Christian Education

What follows here is adapted from the first lesson of a lesson series I am teaching on Christian education. You can listen to the recordings here. The series looks at a Christian view of education and the various fields of study. This first lesson is an introduction to Christian education, giving an overview of some biblical principles for education.

Great are the works of the LORD,

        studied by all who delight in them.

Full of splendor and majesty is his work,

        and his righteousness endures forever.

He has caused his wondrous works to be remembered;

        the LORD is gracious and merciful. (Ps. 111:2-4)

The works of God are great and are studied by all who delight in them. We delight in them, since they are wondrous works full of splendor and majesty, and therefore we study them.

The works of God include not only his work of redemption, which is an especially wondrous work, but also his works of creation and his works of providence in general. His world ought to be studied, as it is the work of God. It should be studied as his world, as our Father's world, in the light of his word. It should be studied to the glory of its maker and governor, for that is what we are doing in this psalm, saying, "great are the works of the LORD." One motive in education and study is simply to wonder and delight at God's glory displayed in his works. 

This would have been done quite easily in man's innocency before the fall. As Adam walked around the garden, he would have quickly noticed the wisdom, power, and goodness of God in creation. Sin has come into the world and hinders this realization and makes us more self-centered, neglecting our Maker. But we can still see it. We should preserve that sense of wonder, the wonder of children in their Father's creation, eager to investigate the world with that wonder and delight. 

We are to study God's word and his world, and his world in light of his word. After all, how can we study man and the world without considering God? How can we educate man to maturity while neglecting his chief end? This purely secular approach to education, an education without considering God and man's chief end - which is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever - is quite prevalent today. This approach is not only deficient. Its neglect of these things distorts education and gives it an atheistic bent. It promotes a view of the world and man that is practically atheistic. It ends up giving a distorted view of man and the world.

In the opening of John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion, he notes that the study of God draws us to a better knowledge of ourselves, and the study of man also leads us to a knowledge of God, our Maker. These subjects are intertwined, we will not have a clear knowledge of the one without a knowledge of the other.

So God created man in his own image,

in the image of God he created him;

male and female he created them.

And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Genesis 1:27–28)

One purpose of studying God's world is so that we might be good rulers over his earth and its creatures. Any good ruler should have a good knowledge of what is under his care. As Proverbs 27:23 says, "Know well the condition of your flocks, and give attention to your herds..." We are set over the world as those who are made in God's image and set over the works of his hands. If we are to rule the earth, to subdue it, to cultivate it, to take care of it, we should study it and understand it. 

Notice also that this text says that we are made in the image of God. This reality is important for education, for a correct understanding of what man is and what it means for man to be brought up to maturity. Being made in the image of God includes being made in knowledge, as rational creatures, able to perceive, able to reason (Col. 3:10). Man was first made in true knowledge with a true knowledge of God. That has been distorted by human depravity, yet man remains a being who is able to know and reason. As we are restored in Christ, we should use that faculty rightly in the light of his word.

Our use of our senses and our reason to study God's world are supported by biblical teachings. Sometimes in apologetics, we might ask the unbeliever, why do you trust your senses? Why do you trust your reason? What is the foundation of your worldview? But we should be careful to not think that our senses and reason is useless. The unbeliever might not be about to account for it, but we can. We believe that God made man, that he fit us to know him and to have dominion over the work of his hands. We believe that God is a God of wisdom and knowledge and that we are made in his image, also able to think and to reason. Our senses and reason point to God's design of mankind. Being gifted in this way as rational beings, we should use God's gifts and use them rightly and well. 

Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. (Ephesians 6:4) 

First of all, this verse says to bring them up. This is of the essence of education, to bring humans up to maturity and to fit them for the responsibilities of adulthood. Education aims at the maturity of the whole person in knowledge, in virtue, in skill. It aims at fitting you to be a good member of a family, a good member of your community, a good member of your nation, and a good human, which also in this age means a good Christian, as grace restores and perfects nature unto the glory of God. To be a good human we need Christ to restore us, that we might be sanctified and truly live as we were made to live. 

The verse also says fathers. It is addressed to fathers. The family has a primary and basic responsibility for the education of children, and this is especially the responsibility of the father as head of the household. This is not to say that fathers, or even parents, must be the only the ones to teach children. They may make a wise use of other people and resources in the education of their children. But parents are the primary teachers and are responsible to oversee the process. They must bring them up.

Regarding religious instruction, not only do parents give this to their children, but both parents and children also receive it from ordained teachers of the church (1 Cor. 12:28, James 3:1, Acts 20:20). In one sense all education ought to be religious, done in the fear of God. By "religious instruction" I mean instruction in what we are to believe concerning God and what duty God requires of man. The church has an educational ministry to teach Scripture, the whole counsel of God, to everyone, and especially to the whole people of God, which includes children. Christians ought to embrace this education and bring their children to it as well. The instruction is not meant to replace parental instruction, but ought to strengthen it and help equip parents. The very context of Ephesians 6:4 is Paul writing to the church, and his specific instruction to fathers is to bring up their children in the Lord, and his specific instruction to the children is to obey their parents in the Lord. 

The verse also speaks of the discipline and instruction of the Lord. In context, that especially means the Lord Jesus (cp. Eph. 4:4-6, 6:5-9, 23-24).

As man's chief end is to glorify and enjoy God forever, and as this is now only done through the Lord Jesus, all education ought to be Christian education. All of life is to be done unto God's glory, in accord with his word, through Jesus Christ. All people should be given a correct understanding of the world and the way to fulfill their chief end in all things through Christ.

In addition to this, Christian households are uniquely bound by God's covenant to give their children a Christian education. Christian parents are bound to bring up their children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord, to lead their households in the ways of the Lord (Gen. 18:19). We say with Joshua, "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Josh. 24:15a). Our children are covenantally consecrated unto Christ as his disciples to be raised as such (Acts 2:28-29, 16:31-34, Matt. 28:18-20). They are directly addressed in Ephesians as fellow members of the household of God. They are to be raised up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord Jesus as his disciples who have been baptized and are now to be taught to observe everything that Christ has commanded. Christ is to be their teacher.

Lastly, notice the terms discipline and instruction. This process of bringing them up includes discipline and instruction. The two Greek words are translated differently in different translations (e.g. nurture and admonition). The two Greek words are paideia and nouthesia. Paideia is the word for training and education. It refers to the whole training and education of children, mind and morals, body and soul, both by instruction and correction (related to the word for child). Nouthesia refers to admonition and instruction (to “put in mind” or “call attention to,” often with a sense of warning). It can be proactive in the giving of instruction and reminders or corrective in the giving of admonition. 

A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher. (Luke 6:40) 

Disciple is not a uniquely religious or biblical word, but was the common word for a learner, a pupil, a student - someone who had a teacher and was being taught by a teacher. This verse teaches us that education aims at passing on the knowledge, skills, culture, wisdom, or character of the teacher to the disciple.

Thomas Sowell once said, "Each new generation born is in effect an invasion of civilization by little barbarians, who must be civilized before it is too late." Education involves the process of enculturation, the passing on of civilization from one generation to the next. Children must learn biblical doctrine and the language, heritage, and customs of their particular people, that they might live well as members of it. We begin as ignorant, foolish, and unskilled people, but we can benefit from the knowledge, skill, and wisdom of others as it is passed down to us. 

Of course, the Teacher that we should all be like without exception is the Lord Jesus. We should rejoice in ever greater conformity to him. 

This verse is also a warning. The verse right before this verse says, "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?" Being like your teacher might not be a good thing. A bad teacher can lead disciples astray. So parents should be sure they are not blind as they teach their children how to see. They should also be careful about the teachers and mentors that they give their children as they get older.

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. 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. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. (Deuteronomy 6:4-9) 

The Lord our God is one. He deserves your single-minded devotion with your whole being. His words ought to be on your heart, and you ought to diligently teach them to your children, every day, throughout the day. You should apply them indeed to all of life - to the work of your hands, to the way you see the world with your eyes, to the life of the home (the doorposts), and to the life of the society (the gates of the city). God is one. His word ought to be on the inside and the outside all the day, in every area, as it is all under him. The one God is over all of life.

Deuteronomy 6:7 refers to the teaching of God's words. But those words that are taught diligently should inform all of life, all the rest of education, not quarantined from them. Things ought to be fit together as a system, a unified way of thought and life. So there is a need for theology and biblical ethics from God's Word to shape the rest, and for the rest to serve its proper ends unto the glory of God.

Adah bore Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe. Zillah also bore Tubal-cain; he was the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron. The sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah. (Genesis 4:20-22)

While "father" might refer here to a natural father or ancestor, it seems (with the reference to "all") that it means here someone who excelled with the field and taught it to others, as we might refer to Gregor Mendal as the "father of modern genetics." The Larger Catechism cites this verse as it notes that the fifth commandment has implications for how we treat all superiors, whether in age or gifts or authority (WLC 124). 

In Genesis 4:20-22, we see how human culture and education developed even among those who rejected God. We find here agriculture and music and technology. By God's common grace, rebellion against God did not mean a cessation of all human culture and advancement in education. Total depravity does not mean that unbelievers get everything wrong. They still live in God's world. They still are made in God's image, although it is now corrupt. God's common grace restrains the full development of sin. Unbelievers still have useful insights and studies on earthly things. As John Calvin wrote, 

What then? Shall we deny that the truth shone upon the ancient jurists who established civic order and discipline with such great equity? Shall we say that the philosophers were blind in their fine observation and artful description of nature? Shall we say that those men were devoid of understanding who conceived the art of disputation and taught us to speak reasonably? Shall we say that they are insane who developed medicine, devoting their labor to our benefit? What shall we say of all the mathematical sciences? Shall we consider them the ravings of madmen? No, we cannot read the writings of the ancients on these subjects without great admiration. We marvel at them because we are compelled to recognize how preeminent they are. But shall we count anything praiseworthy or noble without recognizing at the same time that it comes from God? Let us be ashamed of such ingratitude, into which not even the pagan poets fell, for they confessed that the gods had invented philosophy, laws, and all useful arts. Those men whom Scripture calls ‘natural men’ were, indeed, sharp and penetrating in their investigation of inferior things. (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.2.15)

Thus, Christian education does not mean you have to turn everything on its head, teaching the opposite of what pagans teach. We need not cast away what good has been done by non-Christians. We should ascribe to God the glory for his gifts given to them and put these developments to a right use, reforming what is amiss. Augustine compared this process to how the Israelites "plundered the Egyptians" when they left Egypt. The idea is that of receiving what is good and in accordance with the truth and putting it to the right use. Sometimes reform is simply that, directing something to the right end. Other times, man's sin has further distorted his culture, causing there to be greater need for reform. Discernment is needed.

"Plundering the Egyptians" is part of a biblical motif. The biblical model is that the treasures of the nations, both material and intellectual, are brought into the service of God as the kingdom advances (Hag. 2:6-9, Mic. 4:13, Rev. 21:24-27). This must be done with wisdom, not simply uncritically adopting everything, but neither simply rejecting things because they came from the pagans. Remember that the treasures received from Egypt went to the building of the golden calf as well as to the tabernacle. When done rightly, the treasures of the nations come in and glorify the house of God. As he extends his kingdom among mankind, Christ is taking human culture away from the service of the devil unto the glory of God.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction. (Proverbs 1:7) 

The fear of the Lord is fundamental to a good education. Those who do not fear God will remain fools in a very important respect. Even if they are insightful on one thing or another, this is God's world and we must not leave him out of our calculations. To be ignorant of some very important factor is to be unwise. The most fundamental thing is God, the Creator of all things. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and knowledge. Education without the fear of the Lord will be deficient and distorted by this neglect. Speaking of the importance of an education in the fear of God, A.A. Hodge wrote,

The claim of impartiality between positions as directly contradictory as that of Jews, Mohammedans and Christians, and especially as that of theists and of atheists, is evidently absurd. And no less is the claim absurd and impossible that a system of education can be indifferent on these fundamental subjects. ... The physical as well as the moral universe must be conceived either either in a theistic or an atheistic light. It must originate in and develop through intelligent will - that is, in a person - or in atoms, force, or chance. Teleology must be acknowledged everywhere or be denied everywhere. … I am as sure as I am of the fact of Christ's reign that a comprehensive and centralized system of national education, separated from religion, as is now commonly proposed, will prove the most appalling enginery for the propagation of anti-Christian and atheistic unbelief, and of anti-social nihilistic ethics, individual, social and political, which this sin-rent world has ever seen. (A.A. Hodge, “The Kingly Office of Christ,” Popular Lectures on Theological Themes (1887), p. 281-284) 

Likewise, those who fear the Lord will be teachable. If we fear the Lord, we will be humble. We will be eager to learn. We will be able to receive correction. We will prize wisdom and instruction enough to diligently seek it out and to endure correction, which is unpleasant. This is a theme that you will find throughout Proverbs. The one who is humble, who fears the Lord, will be ready to endure the hardship of education. Is it sometimes hard to do schoolwork? Can it be hard to press on? Yes, but if you love wisdom, if you love knowledge, if you delight in God's works, then you are going to be able to do the hard work of doing the study, writing the paper, getting corrections on your homework, and growing. 

Let us therefore be diligently to raise up our children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. And may we all delight in God's works, and therefore continue to study them, unto his glory and for the good of ourselves and others. 

John Wallis: Minister, Cryptographer, and Mathematician

John Wallis (1616-1703) was a remarkable figure in 17th century England, serving as a minister, cryptographer, mathematician, and more. 

In 1640, he was ordained in the Church of England and served as a chaplain. He became the chief cryptographer for Parliament as the English Civil War broke out in 1642, decoding secret messages. As the Westminster Assembly gathered in London in 1643 to reform and clarify the government, worship, and doctrine of church, it asked Parliament to appoint Wallis, "a godly & industrious young man," as an assistant to the scribes of the assembly. He was appointed and he eventually became one of the non-voting scribes himself. In 1648 he wrote the earliest commentary on the Westminster Shorter Catechism. 

At the same time Wallis joined a group of scientists that would become the Royal Society, of which he remained a member when it was formally organized. While he opposed the execution of King Charles I, he was appointed by Cromwell as a professor of geometry at Oxford in 1649, a post he would fill for 50 years.

He received the degree of Doctor of Divinity in 1654. Upon the restoration of the monarchy, he was appointed a royal chaplain and was one of the presbyterian members of the Savoy Conference. While he was presbyterian in his doctrine, he remained in the Church of England.

He was a leading English mathematician of his day and an influence on his younger contemporary, Isaac Newton. He made significant contributions to trigonometry, geometry, and the origins of calculus. He is credited with introducing ∞ as the symbol of infinity. 

He was skilled in doing mental calculations. “On one occasion he extracted the square root of a number expressed by fifty-three figures, and dictated the result to twenty-seven places next morning to a stranger. It proved exact.” (DNB). He did this at night to test the strength of the mind at night. This feat was described in the journal of the Philosophical Society of Oxford.  

He continued to serve as a cryptographer throughout his life, deciphering codes for parliament and later for King William. He wrote books on mathematics, music theory, logic, grammar, and theology, defending infant baptism, the sabbath, and the Trinity.

You can read more about John Wallis here:

John Wallis (Oxford Mathematics)

John Wallis (Dictionary of National Biography)

John Wallis (Wikipedia)

"He Made from One Man Every Nation of Mankind"

In Acts 17:22-31, Paul spoke in defense of the faith to the Athenian Areopagus. In the course of his speech, he taught some important truths about the peoples of mankind. 

In verses 24-25 and 28-29, Paul taught that there is one Creator of all. Everything owes its source to him. All of us are God’s offspring, made in his image. God is not our offspring - a tribal god or a product of man’s imagination and art.

In verse 26a, Paul said, "And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth..." There is only one origin to the human race. We are all sons of Adam. We are ultimately one biological race. We have a shared history (the first 11 chapters of Genesis). We all inherit the image of God, with its dignity and honor, as well as the guilt and corruption of sin. In Adam’s fall, we sinned all. This unity in Adam should promote respect, sympathy, and humility.

In verse 26, Paul teaches that from this one man came a diversity of people - every nation of mankind on all the face of the earth. God said, “fill the earth,” dispersing them over the earth. He had them disperse as communities. Genesis 10 describes this dispersion: “in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations” (10:5). 

These people groups were bound together by location, language and culture, and family ties. The Bible realizes there are multiple factors that bring people together, and describes people groups with multiple terms like tribes, peoples, languages, nations, and lands. These things tied people together in communities for mutual support. It is good for people who live together to have a shared way of life. At the same time, none of this was immovable. People can assimilate into another culture. While it took effort, a person could move, learn a new language, marry someone of a different people or culture, or be adopted by a family or people (e.g. Gen. 12:1, Num. 12:1, Ruth 1:16, 2 Sam. 11:3).

Notice the difference between diversity of this kind and sex difference. During the creation week, God made from the man a woman. The sex difference is part of the creation order. Thus men and women are forever distinct and this distinction should not be blurred (Deut. 22:5). But the subsequent diversity of the peoples of mankind is is not rooted in creation, but develops in the course of God's providence and is more superficial and flexible. That there would be variety is natural, but the particular varieties are not fixed parts of the creation order.

Paul says in verse 26 that God made from one man every nation of mankind, "having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place..." As families seek a home to live in with boundaries, nations also seek homelands to dwell in with boundaries. National borders should be respected by all and wisely regulated by the civil authorities. But what does it mean that God determined their allotted periods and boundaries? It means that God is sovereign over the times and boundaries of the nations. This is neither a call to ethnic purity or to the abolition of borders, but a call to humility before God. Cultures and peoples change over time. They can improve or decline, they can expand or shrink, they can become prominent or marginalized, and they can develop over the generations, responding to their situations. But God is sovereign over it all. The earth is his, and he portions it out to the peoples as he desires (Deut. 2:1-12, 32:8). He uproots and he plants. He divides the peoples and gives them what they have. Each people owes its existence to God. No people is guaranteed its current position - not even ancient Israel was. God blesses the peoples and judges them.

Men error when they confuse existing providential conditions as static and fixed in nature, or as demonstrating their might and superiority. Let no one say with Nebuchadnezzar, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” (Daniel 4:30), lest he be humbled like him. Let all flesh be humble and grateful before the Lord. “The LORD makes poor and makes rich; he brings low and he exalts” (1 Samuel 2:7).

Finally, in verses 27, 30-31, Paul makes the point that all peoples ought to seek their common Father, repent from their idols, and turn to the risen Christ. God’s intention was that all peoples should seek him. Even as they are united by common decent from Adam, so they are called to be united in the service of their common Creator through Jesus Christ. God now commands everyone everywhere to repent. Salvation is offered to all without partiality. Christ preaches peace to all peoples. Those who turn to him become fellow members of the household of God (Eph. 2:11-22). The church of Jesus Christ is composed of the redeemed from every tribe, tongue, and nation, with a Christian communion extended to everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord Jesus. This unity does not abolish national or ethnic distinctions, but it ought to bring about spiritual unity and fellowship among those of different nationalities; peace among the nations rather than ill-treatment of one another in thought, word, and deed; and the reformation of each one according to the word of God (Is. 2:1-5).

The Nature of Civil Government

"Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good." (1 Peter 2:13–14) 

The apostle Peter exhorts Christians to be subject to civil authorities “…for the Lord’s sake.” The Lord Jesus commands it. Why? As Paul in Romans 13 explains, God has ordained human government. He is the supreme ruler over all, and he has ordained that humanity, in its various commonwealths, be governed by men who will be under him and over the people. Kings and rulers are God’s ministers, governing the peoples of the earth.

Civil government is a natural institution, baked into God’s design for humanity. God created man as a social creature, to join together as mankind multiplied, forming communities. Mankind forms into clans and tribes, cities and nations, each with corporate responsibilities before God and a common life and a common good, requiring common government for good order and leadership. As authority existed in the household before sin, so it would have existed in some form in the community before sin as well.

Civil government now has more duties due to sin. The punishment and suppression of sin is now necessary, and the promotion of good is more pressing. God has authorized the civil authorities to use the sword against man, to exercise even capital punishment and, on just and necessary occasion, to wage war. After the flood, God charged man with the responsibility for avenging innocent blood of his fellow man (Gen. 9:5-6). He did not there first institute civil government, but he assumed and implied it and gave it this task. As this was a corporate responsibility, it was to be carried out by the public authority.

Civil government is a “human institution,” that is, a government among men, and, with respect to its execution and particular form, by men. Civil government varies in form among the peoples of the earth. Nations might be monarchies or they might be governed under a different form of government. Men must be governed, but each community or people may appoint a government that best fits them.

“…sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.” Peter mentions this intention as a good and proper thing. This is one more reason to submit to civil government, since it aims at a good thing. While the Roman governors imperfectly fulfilled this charge, this basic function of civil government was correct. God intends civil government to do these things (cp. Rom. 13:1-4, Prov. 16:12-13, 20:26), and even pagan nations understood this.

By stating this, it also implies what civil government ought to do. This is a main duty of the civil magistrate. When a ruler neglects to do these things, or even punishes those who do good or praises those who do evil, they are being faithless to the obligations of their office and are being bad rulers.

These statements, then, not only serve as reasons for you to honor and maintain civil government, but they also give direction to those who participate in politics, whether in office or as citizens. As citizens in our republic, may we seek to promote good government.

To Punish Those Who Do Evil

Evil is that which is corrupt, wrong, destructive. Outward expressions of impiety, immorality, and injustice are evil and are to be punished by the magistrate. God’s law is a guide to human flourishing. So evil things like sorcery, blasphemy, sabbath-breaking, some expressions of false religion, rebellion, murder and unlawful violence (including abortion), adultery and pornography and homosexuality and fornication, theft and fraud and human trafficking, and perjury and slander - things like these are evil and ought to be punished by the civil magistrate. Rulers and legislators should use wisdom how best to do this, in a way that befits their situation. The Bible says that rulers need to be wise (Deut. 1:13). They need to discern how to rule the particular people in front of them. Consider how Moses and Nehemiah took different approaches in different situations for the same ends (e.g. how they enforced the sabbath). Whatever particular measures are taken, the aim is the same, to punish evil and suppress it. 

The magistrate ought to maintain justice when it has been violated, putting things right, enforcing restitution, delivering victims from wrongdoing (Deut. 16:18-20, Ps. 82:3-4). Now, some people think that vices that do not directly harm another person should not be punished. But this usually comes from a superficial view of evil. As John Witherspoon said, “It is common to say of a dissolute liver, that he does harm to none but himself; than which I think there is not a greater falsehood that ever obtained credit in a deceived world.” Impiety and immorality corrupt people and society, and they give birth to other evil practices that do directly harm one’s fellow man. Rulers should strike close to the root. 

There is so much evil that is not only practiced in our society, but even exalted and celebrated. The civil government cannot convert people by its use of force, but it can suppress and restrain evil for the good of the people, preventing it from leavening the whole society and destroying it. Evil does not stop on its own, but continues to move on to the next corruption unless it is stopped. 

To Praise Those Who Do Good

Good is that which is excellent, right, beneficial. God’s ways are good. Piety, steadfast love, and justice are good. As Micah 6:8 says, “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” Righteousness is good. “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people” (Prov. 14:34). Civil government should seek to praise and encourage justice, faithfulness, courage, and true religion, even as it discourages the opposite.

Note that rulers are both to punish and praise, discourage and encourage, suppress and promote, rectify and reward. They are not only to fix problems, but are also to lead their people to what is good. Those who rule need a positive vision of the public good, taking measures to encourage it.

Preeminent aspects of the public good to be maintained are piety, justice, and peace. In 1 Timothy 2:2, Paul teaches us to pray for “kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.” That is a positive vision for which rulers ought to aim. In other words, the aim of civil government, that we should pray is achieved, is the flourishing of peace and order in society, of godliness (that is, piety toward God), and of justice (the idea of “dignified” being honesty and uprightness). This is why the Westminster Confession of Faith says that magistrates “ought especially to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each commonwealth” (23.2).

The ultimate purpose of civil government is God’s glory and its immediate purpose and end is the public good - the common good, the good of the people. As Paul says, the magistrate is “God’s servant for your good” (Rom. 13:4). 2 Samuel 5:12 notes that good king David recognized that “the LORD has established him king over Israel, and that he had exalted his kingdom for the sake of his people Israel.” David was unique in that his people was the covenant people of God, but he held an office that existed in other nations, and it was as a good king that he recognized that God had put him there, and that he was exalted for the sake of the people over whom he ruled.

Even pagan governments can promote the public good. Yet not all governments do this equally as well. Some do this better than others. So we value and submit to civil government, even as we also pray and work toward reform according to our place and calling. Christianity is hostile to sin, but it is not hostile to civil government, culture, or nation. These things are rooted in God’s natural order, doing some good even when corrupted, to be restored rather than destroyed.

Exiles: Is That the Right Word in 1 Peter?

In his first letter, the apostle Peter describes Christians as "elect exiles of the Dispersion." At first it may seem like he is writing to the Jews or to Jewish Christians, since "the Dispersion" usually referred to the Jews living outside of Palestine. But the actual content of 1 Peter will show that he is writing to the church, Jew and Gentile. In fact, it seems his readers were predominately Gentiles given the way Peter describes their past. Instead, what Peter is doing - and will continue to do in this letter - is applying such language to the church of Jesus Christ as the continuation of God’s covenant people.

As the Jews had been dispersed among the nations, so Christians (whether Jew or Gentile) are dispersed among unbelievers throughout the world. As the Jews had been chosen by God out of his mere mercy, so it is the case with Christians, whether Jew or Gentile. As the Jews had been literally sojourners in foreign countries looking to Jerusalem as their home as a type of the city of God, so Christians - still having their various earthly nationalities and homes - are sojourners waiting for the heavenly city to come in all its glory.

I think “exiles” is a poor translation. The definition of the Greek word does not refer to the sense of being exiled or forced out, but rather to dwelling in another land as a foreigner. As one lexicon explains, the word refers "to staying for a while in a strange or foreign place" (BDAG). Some other translations translate the word as sojourners, strangers, pilgrims, those who reside as aliens, those living as foreigners.

The Greek word translated here as “exiles” (parepidémos) is found in two places in the Greek translation of the Old Testament: Genesis 23:4 and Psalm 39:12. In Genesis 23:4 it is the word translated as “foreigner” in Abraham’s statement, “I am a sojourner and foreigner among you…” In Psalm 39:12 it is translated as “guest” in David’s statement: “For I am a sojourner with you, a guest, like all my fathers.” In neither case does the word mean “exile.” (A different word is used in the Greek Old Testament to translate the word “exiles.”) 

In both Genesis 23 and Psalm 39, the word is paired with a similar word, translated sojourner in both cases. The Greek word used to translate this word for sojourner (paroikos) also appears in 1 Peter. Both words are found together in 1 Peter 2:11 like they are in Genesis 23:4 and Psalms 39:12, where Peter exhorts them as such. A form of paroikos is also found in 1 Peter 1:17, translated by the ESV as "exile" in "the time of your exile." A better translation would be "the time of your sojourn." 

It is true that Peter is applying terms that would have been used for the Jewish Dispersion, which originally began with exile, but the dispersed Jews were no longer “exiles” by the time of the New Testament. They were sojourners, resident aliens.

The Jews of the Dispersion were sojourners among the Gentiles. This meant they were distinct from those around them and that they saw another place as their home. The term is applied to Christians in a modified sense. Christians are not an earthly nation and ethnicity like the Jews were, but are a spiritual nation, intersecting all the earthly nations. They are spiritually distinct from unbelieving neighbors. Christians are foreigners to the kingdom of darkness. The home they look to is not Judea, but the kingdom of God; not the earthly Jerusalem but the heavenly Jerusalem. This identity exists along with natural earthly bonds to family and nation. Your identity as sojourners refers to your distinctness from the fallen world as the people of God (1 Peter 2:9-12), and to your hope of your eternal inheritance (1 Peter 1:3-9).

Realizing that parepidémos does not mean “exiles” but something more like “resident alien” is important for our conception of what is being said in 1 Peter. Think of Abraham’s sojourning rather than the Israelites’ exile from Jerusalem. In 1 Peter, we are not going back to the place we came from. We have left the darkness and have come into the light and we await glory. We have been called out of one place and are going to another. The people in the old place want us back, but we must press on and not turn back, looking to the hope set before us. We have left the city of destruction and are headed to the celestial city. It is a pilgrimage through time - a perseverance in the land until we possess the full inheritance.

If you belong to the church of Jesus Christ, you are sojourners of the dispersion. Therefore, be distinct from the ungodliness around you and look with hope to the eternal inheritance that awaits you. You do not belong to the fallen world of unbelief and sinful passions around you. Hold fast to Christ with an endurance supported by believing hope.

Five Earnest Exhortations from Rev. John Thomson (c. 1690-1753)

John Thomson (c. 1690-1753) was an early American Presbyterian minister. He was born in Ireland, educated in Scotland, licensed to preach by the Armagh Presbytery in Ireland, and ordained as a pastor in Delaware. He pastored churches in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, and died while engaged in an itinerant ministry on the North Carolina frontier. He was an important figure in the passing of the Adopting Act in 1729, by which the Synod of Philadelphia officially adopted the Westminster Confession and Catechisms. He wrote several books, including An Explication of the Shorter Catechism (1749). You can read this commentary on the Westminster Shorter Catechism online here or order the newly published edition of the book here. 

What I want to share from this book comes from his short epistle to the Christian reader at the end of the book. In that epistle, he gives several concluding exhortations. I have kept the original spelling and capitalization. 

Now, Christian Readers, and dear Souls, for whose Sake I have been at Pains to make this little Collection of Christian Doctrines; whether you be Dissenters or of the establish'd Church, I will shut up this little Epistle, with an earnest Request to you all in the Bowels of Jesus Christ, that you would hearken unto and practise these following Particulars.

First, Make serious Piety and Religion, both as to Knowledge and Practice, your main Study, remembering, that without Holiness no Man shall see the Lord. Heb. 12.14

2dly, Endeavour so to be aquatinted with the Principles of Religion as to have your Faith founded on the Word of God, not contenting yourselves with an implicit Faith on the Credit of any Men or Church on Earth; but labour to search the Scriptures daily, whether these Things be so. Acts 17.11

3dly, As we all profess to adhere to the same infallible Rule, viz. the Word of God, to believe the same Christian Doctrines, to submit to the same divine Law, both Moral and Gospel, to believe in the same common God and Saviour, to adhere to the same Covenant of Grace, to hope for the same eternal heavenly Inheritance; as we have the same common Friend and Enemies, the same Helps and Impediments of our Edification and Salvation, &c.

Let us all cordially endeavour to be united in our Christian Affections and Charity towards one another, as well as true Love towards God; let us cordially strive to imitate, emulate, and encourage one another, in every Thing that is commendable before God, and agreeable to our own Consciences; and let us beware lest our differing judgments and Sentiments in lesser Points of Religion have more Influence upon us, to alienate our affections from one another than our Agreement in the more substantial Parts of Religion can have to unite and cement our Souls together in mutual Christian Love. 

4thly, Beware of sitting down contented with any Measure of Grace or Knowledge that you have attained, but still strive to grow in Grace, and in the Knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 

5thly, Be frequent and earnest in wrestling with God by Prayer, that he may pour out his Spirit, as a Spirit of Power, Light, Love, and a sound Mind, on this degenerate, backsliding Generation, that by the power of his Grace, accompanying the Gospel, he may heal the many dangerous, deadly Diseases of this sinful Age, such as Ignorance, Prophanity in Cursing and Swearing, Sabbath-breaking, Uncleanness, lifeless Formality in Matters of Religion, the prevailing prophane Neglect of Family Religion, and secret Devotion; that he would stir up all Ranks to endeavour to extend and diffuse their Influence for this Purpose, according to their Capacity, Station and Character, especially those in Authority, whether Parents, Masters, Ministers or Magistrates, by their Instruction, Example and Authority. 

O! how happy and glorious a prospect should we have if this were brought to pass! Then God's Salvation would be near us, and God, even our God would bless us: But if it should never be our Lot in this World to see such happy halcion Days; yet still it will be your Wisdom and Interest to strive to be of the few that enter in at the strait Gate, of the little Flock to whom your Father will give the Kingdom; and as the Furtherance of these Things was the main Design of this whole Performance; so it is and shall be the Prayer of one who desires to approve himself the Servant of your Souls, for Jesus's Sake.  

OPC Statements and Communications on Issues in Society

From time to time, as situations have arisen, the General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) has spoken to issues in society, whether by statements, letters, or petitions. Here are a few examples:

1. 1937 Statements on Atheistic Movements, Communism, and Pacifism.

At its third general assembly (1937), the OPC (then called the Presbyterian Church of America) adopted an overture to warn all their churches to take their stand against atheistic movements and “that to tolerate communism in our midst is equivalent to the destruction of our Church.”

WHEREAS atheistic movements under various names are working through the Church life of this nation, not only to overthrow the Christian faith of the present adult generation, but seriously to impair the the faith of the growing youth of our nation, therefore: 

BE IT RESOLVED that the Presbytery of California, Presbyterian Church America, respectfully overtures the Third General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of America, meeting in Philadelphia, June 1, 1937, to warn all of our churches and churches which will ultimately be formed to take their stand against all such movements, and so to indoctrinate our people in the doctrines of the Christian faith that they will be able to discern the true from the false, and that to tolerate communism in our midst is equivalent to the destruction of our Church. 

Passed by unanimous vote of the Presbytery of California, of the Presbyterian Church of America, on April 13, 1937.

Concurred in by Northwest, Chicago Area.

Concurred with slight amendment, Iowa.

The overture was approved by the General Assembly by a vote of 42 to 30. The same assembly also adopted another overture in amended form publicly reaffirming WCF 23.1-2 in light of “widespread confusion of thought in this nation on the relation of Christians to military institutions of duly constituted civil authorities”.

2. 1972 Statement on Abortion

In 1972, the 39th General Assembly of the OPC adopted a statement affirming that voluntary abortion, except possibly to save the physical life of the mother, is in violation of the Sixth Commandment (Exodus 20:13). 

Believing that unborn children are living creatures in the image of God, given by God as a blessing to their parents, we therefore affirm that voluntary abortion, except possibly to save the physical life of the mother, is in violation of the Sixth Commandment (Exodus 20:13). We state the following reasons:

1. The Bible treats human personhood as beginning at conception (Psalm 139:13-16; 51:5; Jeremiah 1:4,5; Luke 1:14-44; 1:29-38; Exodus 21:22-25). 
2. The Bible considers the human person to be a complete person (Genesis 2:7; Numbers 23:10; Deuteronomy 6:5; 1 Thessalonians 5:23). This unity is severed only by death and then only temporarily until the natural, intended union is restored at the resurrection (2 Corinthians 5:8; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17). 
3. The Bible forbids murder because man is created in the image of God (Genesis 9:5, 6). The Bible further says that succeeding generations of men are conceived in the image of God (Genesis 5:1-3). 

We call upon society and the church to show compassion toward unwed mothers and mothers of unwanted children. To this end, not only sympathetic counsel, but also concrete help should be extended (1 John 3:16-18; James 2:14-17).

But we also call upon our society to return to the law of God, recognizing the Word of God that "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people" (Proverbs 14:34).

You can find this statement on the OPC website here and in the minutes of the 39th GA of the OPC (Minutes, May 15-20, 1972, pp. 17-18, 149). The background for this is that the General Assembly set up a study committee on the topic in 1970 in response to an overture from the Presbytery of New Jersey asking the assembly to declare "that life being given by God should not be terminated by abortion, apart from valid medical grounds related to the preservation of the life of the mother." (1970 was the same year that Roe v. Wade reached the Supreme Court of the USA.) This study committee delivered its report to the assembly in 1971. This report was sent to the presbyteries, and two of them (NJ and Northern CA) sent overtures to the next assembly with similar proposed statements. A slightly amended version of one of these was the statement adopted in 1972. (The Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973, a decision that was later overruled by its Dobbs decision in 2022.)

There was a protest submitted by some members of the assembly against making this statement, not for the content, but because they objected to making such statements apart from particular judicial cases. The assembly's response to the protest called attention to WCF 31.2 and added "The church of Christ, in assembly at Jerusalem, resolved a case of doctrine and conscience not brought to it as a judicial proceeding against any individual (Acts 15). Granting that resolutions on such cases should be made with discretion and only in matters of great concern, the Assembly reaffirms its right and duty to declare the truth ministerially to the people of God and the world in which we live."

3. 1993 Petition to the President Regarding the Sin of Homosexual Activity

In 1993, the 60th General Assembly of the OPC submitted a humble petition to President Clinton, asking him to stand against the sin of homosexual activity. The terminology of "humble petition" comes from our Confession of Faith, which says that "Synods and councils ... are not to intermeddle with civil affairs which concern the commonwealth, unless by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary; or, by way of advice, for satisfaction of conscience, if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate" (WCF 31.4). 

Bill Clinton had been elected president in 1992 and in his campaign he had indicated he would allow homosexuals to serve in the military. Once he became president, he called for legislation that would lift the ban that prohibited this. In this context, the Presbytery of Northern California sent an overture to the General Assembly with proposed language for a petition, and this was amended and adopted. This petition can be found on the OPC website here as well as in the minutes of the 60th GA of the OPC. 

The 60th General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church humbly petitions the President of the United States of America to stand against the sin of homosexual activity. We support this petition with the following considerations.

Based on the Word of God and his creation law, homosexuality (including bisexuality and lesbianism) violates God's non-negotiable moral standard and therefore is sin. According to the Scripture of the Old and New Testaments, it is an abomination and contrary to nature as God intended for man and woman. "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable" (Leviticus 18:22). "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion" (Romans 1:26-27).

The practice of homosexuality is a reproach to any nation. It undermines the family, and poses a substantial threat to the general health, safety and welfare of our citizens. Your own Christian background ought to demonstrate to you the practical benefits of upholding the biblical stand against homosexuality, especially in light of the current epidemic of AIDS and other diseases spread through homosexual conduct.

And, specifically, we urge you as Commander-in-Chief of all the armed services not to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military. Lifting the ban would effectively discriminate against chaplains who hold to biblical ethics by forbidding them to preach God's law against this sin. Such a prohibition compromises the Free Exercise of Religion clause as well as the gospel message which delivers homosexuals from this destructive practice. "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). Moreover, any such preaching subsequent to lifting the ban might be considered a hate crime.

Therefore, for the honor of Christ and his Church, and the welfare of our nation, we exhort you to remember the words of the wisest magistrate, "Righteousness exalts a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people" (Proverbs 14:34). Our prayers go with you, your family and your administration, and we commend to you the salvation that comes only though Jesus Christ our Lord. "I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone—for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness" (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

Very respectfully submitted,

The General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church

June, 1993

At the end of that year, the "don't ask, don't tell" policy was adopted by the Department of Defense as a compromise measure that continued to bar openly homosexual persons from the military.  

4. 2001 Statement on Women and the Military

In 1998, the General Assembly of the OPC set up a study committee on women and the military, in light of the possibility that the requirement to register for the Selective Service might be extended to women. This committee presented an initial report in 1999. The General Assembly returned the report and pending motions to the committee for further study and reflection and added two more members to the committee. In 2000, the General Assembly ran out of time to consider the expanded report. In 2001, the 68th General Assembly of the OPC heard the report and responded by adopting the following statement: 

The 68th GA declares that the use of women in military combat is both contrary to nature and inconsistent with the Word of God.

The OPC was not alone in making such statements. I have posted about this before, and you can read the statements from the PCA, RPCNA, and ARPC at this link.

There was a protest made by some members of the assembly over whether there was sufficient biblical grounds for the statement, objecting that the statement rested on a report that argued largely from Old Testament narrative and civil law, supposing this to be in contradiction to WCF 19.4. The General Assembly responded that it adopted the statement because it was convinced there was sufficient biblical grounds, that New Testament passages affirm the principles that lay behind the direct teaching of the Old Testament on the topic, and that it is legitimate to declare a position argued largely from Old Testament narrative and civil law (giving examples of where this is done in our confessional standards). I think the General Assembly got it right here and that this is a good example of how the judicial laws of the Old Testament continue to bind nations today as far as their general equity requires (WCF 19.4). In the Bible, men alone are assigned the responsibility for national defense (Neh. 4:14, Num. 1:2-3, Deut. 24:5), and this was not something pertaining to ancient Israel alone, but a principle based in the creation order (Gen. 1:27, Is. 19:16, Jer. 51:30, 1 Peter 3:7). I have written more about WCF 19.4 and general equity here and here. 

5. 2010 Letter to the Department of Defense 

In 2010, the 77th General Assembly of the OPC sent a letter to the The Department of Defense Comprehensive Review Working Group. You can find the letter on the OPC website here, and I will quote both the stated clerk's note regarding the context as well as the letter itself. 

Stated clerk's note: The United States Secretary of Defense has established a Department of Defense Comprehensive Review Working Group to "review issues associated with the possible repeal of 10 U.S.C. §654, which would allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, and to develop an implementation plan, should Congress repeal the law." In the course of that review the working group solicited comments from agencies that endorse chaplains. The 77th General Assembly of the OPC has responded to that request with the following letter.

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

Office of the General Assembly

George R. Cottenden, Stated Clerk

July 20, 2010

TO: The Department of Defense Comprehensive Review Working Group

c/o Chaplain (COL) Gary Linsky

SUBJECT: Concern about Repeal of the Current Military Policy Prohibiting Homosexual Behavior

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) is thankful for the opportunity to respond to the letter of Major General (S) Gregory A. Biscone, USAF, Chief of Staff and the subsequent letter from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense under the signatures of Chaplain (Major General) Douglas L. Carver, USA, Chairman and Army Chief of Chaplains; RADM; CHC, Robert F. Burt, USN: Chief of Chaplains; and Chaplain (Major General) Cecil R. Richardson, USAF, Chief of Chaplains soliciting our "views ... regarding the impact of the repeal of [10 U.S.C. §654]" and promoting dialog "with civilian organizations regarding religious issues" (see attachments 1 & 2). We regret that the Assembly itself could not make the 15 May 2010 deadline, for our denomination did not meet in deliberative session until our July General Assembly. This is the official response that supersedes the earlier communication you received 15 May 2010 (see attachment 3).

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church is gravely concerned over the potential repeal of 10 U.S.C. 8654 that governs the service of homosexual individuals in our military. Therefore, we are grateful for your desire to consider carefully the moral implications of your approving sexual practices that God has explicitly condemned.

We are concerned that the repeal of the current law may go so far as to force our currently serving chaplains to choose between violating their ordination vows and resigning from the military. They have affirmatively answered the following question in their ordination: "Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice?" Thus, OPC chaplains preach and counsel from the Scriptures because they are convinced that "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17). (All Bible citations are from the English Standard Version.)

We are concerned that other members of the OPC who are serving in the Armed Forces may also be coerced to teach and enforce a policy that explicitly violates the Word of God. When they took their membership vows in an Orthodox Presbyterian Church they answered "Yes" to this question: "Do you believe the Bible, consisting of the Old and New Testaments, to be the Word of God, and its doctrine of salvation to be the perfect and only true doctrine of salvation?"

Several Bible passages forthrightly state God's condemnation of homosexual behavior. From the Hebrew Bible, Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Romans 1:18-33 in the New Testament historically and prophetically describes how the wrath of God is revealed against people who, by their own sinful behavior, suppress the truth about the one true God and how the moral disintegration of society follows. In the consequent moral disintegration in human society, the acceptance of homosexuality is a prominent symptom: "26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature: 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."

Our military chaplains and members are concerned about the following specific consequences:

• Chaplains may be open to charges of discrimination or command reprimand when they preach or counsel in accordance with the passages in the Bible which directly speak of the sin of homosexual practice. Such threats compromise the First Amendment protection of the free exercise of religion clause and the freedom of speech as well as the gospel message which delivers homosexuals from this destructive practice (1 Corinthians 6:9-11—Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.)

• Bibles in military chapels and on military bases may be under the threat of excision of all passages which speak very directly to the sin of homosexual practice. Whether it be under the guise of opposing "hate speech" or alleging insubordinate opposition to a policy of the Department of Defense, the effort may be made soon after the repeal of the law.

• Marriage and family retreats conducted by chaplains intended to strengthen traditional marriages and families may have to include homosexual couples, which will violate chaplains' faith tenets and may discourage the voluntary participation of unmarried, heterosexual couples.

• Homosexual couples may seek union ceremonies or marriages, which are in violation of the beliefs and ordination vows of a large percentage of military chaplains, not just those from this denomination. Refusal may invite the charge of discrimination and command reprimand.

These expressions are consistent with the Chaplain's Manual of the Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel, Section "Policy and Guidance; V. HOMOSEXUALITY" (we will be happy to provide a copy upon request) and our own denomination's Instruments of the General Assembly, Appendix A (www.opc.org/GA/Instruments2009.pdf, p. 3023, starting at line 530).

We provide this response for the good of the nation, for the integrity and effectiveness of the chaplains who serve the nation on behalf of their church, for the military and spiritual welfare of our members who serve in the Armed Forces, and for the protection of the constitutional principle of the free exercise of religion.

Sincerely,

George R. Cottenden

Stated Clerk, The Orthodox Presbyterian Church

Enclosures: 3

DOD Comprehensive Review Working Group

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense

Committee on Chaplains and Military Personnel to CRWG correspondence

cc: Major General Douglas L. Carver, Chief of Chaplains, U. S. Army

Rear Admiral Robert F. Burt, Chief of Chaplains, U. S. Navy

Major General Cecil R. Richardson, Chief of Chaplains, U. S. Air Force

Rear Admiral Mark L. Tidd, Chaplain of the Marine Corps

Chaplain (COL) Thomas E. Preston, Executive Director, Armed Forces Chaplain Board

A Denominational Primer

In the following ten articles, I give overviews of the major denominational traditions in the light of church history and Scripture. I do so from the perspective of a Presbyterian and I also write with the American context especially in mind. 

Presbyterian and Reformed

Anglican and Episcopalian 

Congregationalist

Baptist

Methodist and Holiness

Pentecostal and Charismatic

Restorationist

Lutheran

Roman Catholic

Eastern Orthodox

As I mention in the articles, the church first experienced a split between the Eastern Orthodox church and the church in the West. The Western church then underwent a split during the 16th century Reformation between the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches. During the Reformation, the Protestants gradually formed into two groups: Lutheran and Reformed.

The Reformed churches included a mainstream - the Continental Reformed and Presbyterian churches - as well as the Anglican Church (Church of England) and the Congregationalist churches. The Presbyterian, Anglican, and Congregationalist churches were the main churches in the British colonies that declared independence in 1776. From the Anglicans (called Episcopalians in the USA after independence) came the Methodists, from the Congregationalists came the Baptists, and from the Presbyterians came the Restorationists, generally speaking. (It should be noted that the Restorationists went further from the Presbyterian position than did the Baptists and even the Methodists.) 

These six major denominational traditions (Episcopal, Congregationalist, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Restorationist), along with the Lutherans, became the mainline churches in America. Roman Catholic numbers rose in America due to immigration and expansion, and some Eastern Orthodox immigrants came to America as well. The Pentecostal movement arose from the Methodist/Holiness tradition around 1900. And thus you get these ten major denominational traditions, all of which are worldwide as well as being present here in America.

I would note that the order in which I have listed them does not necessarily indicate how close they are doctrinally. Lutherans are much more like Presbyterians than Pentecostals are, for example. Rather, they are ordered in the way I thought made the most sense in seeking to explain how they are related to each other.

Some might wonder where the non-denominational churches are. After all, more and more American Christians are non-denominational. I did not include them since they are independent churches that are essentially in one or another of these traditions (or possibly a mix of two), simply without a regional or national organization.

Of course, from a Protestant perspective, the church of Jesus Christ is bigger than any one of these denominations. Chapters 25 and 26 of the Westminster Confession of Faith describe the biblical doctrine of the church well. May the Lord Jesus sanctify his church, removing false teaching and corrupt practices, working through us to build it up in truth and love, that we might clearly proclaim the truth of God's word together and stand firm "in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by your opponents" (Phil. 1:27-28).

Eastern Orthodox

As the Roman Empire divided into western and eastern portions, so the church in these regions gradually grew apart. They came to have different languages (Latin and Greek) and different political situations (Germanic tribes/Holy Roman Empire and the Byzantine Roman Empire). Friction between the two arose, and several particular conflicts like the one in AD 1054 drove the two apart, despite various efforts to regain unity. 

While both the eastern and western churches claimed to be orthodox and catholic, the eastern churches later came to be commonly called Eastern Orthodox or Orthodox. The word "orthodox" is a good word, meaning "right doctrine" (or, according to many Eastern Orthodox, "right worship"), and is even used by my denomination, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, without any reference to Eastern Orthodoxy.

Eastern Orthodox churches are united in an acceptance of the “seven ecumenical councils,” as well as communion with the patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, and shared liturgical practices (the Byzantine Rite). They also share a rejection of the Roman bishop’s claim to universal supremacy. There are about 14 autocephalous regional churches in communion with each other, each having a head bishop that does not report to a higher-ranking bishop (nine of these head bishops are called patriarchs, including the four mentioned above). There are also a few other regional churches whose autocephalous status is contested, some not recognized by Constantinople and some not recognized by Russia. This structure, of a communion of regional churches organized with episcopal government, is similar to the structure of the Anglican Communion. Eastern Orthodox churches are found mostly in countries like Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Belarus, the Balkans, Greece, and Georgia. There are around 260 million people that are Eastern Orthodox in the world today. 

Notable Eastern Orthodox figures include John of Damascus (8th century), Photius (9th century), Gregory Palamas (14th century), Cyril Lucaris (17th century), Seraphim Rose (20th century), Alexander Schmemann (20th century), and Kallistos Ware (20th century).

Differences Between East and West

The Eastern church came to differ from the Western church (from which came both Roman Catholic churches and the Protestant churches) in the following ways.

• The filioque clause in the Nicene Creed. This is the clause that says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father "and the Son." This clause was adopted in the West, e.g. Council of Toledo in 589, but never adopted by the East. 

• The use of icons. There was division within the East for a time over the use of icons. At the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 the East affirmed the veneration of icons. Much of the West opposed it at first, but gradually adopted a similar use of images until the Reformation. I have written more about this history here: The Iconoclast Controversy. 

• The leadership of the church and the rise of the papacy. The East has always denied that the pope has universal supremacy or infallibility. It gives the patriarch of Constantinople a position of honor, but not of rule over the whole church, placing more weight on councils and regional churches.

• Leavened or unleavened bread in communion. The East used leavened bread, while the West used unleavened. 

• Facial hair. Eastern clergy did not shave, while Western clergy did shave. 

• Married priests. The West forbade the marriage of priests in the 11th century, while the East allowed it, although it forbade getting married after ordination and married bishops.

• Purgatory. The West affirmed it, while the East did not.

• Original sin. The West affirmed the doctrine, being more strongly influenced by Augustine, while the East held to a weaker view. 

• Immaculate conception of Mary. The West would begin to affirm it, while the East denied it.

• Mode of baptism. The West used sprinkling, pouring, and immersion, while the East only immersed.

• Age of confirmation and first communion. The West waited until the age of discretion and first confession, while the East gave communion to baptized infants.

• Calendar. The West adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1582, while the Eastern church has retained the older Julian calendar for ecclesiastical use. 

• The East used the Greek translation of the Old Testament (and the Greek New Testament), rather than the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible (which translated the Old Testament from Hebrew).

• Different emphases. The West would give more attention to the atonement, justification, and doctrine than the East, while the East would put more emphasis on “deification,” mystical devotion, and liturgy.

Notice that in some of these categories, the Protestants continue to hold the Western position, as with the filioque clause, original sin, mode of baptism, rejection of paedo-communion, the eventual use of the Gregorian calendar, and general emphases; while in other areas Protestants adopt a position more like that of the East, as with rejection of papal claims, allowing the use of leavened bread in communion, of clerical facial hair, the marriage of minsters, and rejection of purgatory.

Eastern Orthodoxy and the Reformation

The existence of the Eastern church formed one hole in Roman Catholic arguments as the Reformation began. Some Protestants had hopes of working with them. In fact, there was a Calvinist patriarch of Constantinople, Cyril Lucaris (1570–1638). As a younger priest, he had encountered Lutherans as he supported Orthodox believers in eastern Europe against the Papists. Later in Egypt, he encountered Reformed theology through a Dutch ambassador to the Ottomans. Lucaris sought to reform the Eastern church and make common cause with Protestants against Rome. His Confession of Faith (1629) proclaimed justification by faith alone, predestination, and sola scriptura. But due to a deal between the Jesuits and Ottomans, he was killed in 1638. Several Eastern Orthodox synods in the 1600s condemned Lucaris’ confession and Protestantism, including the Synod of Jerusalem (1672), motivated it seems by Jesuit influence. Thus, the Eastern Orthodox churches did not experience the Reformation.

Eastern Orthodoxy and America

Eastern Orthodoxy first came to America from Russia to Alaska in the 1700s. This mission of the Orthodox church in Russia moved its headquarters to San Fransisco and then to New York City. It grew through immigrants and through gaining some people who left the Roman Catholic Church. Russian leadership was lost with the Russian Revolution in 1917. The North America diocese operated independently and eventually became the Orthodox Church in America (OCA) when it was granted (disputed) autocephalous status in 1970. But in the meantime, other immigrant groups looked to their own homelands for leadership, so that other Orthodox missions were started. Today there are 13 branches of the Eastern Orthodox Church present in the USA, with most American Eastern Orthodox churches being Greek Orthodox, OCA, or Antiochian Orthodox.

Evaluation 

The Eastern Orthodox Church has some of the problems that the Roman Catholic Church has (e.g. use of images, rejecting sola scriptura, insisting on apostolic episcopal succession, prayers for the intercession of dead saints). It also rejects or at least does not affirm some Roman Catholic errors (e.g. rejects papal supremacy and infallibility, less precise on transubstantiation and justification). It also has some problems of its own (e.g. rejects the filioque clause, weaker on original sin, weaker on doctrine in general).

Some areas of appreciation:

• Their emphasis on the doctrine of the Trinity in doctrine and liturgy.

• Their emphasis on union with Christ, sanctification, and glorification.

• Their relative freedom from the critical spirit of the Enlightenment.

• Their music, especially their Psalm singing.

• Their assent to the doctrinal affirmations of the first six ecumenical councils

• Their perseverance under persecution by Islam and Communism. 

Primary objections:

• Their denial of sola scriptura, seeing Scripture as an especially important part of infallible church tradition; their idea that the Spirit speaks through the church, including through the Scripture as the main written authority in the church, but not the only rule of faith and life. (Extra-biblical church tradition is mostly the ecumenical councils and the liturgy, containing less dogmas than the RCC).

• Their recognition of the apocrypha as Scripture, adding books to the Old Testament not given as Scripture or recognized as Scripture by the Jews, who were entrusted with the oracles of God (Rom. 3:2).

• Their veneration of icons, both in authoritative doctrine (Nicaea II) and in practice.

• Their doctrine of original sin and free will, of predestination based on foresight of the use of prevenient grace, rather than the predestination of those unconditionally chosen according to his sovereign grace and his effectual calling of them (John 6, 10). 

• Their prayer to deceased saints for their intercession, and prayer for the dead. 

• Their hostility to the filioque clause. In fact, the Spirit does proceed from the Father and the Son, being the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son (John 15:26, Galatians 4:6).

• Their insistence on apostolic episcopal succession, namely, that only bishops can ordain a person who may truly administer the sacraments through which a person is saved.

• The distinction that has become common in Eastern Orthodox circles between God’s unknowable essence and his energies, so that we can only describe God by negation.

• Their downplaying of teaching and of doctrine (beyond the seven councils), which is generally a weakness. Its approach to worship breeds superstition.

A classis of the URCNA has produced a study report on Eastern Orthodoxy that identifies four reasons people give for joining Eastern Orthodox churches: mystery, history, beauty, and experience. But, on the one hand, these things can be found in the Reformed tradition; and on the other hand, Eastern Orthodox mystery is too agnostic, its tie to history is later and more forged than they claim, its beauty also includes superstition and is at times overdone and gaudy, and its experience is not a safe guide. And the eastern church fathers, like Chrysostom, are not their sole possession - we, like the Reformers, can learn from them as our fathers too. 

Roman Catholic

Thus far in this series on denominations, we have looked at the eight major denominational traditions that are Protestant. Today we turn to an overview of Roman Catholicism. During the Reformation in the 16th century, the western church split into Protestant and Romanist churches. Just as there were proto-Reformers in the medieval era, so also the beliefs and practices that would define the Roman Catholic Church had been developing for some time. Yet Roman Catholicism would take its dogmatic and well-defined form as a denomination in Rome’s negative response to the Reformation. The Roman "Catholic" Church claims to be the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, not merely a branch of it, but this is one of its false claims.

History

Pre-Reformation

In general, many errors and bad practices developed in the medieval era, and yet things were contested and debated, and various reform movements were active in that era. 

Transubstantiation and the Sacrifice of the Mass

The word “transubstantiation” was first affirmed in 1215 by the Fourth Lateran Council. The word was used more and more over time, even while the doctrine that the substance of the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ was opposed by the Waldensians, Lollards, and Hussites. The idea that the Lord’s Supper was a propitiatory sacrifice for sins developed gradually in connection with other beliefs like transubstantiation and purgatory.

Purgatory and Indulgences

The idea of purgatory developed gradually, more in the west than the east, as a consequence of beliefs concerning penance and the satisfaction of the temporal penalties for sin. What began as church discipline turned into a system of making satisfaction, even after death. This in turn led to the use of indulgences, and eventually even the sale of indulgences, that remitted some of these temporal penalties. 

Papal Authority

Due to the historic prominence of the city of Rome, the bishop of Rome held an influential position in the church. In 1303, Boniface VIII issued Unam Sanctam, in which he asserted his authority over the state and said “Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff.” But it took time for this claim to be established and recognized. Boniface VIII was soon arrested by French troops and died shortly after. The “Babylonian captivity of the papacy” in France lasted from 1305 to 1376. This was succeeded by the “Western Schism” from 1378 to 1417, in which there was more than one person who claimed to be the bishop of Rome (i.e. the Pope).

Reformation and Counter-Reformation

Pope Leo X rejected Martin Luther’s appeals for reform and held firmly to the sale of indulgences. He excommunicated Luther and died about a year later. 

The Council of Trent (1545-1563) met to respond to the Reformation. Despite some dissenting voices, it generally rejected the Protestant position and stated it own contrary position. It also made some reforms, such as forbidding the sale of indulgences (although not the granting of them).

The Council of Trent was part of, and a foundation for, the Counter-Reformation. The Counter-Reformation was led by men like Ignatius of Loyola (1491-1556, founder of the Jesuits), Charles Borromeo (1538-1584, Archbishop of Milan), and Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621, a Jesuit theology professor and Archbishop of Capua). The Counter-Reformation in the 1600s mostly halted the advance of Protestantism in Europe and led to the retaking of some territory (e.g. Poland) and foreign missions (e.g. Japan). The first English Bible to be printed with Papal approval was published in 1582 (NT) and 1610 (OT).

Scipione Rebiba (1504–1577) is an important figure, since about 95% of Roman Catholic bishops today (and all popes since 1700) trace their ordinations back to him and it is unknown who ordained him. Thus, most of them cannot trace their ordinations back to the apostles, something they believe to be essential for a valid ministry.

America

While the first two churches in what is now the United States of America were Roman Catholic (in Florida and New Mexico), Roman Catholicism was a fringe minority in the British colonies that became the United States. The most prominent Roman Catholics were in Maryland, and the first Roman Catholic bishop in the United States (1790) was John Carroll in Baltimore. His cousin signed the Declaration and his brother signed the Constitution. Many Roman Catholic immigrants arrived in the 1800s (e.g. Irish, Germans, Italians) and the United States grew to include historically Roman Catholic territories, such as Florida, Louisiana, and the Southwest. Thus, the Roman Catholic Church became the largest denomination in America by 1850 (i.e. after the Mexican-American War), although it remained outside the “mainline.” In the mid-1900s, Fulton Sheen was a prominent bishop in America, hosting a television program.

Later Councils

Vatican I (1870) - This council dogmatically affirmed the universal jurisdiction and infallibility of the pope when he speaks ex cathedra. Those who disagreed formed the Old Catholic Church, separate from Rome.

Vatican II (1962-1965) - The full impact of this council is hard to summarize. It led to the use of vernacular languages in the Mass instead of Latin, communion under both kinds (bread and wine), reduction of the prohibition of meat to just the Fridays of Lent, other liturgical changes, and a softer approach to other churches and religions. Bishop Wojtyła took part in this council and became Pope John Paul II in 1978.

Overview

The Church of Rome teaches that special revelation from God is given to us through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, as interpreted by the Magisterium (the Pope and the bishops in communion with him).

As is the case with historic Protestants, they use the Creeds, the Ten Commandments, and the Lord’s Prayer as basic catechetical summaries of the Christian religion. Another structure that is used by them (and some Protestants) to teach the Christian life is the seven virtues, composed of the four cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, fortitude, temperance and the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity. They also teach that there are seven (not just two) sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, the Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony.

Errors

Authority, Succession, Canon, and Implicit Faith

They add tradition to Scripture, denying the sufficiency of Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16-17). They insist on a certain episcopal “apostolic succession” of ordinations for a valid ministry without biblical warrant. They recognize the Apocrypha as Scripture (adding books to the Old Testament not given as Scripture or recognized as Scripture by the Jews, who were entrusted with the oracles of God, Rom. 3:2). And they demand and teach an implicit faith in what the church officially teaches, denying liberty of conscience. They wrongly exalt the pope as the earthly head of the whole church, with spiritual and temporal jurisdiction, while in fact Christ is the only head of his church (Col. 1:18, Eph. 2:20). 

Justification

They accept the satisfaction of Christ for their satisfaction, but not for their righteousness before God. They teach that justification is by the forgiveness of sins and by the renewal of the inner man, on the basis of which a person is declared to be righteous. I have written more about these errors and those of the next paragraph here.

Penance, Temporal Penalties for Sin, and the Sacrifice of the Mass

They teach that justification can be lost by mortal sins but restored through penance; that temporal penalties remain even when the guilt and punishment of sin is remitted; that if a believer dies before suffering all the temporal punishments for their sins, they must be further purified by suffering in purgatory; and that the sacrifice of the Eucharist is a reparation for the sins of the living and the dead that obtains spiritual or temporal benefits from God.

Worship and the Saints

They add many ceremonies without warrant of Scripture. They pray to dead saints and pray for the souls of the dead in purgatory. Their prayers to dead saints often ascribe far too much to them, and their use of their relics is superstitious. They direct their worship of God and veneration of the saints to (“through”) images. They also have some errors in their moral teaching, such as their current opposition to the death penalty and their prohibition of divorce in all cases.

What Good Remains

The Roman Church retains many truths, even if it also misleads or obscures the truth by other teachings. For example, they affirm the doctrines of God, the Trinity, Scripture (that it is the word of God), the Incarnation, Christ’s life, miracles, death, resurrection, ascension, and coming to judge the world; and that Christ’s obedient sacrifice of himself was offered in reparation for our disobedience, atoned for our faults, made satisfaction for our sins to the Father, and merited justification for us (CCC 613-617). They believe in the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life of the age to come. They retain baptism (a washing with water, in the name of the Trinity, with the design to signify, seal, and apply the benefits of the new covenant). They have successfully resisted cultural pressures to give official approval to abortion, homosexual marriage, and the ordination of women.

The Status of the Roman Church from a Protestant Perspective

A good analogy that was used by the Reformers was that of the northern kingdom of Israel. The northern kingdom professed the true God, its members were marked by the sign of the covenant, and there was a remnant of faithful believers in it; yet that kingdom had departed from ordinances God had appointed in Jerusalem, they had substituted for them the idolatrous and corrupt worship of the true God using golden calves, and they were led by kings that made the people to sin in unfaithfulness to their covenant God. Calls were given to the northern kingdom and its members to turn to their Lord and to worship him in Jerusalem.

Calvin compared the Roman Church to ancient Israel when it had fallen into apostasy but nevertheless retained God’s covenant and circumcision, so that the children born of that people were his (Ezek. 16:20-21). He denied that we must maintain fellowship with them and accept their teaching, but also conceded that, “the Lord has left in them some trace and semblance of his church. There is, first, God’s covenant, which cannot be broken, and baptism, which is its sacrament and which, being hallowed by the Lord’s mouth, retains its force despite the impiety of man. To sum up, we do not at all deny that in them exists a church, nor do we simply affirm it without qualification. These are churches to the extent that our Lord preserves in them the remnants of his people who are miserably scattered among them; to the extent, too, that they retain some marks of the church, especially those whose effectiveness cannot be destroyed either by the devil’s wiles or by human wickedness. On the other hand, because the marks essential to the church we now describe are there erased, if we seek a properly ordered church, no lawful form of it will be found there.”

The beliefs of its members are supposed to be whatever the church teaches, but this is often not the case. Their beliefs can be worse than the official dogma, but their beliefs can also be better, especially when they have been influenced by Protestants. If you are interacting with individuals in the Roman Church, it is important to not jump to conclusions. See what they themselves actually believe (and what they think you believe). Encourage them to be true to their baptism by resting upon Christ alone for their salvation if they don’t already, and by forsaking the false teaching and corrupt worship of the Roman church. Let them know that to leave the Roman church is not to leave the one holy catholic and apostolic church that Christ founded. The Reformers did not found a new church during the Protestant Reformation. They worked to reform the church of Jesus Christ, which already existed.