Chapter 5: Reality - Modern Examples of Meeting Structure

Overview

This chapter examines modern examples of how Christian groups structure meetings to honor both the Lord’s Supper and participatory worship. The “Reality” component of the SCAR Quadrilateral asks: “Can this be lived? Are there examples of faithful believers doing so?”

Key Principle: If an interpretation of Scripture leads to outcomes contrary to Christ’s character, or if no one can actually live it out, we should question the interpretation. Conversely, when communities successfully practice a teaching, it validates the interpretation.

PART 1: PLYMOUTH BRETHREN

Background

Founded: 1820s in Plymouth, England
Key Figures: John Nelson Darby, George Müller, Anthony Norris Groves
Current Status: Global movement with thousands of assemblies

Meeting Structure

Primary Purpose: The Lord’s Supper

Alfred P. Gibbs:

“The Lord’s Supper, as we have already seen, is for all the Lord’s people who are sound in life and doctrine. An examination of the practice of the early Church, as seen in the book of Acts, seems to indicate that brethren of a given community came together each Lord’s day to show forth the Lord’s death in the breaking of bread (Acts 20:7). They came primarily, not to hear preaching, but to break the bread, symbolic of the body of their Lord and Savior; and drink the cup, symbolic of His precious blood.”

C.H. Mackintosh:

“It should be the special aim of Christians, to show that the breaking of bread is their grand and primary object in coming together, on the first day of the week. They should show that it is not for preaching or teaching that they assemble, though teaching may be a happy adjunct, but that the breaking of bread is the leading object before their minds.”

Key Characteristics:

Primary purpose: Breaking bread, not preaching
Frequency: Every Lord’s Day (first day of the week)
Focus: Remembering the Lord’s death
Pattern: Following Acts 20:7

No Human Presidency

William Kelly:

“Human presidency there is avoided in scripture. How precious therein to merge all else and have nothing before the soul but Himself Who died for us in infinite love! This the Lord (the night in which He was betrayed) commended to the saints.”

Alfred P. Gibbs:

“There is no visible head at this feast of remembrance, for none such is contemplated in Scripture. Christ, however, is there according to His promise: ‘Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them,’ and who would dare to take His place?”

Key Characteristics:

No ordained minister presiding
No human “head” at the table
Christ Himself is the Host
Rejection of clericalism

Spirit-Led, Participatory Meetings

Alfred P. Gibbs:

“Inasmuch as it is the Lord’s supper, there is no one present who attempts to usurp the Lordship and authority of Christ by attempting to take His place, or arrange its program. One after another of the brethren arise as the Spirit leads—one with a hymn, another voicing the worship of the assembly, another with some Scripture exposition in keeping with the feast of remembrance. One rises to give thanks for the bread, and it is broken and passed so that all may break it and eat. Perhaps another rises to give thanks for the cup and it, in turn, is passed from one to the other.”

H.A. Ironside:

“It must be remembered that when we come together for the Lord’s Supper, Christ is as truly present in our midst as He was among the first disciples two thousand years ago… The Holy Spirit will guide those gathered concerning prayers of worship, the spiritual tone, and portions of the Word of God which exalt the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Key Characteristics:

No pre-arranged program
Spirit-led participation
Multiple brothers may contribute
Flexibility in order
Silence is acceptable and meaningful
Focus on Lord’s Supper, but participatory

Current Tension

The Situation:

Weekly meeting is “kind of open” around the Lord’s Supper
People are free to speak BUT must focus on the Lord’s Supper
Doctrinal teaching (e.g., doctrine of healing) is not welcome during Lord’s Supper time
After meeting: snacks, singing, testimonies, prayer requests
Still not a place for doctrinal sharing/learnings in “open meeting way”
There’s a prepared lesson with discussion
Some want another segment (“two meetings”) where they can “exercise” gifts and share doctrinal things

The Challenge:

Need for focused, reverent remembrance of Christ’s death
Need for open participatory teaching and mutual edification
How to honor both without diluting either?

The Question:

Should there be a separate time for doctrinal teaching and “exercising gifts”?
Or should the Lord’s Supper meeting be more open to doctrinal teaching?
How to balance reverence and participation?

Brethren Approach to the Tension

Strengths:

Lord’s Supper as primary purpose (biblical)
Participatory elements (biblical)
Reverence maintained (important)
Spirit-led approach (good)

Challenges:

Tension between focus and openness
Doctrinal teaching not fitting in current structure
Some wanting more opportunity to share
Need for balance

Possible Solutions Being Considered:

“Two meetings” - Separate time for doctrinal teaching
More openness in Lord’s Supper meeting
Better balance between reverence and participation

PART 2: SHIELD OF FAITH MISSION INTERNATIONAL (SFMI)

Background

Founded: 1953 by Dick York in Eugene, Oregon
Website: sfmiusa.org
Focus: Global missions, training, New Testament church functioning

Key Beliefs

Priesthood of Every Believer:

All born-again believers are called by God
Equipped by Holy Spirit to engage in ministry
Different gifts and ministries, but same goal
Equality and unity of all believers
Rejects clergy-laity divide
All members actively involved in ministry

New Testament Church Functioning:

Adheres strictly to New Testament teachings on church functioning
Emphasizes that all believers can minister
Not just leaders, but all members
Distinguishes between God’s commandments and human traditions
Avoids practices not found in Scripture
Guided by Holy Spirit, not human hierarchy

SFMI Conference Orientation Script

Source: Conference Orientation Script provided by a brother at SFMI (November 2024)

This orientation script provides practical, detailed guidelines for how SFMI conducts open/participatory meetings. It demonstrates their actual implementation of participatory worship with biblical boundaries and practical wisdom.

Key Scriptural Foundations

1. All Members Important (1 Corinthians 12):

All members of the Body of Christ are important
God distributes a variety of gifts as He decides
Foundation for participatory worship

2. “Each One Has” Pattern (1 Corinthians 14:26):

“When you come together, each of you has a psalm, a teaching, a tongue, a revelation, an interpretation… let all be done for edification”
Direct biblical basis for participatory meetings
All members can contribute

3. Gender Roles (1 Timothy 2:12):

“Do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man”
Acknowledges Jesus valued women and children equally
But God has set structure and restrictions on gatherings
Practical application of complementarian theology

Practical Guidelines

1. Testimonies:

God’s testimony, not man’s - Focus on what God did, not human details
“Be short on human details and long on God’s actions”
Details of how bad the situation was focus attention on the person, not God
Personal stories belong in fellowship before/after meetings, not in the meeting itself

2. Speaking in Tongues:

Scripture admonishes not to forbid speaking in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39)
But requires interpretation: “If there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God” (1 Corinthians 14:28)
Balance between allowing gifts and maintaining order

3. Teaching/Revelation:

Men are free to bring teaching
Must “speak the Oracles (truths) of God” (1 Peter 4:11)
“The spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Corinthians 14:32)
Must be accurate to God’s truth
Must be discerning about “when” the Holy Spirit wants them to speak

4. Discerning God’s Agenda:

God often has His own agenda for each meeting
Need to be sensitive to how the Spirit is leading
Should not bring anything that distracts from God’s agenda for that meeting
“How is the Holy Spirit leading this meeting, right now?”
Encourages brothers to be discerning about timing

5. Time Management:

“All can prophecy one by one” (1 Corinthians 14:31)
Many can speak, but in large assemblies, keep time short
10-15 minutes maximum at the mic
5 minutes is better
Ensures others have opportunity to participate

6. Value of Silence:

“Silence is okay - for it is in those times that we hear God best”
Not every moment needs to be filled
Allows space for God to speak
Important reminder in participatory meetings

Meeting Structure

First Open Meeting (Full Orientation):

Opening prayer - ask God’s blessing
Announcement: “Let us now sing for a bit and remind ourselves that silence is okay – for it is in those times that we hear God best”
Open participation begins
Generally includes: singing, prayer, testimony, teaching

Second Open Meeting (Brief Reminder):

Brief summary for those who missed first night
Reminder of key guidelines
Emphasis on sensitivity to Spirit’s leading

Key Insights

1. Balance of Freedom and Order:

Participatory (all can contribute)
But with biblical boundaries (gender roles, interpretation, discernment)
Not chaos, but ordered participation

2. Spirit-Led, Not Program-Driven:

Emphasis on discerning what God wants for this specific meeting
Not just following a program
Sensitivity to Holy Spirit’s leading

3. Edification Focus:

All contributions must be “for edification”
Testimonies focus on God, not self
Teaching must be “oracles of God”
Everything serves to build up the body

4. Practical Wisdom:

Time limits prevent domination by one person
Silence valued as important
Personal stories in fellowship, not meeting
Balance between participation and order

5. Regulative Principle in Practice:

All guidelines based on Scripture
No human innovations
Strict adherence to biblical patterns
Distinguishes between God’s commands and human traditions

PART 3: SHIELD OF FAITH FELLOWSHIP OF CHURCHES INTERNATIONAL

Background

Founded: 1981 as Bethany Community Church in Pomona, California
Founders: Bishop Henry B. Alexander and Dr. Marty Alexander
Size: Over 1,000 congregations worldwide
Website: shieldfellowship.org

Key Characteristics

Reformation and Restoration Movement:

Aims to restore Apostolic doctrines and practices
Committed to continual searching of Scriptures
Identifying and correcting doctrinal errors
Aspiring to 100-fold fruitfulness
Restoration of early church patterns
Return to New Testament church model

Participatory Worship:

Emphasizes participatory worship (“body functioning”)
Encourages believers to engage actively
Members can exercise spiritual gifts
Mutual edification
Restoring early church practices
All members participate, not just leaders
Active involvement in worship

Theological Beliefs:

Inspiration of Scriptures
Trinity
Deity of Jesus Christ
Salvation through faith and repentance
Baptism of Holy Spirit
Spiritual gifts active (continuationist)
Five-Fold Ministry (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers)
Pentecostal/Charismatic theology

Significance

Why Shield of Faith Fellowship Matters:

Large network (1000+ churches) - Shows participatory worship can work on a large scale
Participatory worship - “Body functioning” model
Spiritual gifts active - Continuationist approach
Restoration emphasis - Returning to early church practices
Practical success - Demonstrates viability

PART 4: JACKIE PULLINGER / ST. STEPHEN’S SOCIETY (Pentecostal/Charismatic Example)

Background

Founded: 1981 by Jackie Pullinger in Hong Kong
Location: Kowloon Walled City (originally), now multiple locations in Hong Kong, Philippines, and India
Current Status (2025): Still active in ministry at age 81, celebrating 60+ years of ministry
Website: ststephenssociety.org

Jackie Pullinger:

British missionary, born 1944
Arrived in Hong Kong in 1966 at age 22 with just $10
Felt called to serve drug addicts, prostitutes, and gang members
Founded St. Stephen’s Society in 1981
Ministry extends to Philippines and India
Celebrated 50th anniversary of arrival in Hong Kong in 2016

Ministry Context:

Kowloon Walled City was one of the most densely populated and crime-ridden areas in the world
High rates of drug addiction, prostitution, and gang activity
Marginalized, outcast population
Ministry focused on transformation through Holy Spirit power and community

Meeting Structure: Charismatic Open Meetings

Theological Foundation:

1 Corinthians 14:26 - “Each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, an interpretation…”
Continuationist - Spiritual gifts continue today
Pentecostal/Charismatic - Emphasis on Holy Spirit activity
Participatory worship - All members can contribute

Key Characteristics of Their Meetings:

1. Highly Participatory Worship:

All members actively engage in worship
Open sharing of testimonies, prayers, songs
No rigid program - responsive to Holy Spirit
Multiple voices contributing throughout meeting
Emphasis on “each one has” pattern from 1 Corinthians 14

2. Spiritual Gifts in Operation:

Speaking in tongues practiced and encouraged
Prophecy and words of knowledge
Healing ministry - emphasis on healing the sick
Interpretation of tongues
All gifts exercised “for building up” (1 Cor 14:26)

3. Testimonies Central:

Personal stories of transformation are central to worship
Focus on what God has done, not just human details
Testimonies of deliverance from addiction, healing, changed lives
Many addicts freed without withdrawal symptoms (attributed to Holy Spirit)
Real-world validation of God’s power

4. Communal Prayer and Intercession:

Collective prayer and intercession
Corporate seeking of God
Emphasis on prayer for healing and deliverance
Active participation in prayer, not just listening

5. Spirit-Led, Not Program-Driven:

No pre-arranged program
Responsive to Holy Spirit’s leading
Flexibility in order and timing
Emphasis on discerning what God wants for each meeting
“How is the Holy Spirit leading this meeting, right now?”

6. Community Living Integration:

Meetings integrated with community living
Shared meals, resources, homes
Mutual support and care
Collective decision-making
All members participate in outreach and ministry

Kenneth Hagin-Style Charismatic Open Meeting Elements

Influence of Word of Faith / Charismatic Movement: While St. Stephen’s Society has its own unique expression, their meetings reflect elements common to charismatic/Pentecostal open meetings, similar to the style promoted by Kenneth Hagin and the Word of Faith movement:

1. Extended Praise and Worship:

Extended periods of music and singing
Creating atmosphere conducive to Holy Spirit’s presence
Active participation, not passive observation
Dynamic, expressive worship

2. Teaching of the Word:

Bible teaching focusing on faith, healing, and believer’s authority
Emphasis on God’s promises and power
Practical application to daily life
Teaching that builds faith

3. Manifestations of the Holy Spirit:

Time allocated for spiritual gifts to operate
Prophecy, speaking in tongues, interpretation
Words of knowledge and wisdom
Healing ministry
All done “decently and in order” (1 Cor 14:40)

4. Altar Call and Ministry Time:

Invitation to respond to the message
Personal prayer and ministry
Laying on of hands for healing
Individual attention to needs
Active participation in receiving ministry

5. Faith Declarations:

Active participation through confession/declaration
Speaking God’s Word over situations
Faith-building through proclamation
Unity in faith and purpose

6. Unity and Harmony Emphasized:

Strife and division can hinder God’s power
Emphasis on unity in the body
Reverence important - cautioned against disruptive practices
Order with freedom - balance of structure and spontaneity

Key Practices

From Her Ministry (Documented):

1. Transformation Through Holy Spirit:

Many addicts freed without withdrawal symptoms
Attributed to Holy Spirit power, not just human methods
Emphasis on prayer and spiritual gifts
Real transformation, not just behavior modification

2. Open Sharing of Testimonies:

Personal stories of transformation central to worship
Focus on God’s actions, not just human details
Testimonies build faith and encourage others
Demonstrates practical viability of participatory worship

3. Community Living:

Members share homes and resources
Mutual support and care
Collective decision-making
All members participate in outreach

4. Training Programs:

Equipping members to minister
All believers can participate in ministry
No clergy-laity divide
Emphasis on “priesthood of all believers”

5. Active Ministry:

All members participate in outreach
Serving poor and marginalized
Ministry extends beyond Hong Kong
Practical demonstration of faith

Strengths

1. Demonstrates Power of Participatory Worship:

Real transformation happens through open participation
Shows that participatory worship produces real results
Validates the “each one has” pattern from 1 Corinthians 14

2. Shows Transformation Through Community:

Community living supports transformation
Mutual support and care
Collective participation in ministry
Long-term sustainability (60+ years)

3. Practical Application of 1 Corinthians 14 Principles:

“Each one has” pattern in practice
Spiritual gifts actively exercised
Order with freedom
Mutual edification through participation

4. Emphasis on Holy Spirit Activity:

Continuationist - spiritual gifts continue today
Emphasis on Holy Spirit leading
Open to manifestations of the Spirit
Balance of structure and spontaneity

5. Real-World Validation:

Works with marginalized, outcast populations
Produces real transformation
Long-term sustainability
Practical viability demonstrated

6. Charismatic Open Meeting Style:

Reflects elements of Kenneth Hagin-style meetings
Extended worship, teaching, ministry time
Spiritual gifts in operation
Active participation encouraged

Significance

Why Jackie Pullinger / St. Stephen’s Society Matters:

1. Pentecostal/Charismatic Example:

Demonstrates that charismatic/Pentecostal groups can practice fully participatory worship
Shows integration of spiritual gifts with participatory meetings
Validates continuationist approach to 1 Corinthians 14

2. Transformation Through Participation:

Real transformation happens through open participation
Not just theory - practical results
Works with difficult populations (addicts, prostitutes, gang members)
Long-term sustainability (60+ years)

3. Charismatic Open Meeting Style:

Reflects elements common to Word of Faith/charismatic movements
Extended worship, teaching, ministry time
Spiritual gifts actively exercised
Active participation encouraged

4. Practical Viability:

Works in real-world settings
Produces measurable results
Sustainable over long periods
Adaptable to different contexts

5. Biblical Foundation:

Based on 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
Spiritual gifts for building up
“Each one has” - all can contribute
Order with freedom

6. Personal Connection:

You visited their church about 10 years ago and saw her
Demonstrates ongoing, practical viability
Not just historical - current and active

Meeting Structure Summary

Typical Meeting Flow (Charismatic Open Meeting Style):

Extended Praise and Worship - Creating atmosphere for Holy Spirit
Teaching of the Word - Bible teaching on faith, healing, authority
Open Participation - Testimonies, sharing, prayers as Spirit leads
Spiritual Gifts - Prophecy, tongues, interpretation, healing
Ministry Time - Personal prayer, laying on of hands, individual attention
Communal Activities - Shared meals, fellowship, mutual support

Key Principles:

Spirit-led, not program-driven
All can participate (“each one has”)
Spiritual gifts for building up
Order with freedom
Unity and harmony emphasized
Transformation through community

PART 5: EARLY PENTECOSTALS (1900s)

Background

Azusa Street Revival (1906-1909):

Location: 312 Azusa Street, Los Angeles, California
Leader: William J. Seymour (African American Holiness Pentecostal preacher)
Significance: Catalyst for global spread of Pentecostalism
Duration: Peak years 1906-1909, but influence continues

Key Figures:

William J. Seymour - Leader of Azusa Street Revival
Frank Bartleman - Chronicler and participant
Charles Parham - Early Pentecostal teacher (1901)
Agnes Ozman - First to speak in tongues (1901)
Lucy Farrow - Key figure in laying on of hands

Reference: See Early-Pentecostal-Writings-1900s/ folder for detailed source files with complete quotes

Meeting Structure: Completely Spirit-Led

Frank Bartleman’s Description:

“Brother Seymour generally sat behind two empty boxes, one on top of the other. He usually kept his head inside the top one during the meeting, in prayer. There was no pride there. The services ran almost continuously. Seeking souls could be found under the power almost any hour of the day or night. The place was never closed or empty. The people came to meet God – He was always there. Hence a continuous meeting. The meeting did not depend on the human leader.”

On No Human Program:

“No subjects or sermons were announced ahead of time, and no special speakers for such an hour.”

On Open Participation:

“Services began in the morning and continued for ten hours and more. There was no order of service, and usually no one was leading. ‘Whoever was anointed with the message would stand and deliver it. It might be a man, woman, or child.’”

Key Characteristics:

No human program - Led entirely by the Holy Spirit
Spontaneous - All activities occurred as the Spirit led
Extended duration - Meetings from 10 AM to near midnight, sometimes until 3:00 AM
Three daily services - Morning, afternoon, and night
Continuous worship - Services going almost around the clock

Participatory Worship: “Each One Has” Pattern

Activities During Meetings:

Spontaneous singing (a cappella, no instruments)
Testimonies (anyone could share)
Prayer (corporate and individual)
Preaching (extemporaneous, Spirit-led)
Speaking in tongues
Prophecy
Healing
Laying on of hands
People falling prostrate in prayer

Frank Bartleman on Spontaneous Worship:

“Suddenly the Spirit would fall upon the congregation. God himself would give the altar call. Men would fall all over the house, like the slain in battle, or rush for the altar en masse to seek God. The scene often resembled a forest of fallen trees.”

Key: Completely participatory - anyone could participate as the Spirit led.

Women’s Participation

Women’s Active Participation:

Women Could Preach: Women were encouraged to exercise spiritual gifts, including preaching
Women Prophesied: Women spoke publicly by “prophesying” or sharing testimonies
Women Led Prayer: Women led prayer meetings and delivered prayers
No Gender Restrictions: The revival broke traditional gender barriers
Women in Leadership: Women like Lucy Farrow were recognized as “anointed handmaidens”
Jennie Moore: Among the first to speak in tongues at Bonnie Brae, later co-pastored with Seymour

Significance: The active participation of women in early Pentecostal meetings was unprecedented for the time.

Racial Unity

William Seymour:

“No instrument that God can use is rejected on account of color or dress or lack of education.”

The Apostolic Faith Newspaper:

“The color line was washed away in the blood.”

Los Angeles Times Report:

“A crowd of colored people and a sprinkling of whites compose the congregation.”

“Whites and blacks mix in a religious frenzy.”

Significance: The Azusa Street Revival broke racial barriers unprecedented for the time.

Lord’s Supper/Communion

Observance:

Not Emphasized: Specific accounts of communion at Azusa Street are scarce in primary sources
Focus on Spiritual Experiences: The emphasis was on tongues, healing, prophecy rather than traditional sacraments
Less Liturgical: Less attention to traditional liturgical practices like communion
Spirit-Focused: The focus was on the immediate presence and work of the Holy Spirit

Note: While communion is not prominently featured in accounts, this does not mean it was never observed. The primary sources emphasize the spontaneous, Spirit-led experiences rather than structured liturgical practices.

Key Principles

No Human Program: Everything led by the Holy Spirit
Open Participation: Anyone could participate as the Spirit led
Spontaneous Structure: No fixed order, completely free form
Gender Inclusive: Women actively participated and led
Racial Inclusive: “The color line was washed away in the blood”
Bible-Centered: “Measuring everything by the Word”
Spirit-Focused: Emphasis on immediate presence and work of the Holy Spirit

Significance

Why Early Pentecostals Matter:

Demonstrates fully participatory worship - “Each one has” pattern in practice
Shows Spirit-led meetings work - No human program needed
Breaks barriers - Racial and gender inclusivity
Global impact - Spread Pentecostalism worldwide
Practical viability - Shows participatory worship can work on large scale

Key Insight: Early Pentecostals practiced fully participatory worship with no human program, showing that Spirit-led, “each one has” meetings can work effectively.

PART 6: OTHER MODERN EXAMPLES

1. New Testament Reformation Fellowship (NTRF)

Background:

Founded: 1990s (exact date unclear)
Website: ntrf.org
Theological Position: Reformed Baptist (Calvinistic)
Focus: Rediscovering and implementing early Christian church practices as described in the New Testament

Key Characteristics:

Participatory worship (1 Cor 14:26 - “each one has” pattern)
Lord’s Supper as full meal (weekly)
Small/house-based churches
Dialogical teaching
Elder-led congregational consensus

Meeting Structure: Three-Phase Meeting

Phase 1: Lord’s Supper (Full Meal)

Weekly observance
Full meal (not just bread and cup)
Communal participation
Focus on remembering Christ’s death

Phase 2: Participatory Worship

“Each one has” pattern (1 Cor 14:26)
Believers in good standing can use spiritual gifts
Songs, testimonies, Scripture readings, exhortations, praise
Purpose: build up the gathered saints

Phase 3: Teaching

Dialogical teaching (discussion-oriented)
Not just one-way preaching
Interactive learning

Key Quotes:

From NTRF Website:

“First-century church meetings were characterized by ‘each one has’ (1Co 14:26). Accordingly, believers in good standing with the church are free to use their spiritual gifts to build up the gathered saints through songs, short testimonies, Scripture readings, exhortations, or praise.”

On Participatory Worship:

“How did Jesus and the Apostles design church meetings so as to motivate people to greater depths of discipleship? In Jesus’ original design, there was considerable spontaneity and freedom for congregants to address the church each week. Church meetings were not a spectator sport!”

On the Principle:

“The prime directive was that anything said had to be crafted to edify (strengthen, build up, encourage) the congregation. Everything combined to motivate believers to greater obedience to the commands of the Lord, a key aspect of discipleship.”

On Order:

“Let all things be done for building up” (1 Cor 14:26). Everything must be for edification. Only one person should speak at a time. Restraint was required for the greater good.

Significance: One of the most explicit modern advocates for the “each one has” participatory worship pattern, with a clear three-phase meeting structure that separates Lord’s Supper from participatory worship.

2. Early Baptists and Baptist History

Background:

Particular Baptists (Reformed/Calvinistic): Emerged in England in 1630s-1640s
First London Baptist Confession (1644/1646): Reformed Baptist confession that NTRF aligns with
Theology: Calvinistic (doctrines of grace), congregational polity
Connection to NTRF: NTRF is theologically Baptist (Reformed/Calvinistic) but practically restorationist

Reference: See Baptist-History-Writings/ folder for detailed analysis

Early Baptist Practices (17th Century):

What Early Baptists Had:

✅ Congregational polity - Local church autonomy, congregational decision-making
✅ Regenerate membership - Emphasis on regenerate church membership, church discipline
✅ House-based meetings - Met in homes (necessity due to persecution)
✅ Memorial view of Lord’s Supper - Not transubstantiation
❓ Weekly communion - Unclear from historical records, likely monthly/quarterly
❓ Participatory worship - Unclear, likely pastor-led (emphasis on preaching suggests monologue)

Later Baptist Practice (18th-20th Centuries):

What Became Standard:

Monthly/quarterly communion - Most common (rarely weekly)
Pastor-led services - Structured, monologue sermons
NOT participatory - No “each one has” pattern
Building-based meetings - Not house-based
Congregational singing - Yes, but not participatory sharing

NTRF’s Distinctiveness:

What Makes NTRF Different from Traditional Baptists:

1. Weekly Communion:

NOT traditional for Reformed Baptists (typically monthly)
NTRF advocates weekly - Restoration of early church practice
Calvin wanted weekly - But wasn’t widely adopted by Baptists

2. Participatory Worship (“Each One Has”):

NOT traditional for Baptists
Traditional Baptist: Pastor-led, structured, monologue
NTRF: “Each one has” pattern from 1 Corinthians 14:26
Restoration - Return to early church practice

3. Dialogical Teaching:

NOT traditional for Baptists
Traditional Baptist: Monologue sermons
NTRF: Discussion-based, interactive
Restoration - Return to early church practice

4. Lord’s Supper as Full Meal:

NOT traditional for Baptists
Traditional Baptist: Bread and cup only
NTRF: Full meal (agape feast)
Restoration - Return to early church practice

Key Insight:

NTRF is theologically Baptist (Reformed/Calvinistic) - aligns with First London Baptist Confession of 1644/1646, but practically restorationist - returning to early church practices that were:

Not necessarily practiced by early Baptists (weekly communion, participatory worship)
Lost over time (house-based meetings, full meal Lord’s Supper)
Advocated by some Reformers (Calvin wanted weekly communion) but not widely adopted

Significance: Shows that participatory worship and weekly communion are not traditional Baptist practices, but NTRF demonstrates that Baptist theology can be combined with early church practices in a restorationist approach. This is significant because it shows that groups can restore participatory worship even if it wasn’t part of their historical tradition.

3. African Independent Churches (AIC)

Background:

Context: Independent churches formed by Africans, separate from Western missions
History: Emerged in late 19th and early 20th centuries
Growth: Rapidly growing across Africa
Diversity: Many different groups with varying practices
Cultural adaptation: Blend Christianity with African culture

Types of AIC:

Ethiopian churches - Breakaways from mission churches (early 20th century)
Aladura churches - Prayer-focused groups emphasizing healing and prophecy (Nigeria, 1920s)
Zionist churches - Emphasis on healing, prophecy, and spiritual gifts (South Africa)
Apostolic churches - Emphasis on apostles and prophets
Kimbanguist Church - Founded by Simon Kimbangu (Congo, 1921)
Many others - Diverse groups across Africa

Key Figures:

Simon Kimbangu (1887-1951) - Founder of Kimbanguist Church, emphasized healing and African self-determination
William Wade Harris (1865-1929) - Liberian evangelist, led mass conversions in West Africa
Samuel Ajayi Crowther (c. 1808-1891) - First African Anglican bishop, promoted African-led Christianity

Reference: See International-Examples-Participatory-Worship-Lords-Supper.md for additional analysis

Meeting Structure:

Typical Meeting (2-4 hours total):

Gathering & Greeting (15-30 minutes) - Arrival, greeting, informal fellowship
Praise and Worship (45-90 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Singing (African style, often with dancing)
- Members can lead songs
- Spontaneous expressions
- Cultural music and instruments
- Extended worship times
Prayer (30-60 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Communal prayer time
- Individual prayers (members pray)
- Spontaneous prayers (as led)
- Intercessory prayer
- Prayer for healing
Testimonies (30-60 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Members share testimonies
- Stories of healing
- Stories of deliverance
- Stories of God’s provision
- All members can share
Teaching/Preaching (30-60 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Bible reading (together)
- Teaching (may be by a member or leader)
- Open discussion (in some groups)
- Members share insights
- Prophetic words (in some groups)
Spiritual Gifts (in many groups) - PARTICIPATORY
- Prophecy
- Words of knowledge
- Healing ministry
- Speaking in tongues (in Pentecostal AICs)
- Interpretation
Lord’s Supper (when included)
- Frequency varies (weekly, monthly, or special occasions)
- Breaking bread together
- Remembering Christ’s death
- Communal participation
- Often part of shared meal
Fellowship & Meal (30+ minutes)
- Shared meal (often)
- Informal fellowship
- Building relationships
- Community building

Participatory Time: 90-180 minutes of participatory segments (varies by group)

Key Characteristics:

All members can contribute - Hymns, prayers, testimonies, teaching, spiritual gifts
Spontaneous participation - As led by Spirit
No predetermined order - Flexible format (in many groups)
“Each one has” pattern - Many groups follow 1 Corinthians 14:26
Cultural adaptation - Incorporates African music, dance, culture
Spirit-led - Emphasis on Holy Spirit leading
Spiritual gifts - Emphasis on spiritual gifts (in many groups)
Healing - Emphasis on healing ministry (in many groups)

Lord’s Supper Practices:

Frequency:

Varies widely - Weekly, monthly, or special occasions
Some weekly - Many practice weekly
Central to worship - Important in most groups
Communal - Emphasizes community

Theology:

Varies - Different understandings
Communal - Emphasis on community
Memorial - Often memorial view
Some real presence - Some groups emphasize real presence
Cultural adaptation - May include cultural elements

Observance:

All believers - All baptized believers participate
Communal - Shared experience
Cultural adaptation - May include cultural elements
Reverent - Treated with reverence
Often with meal - Often part of shared meal

Examples of Specific AIC Groups:

1. Aladura Churches (Nigeria, West Africa):

Founded: 1920s
Emphasis: Prayer, healing, prophecy
Participatory: Highly participatory
Spiritual gifts: Emphasis on spiritual gifts
Meeting style: Extended worship, prayer, testimonies

2. Zionist Churches (South Africa):

Emphasis: Healing, prophecy, spiritual gifts
Participatory: Highly participatory
Cultural: Strong African cultural elements
Meeting style: Extended worship with dancing, prayer, healing

3. Kimbanguist Church (Congo):

Founded: 1921 by Simon Kimbangu
Emphasis: Healing, African self-determination
Participatory: Participatory worship
Size: Millions of members
Meeting style: Participatory with emphasis on healing

4. East African Revival (Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya):

Began: Late 1920s
Emphasis: Personal salvation, holiness, testimonies
Participatory: Highly participatory
Influence: Significant influence on Anglican Church and others
Meeting style: Testimonies, prayer, mutual edification

Key Insights:

1. Cultural Adaptation:

Incorporates African music, dance, and cultural expressions
Makes Christianity relevant to African context
Balances Christianity with cultural identity

2. Participatory Worship:

Many groups practice fully participatory worship
“Each one has” pattern in many groups
All members can contribute
Spirit-led, not program-driven

3. Spiritual Gifts:

Many groups emphasize spiritual gifts
Prophecy, healing, words of knowledge
Continuationist approach
Gifts for building up the body

4. Community Focus:

Strong emphasis on community
Shared meals
Mutual support
Building relationships

5. Growth and Influence:

Rapidly growing across Africa
Significant influence on African Christianity
Millions of members across various groups
Dynamic and evolving

Challenges:

Diversity - Hard to generalize across many groups
Resources - Limited materials and training
Syncretism - Risk of blending Christianity with traditional religion
Leadership - Developing and training leaders

Significance: African Independent Churches demonstrate that fully participatory worship with weekly/monthly communion works in African contexts, with strong cultural adaptation and emphasis on spiritual gifts. They are significant examples of participatory worship in non-Western contexts, showing that the “each one has” pattern is not limited to Western contexts.

3. China House Churches

Background:

Context: Underground movement operating outside state-sanctioned churches
Size: Largest Christian movement in world (estimated 50-100+ million)
Persecution: Face government persecution
House-based: Meet in homes, not public buildings
Participatory: Highly participatory due to necessity and conviction

Reference: See China-House-Churches-Writings/ folder for detailed analysis

Meeting Structure:

Typical Meeting (2-3 hours total):

Welcome & Fellowship (15-20 minutes) - Arrival, greeting, informal fellowship
Worship (30-60 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Singing hymns (members can request)
- Scripture readings (members read)
- Testimonies (members share)
- Spontaneous prayers (members pray)
- Expressions of thanksgiving
Prayer (30 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Communal prayer time
- Individual prayers (members pray)
- Spontaneous prayers (as led)
- Shared concerns
Teaching/Discussion (30-60 minutes) - PARTICIPATORY
- Bible reading (together)
- Expository teaching (may be by a member or shared)
- Open discussion (members participate)
- Members share insights
- Members ask questions
Lord’s Supper (when included)
- Breaking bread together
- Remembering Christ’s death
- Communal participation
- Often part of shared meal
Community Time (30+ minutes)
- Shared meal (often)
- Informal fellowship
- Building relationships

Participatory Time: 90-150 minutes of participatory segments

Key Characteristics:

All members can contribute - Hymns, Scripture, teaching, prayers, testimonies
Spontaneous participation - As led by Spirit
No predetermined order - Flexible format
“Each one has” pattern - Follows 1 Corinthians 14:26
Weekly communion - Some weekly, some monthly/quarterly (varies)

Examples:

Early Rain Covenant Church (Chengdu) - 500+ members, Reformed Presbyterian
Shouwang Church (Beijing) - 1,000 members (by 2011)
Zion Church (Beijing) - 1,600 members, 6 services weekly (before closure 2018)

Significance: Shows that fully participatory worship with weekly communion works on a massive scale (50-100+ million believers), even under persecution.

3. Wesley Brothers (John and Charles Wesley)

Background:

John Wesley (1703-1791) - Founder of Methodism
Charles Wesley (1707-1788) - Co-founder, prolific hymn writer
Anglican priests - But emphasized frequent communion and participatory worship
Established “Holy Club” - At Oxford, met daily for prayer and Scripture reading

Reference: See Wesley-Writings/ folder for detailed analysis

Weekly Communion:

John Wesley’s “The Duty of Constant Communion” Sermon:

“Let every one, therefore, who has any desire to please God, or any love of his own soul, obey God, and consult the good of his own soul, by communicating every time he can; like the first Christians, with whom the Christian sacrifice was a constant part of the Lord’s day service.”

“This is the food of our souls: this gives strength to perform our duty, and leads us on to perfection.”

Wesley’s Practice:

Weekly communion - Every Sunday (at minimum)
Sometimes several times a week - Went far beyond Church of England requirement
Controversial - Their frequent communion was controversial
“Sacramentarians” - Nickname due to frequent communion
Exceeded norms - Church of England required only 3 times/year

Class Meetings (Participatory Small Groups):

Structure:

Size: 10-12 members
Frequency: Weekly meetings
Accountability: Members shared struggles and victories
Mutual edification: Members ministered to one another
Participatory: All members participated

How It Worked:

Questions about spiritual state (“How is it with your soul?”)
Confession of sins
Sharing of victories
Mutual prayer and encouragement
All members participate

Love Feasts:

Communal meals with testimonies and prayers
Participatory
Separate from Lord’s Supper but similar in nature

Charles Wesley’s Hymns:

166 hymns on the Lord’s Supper - Extensive hymnody
Congregational participation - Enabled all members to participate in singing
Theological teaching - Hymns taught theology

Significance: Early advocates of weekly communion in Protestant tradition, with highly participatory class meetings for mutual edification.

4. John Calvin (Reformed Tradition)

Background:

John Calvin (1509-1564) - Reformer and theologian
Author of “Institutes of the Christian Religion” - Final edition 1559
Leader of Reformation in Geneva - Founder of Reformed/Presbyterian tradition
1537 Articles to Geneva Council - Expressed desire for weekly communion

Reference: See Reformed-History-Writings/ folder for detailed analysis

Weekly Communion:

Calvin’s Position:

Weekly communion - Advocated for weekly observance (at least)
“At least once a week” - Minimum frequency
“Very frequently” - Preferred even more frequent observance
Every Sunday - Desired for Holy Supper to be celebrated every Sunday when congregation assembles

Quote from Institutes (IV, 17, 44, and 46):

“The Lord’s Supper should be administered at least once a week”

From 1537 Articles to Geneva Council:

“The Holy Supper should be celebrated at least every Sunday when the congregation assembles”

Why It Wasn’t Adopted:

Geneva Town Council / City Magistrates opposed - Primary opposition
- Had authority over church practices (Calvin did NOT have absolute rule)
- Concerned about logistics, misunderstandings, potential superstition
- Limited communion to quarterly (4 times per year: Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, first Sunday in September)
The “Libertines” opposed - Faction of wealthy, politically powerful families
- Led by Ami Perrin (prominent syndic)
- Opposed Calvin’s reforms and authority
- Wanted to maintain traditional practices
Calvin’s response - Documented his disagreement in public records, hoping future generations would correct it
Most Reformed churches - Adopted monthly/quarterly communion (following Geneva’s practice)
Result: Gap between Calvin’s desire and actual practice - Calvin wanted weekly but had to compromise with quarterly

Theology:

Spiritual presence - Believers partake through Holy Spirit and elevation of soul to heaven
Means of grace - Divine gift to sustain and strengthen faith
Unity - Fosters unity among Christians
Remembrance - Frequently call to mind sufferings of Christ

Participatory Worship (Limited):

What Calvin Advocated:

Active congregational participation - Not passive experience
Congregational singing - All sing psalms together (Geneva Psalter)
Responsive prayers - Congregation responds
Communal Lord’s Supper - All believers partake together
Mutual edification - Promotes understanding and engagement

What Calvin Did NOT Advocate:

NOT “each one has” pattern - Did not advocate for 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
NOT open participation - Not open participation from all members
NOT spontaneous - Structured liturgy, not spontaneous
NOT lay teaching - Preaching was minister-led

Quote from Institutes:

“The congregation should be actively involved in the service.”

“The Lord’s Supper is not merely a ritual performed by clergy but a communal act where all believers partake together, reflecting the unity and mutual edification of the church body.”

Significance: Calvin advocated for weekly communion and active congregational participation, but his weekly communion desire was not widely adopted in Reformed churches. His participatory worship was limited to congregational singing and responsive prayers, not the “each one has” pattern. This shows a gap between ideal and practice - a major Reformer wanted weekly communion but it wasn’t adopted.

5. Charles Finney

Background:

Charles Finney (1792-1875) - 19th-century revivalist
Presbyterian minister - But emphasized revival meetings and personal conversion
Introduced “anxious bench” - Innovative method for involvement

Reference: See Finney-Writings/ folder for detailed analysis

Lord’s Supper:

From “On the Lord’s Supper” Sermon:

“One great and leading desire of this ordinance is to promote the progress of Christ’s kingdom. It aims to quicken the faith, the zeal and the love of his people, and to testify before the ungodly to the great fact of the death of Jesus Christ for their salvation if they will come and receive it.”

Finney’s Practice:

Open communion - Invited all Christians who truly loved the Lord
Emphasized importance - But his own practice/frequency less clear
Critiqued infrequent communion - Described churches with only annual communion as problematic

Participatory Revival Meetings:

Revival Meetings (Protracted Meetings):

Extended duration - Several days or weeks
Continuous services - Continuous prayer and preaching
Participatory - Spontaneous prayers, testimonies, exhortations from attendees
Anxious bench - Designated area where those seeking salvation could come forward

Anxious Bench:

For those seeking salvation or under conviction
Public commitment
Break down pride
Immediate decision
Prayer and counsel

Key Characteristics:

Spontaneous prayers - Attendees prayed spontaneously
Testimonies - Members shared testimonies
Public confessions - Public confessions of sin
Exhortations - Attendees gave exhortations
Anxious bench - Innovative method for involvement

Significance: Participatory revival meetings with emphasis on immediate response and public commitment.

5. House Church Movements (Other)

Various Groups:

Simple Church Network
House2House
Various independent house churches

Key Characteristics:

House-based meetings
Intimate, participatory
Various structures
Some integrate Lord’s Supper, some separate

Significance: Shows participatory worship works in small, intimate settings.

3. Modern Leaders: Mark Dever (9Marks) and Francis Chan

Reference: See Modern-Leaders-Writings/ folder for detailed analysis

Mark Dever (9Marks)

Background:

Senior pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church (Washington, D.C.)
Founder of 9Marks ministry
Reformed Baptist/Calvinistic theology
Author of “Nine Marks of a Healthy Church”

Views on Lord’s Supper:

NOT weekly - Does not advocate for weekly communion
Concern about frequency - Has expressed concern that too frequent observance might make it rote
Preaching is central - Emphasizes preaching as the focal point, not Lord’s Supper
Regular but not weekly - Advocates for regular observance, but not necessarily weekly

Views on Participatory Worship:

Structured, pastor-led - Emphasizes structured, pastor-led services
Preaching is central - Monologue sermons are the primary teaching method
NOT “each one has” pattern - Does not advocate for 1 Corinthians 14:26 participatory pattern
Congregational but structured - Yes, but in structured ways (singing, responses)

9Marks Model:

Structured, pastor-led services
Preaching-focused
Regular (but not weekly) communion
Regenerate membership and discipline
But NOT participatory worship (“each one has” pattern)

Significance: Represents a healthy, biblical, Reformed Baptist model that emphasizes structured, pastor-led worship and regular (but not weekly) communion, but does NOT practice participatory worship. Provides important contrast to participatory groups.

Francis Chan

Background:

Former megachurch pastor (Cornerstone Community Church)
Author of “Letters to the Church” (2018)
Founder of “We Are Church” movement
Shifted from megachurch to house church model

Views on Lord’s Supper:

Weekly communion - Advocates for weekly observance
Central to worship - Believes Lord’s Supper should be central, not preaching
Historical emphasis - Notes that for first 1,500 years, body and blood were central
Communal meal - Emphasizes Lord’s Supper as communal meal
Theology shift - Moving toward Eastern Orthodox view (real presence, not just symbolic)

Key Quote (2022 Conference):

“For the first 1,500 years after Jesus’ ministry, the body and blood were central when Christians gathered for worship.”

“The shift toward emphasizing sermons over communion has harmed Christian unity.”

Views on Participatory Worship:

House church model - Advocates for smaller, home-based fellowships
Participatory gatherings - Emphasizes active participation from all members
“Each one has” pattern - All members contribute, mutual edification
Early church practices - Return to early church participatory model
Not spectator sport - Church meetings should not be spectator events

Meeting Structure:

Small groups (10-30 people)
House-based meetings
Participatory worship (all members contribute)
Weekly communion (central)
Communal meal (Lord’s Supper as full meal)

Significance: Represents a significant shift from megachurch model to house church model, advocating for participatory worship, weekly communion as central, and return to early church practices. Shows a well-known pastor shifting toward participatory worship.

Comparison: Dever vs. Chan

Mark Dever (9Marks):

✅ Structured, pastor-led services
✅ Preaching central to worship
❌ Regular but NOT weekly communion
❌ NOT participatory (“each one has” pattern)
✅ Traditional church model
✅ Reformed Baptist, memorial view

Francis Chan:

✅ House church, participatory
❌ Preaching NOT central (Lord’s Supper central)
✅ Weekly communion, central to worship
✅ Participatory (“each one has” pattern)
✅ House church model
⚠️ Shifting toward Eastern Orthodox view (real presence)

Key Insight: These two leaders represent different approaches - Dever represents traditional, structured, pastor-led model; Chan represents shift toward participatory, house church, weekly communion model. Both are significant voices in modern church discussions.

David Bercot

Background:

Scholar of early Christian beliefs and practices
Author of “Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up”
Author of “A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs”
Publisher: Scroll Publishing
Influential in Anabaptist and restorationist circles
Note: Full writings primarily available on CD, not widely online

Views on Lord’s Supper:

Weekly communion - Advocates for weekly observance
First day of the week - Particularly emphasizes observance on the first day of the week
Regular fellowship - Part of daily, meaningful fellowship including sharing meals
Unity of Body - Acknowledges unity of Body of Christ and shared experience of Holy Spirit

Key Quote (from available sources):

“He advocates for daily, meaningful fellowship among believers, which includes regularly sharing meals and partaking in the Lord’s Supper, particularly on the first day of the week.”

“This practice acknowledges the unity of the Body of Christ and the shared experience of the Holy Spirit among believers.”

Views on Participatory Worship:

Return to early church - Advocates for returning to early church practices
Participatory worship - Emphasizes communal participation
Not spectator sport - Worship is about offering our lives in service, not just attending services
Mutual edification - Body of Christ functioning together

Key Quote (from available sources):

“He highlights that worship is fundamentally about offering our lives in service and gratitude to God, rather than merely attending church services.”

Meeting Structure:

Daily, meaningful fellowship
Regular meals together
Weekly Lord’s Supper (particularly on first day of the week)
Communal participation
Unity of Body of Christ

Significance: Represents a scholarly approach to early church practices, advocating for weekly communion and participatory worship based on extensive research into early church practices. Influential in Anabaptist and restorationist circles. Note: Full teachings available on CD through Scroll Publishing.

4. Quakers (Religious Society of Friends)

Key Characteristics:

Fully unprogrammed meetings
No human leader
Silent waiting on the Spirit
Anyone can speak as led
No outward Lord’s Supper (only spiritual communion)

Significance: Fully participatory model, though they don’t practice outward Lord’s Supper.

4. Restoration Movement (Churches of Christ)

Key Characteristics:

Weekly Lord’s Supper
Participatory worship (congregational singing, prayers)
Restoration emphasis
Mutual edification
Reverent observance

Significance: Restoration movement emphasizing weekly, reverent Lord’s Supper with participatory worship.

PART 6: MAJOR DENOMINATIONS (FOR CONTRAST)

Overview

This section examines major Christian denominations to show that while they practice weekly communion, they do NOT practice fully participatory worship. This provides important contrast and shows the gap between what major denominations do and what participatory groups do.

Reference: See Major-Denominations-Participatory-Worship-Lords-Supper.md for detailed analysis

Eastern Orthodox Church

Lord’s Supper:

✅ Weekly communion - Divine Liturgy includes Eucharist every Sunday (and often daily)
✅ Reverent observance - Highly reverent, solemn observance
✅ Central to worship - Eucharist is the primary act of worship

Participatory Worship:

❌ NOT fully participatory - Structured, priest-led liturgy
❌ NOT “each one has” pattern - No 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
⚠️ Limited lay participation - Responses, chanting, reading (but not “each one has”)

Key Insight: Weekly communion with great reverence, but NOT fully participatory worship.

Roman Catholic Church

Lord’s Supper:

✅ Weekly/daily communion - Mass available daily, most Catholics attend Sunday Mass
✅ Reverent observance - Highly reverent observance
✅ Central to worship - Eucharist is the “source and summit” of Christian life

Participatory Worship:

❌ NOT fully participatory - Structured, priest-led Mass
❌ NOT “each one has” pattern - No 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
⚠️ Increased lay participation (post-Vatican II) - Readers, eucharistic ministers, music (but still structured)

Exception: Base Communities (Latin America):

✅ More participatory - Scripture reflection, sharing, participatory elements
✅ “Each one has” pattern - More participatory than regular Mass
⚠️ But still includes Mass - Mass requires priest

Key Insight: Weekly/daily communion with reverence, but NOT fully participatory worship (except base communities).

Anglican/Episcopal Church

Lord’s Supper:

✅ Weekly communion - Most Anglican churches offer Eucharist weekly
✅ Reverent observance - Reverent observance
✅ Central to worship - Eucharist is primary service

Participatory Worship:

❌ NOT fully participatory - Structured, priest-led liturgy
❌ NOT “each one has” pattern - No 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
⚠️ Lay participation - Readers, eucharistic ministers, music (but still structured)

Key Insight: Weekly communion with reverence, but NOT fully participatory worship.

Lutheran Church

Lord’s Supper:

⚠️ Weekly/bi-weekly communion - Varies by synod and congregation
✅ Reverent observance - Reverent observance
✅ Real presence - Emphasis on real presence

Participatory Worship:

❌ NOT fully participatory - Structured, pastor-led liturgy
❌ NOT “each one has” pattern - No 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
⚠️ Strong congregational singing - Lutheran hymn tradition (but still pastor-led)

Key Insight: Weekly/bi-weekly communion with reverence and strong congregational singing, but NOT fully participatory worship.

Methodist/Wesleyan Churches

Lord’s Supper:

⚠️ Monthly/weekly communion - Most monthly, some weekly
✅ Reverent observance - Reverent observance
✅ Means of grace - Sacrament as means of grace

Participatory Worship:

❌ NOT fully participatory - Structured, pastor-led service
❌ NOT “each one has” pattern - No 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern
⚠️ Some lay participation - Testimonies, prayers, but not fully participatory

Historical Note:

Class meetings (historical) - Were highly participatory, but not current practice in most churches
Wesley’s advocacy - John Wesley advocated weekly communion and participatory class meetings, but main worship was still pastor-led

Key Insight: Monthly/weekly communion with reverence and some lay participation, but NOT fully participatory worship in main services.

Summary: The Gap

Major Denominations:

✅ Weekly communion (most)
✅ Reverent observance
❌ NOT fully participatory worship
❌ NOT “each one has” pattern
❌ Structured, clergy-led services

Participatory Groups (for comparison):

✅ Weekly communion
✅ Reverent observance
✅ Fully participatory worship
✅ “Each one has” pattern
✅ Open, Spirit-led services

Key Insight: Major denominations practice weekly communion but NOT fully participatory worship. This shows that weekly communion does NOT automatically mean participatory worship. Participatory worship requires intentional structure that allows “each one has” participation.

PART 7: LARGE CHURCHES AND SMALL GROUPS

The Principle: Participatory Worship Only Viable in Small Groups

The User’s Insight:

“In a large church the participatory model is only viable in small groups”

Reference: See Large-Churches-Small-Groups-Participatory-Worship.md for detailed analysis

The Problem with Large Churches

Challenges:

Time constraints - In a 200-person meeting, if everyone gets 5 minutes, that’s 1,000 minutes (16+ hours)
Coordination - Who speaks when? How to prevent chaos?
Intimacy loss - Harder to know everyone, less personal connection
Practical logistics - Sound system, space, time management

Historical Pattern:

“As gatherings moved to larger basilicas, participatory worship was replaced with more structured performances by clergy, leading to a loss of the practical reality of the priesthood of all believers.” (NTRF)

The Solution: Small Groups Within Large Churches

The Pattern:

Large main service - Structured, clergy-led liturgy (weekly communion)
Small groups - Participatory worship, mutual edification
Both together - Complete church experience

Catholic: Base Communities

Background:

Latin American Base Communities - Small groups within Catholic Church
1960s-1970s - Began in Latin America
Vatican II - Influenced by Vatican II
Small groups - 10-30 people typical

Participatory Worship:

✅ Fully participatory - “Each one has” pattern
✅ Scripture reflection - Members discuss Scripture
✅ Prayer - Spontaneous prayers
✅ Sharing - Members share experiences
✅ Mutual edification - Members minister to one another
✅ Weekly communion - When priest available

Key Characteristics:

Small groups (10-30 people)
Fully participatory worship
Weekly communion (when priest available)
Scripture-centered
Within larger parish structure

Significance: Base communities demonstrate that participatory worship with weekly communion works in small groups within the Catholic Church, even when the main parish Mass is structured and clergy-led.

Anglican: Cell Groups / Small Groups

Background:

Cell groups - Small groups within Anglican parishes
Home groups - Home-based small groups
Bible study groups - Scripture study groups
Prayer groups - Small prayer groups

Structure:

Small groups - 8-15 people typical
Participatory - Members can share, pray, discuss
Mutual edification - Members minister to one another
Complement main service - Supplement structured liturgy

Participatory Elements:

Discussion of Scripture
Prayer for one another
Sharing testimonies and experiences
Mutual support and accountability

Key Insight: Anglican parishes use small groups to enable participatory worship, while main services remain structured and liturgical.

Orthodox: Fellowship Groups

Background:

Fellowship groups - Small groups within Orthodox parishes
House groups - Home-based groups
Study groups - Scripture and theology study
Prayer groups - Small prayer groups

Structure:

Small groups - 10-20 people typical
Participatory - Members can share, discuss, pray
Complement Divine Liturgy - Supplement structured liturgy
Fellowship - Building relationships

Participatory Elements:

Discussion of Scripture and theology
Prayer together
Sharing experiences
Mutual support and encouragement

Key Insight: Orthodox parishes use small groups to enable participatory worship and fellowship, while Divine Liturgy remains structured and liturgical.

The Pattern Across Traditions

All Three Traditions:

✅ Large main service - Structured, clergy-led liturgy (weekly communion)
✅ Small groups - Participatory worship, mutual edification
✅ Combination - Best of both worlds
✅ Complementary - Small groups complement main service

Why This Works:

Main service - Maintains structure, reverence, tradition
Small groups - Enable participation, intimacy, mutual edification
Both together - Full church experience

Key Insights

1. Participatory Worship Requires Small Groups:

Large churches = Structured, clergy-led (necessary for order)
Small groups = Participatory worship (enables participation)
Both together = Complete church experience

2. Base Communities as Model:

Catholic - Official recognition of small groups
Fully participatory - “Each one has” pattern
Weekly communion - When priest available
Within larger church - Part of parish structure

3. The Principle Confirmed:

“In a large church the participatory model is only viable in small groups”

Confirmed by:

✅ Catholic base communities
✅ Anglican cell groups
✅ Orthodox fellowship groups
✅ Historical pattern (as churches grew, participatory worship moved to small groups)

Significance: This confirms that participatory worship in large churches is only viable in small groups, and all three major liturgical traditions (Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox) have developed small group structures to enable participatory worship while maintaining structured main services.

PART 7: INTERNATIONAL EXAMPLES

Overview

This section examines international examples of participatory worship and weekly Lord’s Supper, showing that these practices work globally and across cultures.

Reference: See International-Examples-Participatory-Worship-Lords-Supper.md for detailed analysis

China House Churches

Already covered in Part 5 - See detailed section above.

Key Points:

✅ Weekly communion (varies)
✅ Fully participatory worship
✅ “Each one has” pattern
✅ Largest Christian movement in world (50-100+ million)
✅ Works under persecution

African Independent Churches (AIC)

Already covered in Part 5 - See detailed section above (Section 2: African Independent Churches).

Key Points:

✅ Weekly/monthly communion (varies)
✅ Fully participatory worship (many groups)
✅ “Each one has” pattern (many groups)
✅ Cultural adaptation (African music, dance, culture)
✅ Spiritual gifts emphasis (many groups)
✅ Healing ministry (many groups)
✅ Rapidly growing across Africa

Examples:

Aladura Churches (Nigeria) - Prayer, healing, prophecy
Zionist Churches (South Africa) - Healing, prophecy, spiritual gifts
Kimbanguist Church (Congo) - Millions of members
East African Revival - Significant influence

Significance: Shows participatory worship with cultural adaptation works in African contexts, demonstrating that the “each one has” pattern is not limited to Western contexts.

Latin American Base Communities

Background:

Catholic movement - Within Catholic Church
Liberation theology - Influenced by liberation theology
Small groups - Meet in homes or small groups
Participatory - Highly participatory
Social action - Emphasis on social transformation

Meeting Structure:

Small groups - 10-30 people typical
Participatory - Highly participatory
Scripture reflection - Members discuss Scripture
Prayer - Spontaneous prayers
Sharing - Members share experiences
Weekly communion - Often includes Mass or separate Lord’s Supper

Key Characteristics:

All can contribute - Scripture reflection, prayers, sharing
Mutual edification - Members minister to one another
“Each one has” - Follows participatory pattern
Spontaneous - Spirit-led, not program-driven
Social dimension - Connection to social transformation

Significance: Shows participatory worship within Catholic Church, with strong emphasis on Scripture reflection and social transformation.

Common Patterns in International Examples

All International Examples Share:

✅ Weekly/monthly communion
✅ Fully participatory worship
✅ “Each one has” pattern
✅ Small groups
✅ Cultural adaptation
✅ Lay leadership

Why It Works:

Small groups - Enable full participation
Necessity - Often by necessity (no clergy, persecution)
Conviction - Also by conviction (priesthood of all believers)
Cultural - Adapts to local culture
Flexible - Adapts to circumstances

Key Insight: International examples show BOTH weekly communion AND fully participatory worship are possible and are being practiced globally.

PART 8: PATTERNS IN MODERN PRACTICE

1. Both Integration and Separation Work

Integrated Models:

Plymouth Brethren: Lord’s Supper meeting with participatory elements
SFMI: Open meetings with guidelines (separate from Lord’s Supper)
Jackie Pullinger / St. Stephen’s Society: Charismatic open meetings with spiritual gifts
China House Churches: Lord’s Supper within participatory meeting
Some house churches: Lord’s Supper within participatory meeting

Separated Models:

NTRF: Three-phase meeting - Lord’s Supper, participatory worship, teaching (separate phases)
SFMI: Separate open meetings from Lord’s Supper
Some Brethren: Considering “two meetings” - Lord’s Supper + separate teaching
Tertullian pattern: Morning Eucharist, evening agape feast
Some house churches: Separate meetings for different purposes

Conclusion: Both patterns work in practice. The choice depends on context and what serves love and unity best.

2. Participatory Elements Are Valued

Evidence:

Brethren: Spirit-led participation
SFMI: “Each one has” pattern with guidelines
Shield of Faith Fellowship: “Body functioning” model
Jackie Pullinger / St. Stephen’s Society: Charismatic open meetings with transformation
NTRF: Explicit 1 Corinthians 14:26 advocacy
Early Pentecostals: Fully participatory, no human program
China House Churches: Fully participatory, “each one has” pattern
African Independent Churches: Fully participatory, “each one has” pattern (many groups)
Wesley Class Meetings: Highly participatory small groups
House churches: Highly participatory

Conclusion: Modern groups value participation, even if structure varies. Groups that practice fully participatory worship (“each one has” pattern) are distinct from major denominations. This pattern works globally - in Western contexts, Chinese contexts, and African contexts.

3. Order and Boundaries Are Needed

Evidence:

SFMI: Clear guidelines (time limits, focus on God, discernment)
Brethren: Focus on Lord’s Supper, not just anything
All groups: Some structure needed to prevent chaos

Conclusion: Participation needs order and boundaries to work well.

4. Love and Unity Are Priorities

Evidence:

SFMI: “God’s agenda for each meeting” - sensitivity to Spirit
Brethren: Focus on Christ, not self
All groups: Emphasis on building up, not self-expression

Conclusion: Love and unity guide structure decisions in successful groups.

5. Context Matters

Evidence:

Small groups: More participatory, less structure needed
Large groups: More structure, but still participatory
Different cultures: Different approaches work

Conclusion: Structure may need to adapt to context (size, culture, etc.).

PART 9: KEY INSIGHTS FROM MODERN EXAMPLES

1. Flexibility in Structure

Observation: Modern groups use both integrated and separated models, depending on context and needs.

Implication: There is no single “correct” structure - both can work, as long as they serve love, unity, and mutual edification.

2. Participatory Elements Are Essential

Observation: All successful groups have participatory elements, even if structure varies.

Implication: Participation is important, even if structure varies.

3. Order and Boundaries Are Necessary

Observation: Successful groups have clear guidelines and boundaries to maintain order.

Implication: Order is required - not chaos, but structured participation.

4. Love and Unity Guide Decisions

Observation: Successful groups prioritize love and unity over being “right” about structure.

Implication: Love and unity are more important than perfect structure.

5. Practical Wisdom Is Needed

Observation: Successful groups have practical wisdom (time limits, focus, discernment) to make participation work.

Implication: Practical wisdom is needed to implement participation well.

PART 8: LESSONS FOR YOUR BRETHREN CONTEXT

What Works in Practice

From Brethren:

Lord’s Supper as primary purpose ✅
Participatory elements ✅
Reverence maintained ✅
Spirit-led approach ✅

From SFMI:

Clear guidelines for participation ✅
Time management ✅
Focus on God’s agenda ✅
Balance of freedom and order ✅

From Shield of Faith Fellowship:

Large-scale participatory worship ✅
“Body functioning” model ✅
Spiritual gifts active ✅

From Jackie Pullinger / St. Stephen’s Society:

Charismatic open meeting style ✅
Transformation through participation ✅
Spiritual gifts in operation ✅
Testimonies central to worship ✅

What to Consider

For Your Situation:

Love and unity first - More important than structure
Remembrance is primary - Lord’s Supper should be reverent and focused
Mutual edification is important - “Each one has” pattern is biblical
Order is required - Not chaos, but structured participation
Practical wisdom needed - Guidelines, time limits, focus

Possible Solutions:

Two-Part Meeting: Focused Lord’s Supper + Open participatory worship
Separate Meetings: Lord’s Supper meeting + Teaching/doctrinal meeting
Integrated with Guidelines: Single meeting with clear boundaries
Sequential Structure: Lord’s Supper first, then participatory worship

The Test:

Does it promote love?
Does it preserve unity?
Does it allow reverent remembrance?
Does it enable mutual edification?
Does it maintain order?

CONCLUSION: THE REALITY TEST

For any meeting structure, ask:

“Does this work in practice?”

“Are there examples of faithful believers doing this successfully?”

“Does it:

Promote love and unity? (All successful groups prioritize this)
Enable participation? (All successful groups have participatory elements)
Maintain order? (All successful groups have structure and boundaries)
Allow reverence? (All successful groups maintain reverence)
Build up the body? (All successful groups focus on edification)

If not, it needs adjustment.

The ultimate test: Does this structure help us love one another, maintain unity, and build up the body, as successful modern groups do?

If yes, it’s good. If no, it needs to change.

Remember: Modern examples show that both integration and separation can work, as long as they serve love, unity, reverence, and mutual edification. Structure is secondary to these principles.

“One after another of the brethren arise as the Spirit leads—one with a hymn, another voicing the worship of the assembly, another with some Scripture exposition in keeping with the feast of remembrance.” - Alfred P. Gibbs (Brethren)

“Each is asked to stand forth and sing, as he can, a hymn to God, either one from the holy Scriptures or one of his own composing.” - Tertullian (c. 197 AD)

“Let us now sing for a bit and remind ourselves that silence is okay – for it is in those times that we hear God best.” - SFMI Conference Orientation Script

“When you come together, each of you has a psalm, a teaching, a tongue, a revelation, an interpretation. Let all be done for building up.” - 1 Corinthians 14:26 (ESV) - Pattern practiced by Jackie Pullinger / St. Stephen’s Society and other charismatic open meetings