New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
Interesting that he mentions this a couple of times. I assume the opposite (women covering their heads for prayer) would be taught, or at least is implied, by Calvin as well?
We don’t yet kneel. This is something I believe we’ll do in the future. We’ve made a number of changes in the past 3 years, several in Sunday-morning worship. There were bigger fish to fry. We’ll likely do some teaching on kneeling and then introduce it patiently. I don’t believe the saints will kick against it as they aren’t refraining from kneeling out of rebellion just out of lack of teaching and leadership. Helpful stuff that will aid when it comes time to teach. Thanks.
Interesting - I’ve never come across this before. Need some help on understanding your interpretation of the regulative principle though.
I think this would help - what’s the difference between your argument for kneeling in church and this argument for dancing in church? Is your understanding of the regulative principle different from his?
I think it’s clear from Scripture (especially the Psalms) that dancing has a place in worship. We’ll get there someday, it will be sweet.
Yes. It was practically universal until fifty years or so ago.
Not “my” argument, actually. The argument of the Reformers which I’m calling attention to. They make no such case for dancing, nor does the New Testament. I’m opposed to drama in worship because of the Regulative Principle. I’m not opposed to dancing as we sing. Many of us at Clearnote Church in Bloomington do it each Lord’s Day at some point or other. It’s just not enforced. Love,
I read Psalm 149 during our Call to Worship a few weeks ago. When I read v3, “Let them praise His name with dancing,” I had an urge to explain it away fearing that some dear person would take to dancing during the singing. Yet, there it was, plain as ever, dancing is encouraged. All things in good time and in good order.
What did the discussion in the church look like when this happened? Did anyone object? Did it happen in liberal churches first or was it a pretty clean sweep?
I was referring to women covering their heads in worship; by the 1950s, mostly with hats. I was not referring to kneeling. Love,
Pastor Bayly -
I think @FaithAlone was asking about head coverings (though I don’t presume to speak for him!). Even though it’s a tangent from the original subject, I think it has significance in the discussion—it’s not just postures that we’ve forsaken in worship. At the very least, I am interested in perspectives on the departure from head coverings.
My generation (80s child) has never seen a world where head coverings weren’t scoffed at by the mainstream as outdated nonsense. I’ve had the privilege of worshipping with believers who maintain the practice, and far from being a thin veil (ha) for vain adornment—i.e. look how fancy my hat is—it was a clear mark of scriptural obedience and an effective reminder of Godly headship.
Reading Thornwell the other day, he said something like reform is always gradual. Slow. This is what I recommend in kneeling and headcoverings. Only a small group of women cover in our worship. It’s not divisive, but the three senior pastors’ wives do it. The day of small beginnings, you know. Love,
Please allow me to restate my question: What did the discussion in the church look like when head coverings disappeared? Did anyone object? Did it happen in liberal churches first or was it a pretty clean sweep?
I’m about the same age as @mark and grew up mainline/liberal, so head coverings just weren’t discussed. As far as I knew, they were just never there. Though my father always made me remove my hat in church.
I’m not keeping up and the rest of this week is going to be very busy. Sorry. Let me simply say that I can’t answer your question because I don’t know. Interesting, though, that the hat rule continues to this day, although barely. (Pun unintended.)
Some SV citizens may know the answer to your question.
Warmly in Christ,
Thank you, Pastor Bayly.