John Fea links to this amusing video.
The mocking of small groups aside — and remember that we have pietists to thank for this odd form of Christian piety — I do wonder what would happen to the dynamics of a group like this if you introduced a Presbyterian elder (not to be confused the the Mormon variety) into the mix. To help answer that question, here’s how the OPC’s Form of Government describes the work of an elder:
1. Christ who has instituted government in his church has furnished some men, beside the ministers of the Word, with gifts for government, and with commission to execute the same when called thereto. Such officers, chosen by the people from among their number, are to join with the ministers in the government of the church, and are properly called ruling elders.
2. Those who fill this office should be sound in the faith and of exemplary Christian life, men of wisdom and discretion, worthy of the esteem of the congregation as spiritual fathers.
3. Ruling elders, individually and jointly with the pastor in the session, are to lead the church in the service of Christ. They are to watch diligently over the people committed to their charge to prevent corruption of doctrine or morals. Evils which they cannot correct by private admonition they should bring to the notice of the session. They should visit the people, especially the sick, instruct the ignorant, comfort the mourning, and nourish and guard the children of the covenant. They should pray with and for the people. They should have particular concern for the doctrine and conduct of the minister of the Word and help him in his labors.
The least that can be said is that an elder should be expected to refer to small group attendees as other than “dude” or “dudette.”
Old Life 
“Superficial has the word super in it. And who doesn’t want to be super?” I love it. By that standard I am “Super”man.
LikeLike
Daryl:
So OPC doesn’t believe in small groups?
LikeLike
Small groups have always been the blind leading the blind. I know that from many years of experience. They are so pervasive now that you can’t get away from them. That was a funny video. The last small group I was at I got in trouble. The leader of the group walked ouit in disgust after a remark I made. Everyone was in shock. I ended up leaving the facility I was at about an hour later.
LikeLike
Ahhh, DG. It’s been awhile, but this post is a nice refreshing dose of you. And it makes me miss having you as an elder at my church (or being at the same church for that matter)! The church we’re in now is smaller than our beloved COPC, but still talks of the possibility of small groups. They do so with the idea that at least one elder or deacon be in each group, which I thought was pretty normal practice. Do most small groups not have some sort of church leader involved? I must be out of touch with the mainstream. (By the way, we’re not as far away these days, I hear … at least during the school year?)
LikeLike
Sup dudes and dudettes. I agree with your concerns about small groups. I see it all the time in Bible studies in my church. But do you really want to say that lay men and women aren’t able to understand the Bible correctly apart from the preaching an teaching of the minister and elder? If so I god it hard to distinguish between that and the position of the church of Rome keeping the Bible from the people in a language they didn’t understand because they werent to be trusted.
If we take your position to its logical conclusion perhaps we shouldn’t turn to our Bibles at all during the week, only during the worship service? And how can parents be trusted to lead their families in worship an bring their children up in the faith of they can’t be trusted to interpret Scripture?
It is no different for an individual reading his Bible and going down the way of error than for a group to read the Bible and go down the way of error: except there might be some correction in a group. Of course nonsense and heresy gets said in groups, but don’t we have to trust that for those who are regenerated the weekly preaching will correct them in due time?
Absolutely the weekly services are the primary, central, foundational and fundamental arenas of learning. But we are privileged to have access to the Word all week, not just on the Sabbath. Aren’t we remiss if we do not take advantage of that?
LikeLike
That should have said, in para one: I find it hard to distinguish. My bad
LikeLike
Alexander, My concern with small groups that do not have an elder or at least a deacon involved is not so much whether the Bible will be maligned, but rather that the big/mega church mentality uses small groups as the primary mode of accountability, because they don’t have enough elders to cover everyone. 1 elder for every 100-150 members doesn’t work, so they’re doing these small groups as a stop gap.
LikeLike
Alexander, um sure, we could “sup” together sometime.
There’s a reason why ministers are tested for their knowledge of the Bible, and there’s a reason why ruling elders are examined for their theological fidelity as well. Truth and falsehood matter, and there’s a lot of theological mischief that can go on in small groups. Be wary of self-appointed teachers.
When you turn to your Bible during the week, it’s a good idea to have in mind the teaching of the church, its confession and the catechism. There’s a reason(s) for them as well.
Small groups don’t necessarily detract from the church but for a long time I have thought the impetus behind the proliferation of small groups is a lack of conviction in the efficacy of vanilla preaching, worship, and sacraments. It’s the same impetus that fuels Promise Keepers and like pep rallies.
LikeLike
Jim, our congregations are so small they are groups.
Seriously, diversity exists in the OPC. But if you want a critique of small groups on Reformed grounds, you’ve come to the right place.
LikeLike
Michael, I agree that truth and falsehood matter and we should be wary of self-apptd leaders. However, how do the older women instruct the older women, if only ordained elders are permitted to teach in small groups in the church?
Thanks,
Deb
LikeLike
oops, older women instruct the younger women… (Titus 2)
LikeLike
Becki, HEY!!! We miss you guys also.
Probably at places like Redeemer — don’t you admire how I didn’t use this video to take a shot at RPCANYC? — an officer is involved, as is the case at Tenth. But I’m not sure that other problems don’t follow. The Princeton sociologist, Robert Wuthnow, has written some very interesting books about small groups that should give caution to using them.
Say HEY!!! to D.
LikeLike
Alexander, who said the point of this post was to suggest that lay people can’t understand the Bible? At the same time, Reformed churches have traditionally insisted that lay Bible studies be overseen by a pastor or elder. But the point was to suggest that sometimes the small group Bible study is more about the small group than about the Bible study.
LikeLike
Deb, check your proof text. What does it say older women should teaching to younger women?
LikeLike
John. “Small groups have always been the blind leading the blind.” I would say from my experience I think there is a great measure of truth to that claim, but NOT absolute truth. Given I’ll bring a reformed fight and unrest to any small group, and I don’t tend to like them, but there are small groups done…well…not badly. I am actually about to go to a small group that is Elder led tonight. It is not the best thing I have ever been to but I have grown to be a family with the people in this group specifically from my church (PCA).
DG. Thank you for this blog and The Lost Soul of American Protestantism. You have very much opened my eyes and connected many dots in making sense of the church I was raised in.
LikeLike
Probably at places like Redeemer…an officer is involved, as is the case at Tenth.
Darryl, are you referring to TKNY’s Redeemer? If so, you got this wrong, unless an elder’s mystical presence counts. In the vast majority of Redeemer small groups, there is no officer present.
LikeLike
Michael, what are you implying then, something extrabiblical?
LikeLike
Deb, I don’t see anything hinting at theological or even formal teaching. It seems to be very practical (“teach what is good, 4and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, 5to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands”) and the kind of thing that could go on while sitting at a coffee shop. Men are nowhere generally told to formally teach (few should presume to be teachers, we are told) so it would be an odd thing if older women were told to formally teach.
I wouldn’t say “extrabiblical” as much as “practical” and “informal.”
LikeLike
John K.,
It is a rare one that is a good one. They should not be replacing or “helping” the local ministry of the local church. The local church should be hiring other qualified pastors and teachers as it grows or else plant another church in a location close to the other one as they can afford it. I see no purpose for mega-churches. The congregants do not get fed properly the bigger the church gets.
LikeLike
Michael, for the most part, I agree with what you’re saying. Although, I do think there is a place for informal Bible Study and I think there is a place for women to discuss and learn theology together. I do hope you are not implying that women should not broach these topics, because there are a number of excellent reformed women who would be out of order, if that were true. I Praise God for them.
One other thing about the small group movement is that most are not intended to be formal Bible studies or formal teaching environments at all. They are called “community groups” or “journey groups” which primarily provide fellowship and accountability. Or more lately, places for people to “be missional together.” They started with the WillowCreek megachurch model, so that the big church would get a smaller feeling to it and people would get to know each other and had very little emphasis on any real teaching per se. More lately, the Saddleback variety has added in some teaching (see Purpose Driven Church for the baseball diamond, where members move from base to base learning about how members should be sharing, serving, leading, and giving), but there is a heavy works emphasis that has people mobilitizing to serve in their communities.
In case you couldn’t tell, I’m not a fan of this stuff.
LikeLike
Does historic Presbyterian polity exclude the possibility (even advisability) of, say, 10 “small groups” each of 6-10 adults (and their children) in a congregation of 100-200 meeting together on Sunday evenings (or another time) for 1) study and continued/deeper application of God’s Word (AM sermon or minister-constructed “lesson”) 2) prayer/praise 3) and providing a place where unbelievers or those who’ve recently fallen under the local church’s ministry can be taught, encouraged, discipled, etc. – all lead by a man duly ordained for the purposes of 1-3 above?
LikeLike
Deb, you started with an appeal to scripture to justify the practice, but now you don’t need one?
The scriptures tell us only some men are apt to teach and tell us not many should because those who teach will be judged more strictly. Then women are proscribed from at least formally teaching in the church. I don’t think an unqualified man or a women should be teaching small groups as a church ministry except under the oversight of elders.
Now I’m thinking, “do I have to include standard disclaimer?” Yup, it would probably be safer: I am not saying women are unintelligent, or can’t understand theology, or can’t write books or can’t blog or can’t be on the United States Supreme Court. This is about the church and proper instruction.
The term “journey group” makes me cringe.
LikeLike
Food for thought.
“VI. At family-worship, a special care is to be had that each family keep by themselves; neither requiring, inviting, nor admitting persons from divers families, unless it be those who are lodged with them, or at meals, or otherwise with them upon some lawful occasion.
VII. Whatsoever have been the effects and fruits of meetings of persons of divers families in the times of corruption or trouble, (in which cases many things are commendable, which otherwise are not tolerable,) yet, when God hath blessed us with peace and purity of the gospel, such meetings of persons of divers families (except in cases mentioned in these Directions) are to be disapproved, as tending to the hinderance of the religious exercise of each family by itself, to the prejudice of the publick ministry, to the rending of the families of particular congregations, and (in progress of time) of the whole kirk. Besides many offences which may come thereby, to the hardening of the hearts of carnal men, and grief of the godly.”
From The Directory for Family-Worship, ASSEMBLY AT EDINBURGH, August 24, 1647, Sess. 10.
ACT for observing the Directions of the GENERAL ASSEMBLY for secret and private Worship, and mutual Edification; and censuring such as neglect Family-worship.
LikeLike
Michael: I was using “sup” in the greeting sense, not the “let’s have dinner sometime” sense. Per your last post I’m not sure we’d be allowed to meet together outside the worship service…?
Dgh: My concern is that the position of this post could lead to the notion that personal Bible study should be distrusted. I think elder oversight and co-ordination is a very good thing. I also think if the ministry in the church is sound then group Bible study can be sound.
LikeLike
*wasn’t using sup in the greeting sense.
Apologies people, I’m writing these posts on my iPhone
LikeLike
So a Seinfeldian approach to small groups? That has to mean a “Curb Your Enthusiasm” approach to worship.
But in taking account of the Presbyterian & Reformed formulations provided thus far, it begins to look like the “small group that meets informally” is called the covenant family. And so adding an elder to the mix looks like a standard family home visit.
LikeLike
Alexander, the legacy of conventicles stems from the anti-institutional notion that weekly formal worship should be distrusted as a sufficient means to grow in grace. I think it’s only fair that institutional Christianity gets to volley back with a distrust of conventicles as a co/sufficient means to grow in grace. But for those wanting to contend for conventicles, I wonder what the biblical case is?
LikeLike
No apologies needed, Alexander. That’s pretty impressive iPhone typing, actually.
I sometimes answer my phone with “wasSUP?” I don’t think my wife likes it.
LikeLike
John Y.
I absolutely agree that a church either needs enough ruling/teaching elders to effectively deal with the needs of it’s congregation. I propose that those are not the ONLY reasons for small group bible studies. I see no problem with encouraging the congregation to in the week, with proper instruction, get together and share a meal and work through scripture and lifes issues in a much more intimate setting. A church of 80 can do this in 3 groups, at different times throughout the week as peoples schedules fit. Do not we do this all the time in practice? I see it done in much more casual ways all the time. For instance, a group of friends from seminary who get together at a pub, drink beers, and talk about theology. I propose there are no rigid forms for fellowship outside of the forms of churchly worship, but certain things may have a benefit and to a body that are superfluous in another. I hope I’m making sense.
I am NOT trying to argue for “doing church together” and “living life communally” as those are current church trends that if meant the way they’re sometimes described don’t need a special category, the “best intentions” of those movements are done better, healthier, and more biblically in confessional churchly congregations. They are not needed at all, I think we are in agreement there. I’m just saying we should not dogmatically oppose them when they do exist if they’re responsibly run with elder oversight.
LikeLike
Darryl,
I recently discovered that, due to my lack of small group participation at the PCA I’m attending (and for which I have said vows), my membership has been placed on “pending” status until I join a small group. In my membership interview, the RE asked how I get “accountability” if I’m not in a small group. And note, most of these small groups have no church officer in attendance. I said I’m trying to become a member in order to become accountable.
Given that lack of small group attendance is apparently enough to bar one from membership in some PCAs, I wonder if such churches would also discipline current members for failure to attend these group meetings.
LikeLike
Darryl, how does it go in the OPC? Can an OPC church bar someone from membership until he agrees to join a small group? Are such criteria within the authority of each church?
LikeLike
Michael: do you say it ironically? I believe one can get away with most anything so long as it is done ironically.
Zrim: I agree that there isn’t clear Biblical warrant for Bible studies and small groups, but is there a clear Biblical command to read our Bibles on a regular basis (outside of the weekly worship service)? I don’t think we can appeal to OT commands to meditate ceaselessly on the Word because that was spoken to a people who didn’t have daily access to the Scriptures.
However, Acts does show us Christians meeting often, even daily. These clearly weren’t only Sabbath worship or even public worship services. I think we could appeal to such examples to argue that small groups, Bible studies or whatever we call them have a place. Bearing in mind, of course, the particular circumstances of the Acts church.
LikeLike
As I understand it, the basic confessional objection to small groups as a form of organized institutional piety is that they are intended to produce by design that which should happen spontaneously.
In a healthy church, there does not need to be any system or procedure for joining a designated “small group,” because the congregation will be meeting in each other’s homes on a regular basis spontaneously, and church officers will be there as a matter of course. In a dysfunctional congregation, this kind of fellowship does not happen without institutional planning, and the role of church officers is likely to be de-emphasized (if there is even a theory about them at all). In other words, the need for an organized small group ministry is a symptom of a more fundamental problem, and fixing the symptoms will not fix the problems.
So when confessional types object to small groups as an institutional practice, it is not because we have something against the goals of the practice, i.e. community fellowship and deepened personal relationships, but because we believe that those sorts of things must emerge organically from a congregational life centered around the means of grace and cannot be programmed or planned.
LikeLike
FWIW: It seems to me that it is better to not have small bible study groups than to have them. Bible studies require men who are truly called to be spiritual leaders – men who are well trained in the confessions and the bible so they can teach sound doctrine and correct doctrinal error. Not all elders fit that description. Some are fine in administrative duties, but not in spiritual duties. Too many elders simply do not have the training and wisdom needed to lead a small group bible study and/or to give pastoral care. Small group bible studies are a different critter than a married couple having family devotions and teaching their children the Heidelberg catechism or Luther’s catechism at home.
To give the power of accountability to a small group is asking for trouble. Since small groups tend to be intimate – it takes great wisdom to not let it fall into a bunch of Job’s friends if someone confesses they are struggling in an area of their lives. Human nature being what it is and power being what it is, it is not good to invest pastoral care into the hands of a small group bible study.
Small groups are also well known for being a place to breed error. It’s always a temptation for a leader to veer off onto their favorite hobby horse and start placing emphasis or shifting the emphasis in doctrine which can result in error and/or divisions in the church. Anyone who disagrees with the leader’s doctrine is in danger of being wrongfully labeled a rebel or trouble-maker and put under discipline. This is a familiar scenario in the CGM churches with small group accountability since small groups are used as a tool to keep members in line with the goals of the CGM leaders. This is not the same as doctrinal error resulting from misunderstanding the confessions or the bible.
Ecclesiology is important and adding small group studies is not the same as a mid-week bible study led by the pastor at the church building or Sunday school classes taught by qualified elders under pastoral/church oversight. I am concerned that small groups change ecclesiology in detrimental ways and the unity of the church can be affected negatively. To make small group accountability mandatory for church membership seems to be adding something pernicious to the life of the church. This kind of program for church members leads me back to my objections to the utilitarian foolishness displayed by mega-churches and their lack of ability to care for the health of the souls that are supposed to be under their care.
P.S. If the ladies bible study isn’t being led by the pastor (or in the case of our denomination: a seminary trained Deaconess), I have no interest in attending a ladies bible study. I have no desire to be misled by a Beth Moore type. Titus 2 can be seen as informal discussion between the ladies on basic common sense applications that help each other love and serve their closest neighbors (family). It can be as simple as helping someone get a grip on themselves by giving the loving support needed to resist the temptation to gripe and criticize their husbands and children, or gossip about their neighbors, and other such ilk.
LikeLike
It seems to me that it is better to not have small bible study groups than to have them.
If it’s a choice between standard evangelical practice and nothing, I go with nothing. But mid-week Bible studies lead by officers and directed by the session can be a good thing. Again though, if your congregation is healthy, this isn’t the sort of thing which will need to be programmed.
LikeLike
Alexander, if as you say there isn’t clear biblical warrant for conventicles then one has to wonder why so much vigor for them, especially the kind that gets church membership placed on “pending” until one submits to one (i.e Joseph). Are these the same Presbyterian churches that allow credo-baptists to become members without the same sort of probation? If so, shouldn’t it be the other way around, pending membership for those who deny what we confess has clear biblical warrant and communing those who are as unpersuaded of small groupery as credos are of paedobaptism?
LikeLike
Joseph: I recently discovered that, due to my lack of small group participation at the PCA I’m attending (and for which I have said vows), my membership has been placed on “pending” status until I join a small group.
I found this striking (in a bad way). Where did you get this information from?
Two things:
(1) In your interview, there was or should have been a motion made to receive you into membership. When we interview candidates, we make a motion “contingent on the candidate’s saying the vows” — which happens directly after the motion is accepted. At that moment, and not later, the candidate is a member of the church. The public saying of vows is simply a reaffirmation in public of “the real thing”, which happens at the interview.
I don’t know what your church’s process is, but if such a motion was made, seconded, and approved, then … you’re a member. There is no category in the Confession or the BCO for “pending membership.”
(2) If you indeed have not been received as a member, you are technically still under the jurisdiction of your old church (BCO 46-3); they might be able to appeal on your behalf.
I find it hard to believe that everyone in that church is able to be a part of a small group. I find it even harder to believe (not questioning your veracity, just the absurdity of the situation) that being a part of a small group is a membership requirement. To my mind, WCoF 25.2 ought to shape our view of church membership.
And anyways, do they discipline people who *leave* small groups?!?!
LikeLike
Joseph, church practices are hardly uniform in the OPC. It is conceivable that a congregation could institute a policy akin to Redeemer’s. But if the prospective member could get a hearing with another body of elders, he or she would likely find ears attached to bodies that would oppose such a policy.
LikeLike
Lily, I should know this but don’t. Do Lutherans have elders? Your description of good administrators but theologically ill-equipped would not characterize the conservative Presbyterian communions (ideally).
LikeLike
Is it really so rare for the Women In the Church (WIC), as the PCA refers to women’s ministry, to hold actual Bible studies, using materials and study guides approved by PCA CEP, such as those prepared by authors like Susan Hunt, Kathleen Neilson, Elyze Fitzpatrick and Lydia Brownback?? Or using other reformed materials approved by the sessions of the churches?
Since I know nothing about the Lutheran Church’s version of women’s ministry, I don’t know what Women In the Church might look like there, if there is such a thing.
In the PCA, weekly, women-led Bible Studies for women (with the approval of the elders of the church) is and has been standard practice from the beginning.
Please forgive me for assuming that women’s Bible studies were the norm in most denoms. It took me by surprise to find out that it is not.
LikeLike
Jeff C,
(1) In your interview, there was or should have been a motion made to receive you into membership. When we interview candidates, we make a motion “contingent on the candidate’s saying the vows” — which happens directly after the motion is accepted. At that moment, and not later, the candidate is a member of the church. The public saying of vows is simply a reaffirmation in public of “the real thing”, which happens at the interview.
I don’t know what your church’s process is, but if such a motion was made, seconded, and approved, then … you’re a member. There is no category in the Confession or the BCO for “pending membership.”
This PCA does things differently, I guess. My interview consisted of me having an hour long interview with one RE and him asking me what I understood by each vow and then having me swear before him (him alone). That RE then brings his “recommendation” regarding the candidate to the session. When the recommendation is positive, then I guess that recommendation would take the form of a motion (as you described) and would then be seconded and voted on. And, unless something unusual happens (and I don’t know how it would since the session has no direct encounter with the candidate), the recommendation of the lone interviewing RE will almost invariably prevail at session.
Now, if as you say, there “pending status” is not a thing per the BOC, then perhaps my interviewing RE either moved that my membership be denied, or more likely, no motion either way was made because they want to wait for me to join a small group before doing anything with my candidacy.
(2) If you indeed have not been received as a member, you are technically still under the jurisdiction of your old church (BCO 46-3); they might be able to appeal on your behalf. I find it hard to believe that everyone in that church is able to be a part of a small group. I find it even harder to believe (not questioning your veracity, just the absurdity of the situation) that being a part of a small group is a membership requirement. To my mind, WCoF 25.2 ought to shape our view of church membership.
There is actually a way around the small group requirement. I was told that the session expects candidates to either be in a small group or on a ministry team and that if I could not join one that it “could present difficulties” for my membership candidacy. So, technically, you’re right: small group membership is not required in the sense that it is not the only way to pass into membership — if you’re on a “ministry team,” then your small group requirement will be waived (on the theory that the ministry team provides you spiritual “accountability”).
WCoF 25.2 says: “out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.” This might prove too much for those who advocate full confessional subscription and close communion. If barring one from entry to the Church because the person does not yet understand the confession sufficiently in order to honestly claim full subscription, that individual is cut off from the ordinary means of grace (the very things they need as a young believer to aid their growth in the faith). And by barring them from the Church, they are “ordinarily” barred from heaven. Doesn’t this flow from WCoF 25.2? This might even be more cruel than the small group requirement, something that in many cases could be rectified rather speedily (I could join one in two weeks time). And don’t both of these positions, in their own way, “turn the Gospel promise into a law threat”?
And anyways, do they discipline people who *leave* small groups?!?!
That’s something I wondered and have not yet had a chance to ask. Frankly, I doubt they would discipline for that.
LikeLike
Deb, did you want to talk about “ought” or “is”? I’m guessing you are right that most PCA and OPC congregations have women’s bible studies. Few pastors are going to be foolish enough to challenge the practice even if they are uneasy with it; if a pastor is planning to upset the church’s alpha females he may as well have his boxes packed and ready to move on to the next church.
This is about theory, really. What is your theory about why do we do women’s studies and do you think they are biblically justifiable?
LikeLike
Very interesting conversation and points. Elder oversight of a small group is good, but then again only as good as the elders doctrine. Indeed one does not have to look hard across the Christian landscape to see that “small groups” have been elevated to such degree of emphasis that it has become a new Sacerdotal system. This is no suprise in our social gospel world. Meanwhile the ordinary means of grace in worship are not seen as relevant enough. Even where it is not a membership requirement it can be so over emphasized as to make members feel like 2nd class if not a “plugged in” part of one. Not even to mention the type of doctrine that is typically found in small groups. What’s the point? May as well throw out the Bill’s Hybel’s book your reading through together at small goup and have a BBQ & a beer together, time would be better spent. This also kind of ties in to large vs. smaller churches which has been discussed here before.
“Congregations are so small they are groups.”
Dr. Hart,
What Robert Wuthnow book might you suggest to read in regards to small groups that should give caution to using them (small groups)?
LikeLike
Hi Michael. Sorry,to have steered this discussion from its original intent.
Quickly though: there are several P&R Books on the topic. The one that comes to mind right away is by Ligon Duncan and Susan called: Women’s Ministry in the Local Church. It contains the scriptural and philosophical support and historical precendent for the PCA model:
Here is an excerpt
Click to access 1581347502.1.pdf
Thanks for the exchange!
LikeLike
BTW, I once heard a female realist say “I don’t go to women’s studies for the study – I can get that better somewhere else. I go for the talk before and after.” The social part is, I think, important, but it can be accomplished in other ways. For that woman, it was at least a dedicated time for social interaction, and that’s how she gets the Titus 2 “teaching” of other ladies.
LikeLike
Can you summarize the support, Deb?
LikeLike
Is there a connection between the prominence of WIC and the clamor for deaconesses in the PCA? Don’t know, just asking…
LikeLike
Joseph: WCoF 25.2 says: “out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.” This might prove too much for those who advocate full confessional subscription and close communion. If barring one from entry to the Church because the person does not yet understand the confession sufficiently in order to honestly claim full subscription, that individual is cut off from the ordinary means of grace (the very things they need as a young believer to aid their growth in the faith).
Bingo. Exactly so.
LikeLike
Dr. Hart, generally speaking, the elders in the LCMS are supposed to look after the welfare of the pastors and their families, and assist in the pastor’s pulpit and altar ministry needs. They are also supposed to oversee the spiritual welfare and activities of the congregation. Each elder is assigned a geographic area where he is supposed to keep an eye on each individual’s church attendance and occasionally phone to inquire about any special assistance they may need. The quality varies from congregation to congregation and within congregations, and seems to be influenced by how confessional or liberal they are (and size of congregation).
Deb, women’s bible studies are a norm in LCMS churches, too. As I wrote above, the quality of what will be found will vary from congregation to congregation and this includes the ladies ministries. It can range from really good to really bad – too many are using Beth Moore studies. Strangely enough, Beth Moore started out as an SBC approved teacher teaching a ladies only Sunday school class that became so popular that it was expanded to include men in a very large conservative male teacher only church. With some gymnastics, the church leaders decided to approve what she was doing by saying she was under male headship so it was okay to teach men.
LikeLike
Joseph, your situation sounds unusual. That’s all I can say.
LikeLike
Lily: It can range from really good to really bad – too many are using Beth Moore studies.
Wow, she’s everywhere…
LikeLike
Yep, and that’s one reason why I’m a cranky, kvetching, curmudgeonly, old lady. 😉
LikeLike
Joseph, I think it’s a good idea to go over the vows in a membership interview, but I have never heard of actually requiring the membership applicant to take the vows before one church elder as part of a screening process. That may be one of the smaller quirks in your situation but it’s troubling nonetheless.
LikeLike
Joseph,
I find myself in a similar situation in my current location. I’m away from Chicagoland on a short-term (2-3 years) work assignment in the Southeast. The two PCA churches in my town require all members to pledge to attend a small group regularly. I objected, so the session has refused to interview me for membership.
I guess Jeff’s church would probably not require me to sign a “small group pledge”. On the other hand, they’d probably bar me from membership on the basis of my being an attorney.
Oh, how I miss the OPC…where people keep their private sins between themselves and the session, where the word “evangelical” is still viewed as having a pejorative meaning, and where small groups are more likely to involve hard liquor than an unpacking anyone’s feelings.
LikeLike
Bob: On the other hand, they’d probably bar me from membership on the basis of my being an attorney.
Nah, actually, one of my good friends on session is an attorney, and a good one. We like them, but we tease ’em too.
LikeLike
Bob and Joseph: Wow. I have a real problem with the requirement, on principle. It strikes me as getting into WCoF 20.2 territory. Or being smack in the middle of it, I’m not sure which.
I guess the next question in my mind is, what does Presbytery think about it?
LikeLike
Bob, It’s nice to know I’m not the only one in some ways, but it’s sad that so many Reformed churches are in this state. Your situation sounds even worse though. At least my church is not asking me to pledge to remain in a small group.
Jeff C, I’m not sure what they think, but my suspicion is that the leaders of the PCA I’m attending probably determine to large extent the makeup of this Presbytery.
LikeLike
E. Burns, Sharing the Journey (Free Press, 1996).
LikeLike
Lily, Thanks.
LikeLike
As far as “accountability,” why haven’t the Reformed churches retained private confession and absolution with the pastor like Lutherans have? We wouldn’t have to call it a sacrament in order to do it.
LikeLike
Joseph’s situation sounds not only unusual–it sounds downright weird. And I say this as an RE in the PCA myself.
LikeLike
Richard, what part of what I said sounds weird? That I said the vows to a lone RE, that they want me to join a small group, or both? The small group thing doesn’t seem so unusual now — Bob is having the same thing required of him at another PCA.
LikeLike
Is there any historical precedent from the Reformation and in Presbyterian history for these small Bible study groups which seem to be popping up in many churches? Are folks not getting the right teaching and preaching which should more than suffice to feed the church?
The last church I was at introduced these ‘studies’ and there was a pattern of certain folks who regularly chipped in their two pennies worth while others kept quiet and perhaps felt uncomfortable and would benefit more from teaching in the usual setting. Why do churches see the need for these group studies? I wonder if informality, relational learning, and some kind of group dynamics is in mind for the enthusiasts.
I may be one on my own, but I have strong reservations about Women’s Conventions and meetings which do not have at least elder oversight and guidance. In the UK I get the sense these para church meetings set a subtle precedence for folks to maybe think that women who preach and teach at such conventions set an example which could then be eased into the church – it somehow softens up people to at least think that women should have an equal role in teaching, preaching and even one day oversight as elders in the church. It is becoming common here to see women as part of the ‘leadership team’ while they are to all intents and purposes acting as elders. Having them as deaconesses sets a mindset in motion which often leads to this.
LikeLike
Bob, you are from Chicagoland? Well, there are two TE attorneys and at least one RE attorney (his name is strikingly similar to mine) in the Midwest Presbytery. You should attend Presbytery sometime so we can do the secret attorney handshake.
LikeLike
The BOTH sound weird, Joseph! Is anyone citing to any authority, like, oh, I don’t know, the BCO?
LikeLike
Michael,
Please tell me the “secret attorney handshake” is not where you reach for your neighbor’s wallet. As an attorney myself, I get enough abuse.
LikeLike
Paul,
I think the biggest precedent is the mid-week prayer meeting, which as I understand it, became popular in the 1850s and coincided with the “pretty good” prayer meeting revival of 1858. In my own upbringing, where the prayer meeting was as much a duty as two services on Sunday, I didn’t see small groups meeting. Somewhere after the 1970s, I sense, once the affinity principle kicked in from church growth gurus, and people didn’t want to go out on a weeknight (preferring to be in a home — watching dvd’s instead of going to the cinema is another form of this), the small group and its homey dynamics started to replace the mid-week prayer meeting. I should add, I think.
LikeLike
Bob & Joseph’s situation (with small groups) are becoming the norm (at least in practice) in the PCA. It is all the Hipster “Fanboys” following the Tim Keller Redeemer model on how to do church. Again even where it is not a membership requirement it is often put to such high degree of importance that one could claim a Sacerdotal like system. How could it be anything else other than Sacerdotal when your only “plug in” to leadership/elder is small group and when small group is promoted as The Place (not worship service) to “really grow.” Or is taught by the lay leader working through a Bill Hybel’s book, or 6 steps on finance, etc.
I have been bringing this up for almost 10 years in the PCA and it has for the most part fallen on deaf and unresponsive ears.
What are ya gonna do? It’s all good! Christ is still the King and our God still rules! Praise His name!
LikeLike
Hi Dr. Hart,
Re: Small groups… Somewhere after the 1970s, I sense, once the affinity principle kicked in from church growth guru…
May I ask if the Jesus and Charismatic movements helped pave the way? Or were they part of what was working with the church growth movements? Whether yes or no, would you mind expanding your explanation a bit? I’d greatly appreciate your insight. Thanks.
LikeLike
One curiosity about the small group / group prayer setting is how the anecdotal evidence only goes one way. A testimony of blessing from one is unimpeachable evidence of their propriety and the blessing of the Holy Spirit, whereas finding them awkward and forced indicates only that you’re further from the Kingdom, if not all of humanity, than the willing participants. Regardless of what they confessed this week. again.
But I’m not convinced there’s much going on other than the typically strained, evangelical fix for deep-rooted problems in a society. In this case, the lack of meaningful community in Western culture.
LikeLike
Re: …situation (with small groups) are becoming the norm (at least in practice) in the PCA. It is all the Hipster “Fanboys” following the Tim Keller Redeemer model on how to do church.
I’m not saying this is going on, but might be worth doing some research into the situation. One of the things we learned several years ago while researching our denomination was that in CGM church take-overs, the small groups were used as a way to control the message and move the congregation in the direction of the leader’s goals. It was one of the ways they identified those who did not agree with their agenda and edged them out. Everything we learned was public knowledge and much was available on CGM leadership training websites. The relationship between Rick Warren and Peter Drucker (non-profit business guru) and how his ideas were implemented in CGM was enlightening, too. Through research in the synod records, it was found that the synod leadership had hired high-priced CGM consultants over a number of years to tailor make different programs/plans for our denomination; these programs/plans were in various stages and being implemented in order to reach their goals to change our churches – to change us from traditional confessional to church-growth/missional evangelicals (our Ablaze Program). I wish I still had my files but here is a sample of pieces of the puzzle we began to look at in our earliest stages of research:
http://www.extremetheology.com/2008/04/changing-the-lc.html
LikeLike
Richard, I’m a little put off when I am NOT abused. Environmental adaptation, I guess.
LikeLike
Lily:
Bingo! A small group is the best place for the thesis/antithesis/synthesis (Hegelian dialectic) to take place, per Leadership Network.
Small groups”work” best when they do not have an elder present and are “lay-led”. The inclusion of non-Christians into the mix adds to the “effectiveness” of the small group to change long-held, Biblically-based beliefs. The more mature Christians in the group give a Biblical response to “what does this scripture mean to you?” Non-Christians follow with their opinion. Then due to peer pressure the group comes to a synthesis of what the particular passage means, moving the group as a whole further and further from the truths of scripture.
LikeLike
Richard, I was the only one in the interview who cited to the BCO.
LikeLike
Mike K. ,
you said…..
“One curiosity about the small group / group prayer setting is how the anecdotal evidence only goes one way. A testimony of blessing from one is unimpeachable evidence of their propriety and the blessing of the Holy Spirit, whereas finding them awkward and forced indicates only that you’re further from the Kingdom, if not all of humanity, than the willing participants. Regardless of what they confessed this week. again.”
BINGO!
Also…
“But I’m not convinced there’s much going on other than the typically strained, evangelical fix for deep-rooted problems in a society.”
Yeah but that is bad enough and should not be the main focus of the Church.
Dr. Hart wrote a great article in the latest issue of Modern Reformation I just read yesterday which hits on this very well, specifically on missions, but it relates here. Someone got a link to it?
LikeLike
Our OPC church plant (with no building of our own yet) are living the dream in some member’s house every Sunday evening! Our teaching elder gives a call to worship, we sing (a lot–and to guitar accompaniment, no less) and are instructed in the catechism, with some discussion, sing some more, are given a benediction, then the dudes and dudettes engage in outreach to salsa (and other things we can dip stuff into). Just so we all know it can be done–and done right! We’re the weekly small group/house church/evening worship service.
LikeLike
Oh yeah! We pray, too. Make that the small group/house church/PRAYER MEETING/Presbyterian Second Service! Can’t beat it (until the Lord provides a building)!
LikeLike
“The more mature Christians in the group give a Biblical response to “what does this scripture mean to you?” Non-Christians follow with their opinion. Then due to peer pressure the group comes to a synthesis of what the particular passage means, moving the group as a whole further and further from the truths of scripture.”
I’m not sure that it’s as systematic as that. Generally conflict is avoided, so the synthesis is more likely to consist of everyone agreeing that everyone else is mostly right, and moving on. And yes, in the wider church discernment becomes reduced to influential people in the congregation policing community norms.
“But I’m not convinced there’s much going on other than the typically strained, evangelical fix for deep-rooted problems in a society. In this case, the lack of meaningful community in Western culture.”
When used in churches where most of the attendees are new, or young, this has the effect of norming the experience of what church should be to the gathering of small groups model.This is excaberated in churches where Alpha is used as an entry mechanism.
LikeLike
Lily, I think the church growth people and affinity group principles are distinct from the Christian youth culture. In effect, the youth culture was the embodiment of the affinity principle. But for the church growth folks (which may actually go back to the 1950s) the affinity ideal was a theory to drive practice.
LikeLike
Zrim: I in no way support witholding membership until the applicant has joined a small group and I don’t believe anything I have posted would imply that I do. All I have argued is that Bible studies, if they are going to be organised by the church, can be beneficial if organised and supervised properly. Furthermore, Christians are going to hold Bible studies: whether they are “offiicial” or “unofficial”. Would you discipline members for holding their own Bible studies, in their own homes?
I actually find it incredible that a church would withold membership, which is effectively barring them from the table, on such grounds. It is scandalous and intolerable. I’d have to consider whether it was possible to remain in a congregation which had such rules. Is this Keller’s church?
LikeLike
Thanks, Dr. Hart,
Re: I think the church growth people and affinity group principles are distinct from the Christian youth culture. In effect, the youth culture was the embodiment of the affinity principle. But for the church growth folks (which may actually go back to the 1950s) the affinity ideal was a theory to drive practice.
I don’t mean to be dense, but would this mean the youth culture is seen as the ordinary affinity that naturally develops in groups of like-minded people whereas the church growth tries to create or construct an affinity that might attract people to join a group? (eg: the seeker-sensitivity model or the mission models that are specifically designed to attract/reach different ethnicities, age groups, and so forth?)
Would it be fair to understand using the affinity ideal to drive practice as problematic because it is an artificial construct where man is calling and shaping the community rather than the Holy Spirit calling people via the gospel and making our common bond one of a shared confession of faith? Or am I wandering in the wrong direction?
Lastly, would it be fair to see small bible study groups as problematic because of similar types of problems – would this form of messaging/fellowship be competing with the Divine Service (Word and Sacrament) for centrality in our shared affinity/bonds as a church? Whereas small interest groups like playing on a church softball team, serving in the charitable outreach of a church soup kitchen, and so forth do not compete for the centrality of the shared bonds of faith in a church? Please correct where my thinking is off-course?
LikeLike
Alexander, it seems to me that the question of discipline arises when the formal means of grace are neglected. So I don’t think generally speaking when folks get together informally over the Bible it is any cause for concern until that morphs into formal neglect.
But my own understanding of the coventicle is that it stemmed from a relative disdain for and suspicion of the formal means of institutional Christianity. Whatever else might be said about conventicles, I think it’s worth examining if what underlies the need for them is an unchecked anti-institutionalism, which if left unchecked seems naturally to lead to neglect. My hunch is that most who contend for the conventicle don’t usually admit to institutional antagonism. But then suggest being content with the ordinary means of grace (thank you very much) and one’s spiritual state is questioned. So if you think Joseph’s personal account here “is scandalous and intolerable” it might be worth considering the distrust of the conventicle you originally criticized in this post. I mean, stuff doesn’t just fall out of the clear blue.
LikeLike
Lily, I’m in over my head here but my point was simply that affinity groups started before the youth culture. The older patterns of affinity were based on real estate (suburbs), education, class, and maybe even race. Over time with the assimilation of the youth culture by the churches came the hipster plants appealing to 20 somethings with studs and tatts.
I think you’re right that such generational based affinity is artificial and will end up colliding with the older forms of affinity once the tatooed Christians produce offspring, move to the suburbs, and look for a congregation with a Sunday school program. It is impossible, in my estimation, for the hipster churches to sustain a person over the course of life — because at some point a person moves from hip to conventional. Funny how jobs, taxes and mowing lawns does that.
And I agree that small groups have competed with the primacy of worship. In fact, some small groups have remained together even after they have left a congregation.
LikeLike
Joseph (and Bob),
I’m speechless, and at a loss, about your situation. If there were some type of authority to complain to, I would do it. I would love to see someone bring some type of action against an elder who is promoting these extra-judicial (BCO) requirements for membership.
LikeLike
Joseph, there may be a remedy for you. I am going to be very cautious here; though I have no reason to doubt you, I haven’t heard the other side either, so I don’t prejudge the matter. I will also say that going through church courts can be a grueling process but if you are willing to do it, there may be a remedy for you, and it could bring about a very beneficial change in the church. I don’t know if you have standing under the PCA BCO (maybe Jeff knows), but if you don’t there may be a way for someone else to move forward with your issues. Find a sympathetic PCA officer with a good knowledge of their polity to advise you. Some lay people with perseverance brought forward some issues for the OPC to confront once upon a time so it can be a good & righteous thing to do.
LikeLike
Thanks, Dr. Hart,
I greatly appreciate your reply. I can’t quite see you being in over your head, but I know I am. All I know is that there are troubling parts and pieces in the puzzle and understanding how to address the small bible study movement and/or the church-growth missional movement (they often seem to be intertwined) is difficult but needful. Most troubling is the use of Christian language but with different meanings (or additions/subtractions) attached.
LikeLike
I agree with Michael’s advice, Joseph–oh, no, two attorneys agreeing on something!
LikeLike
Michael (and Richard),
I’m contemplating a couple job offers right now. If I take the one, it will result in me moving closer to more suitable reformed churches, in which case, I would stop attending this PCA and my standing (even if I have it now) would be destroyed (I think). This is a better result for me, though perhaps not for the church.
If I take the other job offer, then I stay in my present location and present church and perhaps preserve standing. I’m leaning toward moving.
LikeLike
Joseph, I don’t have specific knowledge, but what Michael is suggesting is what I was hinting at when speaking of your previous church.
I would suggest these steps in this order (others, please feel free to correct me!):
(1) Appeal directly to the session. Contact the clerk of session and ask to be placed on the agenda for 10 or 15 minutes. Prepare a good, biblical case (don’t forget WCoF 20.2) that you belong to Christ’s church and ought to be received as such, without having an extra-Biblical requirement placed on you. Emphasize that you are willing to be accountable to an elder, but not to an unordained small-group leader.
This would be the best outcome.
(2) Let me assume for a moment that you are leaving a NAPARC church as a member in good standing. Your old church really could appeal to the new church for them to simply make an exception to their rule. The cause would be that ‘failure to join a small group’ is an unreasonable ground to refuse to receive a member of Christ’s church.
(3) But if you wanted to go legal, here’s the thought process:
* Your previous church has been notified of your intent to transfer membership and has provided a certificate of dismission (right? BCO 46-1)
* You’ve been denied membership in the new church.
* Which means that you remain under the jurisdiction of the old church (46-3)
* You cannot therefore complain to the session of the new church, because you are not under their jurisdiction (46-1).
* However, your church on your behalf could file a report with the Presbytery of “an important deliquency or grossly unconsitutional proceeding” of the session of the new church (40-5). Or perhaps you could — not sure about that.
But I say, best to keep it out of the courts. Who wants to join a church under those circumstances! The goal of going the legal route would really be to force the church to change its ways, not so much to attain membership for yourself.
Anyways, is this a good church fit for you?
LikeLike
Jeff,
Thanks for the detail. I was aware of BCO 46-1, but don’t know if it applies to me. I was a non-voting communing member. That is, I was examined by the session at my old NAPARC church (another PCA), but was never sworn into membership. This was what they proposed for me so I could take the Lord’s Supper. Since, I was not a “member” of any church before this (the last church I attended did not believe in membership) , per the BCO, I could not take the Lord’s Supper. And yet, I was also not planning to be in that PCA very long (only a few more months before moving for school). That’s why they didn’t propose full membership vows. So, here I am: not a full sworn-in voting member anywhere, and therefore, not sure if the BCO allows me to take communion at PCAs other than at the PCA that examined me, and not sure if a BCO 46-1 is required.
The current PCA is the best fit (unfortunately) given where I live. If my reformed affections (oops, I said it) were stronger, I might be willing to travel over an hour away to get to the nearest OPC. I’m just not that sustainably pious.
LikeLike
I hear ya. The theory is “be in a Gospel-preaching, sacrament-administering, discipline-practicing church”; the reality is that finding a Gospel-preaching church is a blessing.
LikeLike
I still think options (1) and (2) are live options for you.
LikeLike
Joseph,
I have no idea where you live or what your church is, but if I have understood your situation, they are violating the PCA Constitution and your Christian freedom to require either small group attendance OR ministry team involvement in order for you to be a member. Where is that in the Constitution of our church? If I have understood the situation correctly, I am sure they are trying to take discipleship and membership vows 3-5 seriously — and it was very good that the RE interviewed you on the basis of the five membership vows.
BUT admission into membership is a JOINT power of elders, NOT a several power (see BCO 3 & 8 on this). AND the membership vows are general for a reason — the only things that the elders may require of you are what the Bible requires of you. And that is to believe on Christ and follow Him in the Church. But how you work that out in your own life is a matter of Christian Freedom. There are lots of fine Christians who work hard during the week, take care of their families, give as they are able, and just show up Sundays. There HAS to be room in the church for these kinds of Christians OR JUSTIFICATION MEANS NOTHING. Think about it. And the Church has no right to deny membership to someone they believe to be justified!!!
I would consider complaining to your Session, and if denied, taking it to Presbytery to see if this sort of requirement would be sustained. I think it is a violation of grace itself.
For further reflection, see this excellent article by Terry Johnson on this matter:
http://www.9marks.org/ejournal/what-does-regulative-principle-require-church-members.
LikeLike
Ah, OK, I just saw Jeff Cagle’s 1:11 post. His wisdom is better than my vinegar. These sorts of demands just get under my skin, because ultimately, they undermine the Gospel (even though I know that is not the intent). Blessings as you work through this peacefully.
LikeLike
Zrim: Just because I object to the one extreme of denying membership because of lack of small group membership, it doesn’t follow that I should adopt the other extreme of objecting to small group Bible study in any form. I’ve still to read any argument against thoughtful, elder or minister led Bible study so long as it doesn’t replace the Sabbath worship. We all agree that small groups can be very bad for the church. But not all small groups/Bible studies are the same and you can’t keep criticising all Bible studies on the basis of the worst examples. Either there should be no such groups whatsoever, in any form, or there are ways of doing them which means they’re beneficial.
LikeLike
Alexander, you haven’t seen an argument against thoughtful, elder or minister led Bible study so long as it doesn’t replace the Sabbath worship from me because I don’t have one. What I said was that I’ve no problem with any informal meeting over the Bible so long as it doesn’t set it itself in relative competition with formal worship. And what I’ve been trying to say is that while I am sure many would contend they don’t intend that, I am not altogether sure that the same are at least aware that this is the legacy of the conventicle.
I’m not comfortable scorching the earth of conventicles. But I’m also concerned that their champions don’t show enough sensitivity to institutional Christianity, a phenomenon that really is hurting in the modern age and could use a lot more help. Maybe I’m misguided, but I’d rather contend for institutional Christianity.
LikeLike
Then we are in agreement 🙂
LikeLike
Burns,
Neither of the two churches described in my comment are in the Keller/Redeemer mold. Both are fairly standard Southern PCA churches a la Coral Ridge Presbyterian (but smaller). The small group requirement probably relates a lot more to a belief that pietism is an essential element of the Christian life. After all, even the so-called TRs in the PCA are generally pietists.
LikeLike
As someone who has just left a SGM church and who was a small group leader (last Friday was my last “gig”) I can say that there are so many negatives to SGs. The SG leaders in my church were great guys, but few of them were solid in doctrine. I can see where wolves could come in VERY easily and never be noticed until the damage is done. Not a good thing.
LikeLike
DJ: ” I can see where wolves could come in VERY easily and never be noticed until the damage is done. Not a good thing”
Yes, and that is exactly the route that Pastors.com and the LeadershipNetwork actually promote in order to take over churches and move them toward the Rick Warren/Bill Hybels model.
It is rampant and unchecked in the PCA. IMO, The PCA is trying to combat issues like reconstructionism and fundamentalism by adopting business models for the church. Unfortunatley, the denomination has been silent about it all. (and to add insult to injury — some of the seminaries (RTS) are pumping these guys out faster than the sessions/elders can track them. BTW-I believe the seminaries really are creating a lot of the issues and problems)Nuff said.
LikeLike
Lily: I agree with you, re: May 16, 2011 at 3:04 pm
http://www.extremetheology.com/2008/04/changing-the-lc.html
LikeLike
Bob,
Great point! This sure is not limited to just the Keller/Redeemer model. But they are the golden boys that the majority are trying to copy. The bigger point is that where ever it may come from, the attitude of “small group requirement” being exalted to the Sacramental/Sacerdotal level is a big problem and in fact is at best a truncated version of the one true Gospel.
LikeLike