One of the latest sectarian movements to arise around the fringes of the Christian religion is something called “family integrated churches.” What this seems to mean, depending on the advocate, is that youth groups are bad, age-segregated Sunday Schools are bad, families need to sit together in church, and even the notion that husbands should serve their wives and children the Lord’s Supper (a practice that was a capital offense in the Bible; Exodus 35:2-3; Numbers 16).
One understands where some of this comes from. I gather that most of these people are Baptists or come from hip-hop PCA churches and want something better. They rightly are opposed to “children’s church,” a practice unknown to Lutheran and Episcopal churches and only found in Baptist and Bapterian churches. They are also concerned about the breakdown of the family in our society. Their cure, however, is not much better than the disease. What is needed is a return to Reformation worship, with full sung liturgy and genuine psalmody. In such a context, Sunday Schools and Youth Ministries are no threat to anyone.
The simple fact is that for 2000 years, the Holy Spirit moved the church to have men and women sitting separately during divine worship. This is because in heaven there is neither marrying nor giving in marriage. There is neither male nor female, bond nor free, child nor parent. Hence, ascended worship, taking place seated in the heavenlies, involves an affirmation of God’s Family and a setting aside of the earthly family. As a matter of fact, if you want God to give you a healthy family, let Him take it apart and put it back together each week, for that is how God always glorifies and empowers His people (Hebrews 6:12-13 + Genesis 2:23-24). I have a lecture on this that can be heard here: http://www.trinvalp.com/ The message is titled “The End of the World.”
Functioning beneath the surface with such groups as Vision Forum and the like is a form of idolatry. We read that the family is the foundation of civilization. That is a fairly ridiculous notion, since the family is a highly temporary social unit. The Bible commands that a child leave his father and mother when he marries (Genesis 2:24). Moreover, as children grow up, they move from an orientation toward parents (imaging the Father), to an orientation toward older young people (imaging the Brother) and finally move out and become oriented toward mentors (imaging the Spirit). This is perfectly natural, and is why wise churches have youth groups in which young people growing away from their parents receive reinforcement from older teens. The notion that a 15 year old must relate to his parents in the same way as a 5 year old is implicitly unitarian. God has designed the family to be temporary, and has designed us to begin to look outward from our initial foundation.
A good discussion is found here: http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/ I don’t usually recommend visiting this site since the men involved are opposed to Reformation theology, but on this point they are right. The discussions below the essay are interesting, because you can see the kind of fanaticism this movement entails.
Another aspect of this business is dealt with here: http://www.patriarchy.org/church/membership.html
Finally I recommend this paper, which deals with how this familistic movement is an enemy of the church: http://trinity-pres.net/essays/THECHURCHANDHERRIVALSversion3.0.pdf
Very helpful. You briefly mention “wise churches” w/regards to youth groups. Could you fill out in a little more detail what a healthy youth group would entail? Or link us to something helpful along those lines. I’ve seen a good youth group or two, but it seems to be the exception rather than the rule. So I sort of understand the impulse to put a kibosh on them. I’m sure that’s an overreaction. Any further help on a healthy direction for youth groups?
t.rob
I’m way too isolated to be able to say “look at this or that.” The ones I was in when young were led by the pastor with one other couple. A good youth group would sing psalms, study the Bible, go to old-folks-homes and sing, learn hospital visitation, and in general engage in training in charity. But the point is that kids DO get together and they DO learn from older kids. God made them that way. So, do a good job of it.
I have been studying this movement for the past several years after having been part of helping to start two family integrated churches and ending up in a traditional church. I wrote a series of articles on the pros and cons of the family integrated church and offer suggestions as to how I believe those families who are frustrated can actually be part of a good solution rather than reacting and forming these sorts of congregations. A couple years ago several pastors in the homeschooling movement announced their agenda to see ALL homeschooling families leave traditional churches and move to family integrated congregations so expect to see even more of them in the future. I am linking to those articles…a long read as I share our own journey, but hopeful because I think there are real solutions to the youth culture mentality within a traditional congregation.
http://www.thatmom.com/articles/pros-and-cons-of-the-family-integrated-church/
So, is it unbiblical or wrong headed to say that teens, along with adults and young children can together sing psalms, study the Bible, go to old-folks-homes and sing, learn hospital visitation, and in general engage in training in charity? Perhaps there are some who practice family-integrated worship because that is the model taught in Scripture.
For the record, I am not in favor of heads of household serving communion or baptizing children. And I am not against all gatherings that segregate by gender, or even by age. It would be a bit odd to have a four year old in a discussion on biblical intimacy. But it seems you are quick to lump all who seek to worship with their children in the camp of wrong-headedness.
Grace and peace,
James McDonald
Dear Mrs. Campbell,
Thank your for sharing your history. It is informative in many ways, and I hope that people will read it. As you point out by implication, homeschooling makes most sense if you are a Baptist. When historic Christians bring their children for baptism, they are confessing that they are not good enough to rear their children alone. The mother is not good enough, so the child is given to the Church as Mother. The father is not good enough, so the child is given to God as Father. Naturally this has led historically to church schools, since it takes a village to rear a child. Nowadays, the isolated home schooling movement is moving into school-networks like classical conversations — and that is all to the good. What is lacking even there is liturgical training, because the Father seeks worshippers, not intellectuals. Training in psalmody and liturgy should be front and foremost in Christian education.
Your essays give a good idea of what happens when a church is defined as a collection of families (esp. homeschooling families) rather than as The Family of God. Jesus repeatedly said that the natural family could easily become an enemy of His New Family. He defined His Family not as Mary and his natural brothers, but as those who were in the covenant with Him.
The early church, as New Family, was able to take in all kinds of broken people, unwed mothers, wayward sons and daughters, without fear. This was because they had a strong fully sung liturgy that was the same every week, so that people became discipled into new patterns of thought. It is also because they sang the psalms, all of them, right from the text. This meant that the style of singing in worship was radically different from what is encountered elsewhere. It meant that worship, ascended into heaven, was something unique.
When we consider the vast number of broken people in America today, it becomes clear that to create a “church” made up of “healthy families” and not anyone else is very wrong. It is not at all what Jesus came to do. Families are one thing; the New Family of the Church is something else, something bigger, something more powerful.
Sadly, what you call “traditional churches” in America are very weak in these regards. It seems as if everything except Biblical principles of worship are employed, and one brand-new technique after another is tried out. Naturally, gathering homeschoolers together becomes another brand-new technique, and it does not work any better than any other brand-new notion.
As you point out also, this movement is way too often linked up with pagan views of patriarchy. The New Creation glorifies the Bride; but in the interest of “protecting weaker vessels,” too often women are put into the closet in this movement. They are not joint-heirs of the grace of life, and are not allowed access to the Lord’s Table save through some man — a totally evil and heretical practice. Instead of seeing women like Deborah as great heroes and examples, they pretend that she was some kind of “exception.”
Anyway, these are some of my comments on your excellent piece. I’m glad you named names, because too many of the leaders of this group, which is increasingly cultic, are given a free pass.
Dear Mr. McDonald,
Obviously children belong in worship. That is why the church historically has had a fully sung liturgy that is the same every week. Even three-year olds can join in. They don’t have to read different prayers every week. What I invited you to consider is why the Holy Spirit led the church, everywhere in the world and in every century for 2000 years, to have men and women separate during ascended worship. Should we feel comfortable ignoring this fact? Is this because the natural family is broken and needs to be regenerated week by week by participating in the Divine Family in a special way?
As for families as units doing charity work, why on earth would I oppose that? The question was what teenagers could be trained to do as an army of Christ. In the old days, the rite of Confirmation was given to make children into an army. Hands were laid on 12-year olds, and special prayers, because a child of that age is moving into a new challenge brought about by physical changes (sexuality). So, you enlist them in an army and give them special works to do. But of course, why on earth would doing this have the effect of excluding adults from doing the same thing?
A good youth group in a church has teens of various ages, because youth of that age are naturally oriented more toward the views of other youth. But my recommendation would be that a couple of grandparent age be the overseers of the group. As kids naturally move out from their parents, the friendly wisdom of the white-haired is usually welcome.
Dear Dr Jordan
I am a pastor of a reformed and family integrated church. I have greatly benefited from your keen insights in the word, your teaching on liturgy, and your emphasis on psalm singing. I can’t express my greatitude enough for the tremendous impact you have had on my thinking and now on the life of the church I pastor.
This particular blog posting is a disappointing departure from your usual sharp thinking and charitable catholicity. Having been involved in the family integrated movement for a number of years and having known some its most visible representatives I find many of your criticisms to be wildly off the mark. This article is beneath your level of scholarship and maturity. I believe you would do well to take heed to your own criticisms of the opponents of FV (well applied criticisms that they were). I would encourage you to treat the leaders of the fic movement (RC Sproul Jr, Doug Phillips, James MacDonald, etc) as brothers and actually talk with them. If you did you may be able to write about this with more accuracy. Your corrections may then be heard by more than your choir.
May the Lord bless you
Sam Hubbard
[…] 1Family Disintegrated Worship « Biblical Horizons SUBMIT […]
Dr. Jordan, I find myself on both sides of this issue, which surprises me. I am very much against the baptistic “family integrated” concept – at least what I have seen of it. I understand that the church is the administer of the sacraments and that it’s not within the authority of a father to administer it to his children. I caught myself laughing to myself when a friend of mine asked me if the church I attend is “family integrated,” while knowing he is a baptist. I thought, “Why yes, we baptize our infants!” I also heartily agree that the church is the primary foundation of all society – not the family. I have heard pastors teach that Adam and Eve were the first family that God used to establish society. Actually, Adam was the first son of the church, then Eve. God brought them together and the first family was formed. The church precedes the family. However, I am puzzled by your referring to churches being wise to have youth groups (and I know you don’t mean the usual run-of-the-mill baptistic youth groups). I agree that children, especially young men, are to move more and more away from being identified by their birth family and into their own identity before Christ. What I am wondering is how does spending time with peers help this process? From my understanding, and I admit I could be wrong, every admonition to obtain wisdom, understanding, direction and instruction in the Bible is to find it in elders. I don’t think that means only the gray heads, but it seems to follow biblical reasoning that a teenage young man could find more wisdom and instruction concerning his particular age struggles from a man in his mid 20’s rather than someone his own age. The teenage “generation” is the only age range that everyone expects for them to be around their peers. Men in their 20’s, 30’s, 40’s, etc., don’t seem to seek out their specific age range to deal with life’s struggles and challenges that are specific to their time of life. They tend to find someone who has already “been there, done that.” Why the exception for teenagers? Perhaps I am admittedly a bit biased since I grew up in the public school system where the “herd mentality” is strong and produces anything but godliness. While there is something to be said about young men going through the same struggles together and forming a godly comradery, I question whether a youth group of peers is a good way to encourage this. I think the point Mr. McDonald was making is wouldn’t it be better if dads and sons of all ages got together and did charitable works rather than having one elderly couple oversee a bunch of peers? I understand the impulse to shrink back from that kind of question due to how it is interpreted in the “family integrated” church movement. Yes, the church is preeminent over the family, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Dear Mr. Hubbard,
I am responding to material found written on the ‘net by a variety of people. If my criticisms do not fit this or that person, fine.
JBJordan
Dear Mr. Goldman,
I complete agree with you. From my limited experience in good churches with good youth groups, having some leaders in their 20s is a good thing, for just the reasons I gave. I do think having some elderly overseers is also good. Young people can get into certain kinds of troubles and temptations that they don’t want to talk to their parents about — because they relate to them as parents — but about which they feel comfortable talking to someone 5-10 years older then thay are. In other cases, they may feel comfortable talking to a grandparent-figure. And of course, make use of the expertise of all the adults in the community.
JBJordan
Mr Jordan,
Thanks for the helpful article. Could you please point me to articles or books which demonstrate and illustrate that for the last 2,000 years the church men and women have worshipped separately. Many thanks
Kip’ Chelashaw
Dear Kip’ Chelashaw,
I wish I could supply what you ask. I know of no treatment of this either in an essay or in book form. My research has been done on line and from comments here and there in books on church history.
JBJordan
Yes, I would just like to say that Mr. Jordan’s quote: What is needed is a return to Reformation worship, with full sung liturgy and genuine psalmody. In such a context, Sunday Schools and Youth Ministries are no threat to anyone.” is right on the money. Children love to sing Psalms! And they don’t mind chanting and they don’t mind saying the apostles creed. The other thing is that when our Lord Jesus taught or preached, it is obvious that he often said things which little children could understand. He wasn’t teaching as if he was trying to impress Immanuel Kant or Plato! It is possible to make the whole service accessible to children while still giving plenty of food for thought to the adults!
Mr. Jordan,
I am not a “hard core” adherent to family-integrated church. I do believe that families ought to worship together on the Lord’s day, that youth groups and age-segregated Sunday Schools have contributed to an already-present problem (they were perhaps a symptom, not a cause), but they can be done wisely in a limited way, much like what you have mentioned.
My issue, then, is only with your suggestion that men and women ought to sit separately during divine worship; the suggestion that, since the Church is the family of God, physical families are “taken apart” each week. If this is so, what do we make of God’s promises about children (of earthly families), and particularly of the fact that families received the sacrament of baptism together?
It seems to me that families are not so much “taken apart” to form the family of God, but rather that the Church is a Family of families.
Curious to hear your take.
May the peace of Christ be with you,
Jacob Hanby