Singing During the Lord's Supper

[earl40]

When will the people see the church, not as she "is" in the world, but as she "is" in reality? When you love a church, you will to see her beauties, not her blemishes.

If a congregation's failures are too much to live with, then get a divorce. But please don't drag her name through the mud on your way to greener pasture.

I have taken your wisdom to heart on this issue though I will say when one has a conviction of something that is done wrong in worship it is impossible to not see the blemish especially in a church that claims to hold to our confession of faith. This is where love covers a multitude of sin which includes my sin which many of the saints at our church see in me.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

There is "thinking critically" about important issues. And some folks really drill-down to diagnose, satisfied with no less than a complete anatomy, a dissection. There doubtless is a place for this kind of serious, dispassionate analysis.

I'm asking, "To what end?" I'm especially concerned if this should be or become an ex post facto exercise in fault-finding. Having chosen a place to settle down (too hasty? I hope not...), now the young and earnest reformette (a novice of sorts, 1Tim.3:6) engages in an calibration of the quality of this place and its practice, which also reflects on the leadership.

Compare this to the man who undertakes a whirlwind romance and wedding; who afterward takes out his "ideal woman" checklist, and begins identifying all the shortcomings of his bride. Only to be a BIG HELP to her, I'm sure--so she knows just those areas in which she may match up with all those positives that made the marriage a possibility in the first place.

This is not the first public inquiry instigated on the PB into the practice (is it really Reformed? let's talk...) of this particular congregation. Is this a happy marriage? Is this a healthy submission to leaders? It's hard to tell these things clearly from the internet. The longer this kind of thing goes on, the more worried I am .

It's why I referenced LOVE in my first answer.

 

[earl40]

It's why I referenced LOVE in my first answer.

Indeed.

 

[Edward]

You're right, but I was referring to a church of 1000 being it's own thread.

To clarify, it's not a church of 1000. That's just the most that the room will hold for a single service.

 

[Andrew P.C.]

There is "thinking critically" about important issues. And some folks really drill-down to diagnose, satisfied with no less than a complete anatomy, a dissection. There doubtless is a place for this kind of serious, dispassionate analysis.

I'm asking, "To what end?" I'm especially concerned if this should be or become an ex post facto exercise in fault-finding. Having chosen a place to settle down (too hasty? I hope not...), now the young and earnest reformette (a novice of sorts, 1Tim.3:6) engages in an calibration of the quality of this place and its practice, which also reflects on the leadership.

Compare this to the man who undertakes a whirlwind romance and wedding; who afterward takes out his "ideal woman" checklist, and begins identifying all the shortcomings of his bride. Only to be a BIG HELP to her, I'm sure--so she knows just those areas in which she may match up with all those positives that made the marriage a possibility in the first place.

This is not the first public inquiry instigated on the PB into the practice (is it really Reformed? let's talk...) of this particular congregation. Is this a happy marriage? Is this a healthy submission to leaders? It's hard to tell these things clearly from the internet. The longer this kind of thing goes on, the more worried I am .

It's why I referenced LOVE in my first answer.

Regardless of what particular congregation this is referring to, it seems you are pitting experience against practice. This isn't a matter of circumstances. This is also not considered "Adiaphora". Anything brought into the worship of God is either from command (the correct understanding) or allowance (man-centered). We aren't Lutheran or Anglican. We believe in the biblical doctrine of the Regulative Principle. If you are bringing something into the worship of God, where is it commanded to do so? If it is not,it is forbidden and it's idolatry.

The bible tells us that "love covers a multitude of sins" (1 Pet. 4) but it doesn't say "love allows us to commit idolatry". The essence of love comes from obedience to God. Loving our neighbor would not allow them to sit in an idolatrous practice, but rather show them the truth of the 2nd Commandment.

Not saying this pertains to you, but I have found it so disheartening that many officers are ignorant of what Presbyterianism is and the historical nature of this biblical view. We do not base our understanding solely on history, but we do not devoid our doctrine from history. I guess this is what "system" subscription gives us.

 

[KeithW]

Kat, please take every one of our responses with a grain of salt. So while one responder might accuse you of being unsubmissive to church authority another might be trying to help understand the uneasiness you mentioned in your original post.

Last year I visited an OPC church to see what one is like. (I do not go there because it is a very long drive). The pastor there does not have congregational singing during the Lord's supper. So not every OPC church practices that.

An old school buddy of mine is now a Reformed pastor. We have been having a conversation over the last few months about church practices related to whether or not they allow the heart/mind/understanding to be engaged during different parts of the service. I asked him about the topic of this thread and he said he does not do congregational singing during the Lord's supper in his church, specifically because it would interfere with contemplating the meaning of what the Lord's supper represents.

 

[TylerRay]

A few moments of silence while serving a few dozen is quantitatively different than the extended silence that would be required while serving 1000.

Not a problem if you use multiple tables.

 

[TylerRay]

An old school buddy of mine is now a Reformed pastor.

It's always good to hear of another Old School Presbyterian.

 

[Edward]

Not a problem if you use multiple tables.

Let's see. The Dallas Convention center can seat 150 per exhibit hall with banquet seating, 180 classroom style. So say 7 halls should work. At $8000 per hall, that would only be $56,000. But I don't see how moving it to a larger facility would make it go any faster. You would still only have the 40 or so elders to pass the elements. I would think it would take longer with tables than with the pews.

 

[TylerRay]

Not a problem if you use multiple tables.

Let's see. The Dallas Convention center can seat 150 per exhibit hall with banquet seating, 180 classroom style. So say 7 halls should work. At $8000 per hall, that would only be $56,000. But I don't see how moving it to a larger facility would make it go any faster. You would still only have the 40 or so elders to pass the elements. I would think it would take longer with tables than with the pews.

What I mean to say is that if the communion is observed around tables, the minister exhorts, breaks the bread, and distributes it to each table, then the congregants all pass the bread around, so that all of the tables are eating at the same time and drinking at the same time. That would cut the time down significantly.

 

[Edward]

Here's something on the Roman view of silence during the liturgy: (Section 3 speaking most closely to this discussion).

http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/4565/silence_in_the_liturgy.aspx

 

[Captain Picard]

Here's something on the Roman view of silence during the liturgy: (Section 3 speaking most closely to this discussion).

http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/4565/silence_in_the_liturgy.aspx

I'm curious as to what you think of the article.

 

[Edward]

I'm curious as to what you think of the article.

While not everything that we inherited from Rome is bad, if it is a tradition from Rome, it should be examined critically. In legal terms, if it is from Rome, it should be subject to strict scrutiny.

 

[Captain Picard]

I'm curious as to what you think of the article.

While not everything that we inherited from Rome is bad, if it is a tradition from Rome, it should be examined critically. In legal terms, if it is from Rome, it should be subject to strict scrutiny.

I agree insofar as that goes, but I honestly think (former Romanist) that the idea of silence at some point during the Supper is wise, as long as it isn't being done to reinforce some kind of propiatory-sacrifice model. I see too much pressure in evangelicalism broadly to make a church service a "performance" that just moves briskly along from one sound/experience to another.