For Christ's Kingdom!
The writing ministry of Peter Bringe, pastor at Covenant Family Church (Wentzville, MO)
Wednesday, March 19, 2025
Distributing the Lord's Supper
Tuesday, February 25, 2025
Catechizing and the Westminster Shorter Catechism
![]() |
Presbyterian Catechising by John Phillip (1817-1867). National Galleries of Scotland. |
The Bible teaches the importance of such instruction. Exodus 12:26-27 and Deuteronomy 6:20-25 describe giving instruction in the faith through questions and answers. Deuteronomy 6:7 teaches parents to diligently teach the word of God to their children. "You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise." This point is confirmed in the New Testament as well (Eph. 6:4). And not only parents are responsible for catechizing. The Greek word katécheó is used to describe the pastor-teachers of the church in Galatians 6:6, "Let the one who is taught the word share all good things with the one who teaches." It is important for the pastors of the church to teach as well as preach (1 Tim. 4:13, 16), to give instruction in sound doctrine, in "the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness" (1 Tim. 6:3, cp. 2 Tim. 1:13-14). Ministers must not shrink back from declaring everything profitable, the whole counsel of God, giving the saints a systematic understanding of what God's word teaches (Acts 20:20, 27).
Not only do we find biblical grounds for this doctrinal instruction by both parents and pastors, but also its use in church history. In the early church, catechetical lectures were given to catechumens before they were admitted to the sacraments, along with catechetical instruction afterwards. From early on, this instruction followed the outline of the Creed (Nicene or Apostles), the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the sacraments.
Catechetical instruction blossomed during the Reformation. Many catechism were written by the Reformers to assist in this work, such as Luther’s Large and Small Catechisms and the Genevan Catechism. The Roman Catholic Church responded with the “Roman Catechism” in 1566.
The Westminster Shorter and Larger Catechisms were produced by the Westminster Assembly in the 1640s and they form part of the doctrinal standards of Presbyterian denominations like my own, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. The Westminster Assembly produced these catechisms as a "Directory for ... catechising" for the churches of England, Scotland, and Ireland, in accord with the Solemn League and Covenant (1643). Its Form of Presbyterial Church Government included "catechising" among the ordinances to be practiced in each congregation and "To catechise, which is a plain laying down the first principles of the oracles of God" as among the duties of pastors.
Children, born within the pale of the visible Church, and dedicated to God in baptism, are under the instruction and government of the Church; and are to be taught to read, and repeat the Catechism, the Apostles Creed, and the Lord's prayer. They are to be taught to pray, to abhor sin, to fear God, and to obey the Lord Jesus Christ. And, when they come to years of discretion, if they be free from scandal, appear sober and steady, and to have sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord's body, they ought to be informed, it is their duty, and their privilege, to come to the Lord's Supper.
Let heads of families be careful to instruct their children and servants in the principles of religion. — Every proper opportunity ought to be embraced for such instruction. But we are of opinion that the sabbath evenings after public worship, should be sacredly preserved for this purpose.
Tuesday, February 11, 2025
Church Membership
There have been times and places when this was not as much of an issue for Christians, because they would automatically belong to their parish church. But our present situation in America places more responsibility on the individual to take the initiative to join a church.
Those whom Christ saves, he makes members of his church, which he organizes with visible government and ordinances, and church members have no right to renounce its jurisdiction and fellowship.
A Christian has no right to withdraw from membership in Christ’s church and its jurisdiction, although they may transfer from one particular church to another.
A Christian is bound by his profession of faith in Christ to participate faithfully in the church's worship and service, to submit in the Lord to its government, and to heed its discipline.
Nor should a Christian want to withdraw from the church - Christ has instituted things like pastoral care, diaconal care, and the sacraments for the good of his people. One of the benefits of salvation is this fellowship in the household of God, in which you are both blessed and a blessing to others.
The church is society, a fellowship, in which each member is called to participate in its common worship, in mutual edification, and in sharing according to abilities and needs (Acts 2:42, Heb. 10:24-25, 1 Thess. 5:11, 2 Cor. 8-9). As the Westminster Confession of Faith puts it, "Saints by profession are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and communion in the worship of God, and in performing such other spiritual services as tend to their mutual edification; as also in relieving each other in outward things, according to their several abilities and necessities" (26.2).
Christ has appointed that there be a government in his church of elders to govern and shepherd the church, “all the flock” (1 Thess. 5:12-13, Acts 20:28), instituting the practice of church discipline, to be used as needed (Matt. 16:19, 18:15-20). Part of how Christ exercises the office of a king is by giving his people "officers, laws, and censures, by which he visibly governs them," as our Larger Catechism explains (WLC 45). Christians are commanded in Scripture to be subject to this government in the Lord. “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you” (Heb. 13:17).
This church is universal (Matt. 16:18), regional (Acts 20:17), and local (1 Cor. 16:19). Christians can transfer from church to church, especially when they move or when attempts to rectify a serious problem fail. But as long as they are Christians, they cannot withdraw from Christ’s church, and ought to therefore have membership in some church under some elders.
Wednesday, January 15, 2025
Jesus the King
In what two ways is Jesus king?
Why do we need a king?
As early as Genesis 3:15, mankind was taught to believe in the king who delivers sinners from the domain of darkness with victory over the serpent. God said to that ancient serpent the devil, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (Gen. 3:15).
When did God first promise kings for his people?
After God rejected Saul from being king, whom did he raise up and establish as king over his covenant people?
The kings like David, Asa, and Jehoshaphat received God’s word from the priests and enforced it, guided the people by it, delivered the people from their enemies, gave them peace in the land, and interceded for the people.
Yet, as David’s descendants acted corruptly, the kingdom fell. Was God done with the offspring of David? What did the prophets say?
How does King Jesus subdue us to himself?
How does King Jesus rule us?
How does King Jesus defend us?
The kingdom of heaven is both a shelter and a transforming power, a place of protective defense and a power of righteous sway. It is a tree where the birds make their nest and it is leaven which transforms the dough (Matt. 13:31-33). (1) It is a shelter where there is reconciliation with God rather than condemnation, favor rather than wrath. In this kingdom there is justification and adoption, and thus peace and joy, through Jesus Christ (Col. 1:12-14). We take refuge under the protection of our king. (2) Jesus reigns in our hearts by his grace, producing sanctification, societal reform, and a new way of life. As a little sin can spread its corrupting influence in people and communities (1 Cor. 5:6), so the reign of Christ spreads its reforming influence in people and communities.
How does King Jesus restrain and conquer his and our enemies?
Psalm 110 serves as a good summary of his kingship. Jesus was enthroned as king when he ascended to his Father’s right hand on the basis of his victorious work of redemption (Ps. 110:1). He now rules in the midst of his enemies, making his enemies his footstool (110:1-2). He does this in two ways, (1) by subduing the hearts of his people by his word and Spirit, so that they “offer themselves freely on the day of [his] power” (110:3), and (2) by restraining and conquering all his and our enemies, executing judgment among the nations (110:5-6).
"[The kingdom of God] was symbolized in the throne of David in Jerusalem and the Jewish theocracy, and it was visibly set up in its higher spiritual form when the long-promised Son of David, having redeemed his people on the cross, rose from the dead, ascended to the heavens and sat down at the right hand of God. This kingdom is not one among the many competing kingdoms of the earth. It is antagonistic to the kingdom of Satan only: all the natural kingdoms of men, except in so far as they are compromised with the kingdom of Satan, are penetrated and assimilated and rendered subservient to its own ends by the kingdom of God. All other kingdoms have their rise, progress, maturity and decadence, while this kingdom alone is eternal, growing broader and waxing stronger through all ages until its consummation in the city of God."
-A.A. Hodge, "The Kingdom Of Christ," Popular Lectures on Theological Themes (1887)
Tuesday, January 7, 2025
Jesus the Priest
Jesus became our redeemer to deliver us from our estate of sin and misery. As our redeemer he executes the offices of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king.
Why do we need a priest?
Who were some of the priests in the Old Testament?
What did they do?
Where was it prophesied that the Christ would be a priest?
What is significant about Jesus being a priest of the order of Melchizedek?
How was Jesus greater than the Levitical priests?
Was it requisite that our priest be man?
What is the sacrifice that Jesus offered for sins?
How is this sacrifice superior to the sacrifices that were offered by the Levitical priests?
What did Jesus do by his sacrifice of himself?
This is not to say that Jesus and the Father were at cross-purposes. The Father had sent the Son because of his love for us, so that God and sinners would be reconciled. As John Murray has said, “The doctrine of the propitiation is precisely this: that God loved the objects of His wrath so much that He gave His own Son to the end that He by His blood should make provision for the removal of this wrath.” (John Murray, The Atonement. Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962, p. 15)
How does Jesus continue to execute the office of a priest for us?
Wednesday, January 1, 2025
Jesus the Prophet
What did they do?
How did the ministry of the prophets differ from the teaching ministry of the priests?
Was there a prophetic expectation that the Christ would be a prophet?
When people began to observe Jesus’ teaching and miracles, they realized that he was this great prophet, the Prophet. The Gospel of John makes this clear by noting that John the Baptist denied that he was the Prophet (John 1:21-27), while the people correctly realized that Jesus was the Prophet (John 6:14, 7:40). Peter quoted the prophecy of Deuteronomy 18 in Acts 3:22 as referring to Jesus.
How was Jesus greater than the other prophets?
How did Jesus exercise his office as a prophet before his incarnation?
How did Jesus exercise his office as a prophet during his earthly ministry?
How did Jesus exercise his office as a prophet during the apostolic age?
How does Jesus exercise his office as a prophet now?
What is it that Jesus makes known to sinners by his word and Spirit?
He delivered the full and final revelation of this message with his coming, a message that was once delivered to the saints through the prophets and apostles, and which was written down for the church in the New Testament. As this message has been delivered by the Prophet, and we await no greater revelation until his second coming, prophecy has ceased and we expect no further revelation. Let us attend to the written word of God and grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Tuesday, December 17, 2024
The Incarnation of the Son of God
"Q. 22: How did Christ, being the Son of God, become man? A. Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin." (Westminster Shorter Catechism)Christ is the eternal Son of God, of one substance with the Father. At a particular time, for our salvation, he became man. He did this without giving up his divine nature, but united the two natures in one person. This is one of the great wonders of the Christian faith. It is such a wondrous thing that from time to time some heretics have felt the need to tone it down. But our catechism explains what God has revealed in his word concerning Jesus, that because we “share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things” and was made to be “like his brothers in every respect” so that he might be our high priest and die on our behalf (Heb. 2:14-18). As a man, he “in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15).
The Human Nature of Christ
What kind of body did Jesus take to himself?
He took to himself a true body. Some heresies have denied this, such as Docetism and Marcionism. Even in the days of the apostles, John warned of deceivers who “do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh” (2 John 1:7). Jesus took to himself a true human body with flesh and bones (Luke 24:39-42). He took to himself a mortal body, with its common infirmities, in weakness. His body was a true body, subject to the limitations of a human body.
Did Jesus have a human soul as well as a human body?
Yes, he took to himself a human soul. Contrary to the heresy of Apollinarianism, he took to himself a “reasonable soul” (that is, a rational soul, a soul that could reason). This too was part of being "made like his brothers in every respect" (Heb. 2:17). He took on a human mind, will, and affections - all willingly subject to his divine will. He fully shared in our human experience, both in the outer life and in the inner life. When he suffered for us, he suffered in both body and soul. When he was in Gethsemane, he told his disciples, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me” (Matt. 26:38). He is able to sympathize with our weakness (Heb. 4:15). While he remained without sin, and thus did not experience any temptation arising from evil desires, yet he did experience things like hunger, thirst, sorrow, and weakness, as well as the temptations of the world and the evil one.
Jesus did not come as superman, a man of steel, but a man in your humble and mortal condition, capable of suffering. He hungered (Matt. 4:2). He got tired (John 4:6). As a youth he studied and grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52). As he prepared to offer himself as a sacrifice for sin, he was in agony, praying with loud cries and tears, with sweat that became like great drops of blood (Heb. 5:7, Luke 22:44). He experienced fear and yet pressed on for the joy that was set before him, entrusting his spirit into his Father’s hands. It was not enough to merely take on a visible appearance to talk with humans, as angels have done, but it was essential to become one of us, in order to die our death and raise us to new life and immortality.
What use should we make of the doctrine of Christ’s true humanity?
(1) Gratitude to Christ. (2) Confidence in his mercy and compassion, seeking his help. (3) Confidence in his sacrifice and redemption, receive and resting upon him. (4) Imitation of his love and humility. (5) Imitation of his perfect humanity. (6) To not despise human nature, body or soul, but to give thanks for Christ’s redemption of our whole nature.
The Virgin Birth
Was Jesus begotten by an earthly father?
Of whom was Jesus conceived? Out of what was his flesh made?
The flesh of Christ came from the virgin Mary, although miraculously conceived. Jesus was conceived “of her substance” (WLC 37, WCF 8.2). Even before his birth, Jesus was called by Elizabeth the fruit of Mary’s womb (Luke 1:42). Mary also nourished him in her womb and gave birth to him. As regards his divine nature, the Son is begotten of the Father before all ages, but as regards his manhood, he was conceived of Mary, of her substance. Jesus is the promised offspring of the woman (Gen. 3:15), of Israelite and Davidic descent according to the flesh (Rom. 1:3, 9:5).
By whose power was Jesus conceived in Mary’s womb and of her substance?
The Holy Spirit was the one who did this work. This is the angel’s answer to Mary’s question, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” How? By the Holy Spirit. Nothing will be impossible with God. The same explanation was given to Joseph: “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for what which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit” (1:20). The Holy Spirit does not act the part of a father, but as the worker of a miracle. The virgin conceived without intercourse, and this happened by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit wrought this miraculous conception, and did so in such a way that the personal union of Christ’s two natures existed from the moment of conception and what was conceived was holy, without original sin.
Note that the Son of God was an unborn baby. The incarnation began at conception. Beginning at conception, a person was in Mary’s womb, conceived of her substance, but no longer her body. She was the “mother of my Lord” while pregnant (Luke 1:43).
How did this miraculous conception fulfill prophecy?
Christ was conceived in this way in accord with the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 (cp. Is. 9:9-7 and Matt. 1:22-23). "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (Is. 7:14).
Besides fulfilling prophecy, why is it important that Jesus was conceived of a virgin by the Spirit?
That Jesus might be the second Adam, a new beginning for the old humanity.
The covenant of works was made with Adam and all his natural posterity, all those descended from him by ordinary generation. Adam’s corruption was conveyed and his guilt imputed to his natural descendants. But Jesus took on Adam’s human nature without being his descendant by ordinary generation. The point is not that original sin comes from the man rather than the woman, but that original sin is passed on by the course of nature and that Christ was not conceived through the course of nature.
Jesus is the head of a renewed humanity, a new beginning for the old humanity, having the same human nature as Adam but without his headship and corruption. Jesus was descended from Adam, but not in a natural way. He was conceived of Mary’s substance by a supernatural work. He is the last Adam (Rom. 5:12-21), the one who would renew the lost children of the first Adam. Thus his miraculous conception is like our own spiritual rebirth in him: not by nature, but by the Spirit of God.
Thursday, November 28, 2024
Books on the New England Puritans
![]() |
Pilgrims Going To Church by George H. Boughton |
A Reforming People: Puritanism and the Transformation of Public Life in New England by David D. Hall
I really enjoyed reading this book by David D. Hall, professor of New England church history at Harvard Divinity School (three of his books are listed here). It contains a careful look at how the New England Puritans transformed public life by implementing the biblical teachings, reforms, and ethic they had developed in their preaching and teaching. It was a good book on a historical level, giving a better understanding of our American roots and the development of our society, as well as on an applied theology level, giving an example of a society that took seriously the imperative to submit itself to Christ the King and his revelation, the Bible. Rather than moving toward a cruel and authoritative oligarchy (as some would portray it), Puritan society in New England fostered community participation and checks on any potentially “arbitrary” government power. The details of their reforms and practices as they were hammered out in the new world is quite interesting and inspiring.
Worlds of Wonder, Days of Judgment: Popular Religious Belief in Early New England by David D. Hall
This book is not as memorable as A Reforming People, but it was another good book by the same author, with a focus on the religion practiced by the people in early New England, how the theology taught in their books was practiced. As Edmund Morgan says in his review of this book, “[Hall] shows us, as never before, how the sophisticated doctrines of the Puritan clergy meshed, clashed, and merged with the inherited attitudes and assumptions of ordinary people in their day-to-day grappling with the mysteries of their world.”
One takeaway from this book is that New England churches were most radically Congregationalist in the 1630s and that from that time there was tension between those who defended that system and those who sought to modify it toward Presbyterianism. I find that the history of the New England Puritans shows that their heirs are not only found in modern Congregationalist churches, but also in Baptist and Presbyterian churches (the directions these two wings of Congregationalism tended toward).
I have admiration for the New England Puritans, but a consistent takeaway I draw from studying them is an appreciation for Presbyterianism. As Charles Hodge noted in the 19th century, “Had New England, with her compact and homogenous population, and all her other advantages, enjoyed the benefit of a regular Presbyterian government in the church, it would, in all human probability, have been the noblest ecclesiastical community in the world.”
The Puritan Dilemma: The Story of John Winthrop by Edmund S. Morgan
An excellent little book that not only tells the story of John Winthrop, but in telling it, lays out the Puritan mission and dilemma, to seek purity without retreating from society. I seem to remember a few brief passages where the author might have misrepresented or overly simplified the theology of the Puritans, but taking those comments with a grain of salt, the book is worth reading. Morgan was a professor of history at Yale, and three of his books are listed here.
The Puritan Family: Religion and Domestic Relations in Seventeenth-Century New England by Edmund S. Morgan
The Puritans took quite seriously the idea that the household is basic to human society. This book is an interesting look into the family life and household structure of the New England Puritans, including the relationships of husbands and wives, parents and children, and masters and servants. (Another book I have but which I have not read cover to cover is a similar book covering family life in Plymouth Colony in particular, A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony by John Demos.)
New England Frontier: Puritans and Indians 1620-1675 by Alden T. Vaughan
An excellent book on the New England Pilgrims and Puritans and their interactions with the native peoples by Alden T. Vaughn, a professor of history at Colombia University (I have the third edition, published in 1995). I came across this book while researching missionary efforts to the native tribes of New England, since it spends three chapters on that subject. It traces the relationships of the colonies to the tribes in other respects as well, from the founding of Plymouth in 1620 to King Philip’s War in 1675. (Two other books I found helpful on Puritan missions were The Theology of Puritan Missions by Rooy and The Puritan Hope by Iain Murray.)
My wife and I read this book while we were expecting our daughter Anne. Later I found out that I am descended from Anne Bradstreet. This book gives a helpful overview of Anne’s life and context as well as her writings, many of which are included in the book (both of her poetry and her proverbs). This is probably the best single book to get on Anne Bradstreet, but another biography with greater focus on her life and character is Beyond Stateliest Marble by Douglas Wilson (also published as Anne Bradstreet: Passionate Femininity), and a good biography for younger readers is Anne Bradstreet by Simonetta Carr.
William Brewster of the Mayflower: Portrait of a Pilgrim by Dorothy Brewster
A helpful and informative biography of a man who lived an eventful life - a Cambridge education, service abroad under Queen Elizabeth, Postmaster and Bailiff of Scrooby Manor, outlaw printer in Holland, and elder of the Pilgrims’ church. This book mostly tells of Brewster's life leading up to the Mayflower. I also have another biography of Brewster which I have not yet read but have heard recommended, Pilgrim: A Biography of William Brewster by Mary B. Sherwood.
Pilgrim Colony: A History of New Plymouth 1620-1691 by George D. Langdon
A helpful history of Plymouth colony from its founding in 1620 to its annexation to Massachusetts in 1691. While many accounts of Plymouth’s history focus only on its beginning, it was nice to see the full history of the colony laid out. Another less academic history of Plymouth which I have partly read is Samuel Eliot Morrison’s, The Story of the “Old Colony” of New Plymouth. Of course, William Bradford’s history of the colony up to 1646, Of Plymouth Plantation, is an important classic. I have the edition edited by Samuel Eliot Morrison. For more on the founding of that colony, you can get Mourt's Relation, an account first printed in 1622, from Applewoods Books.
Puritans at Play: Leisure and Recreation in Colonial New England by Bruce C. Daniels
An interesting look into how the Puritans viewed and practiced leisure and recreation. While they placed limits on play, they still had fun within those limits. And even as those limits expanded later in the colonial period, they continued to be influenced by the original principles of practicality and moral restraint.
Jonathan Edwards: New Biography by Iain H. Murray
I have read many of Iain Murray’s books and I have appreciated each one. This biography of Jonathan Edwards was no exception. And in the life of Jonathan Edwards, we learn more about what happened to New England Puritanism in the 18th century.
The Gentle Puritan: A Life of Ezra Stiles, 1727-1795 by Edmund S. Morgan
An interesting book for its insight into 18th century New England from the perspective of the history of Ezra Stiles, a Congregationalist minister and president of Yale College. This book continues the story of New England from the Great Awakening through the American Revolution to 1795. As the author says in his preface concerning Ezra Stiles, “his intellectual curiosity was omnivorous, and precisely because his mind was more receptive than creative, this book is as much a study of the times as it is of the man.” The book also provides another perspective on Edwards, and especially his successors, since Stiles was usually on the other side. I would like to read a book on Stiles' successor at Yale, Timothy Dwight IV, but I have not done so yet.
Connecticut’s War Governor: Jonathan Trumbull by David M. Roth
I did not know much about Governor Trumbull until we visited his hometown, Lebanon, CT, which is where I got this book. He was a vital figure during the American War for Independence and a man firmly rooted in New England's Puritan heritage.
“Day after day, through personal tragedy, and through news of military defeat, financial chaos, and political confusion at Philadelphia, Jonathan Trumbull sat at his desk in the 'War Office' and turned out the directives, and occasionally pleas, that kept the Connecticut war effort functioning until ultimate victory was achieved. The old man came to be something of a comic figure to the sophisticated visitors, especially the French, who passed through Lebanon during the war. Remarks were made about the short, unimposing governor whose conversation was saturated with biblical exhortations. Yet, the smiles never lingered very long, for this Old Testament patriarch never appeared very anachronistic when the time came for performance. His quotas were always filled on time. He was the man to whom Washington turned when the shaky Continental Army was on the point of dissolution.” (p. 65)
The Pioneers: The Heroic Story of the Settlers Who Brought the American Ideal West by David McCullough
One important aspect of studying the New England Puritans is that their legacy is not only to be found in New England, but also in other parts of the USA, especially the Midwest. My own New England ancestors moved west over the generations to Wisconsin. This book tells the story of the settlers who came from New England to settle the Northwest Territory, and in particular, the town of Marietta, Ohio.
Tuesday, November 26, 2024
Our Errand in the Wilderness
![]() |
The Mayflower in Plymouth Harbor by William Halsall |
None of the passengers returned on the Mayflower. This small group of 52 people remained - without a ship - in their little village on the coast of New England. Why were they there? Why did they stay? Why had they ventured everything on this settlement?
This was the same question asked 50 years later by Samuel Danforth, the pastor in Roxbury, Massachusetts. In 1670 he preached a memorable election day sermon entitled, “A Brief Recognition of New-England’s Errand into the Wilderness” (available online here). What was their errand in the new world? What was the purpose of their settlement? Why did the founders of New England, Pilgrims and Puritans, go out into the wilderness and remain there? He took his text from Matthew 11:7-10 where Jesus spoke of John the Baptist.
And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses. But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
Such as have sometime left their pleasant Cities and Habitations to enjoy the pure Worship of God in a Wilderness, are apt in time to abate and cool in their affection thereunto: but then the Lord calls upon them seriously and throughly to examine themselves, what it was that drew them into the Wilderness, and to consider that it was not the expectation of ludicrous levity, nor of Courtly pomp and delicacy, but of the free and clear dispensation of the Gospel and Kingdome of God.Having explained this doctrine, he began to apply it, with its first use being:
Use 1: Of solemn and serious Enquiry to us all in this general Assembly, Whether we have not in a great measure forgotten our Errand into the Wilderness. You have solemnly professed before God, Angels and Men, that the Cause of your leaving your Country, Kindred and Fathers houses, and transporting your selves with your Wives, Little Ones and Substance over the vast Ocean into this waste and howling Wilderness, was your Liberty to walk in the Faith of the Gospel with all good Conscience according to the Order of the Gospel, and your enjoyment of the pure Worship of God according to his Institution, without humane Mixtures and Impositions.It is incumbent us, their heirs, to make a similar enquiry. Have we forgotten our errand in the wilderness? Have we been true to our godly heritage?
What Danforth said of New England generally was indeed true of the Pilgrims in particular. William Bradford listed several reasons they decided to leave Holland, including the coming war with Spain and economic hardship, but the first reason went beyond these to the bigger picture:
And first, they saw and found by experience the hardness of the place and country to be such as few in comparison would come to them, and fewer that would bide it out and continue with them … For many, though they desired to enjoy the ordinances of God in their purity and the liberty of the gospel with them, yet (alas) they admitted of bondage with danger of conscience, rather than to endure these hardships … But it was thought that if a better and easier place of living could be had, it would draw many and take away these discouragements. (Of Plymouth Plantation)Thus, the difficulties of life in Holland were not just a hinderance to their comfort, but a hinderance to their mission of building a community that enjoyed the ordinances of God in their purity and the liberty of the gospel. They were not persecuted in Holland, but due to economic, political, and cultural pressures, they were in danger of shrinking and scattering. These difficulties also kept other English Puritans from joining them. But in the new world, as an English colony in the wilderness, they had the opportunity to build a place where others might come from England and join them, practicing freely the principles of God’s word.
Many Puritans desired a further reformation of church and society, but were held back from it in England. If the Pilgrims established this reformation in New England, in a land where they could make a good living, be secure from foreign conflicts, and create an English society reformed by God’s word, then these Puritans could come and join them. The settlement of a new land would certainly be more difficult in the short term, but the opportunities were much greater and the long term prospects much brighter than in Holland.
Indeed, this is what happened! The Pilgrims arrived in Plymouth in 1620. In 1630, John Winthrop and his fleet arrived in Boston harbor, bringing 1,000 Puritans. By 1640, about 20,000 Puritans had come to New England. Their background differed from the Pilgrims, but their basic intention was the same: to complete the reformation and enjoy the purity of God’s ordinances and the liberty of the gospel. In 1643, Plymouth and the other Puritan colonies joined a federation and declared, “we all came into these parts of America with one and the same end and aim, namely to advance the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ and to enjoy the Liberties of the Gospel in purity with peace.”
Therefore, William Bradford said concerning the arrival of the Puritans in 1630,
Thus out of small beginning greater things have been produced by His hand that made all things of nothing, and gives being to all things that are; and, as one small candle may light a thousand, so the light here kindled hath shone unto many, yea in some sort to our whole nation; let the glorious name of Jehovah have all the praise. (Of Plymouth Plantation)In fact, when Bradford was writing, “our whole nation” of England (at least, as represented by its parliament) had embraced Puritanism, corrected the tyranny of the king, and had called the Westminster Assembly to reform the church. This brought great joy to the Pilgrims. Bradford wrote in 1646:
Do you not now see the fruit of your labors, O all ye servants of the Lord? that have suffered for His truth, and have been faithful witnesses of the same, and ye little handful amongst the rest, the least amongst the thousands of Israel? … But thou wilt ask, ‘What is the matter? What is done?’ … The tyrannous Bishops are ejected, their courts dissolved, their canons forceless, their service cashiered, their ceremonies useless and despised, their plots for popery prevented, and all their superstitions discarded and returned to Rome from whence they came, and the monuments of idolatry rooted out of the land … Hallelujah! (Of Plymouth Plantation)Unfortunately, that full national embrace of Puritanism was short lived in England. But what Bradford celebrated would endure in New England, as well as in Scotland. And the influence of New England Puritans and Scots-Irish Presbyterians would spread throughout what would become the United States of America.
In application, let us first consider whether we have we forgotten our errand? Have you, and has our nation forgotten? Have we neglected our privileges, blessings, and heritage? Have we forgotten the importance of "our Liberty to walk in the Faith of the Gospel according to the Order of the Gospel, and our enjoyment of the pure Worship of God according to his Institution"?
Secondly, let us attend and prosecute our Errand into the Wilderness! We did not come to see a reed shaking in the wind. Therefore do not be such a reed - light, empty, and limp - but be “solid, serious and sober Christians, constant and stedfast in the Profession and Practice of the Truth, Trees of Righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he may be glorified, holding fast the profession of our Faith without wavering” (Danforth). Nor did we come for courtly pomp and soft clothing. Therefore do not be soft, immodest, or vain, but rather humble, respectable, with self-controlled.
Instead, we came into the wilderness, as the people did in the days of John the Baptist, for the ministry of God’s word. As Danforth said, we came for “the pure and faithful Dispensation of the Gospel and Kingdom of God.” This is a worthy thing to seek. Jesus said, “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you” (Matthew 6:33). This kingdom is established and administered by Christ’s ordinances, used with faith and obedience (Matt. 20:18-20, see also WLC 45, 191). Let us arise and build, and seek the Lord’s blessing.
The Puritans spoke much of the ordinances of God and of keeping them pure and observing them diligently. These ordinances included prayer, singing psalms, the reading and preaching of Scripture, the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper, catechizing, biblical church government, collection for the poor, and the observance of the Christian sabbath. God works by these means, and by them Christ builds and administers his kingdom. They are to be kept unmixed with human innovations and used with faith, a faith which embraces the promises and obeys the commands.
Friday, November 1, 2024
19th Century Presbyterians and Abortion
When the Orthodox Presbyterian Church affirmed in 1972 "that voluntary abortion, except possibly to save the physical life of the mother, is in violation of the Sixth Commandment," they were not breaking new ground.
The 1869 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America unanimously adopted the following committee report:
"That it is with great pain we are constrained to admit the increasing prevalence, in many parts of our country, of unscriptural views of the marriage relation, in consequence of which the obligations of that relation are disregarded by many, and separations of husbands and wives, and divorces for slight and unwarranted reasons are becoming more frequent every year. Nor can we shut our eyes to the fact that the horrible crime of infanticide, especially in the form of the destruction, by parents, of their own offspring, before birth, also prevails to an alarming extent. The evils which these errors and crimes have already brought upon our country, and the worse evils which they threaten in the near future, make it imperative, as we believe, that the whole power of the ministry and Church of Jesus Christ should be put forth in maintenance of the truth, and of virtue in regard to these things. Many causes have operated to produce a corruption of the public morals so deplorable, prominent among which may be mentioned the facility with which divorces may be obtained in some of the States, constant promulgation of false ideas of marriage and its duties, by means of books, lectures, &c., and the distribution, through the mails, of impure publications. But an influence no less powerful than any of these, is the growing devotion to fashion and luxury of this age, and the idea which practically obtains to so great an extent, that pleasure, instead of the glory of God and the enjoyment of his favor, is the great object of life. It is therefore the duty of the Church of Christ to oppose, in every practical way, these and all other corrupting agencies and tendencies, and we especially urge upon all ministers of the gospel the duty of giving instruction to the people of their respective charges, as to the scriptural doctrine concerning the marriage relation. We warn them against joining in wedlock any who may have been divorced upon other than scriptural grounds. We also enjoin upon church sessions the exercise of due discipline in the cases of those members who may be guilty of violating the law of Christ in this particular.
"This Assembly regards the destruction by parents of their own offspring before birth with abhorrence, as a crime against God, and against nature, and as the frequency of such murders can no longer be concealed, we hereby warn those that are guilty of this crime, that except they repent, they cannot inherit eternal life. We also exhort those who have been called to preach the gospel, and all who love purity and truth, and who would avert the just judgment of Almighty God from the nation, that they be no longer silent or tolerant of these things, but that they endeavor by all proper means, to stay the flood of impurity and cruelty. We call upon all to remember that marriage is honorable, not only in itself, but in its ends. Therefore, those who seek to avoid the responsibility and cares connected with the bringing up of children, not only deprive themselves of one of the greatest blessings of life, and fly in the face of God's decrees, but do violence to their own natures, and will be found out of their sins even in this world."
This statement is quoted in a book by Hugh Lenox Hodge, the brother of theologian Charles Hodge. Hugh Hodge was a committed Presbyterian and the Professor of Obstetrics and the Diseases of Women at the University of Pennsylvania. He wrote a book, Foeticide, or Criminal Abortion in 1869, to join with the efforts of his profession to "illuminate the public mind on the nature of this crime, and to urge our legislative and executive officers to greater stringency in the formation and execution of legal enactments" (p. 4). He argued that human existence and the union of our body and soul begins at conception, and that from that point the child “is truly a perfect human being, and that its criminal destruction is murder” (p. 27). The book can be found online here: Foeticide, or Criminal Abortion.
Wednesday, October 30, 2024
Reformation Day
Already in the previous year, Martin Luther had begun to warn his congregation against the use of indulgences. He had preached about it on All Saints Eve in 1516. Now on All Saints Eve in 1517, Luther published 95 theses against the sale of indulgences, posting it on the church door of the Castle Church.
Once Luther’s arguments were translated and made known, indulgences lost their credibility in Wittenberg. Elector Frederick himself ceased his annual display of his relics in 1523. On the other hand, Luther's arguments were not received well by the bishop of Rome. The ensuring controversy grew into a wide-ranging reform of the church according to Scripture called the Protestant Reformation.