like this:

friend1: So are you looking forward to your date?

friend2: I'm not sure, IF there will be a date!

friend1: Why not?

Friend2: my dad said the only way I can go out with him is if he agrees to take a bible with us and place it between us in the car.

friend1: huh?

Friend2: yeah, my dad said "He Needs to be reminded that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Jesus are there protecting me from his wondering hands. And if he's not willing to do that, then I can't go out with him."

I chuckled at the thought of how a boy would respond to that, and deep down I wondered *what kind* of boy would choose to go out with a girl whose father had those standards. To my knowledge at the time I didn't know any.

But, back then I didn't understand the wisdom her father had, I mean I wasn't a Christian, and didn't understand his role as her dad to protect her, but I thought it was neat and envied it, and wished I had a dad who cared enough to protect me like that.

Thinking back to then, and wondering what kind of guy it was that would agree to do such, is the kind of guy I want my daughters to date, someone who understands what that father was trying to teach his daughter.

And as their mom, I have to teach them how to be the kind of girl, a guy like that would want to date, even in their dress.

Bobbie, I love the means you've used A friend and I have been having the same conversations with our daughters.

[Edited on 9-14-2006 by BJClark]

 

[LadyFlynt]

Bobbie, there is an "application" that a pastor online put up...I'll have to find it. It's hysterical. It's for "the young man" to fill out