Some Interesting Links . . .

The CRC wants to be included among those swooning over Benedict XVI.  The once faithful church of farmer-theologians has become the RCA-lite (h.t. Chris Coleman).  Click here: CRC Executive Director Welcomes Papal Invite - Christian Reformed Church      

So, a church is going to hold worship services in a bar.  Its not a Lutheran Church.  Its not a Reformed Church.  Ironically, it is a Methodist Church.  Boy, times have changed.  I'll bet their potlucks are a hoot!  Lots of chips, buffalo wings, and open tabs.  Click here: Area church to hold worship services in bar.

Taking the "be careful little hands what you do" theology to new levels, a number of pastors in the UK plan on boarding city buses to control unruly youth.  Yeah, that will work!  Click here: Croydon Pastors Patrol Bus Routes (from This Is Local London)

There is no doubt that the number of mysterious fires and human deaths, along with strange and ungodly noises in the night, will soon rise to alarming levels.  America is about to be overrun by feral cats--Click here: FOXNews.com - Expert: America About to Be Overrun by Feral Cats - Science News | Science & Technology | Technology. 

Meanwhile, another brave dog saves its owner's life--Click here: Dog saves woman from watery death.

Comments

[Jim Vellenga]

As someone who grew up CRC and currently pastors in the RCA, all I can say is the CRC is not RCA lite, the two are virtually identical. They both have conservative congregations, but in both denominations they are loosing ground to the Purpose Driver, Seeker Driven, Emergent, Relevantist, Egalitarian, We're all really the same Evangelibean form of Christianity.

I have been blessed with a solid, reformed, conservative congregation to serve in, but looking around there are few others that I could go to in either the RCA or CRC. Thankfully there are still some, and although few,they are seeking to hold the line.

[DB]

I seem to remember that at the last CRC synod, they and the RCA were making plans to produce a new joint psalter-hymnal, perhaps with the view of merging the denominations. Last year was the 150th anniversary of the CRC. The synod seemed to be celebrating by hastening the church's demise.

[LLOYD]

Ever notice that when these liberals embrace ecumenical unity with the Roman Catholic church, they often have to come to the viewpoint of Rome? The Catholic church is uncompromising in not embracing the theology of the liberals.

If these liberal leaders were not receiving such lucrative perks in their respective denominations, they would quickly abandon their churches and kiss the popes hand!

In WELS, if a pastor ever serves communion to a person that is not WELS, or one of the other 20 denominations (CELC) that we have fellowship with, that pastor is FIRED. With us, it is all (matters of doctrine) or nothing.

[Zrim]

DB,

They plan on coming out with that joint Psalter in 2010. The plan to join denom's probably won't come to fruition since the RCA has very different views on day schools than the CRC. Oh, if only the CRC was as serious about its confessional tradition as it is about something found in the common sphere and is un-implied by Christianity (education).

[lee n. field]

"I seem to remember that at the last CRC synod, they and the RCA were making plans to produce a new joint psalter-hymnal, perhaps with the view of merging the denominations."

Minus the Heidelberg Catechism, I think I remember reading. <sigh>. The years we've been away continue to mount up, and I'm not sure why I care anymore, but I do.

[Chris Sheman]

Hmmmm, feral cats- and a worldwide food shortage, do we see a connection here? Maybe a solution to the food shortage as well. Do you suppose they taste like chicken?

[PB]

Lloyd, help me understand something. I'm honestly curious about this. If a pastor in WELS (stands for?) serves communion to me, a Reformed Baptist (leave aside debates about that label for the moment) and a pastor to boot, he's in trouble? Because I don't agree to...which confession or other statement of faith? For example I can go with everything in the Heidelberg Catechism except what it says about baptism! Just trying to understand here, thanks.

[Mark Priestap]

Wondering how the Pope will enjoy Toby Mac. ;) Will the papal toe start tapping?

Cats... let them loose in NYC sewers. Maybe after they eat all the rats they'll find that pesky alligator.

I'd invite all ya'll in the RCA and CRC to the PCA, but who knows where we'll be in 30 years. Probably the same predicament. It all starts with taking the focus off Christ and His gospel.

May His Kingdom come, may His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.

[LLOYD]

Hi PB:

Thanks for asking! I'll do the best that I can to answer your questions. WELS stands for Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. Our Web site is WELS.NET. You can probably spend more than a thousand hours on it, just for doctrinal questions alone!

I am an elder at St. Thomas Lutheran Church at both the Goodyear and Phoenix Arizona campuses. For over 90 years - up until 1961 - we were in fellowship with the LCMS. In 1961, WELS split with the LCMS because of differences in doctrine and the practice of church fellowship.

We are an extremely conservative, confessional German Lutheran denomination. Both the LCMS and WELS are supposed to practice "Close(d)" communion. The difference is, we enforce it. However, many LCMS pastors and churches practice "open" communion, allowing individuals who are not members of congregations or church bodies in fellowship with the LCMS to commune at their altars.

WELS practices close(d) communion. We invite to commune at our altars those who are members of congregations and synods in our fellowship. Since the Wisconsin Synod and the LCMS are no longer in fellowship, our pastors don't commune members of the LCMS.

We view it as false doctrine, when the Reformed or any other denomination teach that the bread and wine "represent" Christ's body and blood. (Both the LCMS and WELS.)

At communion, we express our oneness of faith . We also confess that Christ's own body and blood are present with the bread and wine for the forgivness of our sins. Those whose confession includes doctrines not consistent with God's Word or who do not believe in the real presence of Christ's body and blood cannot commune with us.

When our elders or pastors distribute communion we say, "Take and eat. This is the true body of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, given into death for all your sins. Take and drink. This is the true blood of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, shed for you for the remission of all your sins. May these, the true body and blood of your Lord and savior Jesus Christ, strengthen and keep you in true faith unto life everlasting. Go now in peace, sins forgiven. Amen."

If someone says "I believe in Jesus but I reject the idea his body and blood are in the Lord's Supper," that person is receiving the Lord's Supper to his condemnation.

In summary, If you are not a WELS member or a member of a church we are in fellowship with (the 20 churches of the CELC), you will not be allowed to commune with us.

[George]

As a life-long member of LCMS congregations (up until about 4 years ago, anyway), I'll chime in after Lloyd and reinforce what he says from a little different viewpoint. The following is an excerpt taken from a very conservative, very confessional LCMS pastor's web site regarding altar fellowship (the Lord's Supper) with a congregation outside of the Lutheran church...

"....The validity of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper rests on the denomination’s public confession. The Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and Christian Scientists may use the right words in their Baptism, but their Baptisms forgive no one and save no one because they officially reject the Trinity. In the same way, the ELCA, the Presbyterian Church USA, the Reformed Church in America, and the United Church of Christ, may all use the correct words in the Lord’s Supper but their Lord’s Supper forgives no one and saves no one because they publicly reject the real presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Sacrament...by comparison, if a dollar bill is not legal tender in some states it is not legal tender in others. In the same way, if the Lord’s Supper is not the real body and blood of Christ in some congregations in fellowship with each other it is not the body and blood of Christ in all the other congregations who belong to the same fellowship. Either all the churches in one fellowship publicly confess and have the real presence of Christ’s body and blood and the forgiveness of sins in the Sacrament or none of them have it...."

At first, this sounds harsh, but when you stop to think about it, it is the same thing that members of a confessional reformed church body do with the Canons of Dort or the Heidelburg Catechism when they use them as a bond of unity in publicly proclaiming what they view to be true in Scripture. Kim has wisely pointed this out by the sermons and essays he has provided for us on his web site.

My own particular dilema is one step worse than even the one described above where a WELS pastor would refuse to commune a non-WELS member: I attend an independent baptist congregation along with my wife (her church from before marriage). At least most Reformed denominations view the Lord's Supper as a sacrament, even if they do not see Christ's body "in, with, and under" [Luther's S.C.] the bread and wine (NOT transubstantiation as the Romanists teach, but what is sometimes referred to as "consubstantiation" by evangelical theologians). This baptist congregation sees the bread and wine as simply physical elements to be consumed as an ordinance to be obeyed and as a memorial of Christ's suffering.

However, when I hear the "words of institution" (listed in Lloyd's response) as being taken from scripture I realize that the elements are more than just food and drink alone. Nevertheless, according to WELS and more conservative LCMS confessions, I have NOT participated in the Lord's Supper and there is NO forgiveness of sin because it has not been viewed as a sacrament with every member of that congregation publicly confessing their belief that it is.

[PB]

OK, I understand, the crux is the understanding of the Lord's Supper. The manner in which you describe the Lutheran view (which is as I recall it from seminary, thankfully <grin>) means that the situation is very similar to whether I should partake of the eucharist in a Roman Catholic service(or should be allowed to, according to the Missal).
Now the wrinkle is that I minister using the words of Scripture in the institution (1 Corinthians 11, in particular) - but being Baptists, we call it an Ordinance (although I often "slip" and say Sacrament, to the dismay of the Baptist oldtimers), and there is no formal liturgy. But I also present what is taking place from a decidedly Reformed (as opposed to Zwinglian) perspective.
Thanks for the explanation. Very enlightening. May the day hasten when the full answer to Christ's prayer in John 17:23 is made manifest!

[LLOYD]

Hi George and PB:

I really enjoy your responses! Thanks!

Just to shed a little more light on the Lutheran view of the sacraments.

Lutherans don't view baptism and communion as ordinances (something that we do for God). But we view them as sacraments (where we receive the forgivness of our sins.)

Lutherans view the H.S. within the sacraments, not along side of them - the Reformed view.

When we take communion, we are receiving power over death, the devil and it represents our salvation! Rome only receives two things - body and blood. The Reformed also receive only two things - the bread and wine. As Lutherans, we affirm what the Scriptures teach - body, blood, bread and wine!

[lee n. field]

"This baptist congregation sees the bread and wine as simply physical elements to be consumed as an ordinance to be obeyed and as a memorial of Christ's suffering."

From what I've observed, they tend to view baptism the same way, simply as a matter of obedience.

[PB]

lee - Well the trouble (and the benefit as well) with Baptists is that we're all over the map. Certainly many offer a memorialist view of the Supper and a view of Baptism as "our first act of obedience" only - but not all by any means.

[max]

Lloyd - the reformed do believe that we receive Christ in the sacrament - not just the bread and the wine. The difference is, we believe that we receive the body and blood of Christ by faith and not by mouth.
The Reformed churches have always taught the real presence of Christ in the sacrament. The disagreement is about what we understand "real" to mean. Furthermore, we find the talk of an "altar" at the supper to be an offense to the gospel.

[Alberto]

How times change. What kind of Reformed Christian would be so happy to join in ecumenical prayer with a bishop who considers himself the bishop of bishops? They might as well convert to Rome and kiss the ring.

[Stan]

Did you even read the post?

“This is an incredible opportunity to personally sit with senior leaders from churches and denominations across North America,” says Dykstra. “It is a huge honor and also a significant responsibility to be there and to help INFLUENCE the broader Christian community with the Reformed world and life view.”

I have no problem with the CRC going to a prayer lunch to influence and dialog with the RCC. Are you an isolationist?

[Kim Riddlebarger]

Stan:

Yes, I read the post. If you think it more likely that Dykstra will influence others, rather than be influenced (seduced) himself, I have some swampland for sale in Florida I'd like to show you.

The CRC is jettisoning its Reformed distinctives as fast as humanly possible. It is reasonable to assume that getting invited to the Pope's party is yet another sad step in that process.

I would also urge you to find and read the essay by Dr. W. Robert Godfrey entitled "The Myth of Influence." It will give you a good dose of reality.