Some info on the conservative Presbyterians

[hedrick]

I believe homosexual behaviour , any particular sin, adultery or fornication is a private matter to the point where they really could have been called by God to lead churches. The gray areas are too large to narrow down who is doing what.

I don't think the PCUSA agrees with you that all sins are private matters when considering church officers. Obviously we don't have any sinless leaders. But it's a matter of degree. Character of leaders is an issue, because they need to be able to teach, and not look like hypocrites. For example, I'm reasonably sure our congregation wouldn't choose an elder who is openly in an adulterous relationship. Of course we might not know if it wasn't open. (I have, however, known pastors to say to a nominating committee, in confidence: "I would prefer not to state a reason, but I recommend not nominating X.")

What 10-A did was remove a fairly recent provision that had mandated standards for sexual sins. Removing it left it to the congregation and Session to decide, based on the totality of a person's life. Except when that standard was in effect, PCUSA judicial commissions have uniformly not permitted policies that try to define specific sins that are disqualifying. The position has always been that since we can't require sinlessness, the congregation should be in a position to judge a person's overall life and witness. However it's also quite clear that many congregations wouldn't choose someone who is in a homosexual relationship, is committing adultery, etc. But some congregations would choose gay officers. However while there is some variation in treatment of specific sins, I believe all congregations consider character to be an issue.

 

[dhh712]

but those who approve of homosexual behavior in the church, or any particular sin, whether it is adultery or fornication among straight couples, they have abandoned Christianity altogether. Those who approve of these abominations should be put out of the church, per Biblical standards.

As for doctrine, the OPC is solid, if you like Calvin and Reformed theology. I know I do!

I agree. I find the liberal churches are far too accepting of sin. Not that anyone should focus on homosexuality as though there weren't any other sins being committed. Nevertheless, it seems to me that they are approving of it and that is what makes me uncomfortable. An advertisement for a church I passed as I was driving along the highway said, "It's okay to not be okay," and that struck me as to just how far-off some of these churches are scripturally, doubtlessly making such false statements in order to draw in the masses; at least that is the only reason for it that I can come up with.

I don't really consider homosexuality to be much of a private sin as someone was saying when someone lives outwardly according to that lifestyle. I think that when it becomes that way, it is the job of the church to try to dissuade someone from a lifestyle which is abhorrent in God's sight. Again, it shouldn't become such a focus so that it makes it look like just the homosexual is sinning and no one else is; nevertheless, in my mind it just borders on approving of the sin and not doing anything to try to get these people to see the error of their ways.

Well, it could be that I'm just seeing it wrong; yet that is how I see it. By the way, you mentioned the OPC. Are you familiar at all with the RPCna? I'm an adherent now and would like to join the church. I find it comfortably conservative especially regarding the psalmody as I did not care for the church music at the PCA church I was attending. I don't care for how the RPC allows women deacons however. Well, every church has it's impurities; it would do well to always keep that in mind.

One thing I feel strongly about though is that one should never let changing society influence whatever interpretation of Scripture God has allowed them to perceive. I'm not sure if that is what was being said in someone's post or if I just read it wrong. My own view about "changing" society is that it doesn't. It may be cloaked in different veils of technology, but society has been the same for centuries. Take for example the books of Kings and Chronicles--when I first read them, I was struck by how people were doing then exactly what they are doing today. I don't see any change that society has gone through beyond it's technological advances; the basics of it has been the way it's been for ages.

 

[Petruchio]

Well, it could be that I'm just seeing it wrong; yet that is how I see it. By the way, you mentioned the OPC. Are you familiar at all with the RPCna? I'm an adherent now and would like to join the church. I find it comfortably conservative especially regarding the psalmody as I did not care for the church music at the PCA church I was attending. I don't care for how the RPC allows women deacons however. Well, every church has it's impurities; it would do well to always keep that in mind.

Unfortunately I have no personal experience with them, but I've never heard anything bad about them. From the OPC website:

Question:


Your website indicates that the OPC has a "relationship of ecclesiastical fellowship" with the RPCNA. I do not know much about the RPCNA. Where did they originate? In what ways do they differ from the OPC?


Answer:

Though I am presently a minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (or OPC) I did serve for a time as a Pastor in the RPCNA (Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America). This church is one of the oldest Presbyterian bodies in America, much older than the OPC. Both of our churches have nearly identical versions of the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms as doctrinal standards. But the RPCNA also has a Declaration or Testimony which goes beyond these other documents to some extent.

One of the distinctive points for which this denomination is well known is its conviction that only the inspired Psalms of the Bible should be sung in Christian worship, and that they should be sung without instrumental accompaniment. This, of course, was the original practice of Presbyterian Churches from the time of the Reformation until the mid 18th century. But the RPCNA is one of the few churches today that still adheres to this practice. You can learn much more about this church that we have warm fraternal relations with by going to their web site. It is at The Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America.

Source: Q and A

Again, it shouldn't become such a focus so that it makes it look like just the homosexual is sinning and no one else is

Indeed, and it is that focus which causes many people to malign us, as if we're all adulterers or fornicators and only disapprove of homosexuality. Unfortunately, in some churches that is actually correct. That is why I always make it a habit never to focus on homosexual sins alone, but to condemn a host of sins to which mankind is prone.

 

[mcpp321]

I was baptized into Christ on Sunday 11/17/13 and am now a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Thank you everyone for the information given to me here!

Yours in Christ

mcpp321

 

[AMR]

I was baptized into Christ on Sunday 11/17/13 and am now a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Thank you everyone for the information given to me here!

Yours in Christ

mcpp321

Blessings to you!

AMR

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I was baptized into Christ on Sunday 11/17/13 and am now a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Thank you everyone for the information given to me here!

Yours in Christ

mcpp321

Congrats!

The OPC is pretty cool. Very intellectually grounded. I'd like the LCMS to enter into fuller dialogue with them. I considered going to Westminster Theological Seminary outside Philly before heading to Concordia St. Louis.