The Wittenberg Door

Reformation Begins with the Pulpit

There is . . . a great need for a reformation of the evangelical pulpit. To reform the pulpit is to reform the church. What is needed is not simply more preaching, but God-enthralled, Christ-magnifying, Spirit-empowered preaching. If this is to occur, the church must regain a high view of the pulpit. As was prevalent during the Reformation, the preaching of the Word must be central in the worship of the church in this generation.

Dr. Steven Lawson points out at the Aquila Report that a second Reformation is desperately needed in our day, and that it will only come if the church has a) a high view of Scripture, b) a high view of God, and c) a high view of the pulpit. In his post, which is an excerpt from his book, The Heroic Boldness of Martin Luther, he focuses on the need for a reformation of the Evangelical pulpit.

In an age where pulpits have been replaced by Plexiglas stands fronting mockups of Opra’s TV stage, and where Genevan robes have been ousted for tee shirts, torn jeans, and flip flops, and where exegetical, Christ-centered preaching has given sway to “live your best life now” pep talks, we do indeed have a lot of work to do. The pulpit, though, is where this work needs to start. Dr. Lawson comments on this need:

In this critical hour of church history, pastors must recapture the glory of biblical preaching, as in the days of the Reformation. Preachers must return to true exposition that is Word-driven, God-glorifying, and Christ-exalting. May the Lord of the church raise up a new generation of expositors, men armed with the sword of the Spirit, to once again preach the Word. The plea of Spurgeon, who witnessed the decline of dynamic preaching in his lifetime, must be heard and answered in this day:
We want again Luthers, Calvins, Bunyans, Whitefields, men fit to mark eras, whose names breathe terror in our foemen’s ears. We have dire need of such. Whence will they come to us? They are the gifts of Jesus Christ to the Church, and will come in due time. He has power to give us back again a golden age of preachers, and when the good old truth is once more preached by men whose lips are touched as with a live coal from off the altar, this shall be the instrument in the hand of the Spirit for bringing about a great and thorough revival of religion in the land… . I do not look for any other means of converting men beyond the simple preaching of the gospel and the opening of men’s ears to hear it. The moment the Church of God shall despise the pulpit, God will despise her. It has been through the ministry that the Lord has always been pleased to revive and bless His Churches.

You can read the rest of Dr. Lawson’s prescription here.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Why Do People Leave for Rome?

Except for one wedding and one funeral, I haven’t spent any non-tourist time in Roman Catholic churches. (The funeral was my grandmother’s and it was a horrible experience: when the priest went to place the wafer on my tongue, I drew back, and the Eucharist fell to the floor; the gasp from the crowd was palpable, and if the priest’s eyes could kill . . . .)

Both before and after becoming a believer there was never any “there” there for me with regards to Catholicism . The former because no church held interest for me, and the latter because I never found it theologically appealing, especially after becoming Reformed. So I’ve often wondered, “What’s with these people leaving Evangelicalism for Rome?”

At The Aquila Report, former Roman Catholic Dr. Christopher Faria, Teaching Elder at Westminster Presbyterian Fellowship in Falcon, CO, offers eight reasons why people make the exodus:

It represents the religion of my youth

It pulls on my legalism

It draws on my idolatry

It mesmerizes my eyes.

It appeals to my lack of faith

It teeters on the mystical

It permits my autonomy

It legitimizes my isolation

Click here for an explanation of each.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

The Freedom of the Regulative Principle

When I was a Pentecostal, the church service was an ever-changing event. Being “led by the Spirit” meant that the whims of the preacher or worship leader could lead the service into any given direction. One of my “pastors,” who fancied himself a prophet, would stop mid-sentence and say something like, “Yes, yes, Lord. I’ll do that.” And off we’d go into a different direction. (Funny, though, that the direction never lead away from the offering.) Anything else was seen as “bondage” because we were “quenching the Spirit.”

You’re average Evangelical church isn’t this bad, but the liturgy is still typically something that revolves around wants and desires of those in charge. As a result, man, not God, determines the means and modes of worship. But the question is for the Pentecostal, the Evangelical, and any other Christian church, is freedom really found in doing what we want?

Pastor Kevin DeYoung answers this question at his blog in a post titled, The Freedom of the Regulative Principle. Here’s how it begins:

Even though I grew up in a Reformed church, until seminary I was one of the multitude of Christians who had never heard of the regulative principle. It’s not been at the core of my identity. But over the years I’ve come to appreciate the regulative principle more and more.

Simply put, the regulative principle states that “the acceptable way of worshiping the true God is instituted by himself and so limited by his own revealed will” (WCF 21.1). In other words, corporate worship should be comprised of those elements we can show to be appropriate from the Bible. The regulative principles says, “Let’s worship God as he wants to be worshiped.” At its worst, this principle leads to constant friction and suspicion between believers. Christians beat each other up trying to discern exactly where the offering should go in the service or precisely which kinds of instruments have scriptural warrant. When we expect the New Testament to give a levitical lay out of the one liturgy that pleases God, we are asking the Bible a question it didn’t mean to answer. It is possible for the regulative principle to become a religion unto itself.
But the heart of the regulative principle is not about restriction. It is about freedom. . . .

You can read the rest of the post here.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church, Worship

The Loss of Symbolism

One of the things I love about the Reformed church is the symbolism, especially the symbolism involving the pulpit. The pulpit comprises a lectern standing upon a raised platform. Being the most important piece of “furniture” in the church, it is positioned in front of the congregation, with all pews facing it. Its symbolic importance can be summarized as follows:

It’s central—The pulpit’s central placement is important because it is from there that God addresses His people via the preached word. Therefore, it commands the most prominent place in the church.

It’s raised—The pulpit is elevated because it is upon the lectern that the minister’s bible rests, symbolizing the word of God being over the people.

It’s solid—The lectern is made of solid wood, symbolizing the sure foundation upon which God’s word stands. Moreover, it’s large enough to obscure most of the minister’s body, thus keeping the focus on the word. For this reason, Reformed ministers stay behind the lectern, so as to stay behind the word of God.

So Goes the Pulpit, So Goes the Glory of God

Overall, the pulpit represents what the church service is to be primarily about—God’s people coming together to worship Him, and, as mentioned, God addressing His people through the preached word.

Things have changed, though. Pulpits are considered outdated, and even stifling. Like nature, the church abhors a vacuum. In the pulpit’s place sprung the Plexiglas stand, allowing the “minister” to be seen in all of his glory. But this too is seen by some as cumbersome. Why let anything stand in front of the minister, hindering his ability to work the crowd like a Vegas lounge lizard?

Too harsh? Perhaps. But the transition from the pulpit to more modern elements is symptomatic of a greater problem: a shift from the glory of God to the glory of man; a shift from the minister as an empty vessel placarding Christ, to the minister as a personality and centerpiece; a shift from the preached word as a Means of Grace to the advent of a new sacrament—the minister himself.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Female Elders/Pastors?

Recently I had an email conversation about female pastors with one of my former pastors from my Pentecostal days. (He was about to ordain a slew of them.) I asked him about it on Facebook because back when I attended his fellowship he disallowed female pastors. “Why the change?” I asked.

What follows is my response to his reasoning. Please note that although I’m only referring to pastors (teaching elders, 1 Tim. 5:17), my case equally applies to ruling elders.

Your question:Where in Scripture does it say that women can be Pastor's? My simple answer is Eph.4:7-8 -...and HE gave gifts to "MEN"- meaning all mankind..Eph.4:11-12 -and He Himself gave some to be Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists, and some to be Pastors and Teachers. 12-For the equiping of the saints for the work of the ministry."
. . . Our Qualifications are: That they are GIFTED by God to lead in the area they are called on, Submitted to their husband, DWC discipleship, Faithfulness of Service, Understanding the DOCTRINE OF GRACE and RIGHTEOUSNESS through Faith in Jesus Christ and Last of all EXPERIENCE.

Greetings, “Bob.” First, you’re right: He does give gifts to “men” (general), but I’m sure that you would agree that he does not give all people the same gifts. God does, however, call people to ministry (Eph. 4:7-8) and provide those called with the needed gifts to fulfill that ministry (Eph. 4:8). Of course, for this discussion, if God does not allow women to be pastors, then he’s not calling them to that office nor is he so gifting them (although they might have similar gifts, like teaching). So first we need to answer the question of whether or not God allows female pastors before we can move on to calling and gifting.

There are a few verses that speak directly to this issue. Consider Paul instructing the young pastor, Timothy, in I Tim 2:

11) A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.

12) But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

Paul’s letter to Timothy is meant as a guide to how a church should operate. In the above passages, Paul is telling Timothy that women should respect the governing role of the church officers. Since they are being forbidden from teaching or exercising authority over the men in the church, women may not have that governing role. (By the way, I do think women can teach in a non-authoritative role, like Priscilla did in Acts 18:26; and I also don’t think that they are restricted when it comes to public prayer or other types of edifying proclamations: I Cor. 11:15.)

Paul finishes chapter 2 by grounding the functional hierarchy of the church in creation. He then continues his instruction in chapter 3 by providing the qualifications for a pastor:

1) It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do.

2) An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

3) not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money.

4) He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity

5) but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?,

6) and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.

7) And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Paul here is not using “man” or “he” in the general sense, especially since these passage follow directly after he specifically talked about women in the church (unless those are to be taken that way too). It is men who are called to “be the husband of one wife,” and it is men who God holds ultimately responsible for the managing of the household and the upbringing of the children. Likewise, God holds the pastors responsible for His household.

Consider the flow of Paul’s thought: women may not teach or have authority over men in the church, followed by the qualifications for the pastorate, which are directed solely to men.

Paul makes the same case in the first chapter of Titus, where he again directs it to only men (husband of one wife, etc.). After completing his teaching about pastors, he starts chapter 2 by giving instructions to “older men” (vs. 2) and “older women” (vs. 3), followed by instructions to young men and bondservants. He finishes the chapter by saying that “. . . the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men” (vs. 11). I mention this because he has switched to the general use of “men.” Before this passage, he was directly addressing specific groups.

Well, that’s it in a nutshell. I might be totally wrong about this, but it seems to me that the case against women being pastors is pretty strong (especially when you add to the mix the example of Scripture—from the Aaronic priesthood, to the apostles, to a young pastor like Timothy). Something to chew on, at least.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Preach Like a Calvinist!

Think like a Calvinist. Preach like an Arminian.

Most Calvinists, myself included, would take exception with the second line—for we, indeed, must also preach like a Calvinist! But what does that mean? How do you preach like a Calvinist? Pastor Eric McKiddie breaks it down like this:

Explicitly call the unregenerate to believe in the gospel.

Trust that the Holy Spirit will do the work to make that call effective in the elect.

Pray that God would save people through the inherent power of the gospel.

Pastor McKiddie expounds on this topic in a post over at The Gospel Coalition site. Here’s an excerpt . . .

Eschewing theological labels for a moment, it is biblical and Christian to call people to believe in the gospel. This is, after all, how Jesus began his ministry: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:14-15). You don't have to know Greek to recognize the imperatives.

But we Calvinists love to quote Ephesians 2:8. "Faith is a gift from God!" we exclaim. "It doesn't originate in the person!"

The question is: When non-Christians do repent and believe the gospel, do they express faith in Christ? Or does God grant the gift of faith in Christ to men? Yes! Why? Scripture teaches that faith in Christ includes both an objective and a subjective aspect. This is not a contradiction. Rather, the two must be held in tension.

Click here to read the rest of the post.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Five Reasons to Join a Church

Tim Challies offers five reasons to join a church :

1. For Assurance
While a person should not feel he needs to join a church in order to be saved, he ought to join a church to be certain that he has been saved. Christians, those who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, will naturally gravitate towards other Christians and will desire to be with them, to learn from them, and to serve them. A person who professes Christ but feels no desire to be among his believing brothers and sisters is not a healthy Christian. Thus, eager participation in a local church and heartfelt attempts to measure our enthusiasm for that group of believers is a God-given way for us to assure ourselves that we are truly saved.
2. To Evangelize the World
The gospel can best be spread through combined and collaborative efforts. Throughout the history of the church great men and women have attempted great things on their own and have often been successful. But more often, great things have been accomplished through the collaborate efforts of Christians working together. If we are to reach this world with the gospel message of Jesus Christ, we must share our efforts with other believers.
3. To Expose False Gospels
As we interact with other believers, we will see what true Christianity is, which ought to expose the common belief that Christians are self-righteous, selfish individuals. As we labor, fellowship, and serve alongside other Christians, and as we observe the lives of other Christ-followers, we will see what biblical Christianity looks like. The more we see of genuine Christianity, the more the counterfeits will be exposed.
4. To Edify the Church
Joining a church will help Christians counter their sinful individualism and teach them the importance of seeking to serve and edify others. The benefit of being a member of a local church is not primarily inward, but outward. Christians attend a local church so they might have opportunities to serve others and thus to serve God. Every Christian should be eager to serve within the church and to edify others through teaching, serving, and exercising the spiritual gifts.
5. To Glorify God
We can bring God glory through the way we live our lives. God is honored when we are obedient to him. He is glorified when his people come together in unity and harmony to find assurance, to evangelize the world, to expose false gospels, and to edify one another. God is glorified in and through the local church.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Children at the Lord’s Table?

New Horizons provides an outstanding insight into the paedocommunion debate. Here are links to the relevant articles, along with a brief summary:

Children at the Lord’s Table
James T. Dennison, academic dean of Northwest Theological Seminary

From at least the time of John Calvin, the Reformed churches have interpreted 1 Corinthians 11:29 as requiring a profession of faith prior to participation in the Lord's Supper. Taking the phrase "discerning the Lord's body" in the sense of implying profession is but a particular instance of the general Reformed rule: confession of faith is prior to the Lord's Table. In the nature of the case, profession of the covenant with the mouth comes before feeding upon the symbols of the covenant with the mouth.

The Lord’s Supper: Warnings for All
George W. Knight III, author, OPC minister, and teacher at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary

Our confessional standards understand 1 Corinthians 11:17–34 as providing warnings to all Christians. But some say that the warnings apply only to those who have sinned as the Corinthians did. Most of these desire to admit children to the Lord's Supper who are unable to do what the warnings require. This article defends the historic way of understanding the warning statements.

The Lord’s Supper and Covenant Children
Stuart R. Jones, OPC minister

A recent decision of the Christian Reformed Church (June 2006) to prepare the way for child communion within that denomination highlights the durability of that issue. The General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church received a report on this issue in 1987 in which a division of opinion was expressed. I will argue that the confessional standards of the OPC are correct in disallowing the practice of paedocommunion, because of the nature of the Lord's Supper as a covenant renewal meal.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church, Sacraments

Come, Eat and Drink Judgment Upon Yourself!

Over at Christianity Today’s Web site (subscription required), popular pastor Jack Hayford of The Church on the Way fame offers a few ideas on how to make unbelievers feel more comfortable in church . . .

We invite all the people to gather around the Lord's Table and partake in small groups. We believe it is the Lord's Table we are invited to, the Lord is doing the inviting, and no one is excluded. To us that means unbelievers are invited, as well . . . we want people to know that they are welcome. For example, I might say, "If you are visiting with us today, you are not only welcome to participate, you are urged to. If you were at my house and it came dinnertime, I wouldn't leave you sitting in the other room while I went to the dining room . . .

It sounds as if pastor Hayford desires to be a good host. I’m sure that if I were invited to his dinner table he wouldn’t want to make me feel uncomfortable by telling me that there’s arsenic in the food and that I might get sick and/or die if I partake. No, that would be rude.

Unfortunately, not everyone is as thoughtful as pastor Hayford. Here’s two noted examples of inhospitality:

John Calvin

A man in Calvin’s congregation refused to repent of his sins and was consequently denied the Table of the Lord. Not feeling “welcomed,” the man complained to the Genevean Council. Ruling in the man’s favor, the council ordered Calvin to grant him the supper.

As the man, and his sword-bearing friends, began to approach the table on the following Lord’s Day, Calvin threw his arms over the table and proclaimed, “These hands you may crush, these arms you may lop off, my life you may take, my blood is yours, you may shed it; but you shall never force me to give holy things to the profaned, and dishonor the table of my God.”

How rude!

Apostle Paul

The Apostle Paul was definitely not very welcoming when it came to granting access to the Lord’s Table to those in sin. In the later portion of 1 Corinthians 11, Paul explains the significance of the occasion (vs. 23-26). He also explains the consequence of partaking in an unworthy manner, or not exercising proper discernment—the possibility of sickness and death ( vs. 27, 29, 30). For this reason, Paul tells us to examine ourselves (vs. 28). “But if we judge ourselves rightly, we would not be judged” (vs. 31).

Furthermore, Paul tells us that if we exercise proper discernment that we (believers) will not be “condemned along with the world” (unbelievers, vs. 32). Paul also points out that this simply isn’t another meal: “If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment . . .” Paul is certainly excluding unbelievers here. Ms. Manners would be scandalized!

Good Host/Bad Host?

So there you have it. You can follow Calvin’s and Paul’s example and guard the Table of the Lord, or you can follow pastor Hayford’s example and open the gates wide. A word of caution, though: If you decide to follow pastor Hayford’s example, I’d recommend that your church purchase extra insurance.

To gain a proper understanding of the Lord’s Supper, including who should and should not partake, I recommend reading questions and answers 75 through 82 of the Heidelberg Catechism.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church, Exegesis, Sacraments

What’s Going on Here?

From Great Commission Publications:

“What’s going on here?” That’s the question the teacher asks when she returns to find her classroom in chaos, or the parent when he sees his children misbehaving. “What’s going on here?” my also be an appropriate question to ask many congregations as they assemble week after week to worship God.

What goes on in church, like the conduct of a class in the teacher’s absence, can be a far cry from what it ought to be in the hour of worship. Some worship services are little more than forms of entertainment. Others center around majestic music and rote liturgy that may or may not foster true worship. All too often we spend the hour in whispered remarks and mental wonderings.

Concentrating on the order of service might help us spend our time in church truly worshiping God. The service begins with the call to worship in which the voice of God himself is heard summoning us to bow before him in adoration and praise. Then the invocation follows, with the minister leading the people in prayer for God’s presence and blessing while we worship. As the congregation rises to sing the doxology and the hymns, we voice our praise of the triune God.

When the Scripture is read the voice of God speaks to his people. In the pastoral prayer the minister prays on behalf of the people, expressing our praise and voicing our petitions to our Father in heaven. The sermon is an explanation of the meaning of God’s revelation in the Bible and its relations to life.

Such activities demand attentive and wholehearted participation. Absentminded singing is mock praise; to whisper or look around while Scripture is read is to despise God’s voice.

Yet we don’t want to communicate that worship is a severe, depressing experience. It is serious, because we are approaching the almighty God of the universe. But it is also a joy and a delight. And how do we cultivate a sense of joy and delight in worship? By cultivating a good memory. We must always remember as we come together what God has delivered us from—bondage and sin, death and decay; and what he has delivered us for—eternal happiness such as we can scarcely imagine on earth.

What’s going on in your church? In you?

Labels: Doctrine of the Church, Worship

Five Reasons to Join a Church

Tim Challies offers five reasons to join a church :

1. For Assurance
While a person should not feel he needs to join a church in order to be saved, he ought to join a church to be certain that he has been saved. Christians, those who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, will naturally gravitate towards other Christians and will desire to be with them, to learn from them, and to serve them. A person who professes Christ but feels no desire to be among his believing brothers and sisters is not a healthy Christian. Thus, eager participation in a local church and heartfelt attempts to measure our enthusiasm for that group of believers is a God-given way for us to assure ourselves that we are truly saved.
2. To Evangelize the World
The gospel can best be spread through combined and collaborative efforts. Throughout the history of the church great men and women have attempted great things on their own and have often been successful. But more often, great things have been accomplished through the collaborate efforts of Christians working together. If we are to reach this world with the gospel message of Jesus Christ, we must share our efforts with other believers.
3. To Expose False Gospels
As we interact with other believers, we will see what true Christianity is, which ought to expose the common belief that Christians are self-righteous, selfish individuals. As we labor, fellowship, and serve alongside other Christians, and as we observe the lives of other Christ-followers, we will see what biblical Christianity looks like. The more we see of genuine Christianity, the more the counterfeits will be exposed.
4. To Edify the Church
Joining a church will help Christians counter their sinful individualism and teach them the importance of seeking to serve and edify others. The benefit of being a member of a local church is not primarily inward, but outward. Christians attend a local church so they might have opportunities to serve others and thus to serve God. Every Christian should be eager to serve within the church and to edify others through teaching, serving, and exercising the spiritual gifts.
5. To Glorify God
We can bring God glory through the way we live our lives. God is honored when we are obedient to him. He is glorified when his people come together in unity and harmony to find assurance, to evangelize the world, to expose false gospels, and to edify one another. God is glorified in and through the local church.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Multisite Churches?

“Multisite” church is gaining more and more popularity. Usually how this works is people gather in a home (or just stay in their own homes) and watch the church service via the Internet. This is in lieu of actually attending the service. There are pros and cons to this approach, although in my mind it’s mostly cons (but it could be a good option for shut-ins).

Writer and pastor Kevin DeYoung adds his thoughts to the debate at The Gospel Coalition Web site. Here’s how it begins . . .

I have been back and forth on the multisite question. When I first heard of the idea years ago it sounded crazy. “Pastors preaching by a recorded video or by a live feed? That’s hardly church.” But as I studied and thought about the issue more I came to understand why some churches chose multisite. It can steward the talents of the preacher. It can save money. It allows a church to get bigger (in one sense) without getting bigger (in another sense). And it gives you another beachhead for ministry.
With these positives I was happy to see our church explore the option of multisite over a year ago. Call me indecisive, but I’ve now swung back in the other direction. I can’t prove multisite is wrong. In fact, it may be the best option in some situations, especially as a temporary measure. But something I read from Martyn Lloyd-Jones cemented in my mind a crucial weakness of most multisite approaches. New technologies and new methods always have trade-offs. Sometimes the pluses outweigh the negatives. And as I think about it more, multisite has one huge negative I don’t want to live with unless I absolutely have to.

You can read the entire post here.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Why do We Go to Worship?

Feeling sorry for yourself helps no one!","Self pity turns a generous impactful person into a self-driven recluse", "The more you allow self pity to settle in your heart, it becomes poisonous to your purpose","We must process all personal pain through Christ", "Take back the Power of your worth from negative influences and give it to Christ in you!"

The above comments were posted on Facebook by a former pastor of mine (from my Pentecostal days). He offers them as a summary of his Sunday sermon. I think they reflect one of the issues faced by the church: What is the purpose of the church service?

Back in my misspent youth in the wastelands of Pentecostalism, the church service was where we were “schooled to rule, and trained to reign”; it was where we gathered to battle demons and to proclaim our victories; and it was where we named and claimed the blessings that God owed us—In other words, the service was for us and for our activities.

As we have seen with Joel Olsteen, and with the pastor cited above, facets of Pentecostalism have morphed into a self-help, live your best life now self-love-fest. Of course, your average Evangelical church isn’t this extreme, but the question of what the service is to be about still remains; and without carefully considering the answer, we might find ourselves listing towards the dazzling smile and finely quaffed hair of the local self-help guru, who is all too willing to tell us what our itching ears want to hear.

Michael Horton considers the question of why we go to church over at The Whitehorse Inn blog. Here’s an excerpt:

Far deeper than instruments and music styles, this divide is the real one. Historically at least, Reformed and Lutheran churches believed that the Triune God is the primary actor in the public service. That’s one reason it was called “divine service”: the Father, in Christ, by the Spirit, serving his people with his good gifts. We find it referred to as “the divine service” routinely in churches of the Reformation over much of their history.
Drawing on the biblical view of the public service as a covenantal event, Reformed churches have understood the Triune God as the primary actor. If the covenant of grace is based on God’s unchangeable promise, with Christ as its mediator, then the public service is where this covenant is established and extended. Here the risen Lord of the covenant assembles his people to bless, convict, absolve, instruct, guide, and send them out into the world as “a kingdom of priests to our God” (Rev 5:9). The key moments in this covenantal event are God’s speech, baptism, and Communion—in each case, God being the actor. The very media themselves indicate that we are recipients of the action.

You can read the entire article here.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church, Worship

Female Elders/Pastors? A Debate - Part 3 (Conclusion)

Here we pick up where we left off in the debate. Before that, though, I would like to mention that having this discussion with one of my former Pentecostal pastors (he is still of that persuasion) was quite a breakthrough. When I left the fellowship (and Pentecostalism) the pastors announced to the church that I was demon possessed and that no one was allowed to talk to me. So please pray that God will continue to open doors such as this, for this man is quite influential in his circles, and his wife (my wife’s former best friend) is a popular recording artist; so a change towards orthodoxy could positively affect others.

The Bible does make it very clear that women are to play essential roles in local church ministry and thank God we have had the privilege to see the fruit of Grace working within submitted women Pastors already in our church. Roles for women in the church are visible in biblical times to the dawning of the 21st century and women as I know you agree have always played key roles in the church. In my opinion, New Testament scripture in the Bible still presents a pattern for service with women in roles of ministry oversight. Many churches in our generation use terms as Director, Overseer, coordinator or minister as a title used to describe a woman in a role of oversight. Even though these titles can be appropriate for those who do not have the calling or gift to Pastor, sometimes these titles given to women are just a politically right term defining their Pastoral role over a specific ministry within the church.

We do agree that women can have very fruitful and valuable ministries. And I think you’re right that sometimes churches make women pastors and then just call them something else. This brings us to something else to consider: women pastors is a modern issue. In the Old Testament the priest were men. In the New Testament there are no examples of women pastors, and Paul excludes them by limiting the role to men in his “overseer” instructions of Timothy and Titus. It wasn’t until the last few generations that this started gaining traction, until women were pressing for more civil rights. (Something to chew on.)

In my opinion when The Apostle Paul challenged the women to be silent, not to teach or not to have authority, It was to re-establish Godly order and to detour those who were being disruptive or insubordinate to the authority of Godly men in the church NOT to set the rule of NO WOMEN PASTORS.

If you’re referring to 1 Cor. 14, then I agree.

There is no indication that Paul restricted women in their callings to specific GIFTS before God for the service of the church. Throughout Paul’s ministry he speaks of women as his co-laborers in the gospel and in Romans 16:7 it says "Salute Andronicus and Junia (feminine), my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me." Here we can see confirmation in the Bible that Paul had women working Key roles with the original apostles as well as Priscilla in Acts 18:26 & Romans 16:3.
In his letter to the Romans 16:1-2, Paul commends Phoebe a woman deacon, to the church of Rome. He is sending her himself as a minister of the gospel. The Greek word for “servant” is diakonos, a deacon. It implies that Phoebe had the same status in the early church as Stephen the martyr and Philip the evangelist. In speaking of Phoebe Paul also charges the Church to serve her with anything she would have need of to accomplish her business or in other words – ministry. This implies that she as a woman was sent with authority to fulfill a certain mission. Throughout the centuries, God has raised up remarkable women in the Body of Christ to places of leadership. They have stood in the five fold ministry of the church as apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. As I mentioned to you before according to Ephesians 4:11-“ It was He who gave some to be Apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be Pastors and Teachers.”

We agree that women can have wonderful ministries. And yes, in modern times, women have served as pastors. The question is, should they serve? And that question isn’t answered by quoting Eph. 4:11, which simply teaches that God provides ministers. If we want to find out the qualifications for those ministries, pastors in this case, then we must go to the Scriptures that provide us with that information: 1 Tim. and Titus.

Postscript

On a final note, My brother- and sister-in-law also attended that fellowship (it’s where we all met as teenagers). When my wife and I left, the pastors met with my in-laws and acknowledged that there would be occasions that they, my in-laws, would have to talk to me; so they were forbidden to talk to me about the bible—they misjudged my brother-in-law terribly. He immediately called me and requested a meeting to go over the Scriptural case for my departure. Today he is a deacon in the Reformed Church of the United States.

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Female Elders/Pastors? A Debate - Part 2

In part 1 of the debate I made my case against women pastors/elders. In this offering I’m posting "pastor Bob's" retort and my subsequent response.

Pastor Bob kicks things off:

Thanks for your response and your concern for us to know the truth. I appreciate you taking time to share your view point and respect your insights concerning this subject of women Pastors. I enjoyed your outline especially since I have looked at all those points extensively many times before and at one point in my life held the some of the same views as you. You were clear and made very valid points. Yes I do agree there are plenty of verses that instruct women to be silent or not to be given a role of authority over a man within the church (I Corinthians 11, I Corinthians 14, I Timothy 2, Titus 2). The question is “what was the reason for these instructions from the Apostle Paul”? The funny thing is he never specifically says that a woman is not to be a Pastor although as you pointed out we automatically conclude this because of his charge in 1Tim.2:12 not to permit a woman to teach or have authority and as you mentioned because of the gender used while defining the qualifications of an overseer.
Obviously as you mentioned Paul in 1Cor.11:5 says that a woman can pray or prophesy if her head is covered (Representing being under authority)..Than we can only accurately suggest that Pauls charge in 1Cor.14:34 “Let your women keep silent in the church, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive”..was to address a particular problem in the Corinthian church with a specific group of women who were being disruptive or insubordinate during their assembly. Just the same I truly believe in 1Timothy2:11-12 Paul himself prohibited women teaching or having authority because I believe that Paul was very clearly challenging a certain teaching or issue that the women of ephesus were challenged with. His challenge was that women were not to overthrow or undermined the authority of Godly Men including their Husbands within the church as you mentioned: “It is men who are called to “be the husband of one wife,” and it is men who God holds ultimately responsible for the managing of the household and the upbringing of the children” So it was important to Paul that the women understood God’s order correctly and if they did not they would not be granted a right to teach or have any type of authority but rather learn to be silent and submissive.

Bob, I think you’re probably right about the 1 Cor. 14 passage. The message of chapter 14 can be summed with the words of verse 40, “Let all things be done decently and in order.” Based on what this chapter is addressing, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that the women were being disruptive. But this is very different from what Paul is addressing in 1 Tim. 2. While here Paul is instructing as to how to behave during a service, in 1 Tim. 2 he's telling them how a church should operate. The context is different, and it’s the context that determines the meaning.

Paul’s message to the Corinthians is for the women to be quite during the service, and if they have any questions they are to ask their husbands afterwards. In 1 Tim. 2, Paul mentions that women should be submissive too, but he adds that they are not “to teach or exercise authority over a man . . .” This separates the two instructions; here Timothy is being told that women may not have an authoritative teaching role (pastor, given the context, since he logically moves into the qualifications), not simply that they mustn’t be disruptive.

One final note. You say that unless they understand God’s order they won’t be granted the right to teach or given authority. That caveat isn’t anywhere in the text. We must take great care not to add to God’s word or “think beyond what is written” (1 Cor. 4:6).

We see in Paul’s writings that even though he acknowledged the work or ministry of women, he also was very concerned with their understanding of submission and respect to their husbands and the authority of men within the church. This would make sense especially in his culture according to Jewish law where women in many senses were not allowed to be educated or have any major role of authority within their community outside of raising their children. I believe through much study of his writings I have found a pattern that grew within The Apostle Paul in His Grace and acknowledgement towards women in ministry. His revelation of even acknowledging women and their work in ministry was not a little thing coming from his strict background of guidelines given by God in the old covenant to women within the Jewish culture. The Apostle Paul had to establish order to women who were learning how to come OUT of THE constraints of the LAW and INTO the LIBERTY of GRACE without losing their sense of Order. Galatians 3:26 For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith. (27) For as many (of you) as were baptized into Christ into spiritual union and communion with Christ, the anointed one (clothed yourselves with) Christ.(28) THERE IS (NOW NO DISTINCTION), NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK, THERE IS NEITHER SLAVE OR FREE, THERE IS NOT MALE AND FEMALE; FOR YOU ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS.

Gal. 3:26-29 teaches that we are all equal in Christ. In other words, when it comes to salvation, the Jew doesn’t have a leg-up on the Gentile, and the man doesn’t over the women. There are no such advantages when it comes to being united with Christ in his finished work, “For we are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.” Paul here is teaching on salvation, not church officers.

Stay tuned for part 3 of the debate!

--The Catechizer

Labels: Doctrine of the Church

Female Elders/Pastors? A Debate - Part 1

Recently I had an email conversation with one of my former Pentecostal pastors about female pastors. (He was about to ordain a slew of them.) My wife asked him about it on Facebook because back when we attended his fellowship he disallowed female pastors. “Why the change?” she asked.

What follows is my response to his reasoning. Please note that although I’m only referring to pastors (teaching elders, 1 Tim. 5:17), my case equally applies to ruling elders.

Your question:Where in Scripture does it say that women can be Pastor's? My simple answer is Eph.4:7-8 -...and HE gave gifts to "MEN"- meaning all mankind..Eph.4:11-12 -and He Himself gave some to be Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists, and some to be Pastors and Teachers. 12-For the equiping of the saints for the work of the ministry."
. . . Our Qualifications are: That they are GIFTED by God to lead in the area they are called on, Submitted to their husband, DWC discipleship, Faithfulness of Service, Understanding the DOCTRINE OF GRACE and RIGHTEOUSNESS through Faith in Jesus Christ and Last of all EXPERIENCE.

Greetings, “Bob.” This is The Chatechizer. The fetching Mrs. Catechizer asked if I would help her out a little on this, so here it goes . . .

First, you’re right: He does give gifts to “men” (general), but I’m sure that you would agree that he does not give all people the same gifts. God does, however, call people to ministry (Eph. 4:7-8) and provide those called with the needed gifts to fulfill that ministry (Eph. 4:8). Of course, for this discussion, if God does not allow women to be pastors, then he’s not calling them to that office nor is he so gifting them (although they might have similar gifts, like teaching). So first we need to answer the question of whether or not God allows female pastors before we can move on to calling and gifting.