Should We Get Rid of Our Pulpit?

By Pastor Al Petroelje

Sometimes I receive invitations to lead worship in other churches. I usually feel privileged to have these opportunities. Something I have been noticing in these preaching occasions is that some churches no longer have their original pulpits and have replaced them with slender lecterns or podiums of various sizes, which are located on the floor level and in the center aisle. The space once occupied by the pulpit is then filled with other things used by musicians. Seeing this makes me wonder if getting rid of pulpits is a growing trend.

How should we think about this practice? Is this a good thing? It certainly poses some challenges for the preacher from a convenience standpoint. Some of the lecterns are little more than the size of a music stand. So when I walk up to this shrunken “pulpit,” I barely know where to place my sizeable Bible, set of notes, and perhaps a bottle of water. But if this were the only concern, the matter would not be one of much significance. It would only be a matter of personal preference. Upon more reflection, I think there is something of much weightier import involved with ridding a church sanctuary of a pulpit.

“The Reformers held and taught that the preaching of the Word of God was the primary means by which the Holy Spirit creates and nurtures the faith of God’s people. And this conviction changed the position of the pulpit in the sanctuary to its center.”

As human beings we are greatly affected by what we see. We are quite optically oriented. For example, the furniture in our homes say something about what we value in our family life. A large table in a dining room is indication that meal time with family and friends is important to us. From the early centuries of the church, the gathering place for worship became a special place for Christians. Even though the church consists of God’s people and not buildings and though church buildings are not like the Old Testament temples, nevertheless, buildings became important for Christians when these buildings were dedicated to the worship of God. And what went into the worship of God determined the visual articles used for worship.

In pre-Reformation times, the Roman church constructed large cathedrals and furnished them with altars which were front and center in their sanctuaries. The reason was that the sacrament of communion, which is called the mass, was primary in their worship. A pulpit was positioned to the side of the altar because preaching was considered secondary to communion. The Reformers held and taught that the preaching of the Word of God was the primary means by which the Holy Spirit creates and nurtures the faith of God’s people. And this conviction changed the position of the pulpit in the sanctuary to its center. It must have a prominent place, and it must have an impressive visual appearance so as to communicate the vital importance of the preaching of God’s Word.  

During our travels, I am often drawn to historic churches, and if permitted, I like to stand in their pulpit. A few years ago, Marcia and I visited some of the historic churches in the Netherlands, and we saw large and ornate pulpits, like the one in Dordrecht (where the Cannons of Dordt were written). These pulpits were elevated and centrally located in large sanctuaries. They may only be occupied by duly ordained ministers of the gospel. They made the unspoken statement about the primacy of preaching for the faith-life of God’s people.

While we were in Heidelberg, Germany, we visited the Church of the Holy Spirit where Casper Olevianus, one of the authors of the Heidelberg Catechism, preached. A pulpit was prominently displayed in that spacious sanctuary. I couldn’t help feeling a sense of awe just thinking of what was preached there and the conviction of the catechism writers that the Holy Spirit produces faith in our hearts by the preaching of the holy gospel (Q. & A. 65). The pulpit itself was intended to make a strong statement about the indispensable means of preaching.

If you visit Saint Andrew’s Chapel in Sanford, Florida, where the late R.C. Sproul preached, your eye will immediately catch sight of the massive, elevated pulpit in front of the sanctuary. Undoubtedly this was intentionally designed by R.C. to underscore the Biblical requirement for preaching to build the church of Christ. In our Reformed tradition, preaching is primary in our worship of God. Music and other elements of worship are secondary.

The pulpit in the church of Dordtrecht, Netherlands. Note the pulpit in white marble and ornate overhead sounding board.

So when a pulpit is removed from a church sanctuary, I can’t help getting the impression that the importance of the preaching of the Word is being diminished. In Dutch that is called “een slecht teken” (a bad sign). I am very heartened by the fact that when our pulpit furniture was replaced a few years ago, we retained a sizeable and impressive looking pulpit. May it be a good sign of our commitment to preaching as the chief means of grace.

Of course, that view of preaching places a great responsibility on those who stand behind that pulpit. The message we bring may not be our opinion or a speech to entertain people but a message arising from the testimony of the Holy Scriptures, something symbolized by the pulpit. As I read recently, “the pulpit is more than just a piece of liturgical furniture. It represents historically, liturgically and architecturally the entire office of pastor and preacher. It represents the stability of the office from person to person. No matter the warm body that occupies that pulpit, that pulpit will be with that congregation for generations, maybe centuries. Preaching is not about the pastor, much less his personality. It is about God's Word and the need for the people to hear that Word week in and week out.”

So in answer to the question whether we should get rid of our pulpit, I hope all of us–and the generations following us–can resoundingly say, NEVER!

From the Pastor's Pen: Fall 2021

By: Rev. Stephen Terpstra

This summer I had the privilege of taking a course on Covenantal Apologetics. That sounds like a big title (better than the more commonly known Presuppositional Apologetics), but it was so helpful and timely and pastoral. Metaphysics and epistemology were the big issues. Again, they sound fancy, but they are all simple ideas. Metaphysics is the study of being or existence. What are the basic things that exist? What is the nature of things – especially humans? Epistemology asks the simple question: how can we know? How do you know what you know about anything? Those are the principal items that all philosophy asks. What is the nature of existence? How can we know?

Cornelius Van Til, a CRC pastor who became a professor of apologetics at Westminster for many years, wanted to form those questions in line with the biblical Reformed teaching we believe in a more consistent way. He argued philosophically what we all know scripturally. God is the source of all being. God is self-existent, needing nothing and having everything. That is our metaphysic. The heavens display the glory of God, and the skies proclaim his handiwork. Humanity was created in God’s image in covenant relationship with him. God has revealed himself in the world and in our nature and in His word so that he can be clearly known. That is our epistemology.

“Every fact any human being comes to know they interpret either in recognition of God or in denial of God. There are no neutral facts because there is no neutral relationship with God.”

But that has profound implications for how we live, and especially how we see human nature. There is no neutral existence, no neutral area of study, no neutral rationality or logic or feelings. We exist as creatures of a creator. We exist as beings made in the image of God with a purpose and meaning and obligations. In sin, we deny that truth and try to live in rebellion as if God did not exist, as if God is not on the throne, as if we can determine our meaning and purpose on our own. In short, we decide in sin that WE determine how we will know things and what they will mean.

It is simply not the case that we agree with non-Christians on most facts and only have a small disagreement in religion. Every fact any human being comes to know they interpret either in recognition of God or in denial of God. There are no neutral facts because there is no neutral relationship with God, who made all things and reveals himself in all things and has a purpose for all things. There is a profound antithesis, a blatant opposition, between those in service to God and those in rebellion to God; between those who acknowledge and give thanks to God and those who deny and reject Him. That means that we should be, as Van Til would put it, epistemologically self-conscious. I hope we can work on that this year. That is, I want you to know the truth, and to know WHY it is true, and how you can be sure it is true, and therefore live truly in the world as it is, as you are, and as God is.

It also means that when we talk to anyone, particularly when we are defending or sharing the faith, we are talking to people who are in covenant relationship to God, though many currently on the wrong side of that covenant. They were made by God and for God–though they deny it. They have the law written upon their hearts–though they deny it. They clearly see God’s nature in the things that are made–though they deny it. They know they are sinners, and they know they need a savior–though they deny it. And the denial is conscious and powerful–though they deny that too. In a sense, when we defend or share our faith–we have everything in common with non-believers, and our task is not merely to remind them of what their soul already knows but refuses to acknowledge, but to challenge them at the very points that they are in denial. It also means that, in a sense, we have nothing in common with unbelievers. The entire orientation of their life is opposed to God. Every fact they know is wrongly interpreted. Their conclusions about the world and human nature and morality are in rebellion against God and in blatant denial of his existence and lordship. This doesn’t mean that common grace does not allow them yet to do some civic good, but it means their basic assumptions (their presuppositions) are fundamentally wrong, and so their conclusions are fundamentally flawed. They do not see the world as it is because they refuse to see God as He is.

“We don’t need to be experts, just speak the truth so the Holy Spirit can do His work. ”

This leads to a practical conclusion for us. It gives us great hope and confidence in defending and sharing the faith, because God is not foreign or unknown to anyone (though he is denied). All is there within them and around them. It is not ignorance but hard heartedness that is the problem, hard hearts that need to be softened by the Spirit through the Word, through the voice of ordinary Christians like you and me. We don’t need to be experts, just speak the truth so the Holy Spirit can do His work.

It also makes us self-aware. The only reason non-Christians do any relative good is because they are inconsistent. They sin against their nature when they are honest, kind, diligent, etc. When sin has finished with them, they will one day be perfectly consistent in their rebellion in hell, and it will be horrible. But Christians like you and me can also sin against our nature. We have been redeemed by Christ and filled with his Spirit. We are the bride of Christ the Righteous One, the children of a thrice Holy God. God is conforming us into Christ’s image from one degree of glory to another. Yet we insist on making foolish choices and decisions in denial of our nature and in denial of God’s goodness and reign and purpose.

I have been challenged in my own life, and challenged in my calling as pastor, to live and preach more and more so that we can live consistently. I want to live as who I am in Christ in all things, and I want you to do the same. God is on the throne from eternity to eternity. We are ever his creatures, and he clearly reveals himself to us. So be holy as He is holy. Proclaim your faith clearly and simply to whoever you meet, for they too have the same creator and judge. These things are not too high for us – they are our calling and destiny. God is our presupposition. God is our metaphysic. God is our epistemology. From Him and in Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever and ever.  Amen.

The History of Reformed Broader Assemblies

By: Rev. Stephen Terpstra

Photo by Matt Meilner on Unsplash

In the first instalment, it was shown that Church Order is a servant of Scripture and of Christ’s reign.

We now turn to the history of the relationship between the local, regional, and national church. This relationship is enacted through the offices of the church, through which Christ has ordained that his church be shepherded. We are not Congregationalists, where authority rests in every individual Christian as they voluntarily gather and vote in a local congregation. Christ has not instituted a bottom up system. Every Reformed church has resisted this impulse. Christ’s church is not a democracy. He reigns as King and feeds as Shepherd through those whom He has called and ordained, as instructed in Scripture. He says to Titus, “put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you.” (Titus 1:5, ESV)

As the Belgic Confession articulates:

the “true church ought to be governed according to the spiritual order that our Lord has taught us in his Word. There should be ministers or pastors to preach the Word of God and administer the sacraments. There should also be elders and deacons, along with pastors, to make up the council of the church… By this means everything will be done well and in good order.”

The church exists not only locally, but regionally and nationally. That seems like a small statement, but it is at the heart of our current debate. The work of elders is critical, not only in their local Council, but also in the Classis and Synod.

“The church exists not only locally, but regionally and nationally. That seems like a small statement, but it is at the heart of our current debate.”

The Reformers realized this immediately as they recovered the authority of the scriptures and the ancient teaching of the church. Geneva’s first attempts at a church polity were revolutionary but incomplete. The closest Calvin came to a regional Classis or National Synod in 1541’s Genevan Ecclesiastical Ordinances was that “if any differences of opinion concerning doctrine should arise, the ministers should gather together and discuss the matter. If necessary, they should call in the elders.” But Calvin was also consulted and affirmed the Church Orders being developed by the Reformed churches in other countries, particularly giving his seal of approval to what happened in France, in Scotland, and in the Netherlands. These four regions all stem from the same root and core theology, and it is therefore not only possible but necessary to look at them all to get a complete picture of what a truly Reformed and biblical church order is and should be.

The Reformed Church in France made the connection between the local and regional church more explicit in their 1559 Ecclesiastical Discipline in Article 6, saying, “The minsters and at least one Elder or Deacon from each Church shall meet in each Province at least once per year.” But the direction for what they should do at such regional meetings is vaguely put in article 39, simply mentioning, “anything of great consequence in which the interest and harm of other churches may be involved.” They did stipulate that local consistories were subject to colloquies and colloquies to provincial synods. Calvin approved of that.

The Scottish book of church discipline, already in 1560 and then in more clarity in 1578, outlined four sorts of assemblies. In part 7, article 1, point 2 they specify: particular churches, from the province, from the whole nation, and from all different nations; namely the council, classis, synod and ecumenical synod. Calvin also approved of their assessment.

Our tradition began with the first Dutch synod of Emden in 1571, heavily influenced by the Swiss reformers Bucer and Zwingli. It was not until the Synod of Dort that a recognizable modern church order was fully developed and widely adopted. Dort’s system insisted on the agreement of major delegated assemblies for more important matters, including issues of ordination and deposition. Dort also acknowledged four ecclesiastical assemblies, namely “the Consistory, the Classical Meetings, the Particular Synod, and the General or National Synod.”

The CRCNA’s church order is developed directly from Dort’s.

We can see then that a biblical Reformed church polity is not congregationalist but is based on the covenant relationship in Christ of His people on the local, regional, national, and even international level. This is expressed not only in our theology about the invisible church, but also practically expressed in our Polity regarding ecclesiastical assemblies.

The Church gathers as Council, Classis, and Synod – each doing the work of the church through the offices of the church in service to the members of the church in obedience to the Lord of the Church. Our system is intentionally Presbyterian, and the offices of the church have responsibilities and tasks that extend beyond the local. We are the Church of Jesus Christ together as the Christian Reformed Church of North America, and we are called to be the church at every level.

Does Church Order Serve the Church or Does the Church Serve the Church Order?

By: Rev. Stephen Terpstra

Photo by Robin Spielmann on Unsplash

As we debate critical issues in the life of the Christian Reformed Church (CRCNA), from LGBTQ+ to Racism to Social Justice to the very core of the gospel, increasingly we are found focusing on Church Order rather than Scripture.

Certainly, in private conversation and in personal meditation and in Synodical declaration we refer to Scripture. But when push comes to shove, when we have to decide what to do, we have been debating procedure rather than obedience. I love church order. We must have order.

God is a God of order.

But we do need to ask, what is the right place of church order in the life of the church. How does Church order relate to Scripture? Does Church order serve the church or does the church serve the church order?

The Church Order of the CRCNA begins with the clearest possible statement: “The Christian Reformed Church, confessing its complete subjection to the Word of God and the Reformed creeds as a true interpretation of this Word, acknowledge[s] Christ as the only head of his church.” All else follows from this principle.

First, it means the Church Order and the Synod and the Classis and the local Council, in all we do, is in complete subjection to the Word of God. There can never be a scenario where we use the Church Order as a reason or an excuse to sin in either commission or omission.

“God is a God of order.”

If Scripture forbids something, it is irrelevant whether Church Order allows it.

If Scripture demands something, it is irrelevant whether our Church Order forbids it.

If Scripture is disobeyed, a Council or Classis or Synod is both obligated to obey Christ and his Word, and subsequently to seek to alter the Church Order so that it is again in complete subjection to God’s Word. Scripture is the revealed will of God. It is true and reliable in every way, infallible and sufficient to accomplish God’s purposes.

If scripture commands us to discipline a false teacher (like an ordained pastor that advocates for Kinism, or one that denies substitutionary atonement), the Council and Classis and Synod are obligated, in obedience to God’s Word, to protect the flock over which we are overseers, to maintain the unity and purity of the bride of Christ, to maintain the witness we have to the world, and to honor the holiness and righteousness and glory of God. Discipline is a mark of the true church.

If Scripture forbids something, it is irrelevant whether Church Order allows it

Second, it is clear that the Church Order, and every decision of any ordained body, is subject to the Reformed Creeds as a true interpretation of this Word. That again seems obvious but is increasingly being denied. We cannot allow churches to deny infants the sacrament of baptism as if the matter were indifferent. Our Creeds declare that “infants as well as adults are in God’s covenant and are his people. They, no less than adults, are promised the forgiveness of sins through Christ’s blood and the Holy Spirit who produces faith.” Likewise, there can be no debate concerning substitutionary atonement, which is clearly declared in all Three Forms of Unity.

When the report on Human Sexuality declares that sexual ethics is confessional, it is stating that we as the church are already agreed and subscribed to the traditional and biblical position. As the Catechism interprets scripture, it declares, “God condemns all unchastity. We should therefore…live decent and chaste lives. We are temples of the Holy Spirit, body and soul, and God wants both to be kept clean and holy. That is why he forbids everything which incites unchastity, whether it be actions, looks, talk, thoughts, or desires.” The church has always included in that description any sexual activity outside the covenant union between one man and one woman in marriage. This is nothing new. There is no excuse for disobedience to God’s Word or our agreed upon interpretation of it. If any office-bearer believes our confessions are in error, the only approved approach is a Graveman or overture to Synod. Office-bearers, Councils, and Classis have no authority to reinterpret scripture for themselves where we have commonly agreed to an interpretation.

“Christ is Lord of the church. It is not my church. It is not your church. The church does not belong to any time or place. She is not under culture or answerable to culture. ”

Finally, Christ is Lord of the church. It is not my church. It is not your church. The church does not belong to any time or place. She is not under culture or answerable to culture. Jesus is her only Lord. We do not always know what God’s purpose or reasoning is. We do not need to. We are creatures and servants. We do not always grasp why God arranges things as he does. We do not need to. It is enough that Christ is our Lord, our Savior, our King, our brother, our groom, our shepherd, our high priest, our sacrificial lamb, our friend, and our beloved. We are not our own, but belong, body and soul, in life and in death, to our faithful Savior. We follow where he leads, no matter what any worldly power may say, no matter what our flesh may protest, no matter how the devil may rant.

Church Order is a servant to the Word, which reveals Christ our Head. It can never be more than a servant, nor can we. Let us covenant together with good order based on solid scriptural support and necessary consequence to keep us faithful. Let us never, never use human words as a reason or excuse to not be faithful to our only Head, Jesus Christ our Lord, as He reveals his will in his written Word. To love Him is to obey Him. To obey Him is to love the world in his name. Nothing less will do.

COMPONENTS OF PATIENCE: LOVE

By: Pastor Al

I heard a man talk on the radio this week. He was a cattle farmer in North Dakota. His “beef” was that the price for which he had to sell his cattle was about the same as the prices back in the ‘70’s. His profit margin was almost nil, in fact, he was losing money. At the same time, the meat processors were collecting whopping profits due to the perceived idea that meat was getting scarce, so they could inflate their prices.

Now, I don’t pretend to know enough about what is going on in the meat markets today to render an opinion on price fairness.  But I mention this farmer’s complaint to illustrate the fact that a perceived injustice is hard to bear. It only aggravates the stress one is already going through due to the restrictions the government is imposing on our lives. From watching and reading the news and from our conversations with others, we are all witnessing high levels of stress in people, much of it triggered by anger. Just listen to the shouts of the protesters in Lansing. Watch the scowls on their faces and hostile gestures, even flaunting firearms within the capital building.  

To be honest, I have some sympathy for the cause of the protesters, (though I find their belligerent behavior highly offensive). I also am bothered by the overreach of government power and unfair treatment of ordinary citizens. But when I feel that way, I sense something in my own soul. It is that simmering feeling of impatience.

“And His Word tells me that the most defining feature of followers of Christ is to walk in love, and that, all the time and toward all people.”

This is not a feeling becoming of a Christian. I lose that peace of mind and joy of the Lord. And then I have to remind myself of who I am; I am a disciple of Christ, the blessed Savior who loved me and gave Himself for me and endured the worst kind of injustice in order that I may experience the eternal joy of being loved of God. And His Word tells me that the most defining feature of followers of Christ is to walk in love, and that, all the time and toward all people.

The apostle John is unequivocally clear about our need to love when he wrote: “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love” (I John. 4:7-8). That classic love chapter of I Corinthians 13 says, “Love is patient and kind…is not irritable or resentful…Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.”

It is noteworthy that Paul links patience to love. The patience produced by the Spirit is willing to endure injustices and the wrongs of others because there is love in it. It is not overcome by evil but tries to overcome evil with good. It seeks the best for the one who may be in the wrong. Love will move us to respect those whom God placed in authority over us and to be diligent in prayer for them. And one benefit for us will be an increase in our patience and easing of our stress, which will likely improve the results of our next health exam. 

“The patience produced by the Spirit is willing to endure injustices and the wrongs of others because there is love in it.”

Furthermore, this patience-enhancing love will be at work in other ways. Most of us have had more time on our hands in recent weeks of the stay-at-home order. It has been a good opportunity to busy oneself with acts of kindness – praying for a long list of people, getting in touch with people we have not heard from in a long time, writing notes of appreciation to those who have blessed your life, doing something for someone like doing yard work or making masks, and just undertaking the routine duties of life with a loving spirit. Love always finds worthwhile things to do. It will, therefore, spare us of boredom and becoming stir crazy.

As the renowned gospel singer, Mahalia Jackson, sang with her beautiful contralto voice:  If I can help somebody, as I travel along; If I can help somebody, with a word or song; If I can help somebody, from doing wrong, No, my living shall not be in vain.

Loving deeds prevent our hearts from being burdened with a sense of futility, which is a major cause of impatience. Love will make time pass more quickly, and thereby, causes patience to grow – as we wait, not only for our freedom of movement to be restored, but for the Lord Jesus to return from heaven. 

So, as we have tried to describe in this series of meditations, patience is never a stagnant thing but is a most dynamic virtue comprised of faith, hope, and love – and the greatest of these is still love.