Ordination in Free Presbyterian Church Valid?
- Thread starter brymaes
- Start date
- Status
Scott
Puritan Board Graduate
I am not taking a position on this, but from my understanding of the validity position, assuming that FPC is independent in church government (I am not familiar with them) then answer would be no.
The "lawfulness" (to use confessional terms) of a minister's vocation has two parts: the inward call (placed by God) and the outward call, placed by the Body of Christ, the established church.
Christ invested his original apostles with authority and they in turn ordained others. The lawfulness of ordination depends on part on ordination being performed by elders who are already lawfully ordained. For example Titus 1:5 serves as precedent for this: "The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you." Elders were ordained by the established church (Titus, an officer of the church, was doing the appointing), not by independent congregations. See also Acts 6:6, for example, where the people select deacons but they are ordaine by apostles. You see this in several other places.
Reformers like Turretin and other believed that the requirement of ordindation by previously ordained elders only had an exception in time of extreme emergency. It was not the ordinary course. To take oridination outside the established church, with its previously ordained ministers, is to take a calling onto oneself. They used Hebrews 5:4 as a warning of the danger of this: "No one takes this honor [the high priesthood] upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was." BTW, the calling to the high priesthood was not even an internal call at all; it was hereditary. You can see Calvin's comments on this here.
[Edited on 4-17-2006 by Scott]
Scott
Puritan Board Graduate
How would this reasoning apply to other authorities, say parenthood? A child has a duty to accept instruction and teaching from parents. That duty is not based only on the content of the teaching. It is based largely on the formality of parenthood. Formalities are important, because God says they are important.
LadyFlynt
Puritan Board Doctor
Okay, just got off the phone with the associate pastor's wife...they are under oversight of a presbytery...they are NOT "independant". Whew...glad that one is cleared up...LOL!
The churches here used to be under oversight from the presbytery in Ireland, but due to the growth here and the fact that we are on a different continent, they let North America split into it's own denomination with blessings. They do still have MUCH contact with the church in Ireland...and in fact, one of the gentlemen at the local church came from Northern Ireland and next week they are having a speaker from Scotland.
[Edited on 4-17-2006 by LadyFlynt]
The churches here used to be under oversight from the presbytery in Ireland, but due to the growth here and the fact that we are on a different continent, they let North America split into it's own denomination with blessings. They do still have MUCH contact with the church in Ireland...and in fact, one of the gentlemen at the local church came from Northern Ireland and next week they are having a speaker from Scotland.
[Edited on 4-17-2006 by LadyFlynt]
Maybe someone asked this already - but valid for what? I don't think these would be a valid ordinations for preaching in a PCA, but would be for preaching in a whatever denomination that one was ordinated under. Maybe there's some inter-denominational recognition of ordination - I really don't know. But I think the term "valid" in context of ordination is limited to the scope of particular denominations.
To be validly or lawfully ordained is to be rightly appointed to be a Minister of the Word and Sacrament. Because this is a universal ecclesiastical office, the question trancends denomination.
If the validity of one's ordination is limited to the scope of the particular denomination, then the assertions that some Presbyterians make on this board that "Independant" ordinations are invalid is nonsensical.
But you question was if ordination in a particular denomination was "valid" in another denomination. You've already limited the scope is to by assuming denominations themselves are valid. If you want to question the practice of denominations to say what is a valid ordination for that denomination, you should first question the validity of denominations themselves. Why do we have denominations? What separates one from another? Validity of ordination is limited to the scope of denominations, it's a technical issue regarding the visible church.
What an interesting discussion.
I think Civbert pointed out something plain, which is to say that there is a technical side to the original question:
"For those who would consider only Presbyterian ordinations to be valid and lawful, would you accept an ordination from the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster/North America (www.freepres.org) as valid?"
I see theologae's point, who asked the original question; I think the consensus answer is yes. But that may be far from whether, say, a PCA minister would "automatically" allow an FPC minister to preach in "his" pulpit, much less have a blanket endorsement to "automatically" be allowed to preach in other PCAs. I believe that is why our Presbyteries have Credentials Committees, to vet these men for the whole church. As for individual churches, the Session would be responsible for who is in the pulpit.
Trevor, I think the answer to your question is "no." But again, I don't believe you could ask for "carte blanche" to preach at, say, any PCA church. (Not that you were asking for this.)
I think Civbert pointed out something plain, which is to say that there is a technical side to the original question:
"For those who would consider only Presbyterian ordinations to be valid and lawful, would you accept an ordination from the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster/North America (www.freepres.org) as valid?"
I see theologae's point, who asked the original question; I think the consensus answer is yes. But that may be far from whether, say, a PCA minister would "automatically" allow an FPC minister to preach in "his" pulpit, much less have a blanket endorsement to "automatically" be allowed to preach in other PCAs. I believe that is why our Presbyteries have Credentials Committees, to vet these men for the whole church. As for individual churches, the Session would be responsible for who is in the pulpit.
Trevor, I think the answer to your question is "no." But again, I don't believe you could ask for "carte blanche" to preach at, say, any PCA church. (Not that you were asking for this.)
The original question was whether FPC ordinations were valid considered by themselves. In other words, are men appointed and sent by that denomination really and truly lawfully consecrated Ministers?
I am aware of an OPC session that will not allow a particular OPC minister preach from their pulpit. So even within the bounds of a denomination, no one's pulpit is wide open in that regard. And nor should it be.
This question was resurrected from a time when there was much controversy here over lawful ordination. At that time, it was stated that Phillip Way's church was not a true church because his ordination was not a Presbyterian one. It had nothing to do with whether he could minister in a church in another denomination, it had to do with whether he could minister in his own!
Scott
Puritan Board Graduate
Someone asked whether the PCA would see say a baptist as a minister allowed to preach. To be clear, this is not really an issue in the PCA. The PCA had reformed Baptist John Piper preach at General Assembly in the past year or two. As Matt has noted elsewhere the idea of valid ordinations is almost forgotten and ignored. I would say that the issue is perceived more as a matter of prudence than anything else (which is quite a departure from the past). Now, that is not saying that the PCA's practical leniency on the issue is correct. But in practice, it is not an issue that many people care about.
Trevor et al., some older threads on the subject:
http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=4953#pid60453
http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=4894#pid59225
Fasten your seatbelts.
Vic
http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=4953#pid60453
http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=4894#pid59225
Fasten your seatbelts.
Vic
Scott Bushey
Puritanboard Commissioner
As I asked earlier, are all ordinations valid? Which ones are excluded? I would second the idea that if the governing body is not a church; if it does not have the 3 marks that make up a true church of Christ then the ordinations are invalid.
Another thread: http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=13415#pid189629
[Edited on 4-18-2006 by Scott Bushey]
Another thread: http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=13415#pid189629
[Edited on 4-18-2006 by Scott Bushey]
Pilgrim
Puritanboard Commissioner
Perhaps this could be the subject of a different thread since it's a more general question than our view of the FPC. I suppose the question is, do we think the Bible has spoken on issues like baptism? And if so, how much compromise is desirable for the sake of unity? And when we speak of unity, what kind of unity do we have in mind?
There is also the issue of mode, since Baptists say immersion is the only valid baptism, and many throughout the ages (witness the IMB guidelines) say it has to be done in a Baptist church.
Scott Bushey
Puritanboard Commissioner
Trevor,
Are all true churches? One needs to address what groups are excluded in this regard. Then, after looking at that, the ordinations. The above will effect the outcome of whether or not one is actually administering a sacrament at all.
[Edited on 4-21-2006 by Scott Bushey]
There are degrees of purity in the church, and therefore among individual churches, so there are degrees of fellowship. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that church C and church P agree on every jot and tittle of doctrine except for the issue of (C)redobaptism v. (P)aedobaptism. And let's say even further that church C doesn't hold firm to immersion, but is holding firm to credobaptism - so basically we have a Reformed Baptist church and a Reformed church. I don't think that either church would call the other false. Neither, though, could these churches enter into formal church fellowship unless one were going to "submit" to the other re: baptism. That is, ideally, church fellowship should be leading to church unity; but I don't believe that disunity in all cases = disfellowship.
Scott
Puritan Board Graduate
Whether a particular congregation is a true church is a separate issue from whether that congregation's ministers' are lawfully ordained. You can have a true church with unlawful ministers. And whether the simple fact of being a true church allows that church to ordain ministers is what is in question. Indepedents would typically say yes. Everybody else would typically say no.
If you use the term "valid" or "lawful" in a broad sense, but the church that would not allow particular ministers in their pulpit would do so based on some criteria that is most likely doctrinal. And if doctrinal, it's probably denominational. A "valid" or "lawful" minister in the broadest sense, may not be considered validly or lawfully ordained within the scope of that church or denomination.
I think part of the problem with the whole question is what scope or sense we are using the terms "valid" and "lawful". Certainly there are ministers who are truly and faithfully preaching the Gospel, truly called by God to the ministy, but that does not neccessarily mean they have been met the legal requirments of ordaination to stand in the pulpit of a particular church. This does not mean he is not a true minister of the Gospel, only that he's credentials do no satisfy the technical requirements of that denomination. And I'm sure that exceptions can be made if that person was willing to be examined by the the elders of the church or denomination.
I think the whole question is like asking who is in the invisible church and who are in the visible church. We go by outward signs to see who is in the visible church - baptism, confession of faith, formal membership - but we also know that some in the visible church are not the elect, and not saved. So we use the outward evidence for practical reasons. And a "valid" ordination is a technical question, not a judgment of the person's true status as a minister of the Word.
[Edited on 4-21-2006 by Civbert]
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
