pilgrim people

I fully agree with your analysis of 'morning and evening', but how does a person fight the massive culture push here? We are a selfish society: selfish with money, space, Time, energy, our hearts &tc. How does a pasture teach that God deserves more than 2 hours a week, and that it is a 'better' model for a church to do that rather than the more popular way?
I have been reading your blog for some time and I am really excited about these upcoming posts your are doing. Thanks for approaching a tough topic.

Pastor Brown:

I've hesitated to comment on this post because what I've wanted to ask about is a scenario that borders on the theoretical, assuming that Christ URC has not encountered such a situation, but here it goes anyway.

D. Michael Lindsay, Asst. Prof. of Sociology at Rice Univ., has written about who he calls elite evangelicals in Faith in the Halls of Power. Why I'm bringing this up here is that these Christians hold positions of power inherent to their vocation that require them to travel from home and be away on Sundays. He talks about Christians in Hollywood, Wall Street, D.C., and the academy. In each case, Christians' responsbilities call upon them to be away from home churches on Sundays and worship where they can depending on where they happen to be on those days, if at all.

I'm curous about how high-church Calvinism might address this potential scenario.

Redpooba,

"how does a person fight the massive culture push here?"

In a nutshell, through teaching Christians that we are disciples not consumers, and citizens of the Kingdom of God.

Michael,

"I'm curous about how high-church Calvinism might address this potential scenario."

Great question to raise. There are a few things we must think about here:

1. Vocations of necessity to the common wellbeing of our neighbor (i.e. emergency rooms, military, police, firefighters, etc.) are not in question here. While a Christian who has one of these callings ought to do his or her best to have the Lord's Day off, it is not a violation of the 4th commandment to work on the Lord's Day in one of these callings as necessary. The Reformed tradition has always applied the 4th commandment in this way in some fashion, rooting its understanding in creation and providence.

2. With regard to entertainment (i.e. actors, dancers, NFL players, etc.) it is quite a bit different. The questions the individual Christian has to ask are: a) Is it necessary for me (and others) to work on the Lord's Day in order to maintain the common wellbeing of my neighbor? b) Is this activity promoting or hindering my participation in the means of grace? Those are tough questions that each Christian has to ask himself. No, the answer isn't always what we want. But isn't that part of being a disciple of Christ? Isn't that part of the sufferings of the pilgrim in this present evil age whose inheritance is not a worldly, earthly glory, but something eternal in the age to come? May we take this seriously and train up our children to think accordingly.

3. In the case of any Christian, if his duties legitimately take him away from home on the Lord's Day, then, yes, he should seek out (and plan ahead for) the best place to attend worship on the Lord's Day.

Speaking of high-church Calvinism, what amazes me in all of this is how some people who profess to be Reformed and/or Presbyterian question these practices as if they are unreasonable or ultra-conservative. (I'm not saying you are doing this, Michael, by raising the question. As I said, your question is a good one to raise.) How can one be Reformed and/or Presbyterian and wink at their own confessions as if to say, "Well, now, that was a long time ago. We know better now."?

This just dumbfounds me.

Well, here's a newsflash for all of us Reformed/Presbyterian people: if one is not confessional, one is not Reformed/Presbyterian. Period. There is nothing difficult about this.

I realize that there is a history of allowing exceptions to be taken in subscribing to the Westminster Confession of Faith, but even there, the "system of doctrine" contained in the WCF takes the Lord's Day and means of grace seriously.

It seems that the real problem is that many folks who claim to be Reformed/Presbyterian are in reality evangelicals with some Calvinistic leanings.

Michael you made a great point, "Is this activity promoting or hindering my participation in the means of grace?" And it need not only to be applied to individual examples, such as Athletes, but what about when we apply the question to Denominations as a whole and their treatment of the Saboth day? Could the inherited model of a denomination be 'hindering my (our) participation in the means of grace'?
I currently attend a PCA church in Dallas and of course we do not have two services. Actually we don't have any form of Sunday school or education classes at all. So when this is pointed out to them and we receive the 'wink' that Pastor Brown points out. What are we do to and think?
If, Pastor Brown, you are arguing that the ideal/biblical model is 2 services what then are we to do with the 1 service models?

(as a disclaimer I love my church and my Pastor has a good heart. Furthermore, the question is not intended for unique settings such as heavy persecution or the likes that make it impossible or unwise to have more than one service in a single day.)

Redpooba,

I am arguing that two services is preferable, practical and historical (so, ideal). I should be clear that I am not arguing that two services are biblically mandated in such a way that churches who do not follow this practice are sinning. That is not what I am saying.

But to answer your questions, Could the inherited model of a denomination be 'hindering my (our) participation in the means of grace'? [W]hat then are we to do with the 1 service models?, we have to keep in mind what our respective church orders mandate. In the URCNA, of which I am a minister and to whcih the congregation I serve belongs, two services are mandated according to our Church Order (Article 37). This goes all the way back to the Synod of Dort in 1618-19. Multiple services on the Lord's Day is the common practice in the Reformed tradition.

But I am not familiar with the PCA BCO. What does it require? If your church only has one service on the Lord's Day (which is too bad), it is probably because the PCA BCO does not require it. Your session is right to follow its BCO. But I am sure that the PCA BCO doesn't prohibit an evening service. I know of PCA congregations that have an evening service. My recommendation to you is to talk to your pastor and elders about it, and then submit to them. You could always ask if it woudl be alright with them if you attended an OPC in town in the evening. Just a thought.

Thank you Pastor Brown for you responses, I do greatly look forward to your continuation on this series. The model of two services and being a Sabotirian in general has been of interest to me lately.
Thank you.

The most difficult thing for me in making the transition from the modern evangelical "community centers" (which I prefer to call them) is getting our children to understand the importance of attending church in the evening - and overall the general importance of attending church period! Attending church is like receiving the Lord's Supper... why wouldn't we want to participate as much as possible. It's a means of grace given to us to strengthen our faith - I need that and God condescends to us through that very means. Why wouldn't I want to be there whenever that's happening. Trying to get a child to understand that when they have come out of the evangelical mess that's out there is difficult. I sometimes don't "make" my teenager come, but it's understood that we need to be there. I don't want to be legalistic about it so I try to be careful and not insist. What is the best way to handle this situation?

Barbara,

Thanks for your honesty and candor. With regard to children attending the means of grace, there is nothing legalistic about the head of a home laying down a rule of attending worship whenever the elders call us to worship, namely, at the morning and evening services. It cannot be legalistic because the issue is in regard to the 5th commandment. Honoring and obeying our parents is not legalistic. Legalism is adding to the law of God. Requiring our child to obey us ("We're going to church" "It's your bedtime" "Finish your homework" etc.) is not legalism; it's the 5th commandment. So, be encouraged in that regard.

As far as helping our children see the beauty of worship, yes, that takes a lot of work, teaching, and patience. But getting into an ordinary rhythm helps tremendously. You know how children are: if they know what we expect of them and that going to church twice on the Lord's Day is "what we do in our house," then there is a lot less resistence. But like everything else, if our children see inconsistency and waffling in us, then they will most likely think the practice is not that important.

This is why we find so much said to Israel about training up children to be worshipers (Deut 6, for example). Parents have to lay down the practice and what is best for the family.

Good stuff, Mike, really good.

Just one note: As head, dealing with children is one thing, dealing with a wife who is resistent is just one different ball game.

Zrim,

I realize that. And I sympathize with you, and will pray for you.