Division

[kceaster]

If you were in a church denomination that you believed was becoming too liberal or going in the wrong direction, which would you choose and why?

A. Seek out those in the denomination who would leave with me and join with a denomination closer to our views of orthodoxy.

B. Seek out those in the denomination who would leave with me and start a new denomination.

C. I would leave quietly and join another denomination.

D. I would leave quietly and start a new denomination or independent church.

E. I would stay and try to help fix the problems.

In Christ,

KC

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by kceaster]

 

[JonathanHunt]

Do you mean which new denomination/church would you choose, Kevin?

JH

 

[kceaster]

Sorry,

I tried to do a poll and I couldn't figure it out. So I just retyped my post.

KC

 

[LadyFlynt]

E for a time and then C

 

[wsw201]

to what Colleen said.

I would start with E because of the membership vows I took. Then if that didn't work and the Gospel could not be discerned from what was being preached and the sacraments were no longer being administered in a manner that could not be construed as remotely correct, then I would go to C.

 

[JohnV]

I am persuaded that it is important to try to work out the problems within the setting you are in, if you are there in the first place because it is/was as true church fellowship. I think the question here is how far to take that. At what point do you say, "Enough, I'm outta here!" I just can't accept that this is an option at any time, but circumstances can make any other option next to impossible.

Many years ago I thought the only way out of an apostacizing church is to be excommunicated for standing for the truth. And in doing so, one simply cannot take any chance of mixing in his own opinioins or ideas into the fray; he has to stand strictly on that particular church's own confessional stand to show that he is being true to the church even though the entire church may differ. The contemporary church is only and expression of the church throughout the ages and that latter church is what we would call the universal or catholic church, which is part of what constitutes the Invisible Church of Christ. So, in effect, it is the universal church bearing witness against the contemporary church which is going its own way, away from the way of the historical church. That has to be the person's stand against his church when he is trying to effect change. It is either the Spirit's work, or it is a doomed work.

But there are extenuating circumstances. I am finding that out the hard way. It is not easy, and its not for every one it seems. It should be everyone's duty, and it is a shame that so many just pick up and leave in order to find a more suitable church; nothing ever gets done in this way. But still, it tears at every part of a person's dignity, rights, and even his family. If the official church (the ruling offices) does not stand by you, and the circumstances prevent the general public in the church from knowing the particulars, then neither does the congregation stand by you, and you are a virtual outcast. You stand alone. And it is quite common that, if there are others, that they are keen on setting up their own priorities first, more than adhering strictly to what ought to be done. So unity is very, very difficult to achieve in such a case. So, in effect, you are quite alone.

Yet, you are not really alone. You have the great crowd of witnesses, spoken of in Heb. 12, on your side; you have the multitude of Church Fathers on your side, but most of all, you have Christ and His Spirit on your side. In reality, it is the apostacizing church that is quite alone. "Then I beheld their end...."

The problem I see with going elsewhere is trying to answer the question, "Where to go then?" Also, is the Church of Christ a mobile church in this way, going from one place or another, and not really having a home? Yet, there certainly are places left that truly worship God, and it is not wrong to seek to attend there instead of the place that will not seek or worship God even by their own standards.

Well, that's my take on it.

 

[sastark]

E and then A

 

[Scott]

Division poll

From Kevin's other post.

"If you were in a church denomination that you believed was becoming too liberal or going in the wrong direction, which would you choose and why?"

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Scott]

 

[Scott Bushey]

In my opinion, one needs to bend a good knee first, then dig in for the coming storm. If after all options have been exhausted, to no avail, I would then leave very quietly as to not cause division.

 

[Michael]

I can't vote because picking one doesn't seem to apply to me. With membership vows in place I would be hesitant to leave. Church is very much like family, we can't just up and disown each other at the first sign of a problem. We try to mend our errors and repent before God. If the situation becomes hopeless though, eventually moving on may be the only way to stand up for truth and righteousness.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Michael,
Your vows remain valid for as long as the church also abides by their vow to the scriptures. If they become liberal and ordain a female pastor, I believe we can consider their vows broken, hence feeing us from responsibility.

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by Scott Bushey]

 

[lwadkins]

The following is a post from a thread involving the PC (USA) and I think it fits this thread. My family and I have already had to make this kind of choice. And although we made our views known before we left, we felt we had to go.

Originally posted by lwadkins
Yes Plimoth Thom, and we felt that there was so many anti-biblical trends that we couldn't stay and be any part of that. As much as we would have liked to help support the confessing movement there, it meant we had to be part of supporting offensive programs and so called ministries. Our other choice would have to be reneging on our promises made when joining the church. We had to leave! My personal opinion is that staying in a denomination that far gone to try to change it, is not a valid option. It means you have to be involved, even if it is unwillingly, in sin that is being perpetrated by the organized church.

Just adding another thought; It always seems so noble and brave to stay and fight to change the church. Then as you watch the effects that unblibical doctrines and attitudes have on your wife, children, and even yourself, you start to ask why are we doing this. It causes your duties as spiritual leader of the family to be much more difficult. In fact, I concluded that I was not doing my duty as spiritual leader by keeping my family in this situation. It udoubtly helps if you happen to be in one of the churches that is primarly faithful and has a good pastor (which we were not). But still if you give to the church as you have pledged to do you are contributing to the proliferation of the churches unbiblical tenets.

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by lwadkins]

[Edited on 3-8-2005 by lwadkins]

 

[kceaster]

I have posted this before, but I though I would again just to add to this discussion. This is a quote from Lewis Cheeseman from his book entitled Differences between Old and New School Presbyterians.

"When the minority of a body become unsound, there is no remedy but excision. When the majority become unsound, there is no remedy but secession. Error desires nothing, demands nothing but toleration. It is sure of ultimate success if let alone. Its advocates, to prevent alarm, maintain that the differences are but slight, perhaps merely verbal, or at most philosophical, and frown at suspicion and inquiry as calculated to disturb the peace of the church... Error is more congenial than truth; the love of it is the normal state, and its power of assimilation in this world is greater than that of truth. The gospel wins its way, and maintains its advantages against the current. Error floats with it, and gains its destination without lifting an oar. Truth in this world is an exotic. Error is indigenous. The former cannot live but by constant protection; the latter thrives without it. Error, therefore, needs nothing but toleration in any communion, for its spread and success. The only successful preventative is excision or secession. To this rule there can be found no exception in the history of the past."

Do you think he's right?

In Christ,

KC

 

[wsw201]

Two chapters that are worth reading are from the Institutes, Book 4 chapters 1 & 2. I think Calvin's comments about the Church and how much we should put up with are appropriate for every Christian.

 

[Michael]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Michael,
Your vows remain valid for as long as the church also abides by their vow to the scriptures. If they become liberal and ordain a female pastor, I believe we can consider their vows broken, hence feeing us from responsibility.

I agree. But do we not have a duty to stand up against such actions of our church and patiently defend scripture before we simply up and leave? Should we not hope and pray that the error of our church is corrected? in my opinion, leaving the church needs to be a last resort.

 

[wsw201]

One of the nice things about the Presbyterian system of Govt. is you have the ability to take issues beyond the local session. So if you see things going wrong, you can appeal to Presbytery and GA. Can't do that in an independent Church.

 

[SolaScriptura]

E and then C.