Religious Travelers - Reformed Christian Congregations in London

DW and I will be in London next Sunday staying in the Paddington area.

Any recommendations on a Reformed congregation in the area? We do have to be on the Heathrow Express by 1300ish

DW and I will be in London next Sunday staying in the Paddington area.

Any recommendations on a Reformed congregation in the area? We do have to be on the Heathrow Express by 1300ishThis thread title fascinated me; I've never seen the term "Reformed Christian Congregation" before. Is there a more common name for this denomination that I might recognize?
[this is meant as a respectful question, not in any way a criticism or put down]

Not taken as such!:)

Reformed Christians are those who hold to the "Doctrines of Grace."

Denominations include, but are not limited to Presbyterians (aka Church of Scotland), Reformed (Particular) Baptists, Dutch Reformed, Huguenot. Also many "Congregationalist" churches are Reformed.

I've wanted to know the same thing in other locations but had never thought to post something here on FT to find out!

Well, you could, of course, visit the Westminster Abbey which, in it's Henry VII Lady chapel and then the Jerusalem Chamber, was the meeting place of the Westminster Assembly of Divines. The Westminster Assembly, as you know, created the Westminster Confession of Faith (the Westminster Catechisms, shorter and larger, also stemming from this).

What I do not know is just how reformed the preaching is today, but I did attend a Sunday morning service there a few years ago and the theology of the sermon was fairly reformed. I do not, unfortunately, know another reformed congregation in London to suggest, but the Westminster Abbey would certainly allow you the opportunity to not only visit a place that was pivotal in the history of the reformed faith but also worship there. I do also highly recommend that you attend, if you are able, one of their evensong services. I can guarantee you will not be sorry that you did. Their website is http://www.westminster-abbey.org/. I'll admit, however, that I found it curious that I didn't find anything in their history section about the Westminster Assembly.

The Westminster Abbey, by the way, is part of the Church of England. In my experience while in England, I have not found churches called "reformed" churches but many of the Church of England churches come as close to it as I have found.

Please post back if you ended up attending or if you found any other reformed congregation while there!

Westminster!?! Well, that is an great idea! Being a good Presbyterian I have a tattered copy of the WCF close at hand at all times.

I was toying with attending the Metropolitan Tablernacle (Spurgeon's church) but that looked like it might be pushing it time wise, with us having to get back to Paddington Station by 1300.

Westminster might just be it. I just looked at the 1100 Matins service might just do for us! The sermons given so far this year look like they could have been good, or not. I'll let you know.

oh, and we will be landing at LHR at 1200 on Saturday. We might be able to catch the evensong at 1500 before dinner and the theater!



Many thanks!:)

Great! I hope you're able to make it to evensong -- you will really love it (hope you're able to make the Sunday morning worship service also).

Just a word of caution: a friend of mine who visited Westminster Abbey this last summer said that she was not permitted to visit the Jerusalem Chamber part of the Abbey -- she wasn't certain whether it was because there was something else going on or what the reason was -- but you may or may not be able to visit the Jerusalem Chamber portion. Still, however, attending a service at Westminster Abbey itself is pretty neat for any Presbyterian who treasures the confession or reformed history.

One more word of caution: don't mix up Westminster Abbey with Westminster Cathedral. They are two different churches.

While Westminster Abbey is a beautiful place, it is firmly in the hands of the Anglicans (last I checked :D ) and doesn't exactly fit the bill for the OP.

I googled:

london reformed church

and got all sorts of interesting hits. I'd browse around there for awhile.

Didn't have time to attend evensong at Westminster, but we did attend Sunday morning worship at Metropolitan Tabernacle.

Very solid service.

For those who are interested it is located at the southern most terminal of the Bakerloo tube line. We asked for directions at a booth inside the station and the nice young lady pointed us in the right direction. It was less than a block from the exit.

Didn't have time to attend evensong at Westminster, but we did attend Sunday morning worship at Metropolitan Tabernacle.

Very solid service.

For those who are interested it is located at the southern most terminal of the Bakerloo tube line. We asked for directions at a booth inside the station and the nice young lady pointed us in the right direction. It was less than a block from the exit.

This is great to know for future trips. Thanks!

DW and I will be in London next Sunday staying in the Paddington area.

Any recommendations on a Reformed congregation in the area? We do have to be on the Heathrow Express by 1300ish

Sorry -- Didn't see that this was a year old!

Not exactly Reformed, but, a huge difference-maker in London:

Hillsong London (http://www.hillsong.co.uk/)

(FYI, I'm Reformed Church in America -- Dutch origin. We attended a United Reformed Church when we lived in the UK in the 1980s.)

(FYI, I'm Reformed Church in America -- Dutch origin. We attended a United Reformed Church when we lived in the UK in the 1980s.)

Ah, so you speak Bavinck and Berkhof, then.

I realize this thread is old, but for any FTers looking for a reformed church in or near London in the future, I'm told the following are solid, reformed churches:

Cheltenham Evangelical Free Church, Cheltenham (not exactly in London) http://www.cheltfreechurch.org/

Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, London (and elsewhere) (http://www.fpchurch.org.uk/congregations/UK/England/London.php)

Free Church of Scotland, London (and elsewhere) (http://www.freechurch.org/)


International Presbyterian Church Ealing, London (http://www.ipc-ealing.co.uk/)

FliesWay2Much, have you had experience with any of these churches when you lived in London? Of course, that was some time ago.

Also, I'd be interested in learning about the similarities or differences between the URC in the UK, the URC in Canada, and the URCNA in the US/Canada -- all distinct and unrelated. The URCNA is also from the Dutch reformed tradition (and still sings from the Dutch Psalter) -- and split off of the CRC (very Dutch). Is the URC UK similar to this?

This RC is again perplexed by the terminology of this thread.

What does "solid" mean in the religious sense? In conformity with recognized teachings? Something entirely different? Is it used in the sense I might say "this priest in faithful to the teachings of the Church?"

This RC is again perplexed by the terminology of this thread.

What does "solid" mean in the religious sense? In conformity with recognized teachings? Something entirely different? Is it used in the sense I might say "this priest in faithful to the teachings of the Church?"

CDTraveler, I should have used the word "solidly" instead of "solid." That may have clarified the intention better; sorry. The general definition I use for "solid" is that which strictly adheres to the confessions/catechisms of the denomination that professes it. For example, the Presbyterian Church in America and Orthodox Presbyterian Church subscribe to (that is, confess as what they believe) the Westminster Confession of Faith and use the larger and shorter Westminster catechisms. The reformed churches that have been derived from the Dutch reformed tradition mostly subscribe to the Three Forms of Unity which are: the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dordt. When I use "solid," I refer to churches that adhere to these confessions in word and deed, opposed to a church that may, officially, subscribe to (a) confession(s), but many of the ministers in the denomination must take scruples against numerous theological points in the confessions because they don't believe much of it. Since I used the word to modify "reformed," the idea I was trying to convey was that the confessions and theology of the churches and ministers of those churches do yet very much resemble the theology of the reformation. I probably just conveyed it in an awkward manner.

So, yes, you have the idea that I meant when you say "in conformity with recognized teachings," those teachings being those that stemmed from the reformation, were written as confessions at the Westminster Abbey (English tradition) or the Synod of Dordtrecht.

Bavinck and Berkhof are simply two Dutch reformed theologians from the late 1800s whose works have been used instrumentally in the education at reformed seminaries.

sinfonia, thank you for the clarification and education. Both were quite helpful.

At the risk of diverting the original intention of this thread, and for the benefit of a non-Christian who just wants to understand, can we get back to basics a bit? what does "Doctrines of Grace." mean? (Again there is no intention to offend just to increase knowledge and learn about other faiths).

FWIW, I concur with sinfonia's post. ^


sinfonia, thank you for the clarification and education. Both were quite helpful.

At the risk of diverting the original intention of this thread, and for the benefit of a non-Christian who just wants to understand, can we get back to basics a bit? what does "Doctrines of Grace." mean? (Again there is no intention to offend just to increase knowledge and learn about other faiths).

No offense taken at all. I'll make a clumsy effort to summarize it. If more discussion ensues from that, then perhaps we can make a thread in the OMNI-PR forum so as to not hijack the thread, but I'll leave that for the moderator(s) to decide.

The "Doctrines of Grace" is a phrase that describes the theology of the reformers. As you know, before the reformation, the Roman Catholic (RC) church was basically "the" church, but there were some who objected to the doctrines and rituals of the RC church based on theological reasons. These were the reformers -Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Hus, and others. The reformers' attempt to reform the church brought about, of course, the reformation. While all of the reformers wrote about those areas in theology which separated them from the RC's views, John Calvin's writings were some of the most prominently noted and his Institutes of Christian Religion was one of the most influential books of the reformation. In it is addressed, from Calvin's reformed view, most of the theological sticking points which separate the RC and reformers. Putting this probably more simply than does it justice, these main principles of the reformers are summarized in the Five Solas of the Reformation (Sola Fide - Faith Alone, Sola Scriptura -- Scripture Alone, Sola Christus -- Christ Alone, Sola Gratia -- Grace Alone, Soli Deo Gloria -- Glory to God Alone) which are hand in hand with five points of the doctrine of salvation which the reformers proclaimed. The five points are sometimes used interchangeably with "Doctrines of Grace" as they summarize the doctrine of salvation from a reformed theology perspective which is heavily based on grace. The doctrines are thus:

Total Depravity -- As a consequence of Adam's fall into sin/original sin, humankind inherited a sinful nature (Augustine) and therefore is enslaved to sin. On our own, we do not love God's laws nor do we love our neighbor as we are commanded to, but put our own interests above these. Because of this sinful nature, we are morally unable to choose to follow God. This ("total") doesn't mean we're as bad as bad can be, but that sin has infected every aspect of man's humanity.

Unconditional Election -- Because we are all sinful and cannot live in perfect obedience with God's law (summarized in the ten commandments), none of us are worthy of being saved from the wrath of God. We can do nothing ourselves to merit God's drawing us to Him - it is solely by His grace. His "electing" us (drawing His children to Himself and saving us from His wrath) is not based on any foreseen merit through good works, virtue, or our own faith, but it is unconditional. We are elected purely by His grace and mercy and He chooses whomever He will to save.

Limited Atonement/Particular Redemption -- Christ's substitutionary (in the place of humankind) atonement for sins on the cross is not limited in its power, but it was definite and accomplished precisely what God intended it to accomplish. Therefore, Christ atoned for (that is, satisfied the wrath of God for) the sins of those whom He has determined to save. His atonement was sufficient for all but efficient for those whom He has called.

Irresistible/Effectual Grace -- Those whom God chooses to draw to Him will, indeed, be drawn to Him. God will not fail to save those whom He chooses to save. The saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom He has determined to save by, in His timing, overcoming their resistance and bringing them to a saving faith in Christ.

Perseverance of the Saints -- While the saints (God's children) have no power themselves to keep their faith and persevere in Christ until death, God maintains their faith so that those whom He has called will not fall away from Him, mercifully preserving them. His sovereign grace keeps them.

At the time of the Synod of Dordtrecht (Synod of Dordt) in the early 1600s, the Dutch churches found themselves in a theological controversy surrounding the doctrine of salvation. A Dutch theologian named Arminius questioned the five points of the doctrine of salvation that Calvin and the reformers claimed (also called "The Five Points of Calvinism," though Calvin did not create these five points, but because he wrote so notably about them and because he was such a major force behind the reformation, they are attributed as such). Arminius's followers (after his death) presented their Five Points of the Remonstrance which were in direct contrast with the Five Points of Calvinism/Doctrines of Grace. That is, they believed in partial depravity, conditional election based on foreseen faith, universal atonement, resistible grace, and falling from grace. The Synod of Dordt was held to settle this serious controversy. The outcome of the Synod of Dordt was a strong rejection of the five points of Arminianism/the Remonstrance. The Synod -- comprised of the Dutch Reformed Church in Holland and voting delegates from eight other countries -- penned a bold statement rejecting the Five Points of the Remonstrance. That statement is a document called the Canons of Dordt (http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/canons_of_dordt.html). It is from this document that the five points of the doctrine were presented together as one document and put forth as a soteriological (dealing with the doctrine of salvation) system.

That's probably more than you asked for, but the clearest way I could come up with to try to explain it with the supporting background. I hope that helps.

Addendum -- To clarify my previous post wherein I mentioned the Presbyterian churches (reformed Presbyterian churches) subscribing to the Westminster confession (http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/index.html) and the Dutch reformed churches subscribing to the TFU (The Forms of Unity) (http://www.cprf.co.uk/languages/foreigncreedslist.htm), I should mention that I've never encountered a Dutch reformed church that does not highly regard the Westminster Confession or a Presbyterian church (more of a British/American tradition) that does not highly regard the TFU. Most reformed churches will affirm both the Westminster and the TFU since the Westminster and TFU are very similar in content.

Nice synopsis.

I am a dyed in the wool Presbyterian, but sadly there is not a solid PCA/OPC/ARP church in my area, so I will be joining a nearby Dutch Reformed (URCNA) congregation.

As far as the confessions go, the WCF is a very technical document, while I find the Heidelberg Catechism much more pastoral in nature.



Addendum -- To clarify my previous post wherein I mentioned the Presbyterian churches (reformed Presbyterian churches) subscribing to the Westminster confession (http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/index.html) and the Dutch reformed churches subscribing to the TFU (The Forms of Unity) (http://www.cprf.co.uk/languages/foreigncreedslist.htm), I should mention that I've never encountered a Dutch reformed church that does not highly regard the Westminster Confession or a Presbyterian church (more of a British/American tradition) that does not highly regard the TFU. Most reformed churches will affirm both the Westminster and the TFU since the Westminster and TFU are very similar in content.

I am a dyed in the wool Presbyterian, but sadly there is not a solid PCA/OPC/ARP church in my area, so I will be joining a nearby Dutch Reformed (URCNA) congregation.

You'll probably find very little that is theologically differentiated between the PCA/OPC and the URCNA, but as you're a good Presbyterian, it will definitely take you some time to appreciate the URCNA governance system. The URCNA is young and still working out its way as a federation.

As far as the confessions go, the WCF is a very technical document, while I find the Heidelberg Catechism much more pastoral in nature.

Agreed. They each have their own strengths this way.

No offense taken at all. I'll make a clumsy effort to summarize it. If more discussion ensues from that, then perhaps we can make a thread in the OMNI-PR forum so as to not hijack the thread, but I'll leave that for the moderator(s) to decide.

The "Doctrines of Grace" is a phrase that describes the theology of the reformers. ............

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Of course it's a lot to take it but I will continue my research just for my own understanding. I was born and lived in the UK all my life but never really understood the fundamental distinguishing principles between Catholisicm, the Anglican church, Prebyterians, Unitarians, etc.

The internet is so wonderful in this respect that as I grow older I have resources at hand now to study and answer many of the questions I have had in my mind for so long.

Once again thanks for answering my question.

Once again thanks for answering my question.

You're welcome, of course. I wish you the best in your research.

Ah, so you speak Bavinck and Berkhof, then.

I realize this thread is old, but for any FTers looking for a reformed church in or near London in the future, I'm told the following are solid, reformed churches:

Cheltenham Evangelical Free Church, Cheltenham (not exactly in London) http://www.cheltfreechurch.org/

Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, London (and elsewhere) (http://www.fpchurch.org.uk/congregations/UK/England/London.php)

Free Church of Scotland, London (and elsewhere) (http://www.freechurch.org/)


International Presbyterian Church Ealing, London (http://www.ipc-ealing.co.uk/)

FliesWay2Much, have you had experience with any of these churches when you lived in London? Of course, that was some time ago.

Also, I'd be interested in learning about the similarities or differences between the URC in the UK, the URC in Canada, and the URCNA in the US/Canada -- all distinct and unrelated. The URCNA is also from the Dutch reformed tradition (and still sings from the Dutch Psalter) -- and split off of the CRC (very Dutch). Is the URC UK similar to this?

No, unfortunately. We lived in Newbury, which is about 50 miles west of London. We attended the URC in Newbury. Unfortunately, it's a struggling congregation these days.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Of course it's a lot to take it but I will continue my research just for my own understanding. I was born and lived in the UK all my life but never really understood the fundamental distinguishing principles between Catholisicm, the Anglican church, Prebyterians, Unitarians, etc.

The internet is so wonderful in this respect that as I grow older I have resources at hand now to study and answer many of the questions I have had in my mind for so long.

Once again thanks for answering my question.

I'll help you out here. The Roman Catholics are the ones who see the Pope as the head of their church, who have required celibacy for priests, and whose priests celebrate Mass (Communion) every day. If you see a nun, 9 times out of 10, she's Catholic. (The Anglicans and Eastern Orthodox have nuns, too, but not as many.)

The Anglicans are the Church of England. Originally, Henry VIII broke away from the Catholic church because he wanted to get divorced, but after a long period in which the monarchs were alternately Calvinist (Edward VI) and Catholic (Mary) and killing people from the other side, Elizabeth I and her advisors decided that the Church of England should be a "via media" (middle way) between the Protestants and the Catholics. Thus they kept a lot of the structure (bishops, cathedrals) of the Catholic Church and their services can get quite ornate, but their theology is more Protestant, especially close to the doctrines of Luther. There's a lot of variety in actual practice. Some are Eucharist parishes (Communion every Sunday) and some are Morning Prayer parishes (Communion only once a month).

Presbyterians are Calvinists, and their theology is explained above. Where an Anglican church will be centered on its altar, a Reformed Church will often have a pulpit at the center. (In Germany, the Kaiser forced the Lutherans and the Reformed to unite, and you can tell which branch a church originally belonged to by noting what's front and center.)

Lutherans are similar to Anglicans theologically, only without the same formal hierarchy and they are concentrated in Germany, Scandinavia, the Baltic countries, and places that have received immigrants from that area.

Many Unitarians do not consider themselves Christians, because one of their teaching is that Jesus was just a great prophet. If you look at one of their pamphlets, the Q&A section often answers questions with "We believe that people should decide for themselves." Some congregations have a traditional religious structure, while others are more like lecture and debating societies.

The groups above (except for the Unitarians) baptize infants and children at their parents' request. The Baptists and similar groups baptize only people who are old enough to request it themselves, and they baptize by full immersion in water. Not all Baptists are fundamentalists, but many fundamentalists are Baptists.

Pentecostals believe that one should "receive the Holy Spirit," which involves entering into a trance state and "speaking in tongues."

I hope this sketch has been helpful, and members of the religions I have mentioned should feel free to elaborate or correct me. (I was brought up Lutheran and now attend an Episcopal=American Anglican church.)

I'll help you out here. The Roman Catholics are the ones who see the Pope as the head of their church, who have required celibacy for priests, and whose priests celebrate Mass (Communion) every day. If you see a nun, 9 times out of 10, she's Catholic. (The Anglicans and Eastern Orthodox have nuns, too, but not as many.)I have found most of the recent threads on "Reformed Christians" to be quite respectful and enlightening, but I find the above remarks somewhat demeaning to Catholics.

If you wished to show Catholics the same respect that is shown to other denominations, it would have more appropriate to highlight the differences in doctrine than focusing on priestly celibacy and nuns. The Protestant churches mentioned in this thread are all break-away churches, churches which separated from the Catholic church for points of theology, not because of the s#x lives of the clerics (or lack thereof).

A few points of difference to consider are the belief in the transubstantiation, the role of Mary, the role of saints, methods of prayer, and whether the continuous descent of the teaching magisterium from Christ to the apostles to the priests of today matters. I know one gentleman, now a Catholic monk, who left the Anglican Church over that last point.