Helm's Deep: Gordon on Calvin

Helm's Deep: Gordon on Calvin

Among the deluge of Calviniana that appeared in his 500th anniversary year there are a number of biographical studies, of which this by Bruce Gordon (late of St. Andrews and now of Yale) is the most thorough and scholarly. It bears comparison with the work of the Reformation scholar Herman Selderhuis, John Calvin, a Pilgrim’s Life, (Leicester, IVP, 2009), if only because the two books have a similar structure. Each author has chosen to write in shortish sections within each chapter, though Gordon’s sections are longer. But both books give the impression of Calvin through his portrayal in short scenes, rather like videoclips. This style makes the books easy to pick up and put down, and gives their authors freedom to roam from topic to topic as he unfolds the life. Of the two, Selderhuis’s is lighter in tone, and may even make you laugh. Gordon sets out to be more serious, and he is certainly successful in that.

The present-day biographer of Calvin who aims to write for a general educated readership is faced with a dilemma. There is a good deal of drama to Calvin’s life. His career was adventurous, and so an account of it ought to make for a good read. His life even as a theologian, controversialist and bible commentator was lived at such a breakneck speed that by his early fifties he was worn out. (When he wrote about divine providence he advised the Christian to live prudently, to take note of the divinely-appointed connectedness of means and ends. But he resolutely failed to heed that advice himself, at least as regards his own health). But what explains the drama – his flight from France, and then from Geneva, the frequent political turmoil in that city, the quarrels, the swings of temper, his deliberate offensiveness to his opponents? Is there a connecting thread?

Yes there is, but now the biographers’ dilemma surfaces. For what made Calvin tick were ideas that now seem remote and unappealing to the modern sensibility, ideas about divine grace and sin, about who has the right to excommunicate a person from church, or about what exactly goes on in the Lord’s Supper. How could these ideas motivate a life, and lead a sensitive soul, with ambitions to be a reclusive scholar and nothing more, to take centre stage and to run himself into the ground for their sake? For Calvin, certain ideas had consequences, deeply personal consequences. Here at least there is consistency in the man. If the idea of your God is not one that can flit in the brain, then discipleship of such a God cannot be a fitful thing. Knowing this God is full-time work.

Bruce Gordon does a pretty good job, it seems to me, in producing a narrative of Calvin’s life that is intelligible in terms of the impact of his ideas upon his own unique personality. That is, he nearly always provides the reader with sufficient theological and religious background to make what Calvin did and suffered intelligible, and sets his activities in the context of his own conversion, even though the circumstances of that momentous change still remain shadowy, and this fact certainly does not help any biographer. To present such a man in such a way is a considerable and praiseworthy achievement. This is not a theological biography, but it is pretty clearly the biography of a theologian, one of the great doctors of the Church. So Professor Gordon does not simple chronicle events; he tells us, for example, the significance of Calvin’s commentary on Romans, and goes into Calvin’s relations with the various Swiss city churches with great thoroughness. He analyses the reasons for the unevenness of Calvin’s international impact, and goes into the printing and publishing of those works of Calvin’s which were rapidly translated and exported, and on which his reputation came to rest.

A couple of things puzzled me a bit. One is Professor Gordon’s claim, which he makes twice, that Calvin’s early book, Psychopannychia, written in 1534 but finally published (after going the rounds in manuscript to various of his friends) in an altered form in 1542, a work against the Anabaptist doctrines of soul sleep and ‘mortalism’ was in fact aimed at Michael Servetus. (43, 216) The reason for Calvin giving these doctrines priority remains something of a puzzle, but it is hard to believe that he already had Servetus in his sights. Servetus did agree to meet up with Calvin in Paris in 1534, an appointment which Calvin kept but he did not, to Calvin’s annoyance. The author provides no evidence for his claim that Psychopannychia, was ‘partly directed to Servetus and his circle in Paris’, or even for the view that Servetus had such a circle. Bernard Cottret, whose biography of Calvin is a good resource for this kind of thing, does not offer a hint of such a connection.

One place where (understandably perhaps) the author’s concern to provide his reader with theological content, or a theological context, seems to fail him is over Calvin’s controversies with the Lutheran theologian Westphal over the Supper. The author recounts in considerable detail each blow and counter-blow and counter-counter blow of this seemingly interminable debate. But he never tells us what the theological issues were between Calvin and Westphal, or how it came about that Calvin had such an ecstatic view of the significance of the Supper, ecstasy caught by his words from the Institutes quoted at length on page 303. The debates about the Supper were tragic enough, but there were real issues at stake, substantive differences . The author’s reluctance to tell his readers what these are makes it hard for them to judge his opinion that Calvin’s debate with Westphal was a personal defeat for him (249), or even what this means and how it could be identified as such.

Nevertheless, this is an excellent general biography of the Reformer, sympathetic, engaging and informative.

Anthony Sparrow on an absolution from heaven itself

Comfortable Words» Blog Archive » Anthony Sparrow on an absolution from heaven itself

CONTINUING the theme of repentance and healing, in this evening’s first reading (2 Chron 33) we hear how after being briefly captured by the Assyrians, Manasseh, King of Judah, heartily repented of giving Israel over to non-Jewish worship.

AND when he was in affliction, he besought the LORD his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, And prayed unto him: and he was intreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD he was God.

Affliction, repentance and confession form a key element in Christian healing too, according to St James in our second reading (Jas 5).

IS any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

The Visitation Of The Sick provides for priestly Confession, and appoints the following Absolution to be read over those whom the priest judges are sincere in their repentance:

OUR Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners who truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences: And by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

This authoritative priestly Absolution, given in the first person, differs superficially from the Absolution at Morning and Evening Prayer, which speaks in the third person of God’s forgiving character, assuring us that “He pardoneth and absolveth all them that truly repent, and unfeignedly believe his holy Gospel”.

Yet by ordering that the priest should stand, and that “If no priest be present the person saying the service shall read the Collect for the Twenty-First Sunday after Trinity, that person and the people still kneeling”, the Prayer Book strongly indicates that even here, there is a unique ministry of reconciliation, founded on our Lord’s words to his Apostles in this morning’s second reading (Jn 20:19-31):

AND this Absolution is an act of authority, by virtue of a power and commandment of God to his Ministers, as it is in the preface of this Absolution. And as we read, “Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted” (Jn 20:33). And if our confession be serious and hearty, this Absolution is effectual, as if God did pronounce it from heaven.

Bishop Anthony Sparrow (1612-1685). “A Rationale On The Book Of Common Prayer.” Morning Prayer: Of the Confession.

Reasonable Christian: The Ornaments Rubrics of the 1552 and 1662 Book of Common Prayer

Reasonable Christian: The Ornaments Rubrics of the 1552 and 1662 Book of Common Prayer

Bishop Thompson Addresses The Diocese of Western Anglicans

Bishop Thompson Addresses The Diocese of Western Anglicans from David Turney on Vimeo.

James 3 in the First Sunday in Trinity: Comfortable Words» Blog Archive » Mark Frank on Christian civility

Comfortable Words» Blog Archive » Mark Frank on Christian civility

Mark Frank on Christian civility

The Revd Mark Frank (1613-1664)
ST JAMES warns in our reading at Evensong tonight (Jas 3),

THE tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature.

When we speak of Anglicanism as a via media or a religion of moderation, we should maybe bear this in mind.

IT IS none of Christ’s religion that teaches men to be uncivil; no, not to return one incivility with another: no, not “revile again though we be reviled,” says S. Peter (1 Pet 2:23), and brings Christ for an example. Others doing us wrong, nay shrewdly persecuting us too, will not authorize us to do it, to requite our very persecutors with any incivility.

A good memorandum for those who make it an especial sign of their being better Christians than others, to be rude and uncivil to their betters, to be saucy and unmannerly to any, to all that run not riot with them into the same madness and folly, sacrilege and heresy; that cannot be content to do men wrong, and rob them of their dues, but must do it with ill language and incivility.

They forget, sure, “the Lord is at hand;” that there is any such thing as a Lord, any superior above them, either at hand or afar off, either in this world or in the other. The Apostle’s επιείκεια is for moderation in this point too, civil and handsome terms, gestures, and carriage; that we should carry ourselves like men, at least, if we will not like Christians.

The Revd Mark Frank (1613-1664). Sermon for The Fourth Sunday In Advent

Commemoration of the Council of Nicea | CyberBrethren-A Lutheran Blog

Commemoration of the Council of Nicea | CyberBrethren-A Lutheran Blog

Prayer:

Lord God, heavenly Father, at the first ecumenical Council of Nicaea, Your Church boldly confessed that it believed in one Lord Jesus Christ as being of one substance with the Father. Grant us courage to confess this saving faith with Your Church through all the ages; through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.

The Christian Church’s First Ecumenical Council was convened in Nicaea (modern Isnuk, Turkey) in the early summer of AD 325 by the Roman Emperor Constantine. The emperor presided at the opening of the council. The major intended topic was the ongoing Arian controversy.

The council ruled against the Arians, who taught that Jesus was not the eternal Son of God but was created by the Father and was called Son of God because of his righteousness. The chief opponents of the Arians were Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and his deacon, Athanasius. The council confessed the eternal divinity of Jesus and adopted the earliest version of the Nicene Creed, which in its entirety was adopted at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

Their version of what we now call the Nicene Creed was almost identical to what is now used in the Church until the third section, where the original ends, “We believe in the Holy Spirit.” It fell to the Second Ecumenical Council (First Council of Constantinople) to add what is now used. Therefore, the confession used in the churches may properly be called the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. The so-called filioque (where “and the Son” was inserted after the words about the Spirit proceeding from the Father) was only later added by the Roman Catholic Church and never accepted in the East.

The Council also saw the first major collaboration between Church and state since Christianity began and signaled a rise in imperial influence in affairs of the Church. Constantine called it, presided over the initial session, and, in many respects, set its agenda. While his personal religious beliefs may have been part of his reason, most scholars agree that his main fear was that a divided Christianity would result in a divided Empire. The historical irony is that the Roman Empire fractured before any major schisms in Christendom.

Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. And He will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom will have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And I believe in one holy Christian [catholic] and apostolic Church, I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life ✠ of the world to come. Amen.

Southwark clergy write to The Times : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

Southwark clergy write to The Times : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

The above URL. Opposition to Reprobate Schori speaking at Southwark Cathedral.

From the website for Southwark Cathedral, we post this:
http://cathedral.southwark.anglican.org/

We know there has been a church on this site since AD 606. There may well have been a church here even earlier. Southwark Cathedral is the oldest cathedral church building in London, and archaeological evidence shows there was Roman pagan worship here well before that.

Significantly, Southwark stands at the oldest crossing point of the tidal Thames at what was the only entrance to the City of London across the river for many centuries. It is not only a place of worship but also of hospitality to every kind of person: princes and paupers, prelates and prostitutes, poets, playwrights, prisoners and patients have all found refuge here.

Salvation, atonement and justification in the Book of Common Prayer by Canon Woods

http://www.pbs.org.uk/downloads/EricWoodsSpeech.mp3

Salvation, atonement and justification in the Book of Common Prayer

Address by The Revd Canon Eric Woods, Vicar of Sherborne Abbey in Dorset. Canon Woods was formerly a Trustee of the Prayer Book Society.

The English Reformation: The Doctrinal Approach of the Reformers by Dr. Roger Beckwith

http://www.pbs.org.uk/downloads/RogerBeckwithSaturdayAM.mp3

The Doctrinal Approach of the Reformers

Address by the Revd Dr Roger Beckwith, internationally known theologian and author and authority on the Reformation. Dr Beckwith is a Vice-President and a Trustee of the Prayer Book Society.

Phil Johnson warns evangelicals of the ‘neo-liberal stealth offensive’ « Churchmouse Campanologist

Phil Johnson warns evangelicals of the ‘neo-liberal stealth offensive’ « Churchmouse Campanologist

Inclusivism | Theological Word of the Day

Inclusivism | Theological Word of the Day

Inclusivism
June 8, 2010
The belief concerning the destiny of the unevangelized that the blood of Christ is the only way for a person to be saved, but that one does not necessarily have to hear and believe the Gospel in order to be saved by the blood of Christ. In other words, Christ is needed ontologically, but not epistemologically. Inclusivists would argue that heaven will be populated by many who did not ever accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ such as Old Testament saints (who never heard it) and those who are mentally unable (infants and the mentally handicapped). Therefore, according to inclusivists, God does save people without explicit belief in the Gospel as we know it and he may save those who have never heard the Gospel today in the same way.

The psalms and hymns, with the the Catechism

The psalms and hymns, with the ... - Google Books

A look at the Dutch Reformed liturgy, c.1840.

R.C. Sproul A Man Called By God

http://networkedblogs.com/4KGms

R.C. Sproul A Man Called By God
by Burk Parsons

Robert Charles Sproul was born on February 13, 1939, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the second child of Robert Cecil Sproul and the former Mayre Ann Yardis. R.C.’s great grandfather immigrated to the United States in the nineteenth-century from Donegal, Ireland. R.C.’s early childhood years were defined largely by two things: World War II and his extended family. He was two years old when World War II broke out. His father, being too old for the draft, was appointed head of the draft board in his district. Only a few weeks after being appointed to his position, R.C.’s father came home in uniform and announced that he had enlisted in the army air corps because he couldn’t send others overseas into battle if he didn’t go himself. R.C.’s father was an honorable man, and he was known throughout the community for his integrity. Just prior to his deployment overseas, R.C.’s father invited his brother and family to live in the Sproul home, and there they resided for ten years.

One of R.C.’s earliest memories is the day in 1945 when his father returned from war. The entire family went to Chicago to welcome him home. The train station was crowded as families eagerly awaited the return of their loved ones. Six-year-old R.C. saw his father from a distance, and he ran to him, as his father dropped his duffle bag, fell to his knees, and opened his arms to catch him.

Growing up as a fan of the Pittsburgh Steelers and of the Pirates baseball team, R.C.’s life revolved around sports. No matter the season, he could be found on some ball field somewhere in his neighborhood. He loved to play baseball, basketball, football, and ice hockey. But In 1945, R.C. met the love of his life, Vesta. He was in the first grade, but he waited until sixth grade to pledge his love. In sixth grade they “went together” for a short while (in the 1940s, “going together” largely meant going to the movies and holding hands). They were a couple again in seventh grade, but that didn’t last either. In the eighth grade, it finally worked. They were both involved in the church choir and the youth group, and so they shared many of the same friends at church and school. As they grew up and completed high school, they were together; nevertheless, R.C.’s high school years were filled with sadness. It was one of the most unhappy periods of his life.

In R.C.’s sophomore year of high school, his father had a number of serious strokes making him an invalid throughout most of R.C.’s high school years. Life became difficult for the entire family, and fifteen-year-old R.C. had to go to work to help support his family. In order to make time for his job, he had to give up his school sports. At the beginning of R.C.’s senior year of high school, his father died, and the home he had lived in for eighteen years had to be sold. He and his mother moved into a small two-bedroom apartment. R.C. was angry at God.

It was September of 1957 when R.C. started his first semester at Westminster College in Pennsylvania. The first weekend of school, R.C. and a friend were on their way to a bar when R.C. remembered that his Lucky Strikes were in his dorm room. He went to retrieve them and on the way encountered the star of the football team who engaged him in conversation. R.C. can’t remember what the man said to him, only that he talked as though he knew Jesus personally. R.C. was riveted, and after an hour’s conversation, he went to his dorm room overcome by a need to pray for forgiveness. He got up from his knees a forgiven man. He fell into bed late that night a converted child of God. The next February, from her college in Ohio, Vesta visited R.C. at Westminster College. Though she knew of his conversion, she didn’t grasp all that it meant until R.C. invited her to a prayer meeting. At that meeting, the Lord opened her eyes and her heart to the Gospel, and she was converted to Christ.

At Westminster College, R.C. met Dr. Thomas Gregory, the professor under whom he studied for his major in philosophy. Dr. Gregory was like a father to R.C., and he had a profound influence on his life, particularly because of his commitment to the Christian faith.

It was 1960, and the Pittsburgh Pirates won the World Series. Vesta had graduated from college, and she and R.C. were married. They lived in New Wilmington, Pennsylvania, in an apartment that had been constructed prior to the Civil War. Vesta went to work at the college while R.C. finished his undergraduate degree. That next year, their first child, Sherrie, was born, and R.C. began his studies at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary while working in the electrician’s shop at a local hospital. His three years of study at the seminary were miserable because of the school’s hostility to orthodox Christianity. However, it was there that the Lord brought John Gerstner into his life. At that point, the beginning of his seminary career, R.C. had not yet embraced the Reformed doctrines of grace. He hadn’t yet been convinced of Reformed theology — in his own words: “If you scratched me, I was still basically a semi-Pelagian.” Then, after five years studying Reformed theology, it was Dr. Gerstner’s course on the theology of Jonathan Edwards that finally persuaded R.C. of the doctrines of grace during his second year of seminary.

In his third year, R.C. supplied the pulpit at a Hungarian refugee church as a student pastor. During his last year of seminary, R.C. was persuaded by Dr. Gerstner to pursue doctoral studies under G.C. Berkouwer at the Free University of Amsterdam. Although he had planned on being a pastor, R.C. decided to follow his mentor’s advice. He borrowed money from a bank. They sold their car and their furniture, and R.C., Vesta, and two-year-old Sherrie set off for the Netherlands, living among a people whose language they didn’t speak. Their first months there were trying as they attempted to learn the Dutch language, traveled to the store on bicycles, and adapted to a new culture. R.C. sat at his desk in their bedroom for 10–12 hours a day studying books written in Latin, Dutch, and German (Latin being the only language with which he was familiar). He soon reveled in his studies and all that he was learning. While they anticipated staying in Amsterdam for three or four years, their time was cut short because of R.C.’s mother’s illness and Vesta’s pregnancy with their second child, R.C. Jr. At that time, R.C. had been offered the opportunity to take a one-year leave of absence from the Free University in order to teach philosophy at his alma mater, Westminster College.

So they returned to the States. Then, three months after their return to the United States, R.C.’s mother died on the very same day R.C. Jr. was born. Two weeks later, R.C. was ordained to the ministry in the presbyterian church. Their plans to return to Holland changed, and they remained Stateside. R.C. then took a teaching post at Gordon College in Massachusetts, and two years later he taught at the Conwell School of Theology in Philadelphia during which time he received his Drs. degree from the Free University (1968). He had continued his studies under Professor Berkouwer by long distance, returning to the Free University to take his comprehensive exams.

While in Philadelphia, attending a local presbyterian church, he was asked to teach an adult education class on the person and work of Christ. It was during that class that R.C. discovered that the laypeople he was teaching were more excited about learning the things of God than were his students in the seminary, and he caught a glimpse of the great need for lay education. The following year, he was offered a ministerial position in which he would be directly involved in lay education. R.C. took the position of associate minister of theology and evangelism at College Hill Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, Ohio.

During his ministerial tenure, R.C. began to speak at churches and conferences throughout the Midwest, and after two years at the church, he received the call to begin a study center near Pittsburgh. The idea was to provide a Christian study center modeled after Francis Schaeffer’s European study center, L’Abri. After speaking with Dr. Schaeffer on a couple of occasions, and after much thought and prayer, R.C. and his family relocated to the mountains of western Pennsylvania where Mrs. Dora Hillman had purchased fifty-three acres and constructed a building on the property. In 1971, they moved from the bustling city of Cincinnati to the quiet countryside of Ligonier. There they established the Ligonier Valley Study Center, and for thirteen years students came from around the country to study Scripture, theology, philosophy, apologetics, and church history. The students studied, slept, and ate in the Sproul’s home and in the homes of others in the study
center community.

While at the study center, R.C. continued to teach at the Conwell School of Theology (which became Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary) and to speak at conferences throughout the country.

In the early seventies, Ligonier hosted a conference at which scholars from around the world drafted a statement on biblical inerrancy. It was known as the Ligonier Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, and from this beginning, the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy was born. R.C. served as the president of the council, and his long-time friend James Montgomery Boice of Philadelphia’s Tenth Presbyterian Church served as the chairman of the council. The council consisted of men such as Edmund Clowney, John Gerstner, Roger Nicole, J.I. Packer, and Francis Schaeffer. It was a ten-year enterprise, the result of which was a document called the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, and many of the relationships that formed over the course of those years still continue to this day.

Through the 1970s and early 1980s, during his years at the study center, R.C.’s writing career developed, and he continued the teaching ministry to which God had called him. At that time, he worked closely with Chuck Colson and served on the board of Prison Fellowship for several years.

In 1984, the board of the Ligonier Valley Study Center decided to move to Orlando, and the ministry was renamed Ligonier Ministries. By that time, R.C.’s audio and video messages had been distributed by the thousands throughout the country, and he continued to speak at conferences and churches around the country.

R.C. began teaching four months out of the year at Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi, and was instrumental in establishing the seminary’s campus in Orlando, Florida, where R.C. served as the school’s first academic dean. He retired from the seminary in the mid-nineties to begin a full-time recording schedule for the new radio broadcast Renewing Your Mind, which first aired in 1994 and now has an estimated international audience of more than three million. R.C.’s classic, bestselling book The Holiness of God was first published in 1985, and over the past twenty-two years many of his more than sixty published works have been translated into various languages and have been distributed throughout the world.

In 1988, a group of publishers envisioned a Bible in the tradition of the original 1560 Geneva Bible containing study notes from a Reformed perspective. They asked R.C. to be the general editor of the study Bible. Dr. Sproul agreed and was tasked with assembling an international team of scholars who would be able to produce such a resource.

R.C. established the editorial committee, and, together with more than fifty biblical scholars from around the world, the New Geneva Study Bible was produced (now titled, The Reformation Study Bible). It was a seven-year project concluding in 1995. Since that time, more than three-hundred thousand copies of the The Reformation Study Bible have been distributed throughout the world.

During the 1990s, R.C. continued to teach theology and apologetics at the graduate level at various seminaries, and he served as the distinguished professor of systematic theology and apologetics at Knox Theological Seminary for nearly ten years. For more than three decades, R.C. devoted a large part of his time to teaching in the classroom. He believed that his primary calling was to teach lay people and those preparing for ministry. Nevertheless, when he was 58 years old, R.C. was called by the Lord to preach.

In 1997, Saint Andrew’s Chapel was established when a group of lay people sought the Lord’s direction in planting a church in the Reformed tradition where the whole counsel of God would be preached and where the Lord would be worshiped with reverence. The small congregation of committed Christians called Dr. Sproul to serve as their senior minister of preaching and teaching. They began meeting in the recording studio at Ligonier Ministries, and from there the congregation began to meet in a local movie theatre. Quickly growing out of the theatre, they moved into the cafeteria of a small private school, and a few years later, in 2001, the congregation built its first sanctuary.

Then in 2002, with the desire to provide a venue for the highest quality of musical instruction, Dr. Sproul established the Saint Andrew’s Conservatory of Music, where more than sixty students are currently enrolled.

Today, R.C. preaches during two Sunday morning services and one evening service, and he is earnestly committed to preaching the Word of God expositionally every week. As Saint Andrew’s Chapel grows, the people of Saint Andrew’s continue to seek the Lord’s direction as they purchase more land with the intention of building a new sanctuary and educational wing to meet the needs of the growing congregation.

In his forty-two years of ministry, R.C. has proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ and has staunchly defended the faith once delivered to the saints. His messages have been heard by tens of millions of people throughout the world, and he continues to serve the Lord God Almighty as he seeks to proclaim the Word of God and to help awaken as many people as possible to the holiness of God by proclaiming, teaching, and defending His holiness in all its fullness — by God’s grace and for His glory alone.

Lunatic-Pentecostalist Watch: POINTS TO PONDER: TODD BENTLEY, BENNY HINN, RICK JOYNER, AND FALSE TEACHERS : Apprising Ministries

POINTS TO PONDER: TODD BENTLEY, BENNY HINN, RICK JOYNER, AND FALSE TEACHERS : Apprising Ministries

More on lunatic watch of these pious Montanists.

SermonAudio.com - The Psalms and Contemporary Worship

SermonAudio.com - The Psalms and Contemporary Worship

Rev. Dr. Robert Godfrey, Westminster Seminary, California.

J.C. Ryle’s legacy — 110 years on : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

J.C. Ryle’s legacy — 110 years on : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

“110 years ago today [well, yesterday - ed.], June 10th, 1900, the prolific writer, vigorous preacher and faithful pastor, John Charles Ryle died in England at the age of 83. Here are some quotes surrounding Ryle’s death and his legacy in Christian history…”

RICK WARREN DECEPTION ALREADY INVADING REFORMED CAMP : Apprising Ministries

RICK WARREN DECEPTION ALREADY INVADING REFORMED CAMP : Apprising Ministries

At RA, we are starting to pay closer attention to Rick. The URL in question has been tracking on Rick for quite awhile. We at RA seek to be deliberative and, like any good judicial proceedings, lengthy. God helping, we hope to get into this more.

This much, we aren't giving up the Bible, Reformed Confessions or our Reformed Prayer Book, 1662.

Diatessaron | Theological Word of the Day

Diatessaron | Theological Word of the Day

Diatessaron
June 9, 2010
Gk. dia, “through” + tessaron “four”

An early compilation of the four New Testament Gospels into a single narrative by Tatian, a Christian apologist, created about A.D. 150. In this harmony, Tatian attempted to resolve all apparent conflicts as well as remove repeated narrative material. It contained most of the Gospels’ material except for, according to Theodoret, the two different genealogies of Jesus (one in the Gospel of Matthew and one in the Gospel of Luke). As well, it lacked the pericope adulterae (John 7:53 - 8:11). It was the standard Gospel text in the Syrian Middle East until about ad 400, when it was replaced by the four separated Gospels.

Recon and Intel on Current Bishop of Oxford, John Pritchard

The Choir of St John's College, Cambridge: 6 Jun 2010

The Choir of St John's College, Cambridge

Biography: The First Book of Common Prayer (9 Jun 1549, Whitsun, May/Jun)

Biography: The First Book of Common Prayer (9 Jun 1549, Whitsun, May/Jun)

The First Book of Common Prayer
9 June 1549, Whitsuntide, May/June

In 1549, under the reign of Edward VI, successor to Henry VIII, the primary language of public worship in England and other areas ruled by Edward was changed from Latin to English, and the first Book of Common Prayer came into use. It was first used on Pentecost Sunday, 9 June 1549, and the occasion is now commemorated "on the first convenient day following Pentecost." The Book was the work of a commission of scholars, but primarily of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury. It was based primarily upon the Latin worship tradition of the Use of Sarum (similar to, but not identical with, the Roman rite used by most Roman Catholic between 1600 and 1950), with some elements taken from the Greek liturgies of the Eastern Church, from ancient Gallican (French) rites, from the new Lutheran order of service, and from the Latin rite of Cologne.

The older usage had grown haphazardly through the centuries, and had added so many complications that it was difficult to follow (the priest often needed to juggle up to a dozen books to get through a single service). The new order pruned and simplified so that only one book other than the Bible was necessary, and so that even the laity could follow the service and participate without difficulty. Moreover, the quality of the English was outstanding. All Christians who worship in English, from Roman Catholics to Southern Baptists and beyond, are in some measure influenced by it, and all to whom it is important that the people of God understand the worship of the Church and take an active part therein have cause to be grateful for the Book of Common Prayer.

At the time, it had its drawbacks. It was resented in non-English-speaking areas ruled from London, such as Ireland, Wales, and Cornwall. If a Gaelic version had been produced simultaneously, the religious history of Ireland might have been radically different. As it was, the Prayer Book and the English Bible were viewed as part of an attempt to impose the English language upon Ireland. Similar sentiments were common in Wales and Cornwall, but with less drastic consequences.

Prayer (traditional language)

Almighty and everliving God, whose servant Thomas Cranmer, with others, did restore the language of the people in the prayers of thy Church: Make us always thankful for this heritage; and help us so to pray in the Spirit and with the understanding, that we may worthily magnify thy holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Prayer (contemporary language)

Almighty and everliving God, whose servant Thomas Cranmer, with others, restored the language of the people in the prayers of your Church: Make us always thankful for this heritage; and help us so to pray in the Spirit and with the understanding, that we may worthily magnify your holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Comfortable Words» Blog Archive » St John Chrysostom on applying ourselves to the cause of virtue

Comfortable Words» Blog Archive » St John Chrysostom on applying ourselves to the cause of virtue

THE details in today’s first reading at Mattins (2 Chron 28; cf. 2 Kings 16) describe King Ahaz of Judah as a man who weakly capitulated to the King of Aram, and reformed Temple worship on the model of the pagan religion of the city of Damascus, capital of Aram.

Yet it was to Ahaz that one of the greatest of all prophecies was made, which unfortunately he met with an ill-timed flash of piety.

THE LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD.

And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Is 7:10-14)

And Ahaz’s own son Hezekiah (at the time of this prophecy already a young man) proved to be one of Israel’s greatest kings, restoring Temple worship and despite wavering under pressure from Assyria, eventually trusting in the Lord and in Isaiah, living to see Assyria defeated.

Despite the most unpromising upbringing imaginable, Hezekiah (some of whose siblings Ahaz sacrificed by fire) rose above his father’s weakness of character and evil environment, prompting St John Chrysostom to urge us to “make neither place, nor education, nor forefathers’ wickedness an excuse”.

FOR if we will take heed to ourselves, none of these things shall be an hindrance to us, since even Abraham had an ungodly father (Josh 24:2), but he inherited not his wickedness; and Hezekiah, Ahaz: yet nevertheless he became dear to God.

And Joseph too when in the midst of Egypt, adorned himself with the crowns of temperance; and the Three Children no less in the midst of Babylon, and of the palace, when a table like those at Sybaris was set before them, showed the highest self-denial; and Moses also in Egypt, and Paul in the whole world; but nothing was to any one of these an hindrance in the race of virtue.

Let us then, bearing in mind all these things, put out of the way these our superfluous pleas and excuses, and apply ourselves to those toils which the cause of virtue requires.

For thus shall we both attract to ourselves more favor from God, and persuade Him to assist us in our struggles, and we shall obtain the eternal blessings; unto which God grant that we may all attain, by the grace and love towards man of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and victory for ever and ever. Amen.

Homily VIII On Matthew, §7

Church Armour: A Short Catechism for Young Churchmen Chiefly on the Thirty-Nine Articles

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=12704

Church Armour: A Short Catechism for Young Churchmen Chiefly on the Thirty-Nine Articles

by Robin G. Jordan
Anglicans Ablaze
http://anglicansablaze.blogspot.com/
June 2010

This Catechism was originally written by the Rev. Dr. W. F. Taylor to familiarize children in Liverpool with the text of the Thirty-Nine Articles and to furnish them with answers "in the very words of the Church" to a number of important questions. These questions were not only important in the nineteenth century but they are also just as important today, if not more so.

I am posting Dr. Taylor's Catechism because I believe that it will also help grown-up North American Anglicans better understanding the Thirty-Nine Articles and what they teach. The Thirty-Nine Articles are the confession of faith of the Reformed Church of England and the sum of her doctrine. As the Jerusalem Declaration affirms, they are as authoritative for Anglicans today as in the sixteenth century. In Being Faithful: The Shape of Historic Anglicanism Today the GAFCON Theological Resource Group identifies acceptance of the Articles as essential to Anglican identity.

Church Association Tract 059

BY THE REV. W. F. TAYLOR Vicar of St. Chrysostom's, Everton, Liverpool

The following Catechism, written by the Rev. Dr. Taylor, is in use in several schools in Liverpool, where hundreds of children are learning it. The Catechism will be found very valuable in familiarizing the minds of young people with the text of the XXXIX Articles, and furnishing them with answers in the very words of the Church to important questions now raised.

Q. (1) Who made you?
A. "God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible."-(Nicene Creed; Gen. i. 1, 26; Job xxxiii. 4; Heb. xi. 3.)

Q. (2) Are there more Gods than one?
A. No. "There is but one living and true God, everlasting, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness."-(Art. I; Mark xii. 32 ; Neh. ix. 6; Jer. x. 10.)

Q. (3) How many Persons are there in the Godhead?
A. Three; "in the unity of this Godhead there are three Persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."-(Art. I; Matt. xxviii. 19; 2 Cor. xiii. 14; John, i. 1; Acts v. 3, 4.)

Q. (4) Who is Jesus Christ?
A. Jesus Christ is "the Son of God, who took man's nature" upon Him. and "was born of the Virgin Mary; He truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried."-(Art. II: Gal. iv. 4; John i. 14; 1 Pet. iii. 18.)

Q. (5) Why did the Son of God become man, and suffer on the Cross? A. The Son of God became man, and suffered in order "to reconcile His Father to us, and be a sacrifice for all the sins of men."- (Art. II; Rom. v. 10; 2 Cor. v. 19; Heb. ix. 26; 1 John ii. 2.)

Q. (6) Where did the soul of Christ go when He was crucified?
A. The soul of Christ went to the invisible world (Hades or Hell), and to that part of it called Paradise.-(Art. III; Acts ii. 27; Luke xxiii. 43.)

Q. (7) Did Christ's soul remain in the invisible world, and His body in the grave?
A. No; "Christ did truly rise again from death, and took again His body, and all things appertaining to the perfection of man's nature; wherewith He ascended into heaven, and there sitteth, until He return to judge all men at the last day."-(Art. IV; 1 Cor. xv. 4; Mark xvi. 19 ; 1 Thess. iv. 16.)

Q. (8) Who is the Holy Ghost?
A. The Holy Ghost is the third Person of the blessed Trinity; "proceeding from the Father and the Son, and is very and eternal God."-(Art. V; John xiv. 26; Acts v. 4; 1 Cor. ii. 10.)

Q. (9) What is the Rule of Faith?
A. The Rule of Faith is The Bible only or "Holy Scripture, which containeth all things necessary to salvation; so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation."-(Art. VI; Isa. viii. 20; 2 Tim. iii. 15; John v. 39; Deut. xii. 32; Rev. xxii. 18,19.)

Q. (10) Is the Old Testament contrary to the New?
A. No. "The Old Testament is not contrary to the New; for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and Man, being both God and Man."-*. (Art. VII; Heb. i. 1, 2; Luke xxiv. 44; Acts xxvi. 22; Rom. xvi. 26.)

Q. (11) What are the three Creeds?
A. The Three Creeds are, "The Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed."- (Art. VIII.)

Q. (12) Why should we believe these three Creeds?
A. Because "they may be proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture."-(Art. VIII; 2 Tim. i. 13.)

Q. (13) What is original sin?
A. "Original sin is the fault and corruption of the nature of every man naturally descended from Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil."-(Art. IX; Ps. Ii. 5; Rom. iii. 10-12; viii. 7.)

Q. (14) Is Man able to turn to God of himself?
A. No. "The condition of man after the fall is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works, to faith and calling upon God."-(Art. X; John vi. 44; xv. 5; Eph. ii. 1.)

Q. (15) What do we need in order to turn to God?
A. In order to turn to God, we need "the grace of God by Christ preventing us (i.e. going before us), that we may have a good will; and working with us, when we have that good will."-(Art. X; Jer. xxxi. 18, 19; 1 Cor. xv. 10; Phil. ii. 13.)

Q. (16) What is the true doctrine of Justification?
A. That "we are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings."-(Art. XI; Rom. iii. 24, 25; v. 1, 9, 19; 2 Cor. v. 21; Phil. iii. 9.)

Q. (17) What are good works?
A. "Good works are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification. They spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith, so that by them a lively (i.e. living) faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by its fruit."-(Art. XII; Phil. i. 11; John xv. 4, 5; Gal. v. 6.)

Q. (18) Are works done before justification good works?
A. No. Works done before justification are not properly good works, "nor are they pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ."-(Art. XIII; Isa. lxiv. 6; Luke xviii. 11- 14.)

Q. (19) What are works of Supererogation?
A. Works of Supererogation are "Voluntary works besides, over and above God's commandments. These cannot be taught without arrogancy and impiety."-(Art. XIV; Luke x. 27; xvii. 10.)

Q. (20) Was the Virgin Mary, or any of the Apostles or Prophets free from sin?
A. No. "Christ alone was without sin. All we the rest offend in many things, and if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in as."-(Art. XV; Luke i. 47; 1 John i. 8.)

Q. (21) What is Election or Predestination?
A. "Election to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby He hath constantly decreed to deliver from wrath those whom He hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation."-(Art. XVII; Eph. i. 4; 1 Pet. i. 2; Rom. viii. 29, 30.)

Q. (22) Can men be saved by the Law or Sect which they profess, if sincere in their obedience thereto?
A. No. "Man cannot be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, for Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved."-(Art. XVIII; John iii. 36; xiv. 6; Acts iv. 12.)

Q. (23) What is the visible Church?
A. "The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same."-(Art. XIX; Acts ii. 41, 42, 47; 1 Cor. xi. 23-25; 1Tim. iii. 15.)

Q. (24) What authority hath the Church?
A. "The Church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another."-(Art. XX; Acts xv. 2, 23; xvi. 4; 1 Cor. xiv. 26, 40; Gal. i. 8.)

Q. (25) Can any particular Church err?
A. Yes. "The Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, have erred; so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith."- (Art. XIX; Rom. xi. 20-22; Rev. ii. 14, 16, 20.)

Q. (26) Are General Councils infallible?
A. No. "General Councils are not infallible, and forasmuch as they are an assembly of men, whereof all be not governed by the Spirit and Word of God, they may err, and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining to God."-(Art. XXI; Acts xx. 29, 30.)

Q. (27) Why should we reject the Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, (i.e. Indulgences,) Worshipping and Adoration, as well of Images as of Reliques, and also Invocation of Saints?
A. Because it is "a fond thing vainly invented, grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God."-(Art. XXII; Luke xxiii. 43 ; Isa. xliii. 25; Ex. xx. 4; 2 Kings xviii. 4; Rev. xix. 10.)

Q. (28) Is it lawful for any man to take upon himself the office of public preaching, or ministering the Sacraments?
A. No. "It is not lawful for any man to take upon himself the office of public preaching, or ministering the Sacraments in the congregation, before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same."-(Art. XXIII; Jer. xxiii; 21; Mark iii. 14; 1 Tim. v. 22; 2 Tim. ii. 2.)

Q. (29) May the public worship of the Church be in a tongue not understood by the people-say in the Latin tongue? Church Association Tract 059 Page 4 of 6
A. Certainly not; for "it is plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the primitive Church."-(Art. XXIV; 1 Cor. xiv. 11,19, 28.)

Q. (30) What is a Sacrament?
A. A Sacrament is an "outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ Himself, as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof."-(Catechism; Acts x. 47; 1 Cor. x. 16.)

Q. (31) How many Sacraments has Christ ordained in His Church?
A. Two only; i.e., Baptism and the Supper of the Lord.-(Catechism; Matt. xxviii. 19; Luke xxii. 19, 20.)

Q. (32) What are the five additional sacraments of the Church of Rome?
A. The five additional sacraments of the Church of Rome are, "Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction."-(Art. XXV.)

Q. (33) Why are "those five commonly called sacraments not to be counted for sacraments of the Gospel"?
A. "Because they have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, and partly are states of life allowed in the Scripture; but yet have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God."-(Art. XXV.)

Q. (34) What is meant by the "Sacrament of Penance"?
A. A sacrament in which, it is said, "Sins are forgiven, by the priest's absolution, joined with contrition, confession, and satisfaction."-(Abridg. Christ. Doc., p. 19.)

Q. (35) Why is this doctrine to be rejected?
A. Because repentance and faith are the only conditions of forgiveness appointed by God.- (Mark i. 15; Luke xxiv. 47; Acts x. 43; xiii. 38; xx. 21; Rom. iii. 25.)

Q. (36) Were the sacraments ordained of Christ to be gazed upon or carried about?
A. Certainly not; "but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same they have a wholesome effect or operation.

Q. (37) Are all duly ordained ministers good men, and sound in the faith?
A. By no means; for, "In the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the ministration of the Word and Sacraments."-(Art. XXVI; Matt. vii. 15; xiii. 25-30; Acts xx. 29,30; 2 Pet. ii. 1.)

Q. (38) What is the Sacrament of Baptism?
A. "Baptism is a sign of Christian profession, and also a sign of regeneration, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive it rightly are grafted into the Church; and the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed." -(Art. XXVII; Rom. vi. 4; Gal. iii. 26, 27; Rom. iv. 11; Acts xxii. 16.)

Q. (39) Is Infant Baptism lawful?
A. Certainly; as "most agreeable with the institution of Christ."-(Art. XXVII; Gen. xvii. 10; Mark x. 14; Acts xvi. 15, 33; 1 Cor. vii. 14.)

Q. (40) What is the Lord's Supper?
A. "The Lord's Supper is a sign of Christian love, and also a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death."-(Art. XXVIII; 1 Cor. x. 16, 17; xi. 24, 25.)

Q. (41) What is Transubstantiation?
A. "Transubstantiation is the (supposed) change of the substance of bread and wine in the Supper of the Lord."-(Art. XXVIII.)

Q. (42) Why is the doctrine of Transubstantiation to be rejected?
A. Transubstantiation is to be rejected because "it cannot be proved by Holy Writ, is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions."-(Art. XXVIII; 1 Cor. xi. 26; Acts iii. 21; John vi. 62, 63; Acts xix. 26.)

Q. (43) How is the Body of Christ received and eaten in the Supper?
A. "The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith"; for, "the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in heaven and not here."-Art. XXVIII. and Decla. Com. Service; John vi. 35. 63; Acts iii. 21; 1 Cor. v. 7, 8.)

Q. (44) Do such as are void of a living faith partake of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament?
A. Certainly not. "Such as are void of a living faith are in no wise partakers of Christ, but rather to their condemnation do eat and drink the sign or sacrament of so great a thing."-(Art. XXIX; John xiii. 27; 1 Cor. xi. 27-29; Heb. xi. 6.)

Q. (45) Should the minister alone drink the Cup?
A. By no means. "The Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the Lay people."-(Art. XXX; 1Cor. x. 17; xi. 26.)

Q. (46) Is there any repetition or continuation of the sacrifice of Christ in the Lord's Supper?
A. No. There is neither repetition, continuation, or renewal of the sacrifice of Christ in the Lord's Supper, but only the commemoration of "the one oblation of Christ, once made and finished upon the Cross."-(Art. XXXI; 1 Cor. xi. 24; Heb. ix. 28; x. 10-12, 14, 18.)

Q. (47) What then are the sacrifices of Masses?
A. "The sacrifices of Masses in which it is commonly said, that the priest offers Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, are blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits."-(Art. XXXI; Heb. x. 1, 2, 11; 2 Pet. ii. 1-3.)

Q. (48) Is the doctrine of Clerical celibacy according to the Scripture? A. No; for "Bishops, Priests (i.e., Presbyters), and Deacons are not commanded by God's law to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain from marriage."-(Art. XXXII; 1 Cor. ix. 5; 1 Tim. iii. 2; iv. 1-3.)

Q. (49) Is it necessary that the Traditions (Customs) and Ceremonies of the Church be always the same?
A. No; "it is not necessary they should be in all places one; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to men's manners, so that nothing be ordained against God's Word."-(Art. XXXIV: 1 Cor. xiv. 26, 40.)

Q. (50) Is it right for any one to break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church by his own private judgment?
A. No. He that doth so "ought to be rebuked openly, that others may fear to do the like."-(Art. XXXIV; 1Tim.v. 20; Rom. xvi. 17,18.)

Q (51) How should we esteem the Book of Homilies put forth by the Church of England?
A. As containing "a godly and wholesome doctrine, and necessary for these times, and therefore to be read in Churches, diligently and distinctly, that they may be understanded of the people."- (Art. XXXV; 2 Tim. i. 13; 1 Tim. iv. 13.)

Q. (52) Is the Ordinal of the Church of England to be received by us? A. Most certainly; for it "hath nothing that of itself is superstitious and ungodly; and therefore whosoever are consecrated or ordered according thereto we judge to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated or ordered."-(Art. XXXVI; John xx. 21-23; Luke xxiv. 47; 2 Cor. v. 18, 19.)

Q. (53) How many orders of Ministers are there in the Church of England?
A. Three. For "it is evident to all men diligently reading the Holy Scriptures and ancient Authors, that from the Apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's Church; Bishops, Priests (i.e. Presbyters), and Deacons."-(Phil. i. 1; 1 Tim. iii. 1, 10; v. 19-22; Titus i. 5; Pref. to Ordination Serv.)

Q. (54) What is meant by the Royal Supremacy?
A. That "the Queen's majesty has the chief power in this realm of England, and other her dominions, and should rule all estates and degrees committed to her charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal"-(Art. XXXVII; 2 Chron. xxiv. 5; Isa. xlix. 23; 2 Chron. xxxi. 2; xxxv. 1, 2; Ezra vii. 27; Rom. xiii. 1.)

Q. (55) Should the supremacy of the Pope be admitted?
A. By no means; for "the Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England." Nor is he the Vicar of Christ or successor of Peter, but rather is by many believed to be the predicted "Man of Sin," who should sit in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.-(Art. XXXVII; Preface to English Bible, Auth. Vere. 1611; Canons of 1606; 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.)

END

If Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians was Published in Christianity Today - The Sacred Sandwich

If Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians was Published in Christianity Today - The Sacred Sandwich

Riddleblog - The Latest Post - Five Books to Read This Summer

Riddleblog - The Latest Post - Five Books to Read This Summer

“Is Truth Worth Fighting for?” – John MacArthur « Reformed Bibliophile

“Is Truth Worth Fighting for?” – John MacArthur « Reformed Bibliophile

Anglicans Ablaze: Six Guiding Principles for Making Decisions Related to Church Practices

Anglicans Ablaze: Six Guiding Principles for Making Decisions Related to Church Practices

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - WHY THE GLOBAL SOUTH WILL TRIUMPH IN THE ANGLICAN CULTURE WARS

VirtueOnline - News - Exclusives - WHY THE GLOBAL SOUTH WILL TRIUMPH IN THE ANGLICAN CULTURE WARS

‘Provocative’ visit to Southwark Cathedral : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

‘Provocative’ visit to Southwark Cathedral : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

What part of discipline does ABC Rowan not get? He excludes Ms.Schori from from Anglican discussions with other faith groups and then invites her to Southwark Cathedral?

Rowan, play the man.

Lutheran Mythbusting: Lutherans Don’t Use the Historic Orders of Prayer Because That’s “High Church” and Against the Reformation! | CyberBrethren-A Lutheran Blog

Lutheran Mythbusting: Lutherans Don’t Use the Historic Orders of Prayer Because That’s “High Church” and Against the Reformation! | CyberBrethren-A Lutheran Blog

Triablogue: Coping with Calvinism

Triablogue: Coping with Calvinism

This one is funny.

(How) Are Evangelicals Gnostic? | Mere Orthodoxy

(How) Are Evangelicals Gnostic? | Mere Orthodoxy

Ps. 38.1 and the Prayer of Humble Access

Ps.38.1:

O LORD, rebuke me not in Your wrath,
And chasten me not in Your burning anger.

κύριε μὴ τῷ θυμῷ σου ἐλέγξῃς με μηδὲ τῇ ὀργῇ σου παιδεύσῃς με

יְהוָה אַל־בְּקֶצְפְּךָ תֹוכִיחֵנִי וּבַחֲמָתְךָ תְיַסְּרֵנִי׃

Domine, ne in furore tuo arguas me, neque in ira tua corripias me.

Why can't the modern, folk-religionists, sing and say this? Or, why "won't" they?

There are answers to that. Any takers?

One hint: the doctrine of God.

It's an extremely serious question. Time for some Rectors and Pastors to take a one-year Sabbatical. Read the Scriptures and books on the doctrine of God. Put em' in a local monastery near their homes. And good liturgical worship in the morning and evening. It's that serious.

Of course, read 38.1 in context...context, context, context. And analogia fidei, hermeneutically.

It's assumed in the Prayer of Humble Access, 1662 BCP.

We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord, whose property is always to have mercy: Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.

The Communion Anthem for Trinity Sunday, 30 May 2010, Mariners' Anglican Church, Detroit

Defense of Infant Baptism by Gregg Strawbridge, Ph.D.

Defense of Infant Baptism by Gregg Strawbridge, Ph.D.

“On Truth and Heresy” (George Gillespie) « Flock Alert

“On Truth and Heresy” (George Gillespie) « Flock Alert

“Truth and Heresy” (1649) by Wesminster divine George Gillespie is an excellent piece warning about doctrinal compromise and deception. The following is an excerpt refuting the theological relativists of his time, who are not unlike those of today.

King Asa: לְבַב־אָסָא הָיָה שָׁלֵם

A Facebook Discussion:

For the OT guys, help. Concerning Asa's heart: perfect, full, shalom. "Steadfast in his purposes" is more of a dynamic and accurate equivalent. Thoughts. 2 Chron 15.17.

D Philip Veitch the heart of Asa was perfect
ἢ καρδία ασα ἐγένετο πλήρης
cor Asa erat perfectum
לְבַב־אָסָא הָיָה שָׁלֵם
58 minutes ago ·

D Philip Veitch
Street translation, ethically, for Christian Marines = "waffling is unauthorized...double-mindedness is wrong...and failure in mission-committment is unauthorized."

Asa was "single-minded."

Again, help from the Hebrew guys.
57 minutes ago ·

V Kerry Inman
You nailed it.
53 minutes ago ·

D Philip Veitch
Kerry, will look increasingly for your input. You're the go-to-man on Hebrew here. Thanks.
15 minutes ago ·

D Philip Veitch
A fair summary on Asa at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asa_of_Judah:

Azariah son of Oded, a wiseman and prophet, exhorted Asa [5] to reinforce strict national observance of Judaism, and Asa paid heed. He purged the land of former religious worships; all the sites of non-Judaic worship were destroyed and the nation entered into a covenant or oath ... See Moretogether [6] . The Queen Mother, Maacah, was also deposed for having been involved with local, non-Judaic gods, worships, and beliefs, which were practiced by neighboring peoples. He also banned prostitution and prosecuted all offenders. Finally, when the religious transition was completed in Asa's fifteenth year, a great feast was held in Jerusalem at Solomon's Temple (2 Chronicles 15:10-11). At that time, many northerners, particularly from the tribes Ephraim and Manasseh, migrated to the Kingdom of Judah because of the fruitful golden age in Judah, and the internal conflict in Israel after the fall of the dynasty of Jeroboam I.

5 minutes ago ·

D Philip Veitch Albright and Thiele on chronology:

William F. Albright has dated his reign to 913 BC – 873 BC, while E. R. Thiele offers the dates 911/910 – 870/869 BC.[8] Thiele's chronology for the first kings of Judah contained an internal inconsistency that later scholars corrected by dating these kings one year earlier, so that Asa's dates are taken as 912/... See More911 to 871/870 BC in the present article. 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles describe his reign in a favorable manner. They both give his reign as lasting 41 years.

SermonAudio.com - A Case for Infant Baptism - Confessions of a Former Baptist

SermonAudio.com - A Case for Infant Baptism - Confessions of a Former Baptist

Traditional Anglican Sermons: The Meaning Of The Parable Of The Rich Man And Lazarus

Traditional Anglican Sermons

The Meaning Of The Parable Of The Rich Man And Lazarus
Christopher Wordsworth (1774-1846)

Dr Wordsworth is writing about the Parable in Luke 16:19-31, the Gospel reading for the First Sunday after Trinity.

CAN IT be meant, that he who is poor and afflicted in this life, does thereby, in his turn, become the favourite of God in the next, and that the rich man, who rejoices here in the youth, strength, and abundance, which God has given him, must, on that account, be recompensed hereafter by pain and misery? Is it intended that heaven shall be the certain reward of every poor man, and eternal punishment the unavoidable destiny of all the wealthy? Shall it be said to every one of these in the day of judgment, "Son, remember that thou in thy life time receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented?"

Are these the everlasting laws and ordinances by which the Almighty Father shall judge the world? No, truly; that cannot be. Lazarus was not rewarded solely because he was poor, and without any other regard to his state or behaviour here: nor was the rich man punished merely because he was rich; nor yet "because he was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day." God forbid. This decision would be contradictory to all other Scripture, and all reason. The Judge of all the earth must do right. There must therefore be some other aim and interpretation of the history, than this to which, at the first sight, it may seem liable.

Jesus, you will observe, had been discoursing to his disciples concerning the right use of riches. By the parable of the unjust steward, he had taught, that we are to consider all our worldly possessions as so many talents and gifts, of which we are the depositaries, and for the use of which we shall hereafter be called upon to render up an account to God: and that, if we manage these aright, and dispense them in good works, and holy offices, according to the divine will, we shall obtain the approbation of our heavenly Master; and, when we die, shall be received by him into everlasting habitations.

After this, Jesus had further proceeded to warn his hearers against the danger and abuse of riches: that we must set our affections on things above, not on things on the earth; that the former must have the pre-eminence and sway in our thoughts and desires: for "no man," says he, "can serve two masters. Ye cannot serve God and Mammon." If we have not regarded his purposes of goodness and mercy, in the gift of the unrighteous Mammon, God will never commit to our trust the true riches.

More: Christopher Wordsworth, The First Sunday After Trinity, Wealth And Poverty, Lazarus, Parables, Sermons

A Salute for Fallen Canadian Soldiers and their Families

Westminster Confession, week 23 « Daily Confession

Westminster Confession, week 23 « Daily Confession

1: Repentance unto life is an evangelical grace,[291] the doctrine whereof is to be preached by every minister of the Gospel, as well as that of faith in Christ.[292]

2: By it, a sinner, out of the sight and sense not only of the danger, but also of the filthiness and odiousness of his sins, as contrary to the holy nature, and righteous law of God; and upon the apprehension of His mercy in Christ to such as are penitent, so grieves for, and hates his sins, as to turn from them all unto God,[293] purposing and endeavouring to walk with Him in all the ways of His commandments.[294]3: Although repentance is not to be rested in, as any satisfaction for sin, or any cause of the pardon thereof,[295] which is the act of God’s free grace in Christ,[296] yet it is of such necessity to all sinners, that none may expect pardon without it.[297]

Comfortable Words: James Ussher on being fruitful under the dew of heaven

Ireland's finest.

Comfortable Words» Blog Archive » James Ussher on being fruitful under the dew of heaven

Triablogue: You Sunk My Arminian Battleship!

Triablogue: You Sunk My Arminian Battleship!

Why We Memorize the Catechism: Dr. Scott Clark

Commendable and worthy of dutiful emulation as commended by Dr. Clark. Although, as Anglicans, we commend the memorization of all the Collects as well. Having said that, we diminish Dr. Clark's article not one whit, not one syllable, nada. He is spot-on. May God give us graces in our time to do these things--the hard, but necessary, good work of diligence in studying His Majesty and all His instructions.

Westminster Seminary California clark

WHY WE MEMORIZE THE CATECHISM
This article was originally published in the Presbyterian Banner (August, 2003). © R. Scott Clark, 2003. All Rights Reserved.

Introduction

Both children and parents in Reformed congregations often ask, "Why must we (or our children) memorize the catechism? If they must memorize anything at all, should they not memorize Holy Scripture instead?" These are fair questions, but they rest on dubious premises.

The first premise is that memorization is somehow out of date or a backward practice. Quite to the contrary, in most circumstances (there not being any significant developmental disabilities) memorization is a most valuable skill to teach our children and further, contrary to much modern educational theory it is exactly what they want at a certain stage of their development.

The second premise sounds pious but contains within it a sort of sugarcoated poison since it juxtaposes implicitly the theology and teaching of the church against Scripture. As a matter of fact, we understand our catechism to be a good, sound, and accurate summary of the whole teaching of Scripture. As a matter of history, all heretics quote Scripture. What makes us Reformed is how we understand Scripture and this understanding is summarized in the catechism. This is why we have a catechism.

If we thought that catechism was not biblical, we would not use it and, if anyone can show that the catechism is unbiblical, the church ought to revise it to bring it into conformity with Scripture.

We ought to memorize Scripture, it is the Word of God which he uses to bring our children to faith and by which they grow in that faith and in sanctity, but our children also need a framework in which to understand the Scripture they are learning. So Scripture and catechism memorization go hand-in-glove.

God's Word is full of exhortations to "confess the faith" either by precept or by example. Deuteronomy 6:4 is perhaps the most fundamental biblical confession, "Hear 0 Israel, Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one." This is a confessional formula to be memorized by all Israelites. John 9:22 and Matthew 10:32-33 teach a Christian duty to confess Jesus as Messiah. Exodus 12:26-27 reflects the ancient practice of God's people of catechizing their children in the history of God's saving acts. This catechesis was part of the process of covenant renewal for those who had been initiated into the covenant through circumcision. In I Corinthians 10 (all) the Apostle Paul says that New Covenant Christians continue that pattern with the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper. The Corinthian problem was that they did not regard sufficiently the holiness of the Supper as a feast of covenant renewal nor did they discern the presence of Christ in the Supper by the Holy Spirit.

Following the Apostolic pattern, catechesis of the children of believers (covenant renewal) and new converts has been the universal practice of the Christian church since the earliest days of the church. The pattern of Christian catechesis was to learn the Apostles' Creed; the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments and the Reformation carried on this tradition.

The Plan

The ancient Christian pattern of instruction is summarized by Dorothy Sayers' wonderful essay, "The Lost Tools of Learning,"' which is widely available in print and on the Internet. In this essay she distinguis-hed the three stages of childhood development as "parrot, pert, poet." Of course, this was her way of explaining the traditional educational pattern of the Trivium, i.e grammar, logic and rhetoric.

In the "parrot" stage (circa ages 4-9), children take great delight in the accomplishment of memorization and are capable of memorizing most anything in small units. In our family we simply divided the longer catechism answers into smaller units until they were learned. I have found in church and at home that if we begin catechizing children (including memorization) at 4-5 they memorize with great joy. To be sure, they do not always understand what they are learning but they don't need to understand everything yet. We are still preparing them to renew the covenant formally before the congregation.

In the "pert" stage (circa ages 9-12), children begin to analyze the raw data which they have memorized. Because they lack emotional maturity, the questions may be expressed rudely (hence "pert'), but in fact questions about the faith show that children are trying to make sense for themselves of what they have been taught. If properly catechized, children now have something interesting to discuss at Sabbath lunch, especially in the pert stage. They will also ask questions just before bed such as, 'Daddy, how can God be one in three persons?" This will be a good stimulus for parents to learn the catechism for themselves!

In the "poet" stage (circa ages 12-14), children begin to apprehend that there is more to reality than what they can taste, touch, see, smell and hear They begin to learn how to express themselves more appropriately and to appreciate the finer things in life.

Much more importantly, however, if we begin catechizing our children early enough, by the time they reach this stage, we can expect them to begin to "discern the body" (1 Corinthians 11:29), to be ready for profession of faith, to take up the covenant for themselves and to be ready to be fed by Christ's body and blood with Christ's congregation. If we catechize our children early on, by the grace of the Spirit, they are able to develop their powers of doctrinal discernment, which they will certainly need.

The Problems

Covenant children may well object to this plan, but they also object to being taken to the dentist or physician and we do not normally listen to their objections because we know that if we do not take them to the dentist, their teeth will be the worse for it. As important as teeth are, we surely agree that there is much more at stake in catechism instruction. So, when our children object, we tell them, "I know you do not always like memorizing catechism now, but when you are old you will be glad we made you do it; (this is true! I have visited a good number of old folks who were glad to be able to confess their only comfort in life and in death when all sorts of indignities were being done to them)..

Therefore we tell our children "We are Reformed, We confess the Reformed faith and in order to commune in this congregation you too must confess the Reformed faith. Learning the catechism is the best preparation for the Reformed faith. How can you confess something with which you're not intimately familiar?"'

There are other things we can do to help our children to take up the covenant for themselves.

The first thing is to reclaim the Sabbath. One of the chief purposes of the Sabbath is Christian instruction of our children. Between morning and evening services the children have all afternoon to learn the catechism and to rest. If families follow this pattern from the start, their children will assume that is the correct thing to do and think it odd that others ignore Christ's command.

Though the dentist might not approve, there is nothing immoral about encouraging young children to accomplish a finite task (e.g. one-half of a longer catechism answer) with the reward of a piece of candy. The Orthodox Presbyterian Church pastor Leonard Coppes wrote some years ago about "candychism." It works because children value the candy as much as token of accomplishment and parental approval as for the sweet itself. Then, of course, there is the matter of duty. Sometimes it is necessary to use the same sort of approach we use with weekday schoolwork. Learning the faith thoroughly and intimately is a responsibility of a covenant child just as it is his responsibility to learn grammar and math. If they refuse, they should face appropriate discipline. Some parents have even been known to promise a talk with the "board of education." This last resort is effective when used sparingly by parents.

To reluctant Christian parents I ask some questions. Do you want your children to be Reformed when they grow up and if so, how do you expect to achieve this goal apart from the catechism? Why would you by-pass the prime season for catechizing your children?

One of the great losses of failing to catechize children in the "parrot" stage is that in these years children have perhaps the greatest facility for memorization they will ever possess. As we grow older, it becomes progressively more difficult to memorize new material. Any adult who has endeavored to learn a second language knows the truth of this axiom.

Recently I was reading the minutes of a North American ecclesiastical assembly from the early 1920's. Even then, they were establishing a committee to discuss the problem of children leaving the church. Eighty years later, we are still erecting such committees and asking the same question. Perhaps it is time to try something old fashioned? Rather than lamenting the fact that our children are leaving the church, perhaps we should try catechizing them again? As a minister on a Consistory (Session) I am bound to say that if parents will not catechize their children or bring them to church for catechism, they may not blame the church when their children come under discipline fifteen years later because they married a Roman Catholic or left the Christian faith altogether.

Reformed catechesis, however, is not mere obligation. It is a joy and a gift from our covenant Lord. If we do make catechesis a regular part of the religious life of our children, if we make regular use of the ordinary means of grace (Shorter Catechism 88), if we pray and read with our children, we may expect them to make a credible profession of faith in the congregation. Watching our children make profession and come to the table of the Lord, these are the answers to the prayers of all Reformed parents. May God grant us such graces.

Dial "MT" = "Empty Theology"

Dial "MT" = "Empty Theology." Law & Order, the MT Unit, tells their stories. These well-trained and experienced detectives from this "special victims crime unit" tell their story. Many stories of those slain by false spirits, of gibberashionizings, and more.

Tune in at Exposing the False Prophets—Reformation Christians Against TBN. http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/group.php?gid=308173344359&ref=ts

Or, if an emergency, just dial "MT." After the arrest, "Book em' Danno."

We uphold the five solas of the Reformation. We are Protestant, Creedal and Confessional. We are ready to give reason for our Faith and proclaim the Gospel to all men. We study, research, post articles, lament and most vehemently protest against the Trinity Broadcasting Network for its lack of doctrine, false teachers, a horrid presentation of the Gospel and for its abuse of all men and women, redeemed and unredeemed alike. Because of our love for all peoples and nations, we proclaim Justification by Faith alone based on the scriptural doctrines of sovereign grace. We strenuously confess our faith while opposing these lying and false spirits. True love of the Brothers and Sisters in Christ is revealed in making them aware of wolves in sheep’s clothing. Because we love the lost, we desire to see the true Gospel proclaimed and protected from abuse by those who falsely take the name of Christ. We stand against those who practice cultic powers over the weak, gullible, untaught, poor and desperate. "Here we stand, so help us God." Psalm 46. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGzuUfQD-G4

Creideamh: Means of Grace

Creideamh: Means of Grace

Traditional Anglican Sermons: From a Catechism German Lutheran Jonas Justus, and put forth by Cranmer's authority, and dedicated to King Edward VI

Traditional Anglican Sermons

We Can Find Peace, Tranquillity And Quietness In Priestly Absolution
Justus Jonas (1493-1555)

NOW God doth not speak to us with a voice sounding out of heaven; but He hath given the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the authority to forgive sin to the ministers of the Church.

Wherefore let him that is a sinner go to one of them. Let him knowledge and confess his sin, and pray him that, accord- ing to God's commandments, he will give him absolution, and comfort him with the word of grace and forgiveness of his sins. And when the minister does so, then I ought stedfastly to believe that my sins are truly forgiven me in heaven. ...

Wherefore, good children, give good ear to this doctrine; and when your sins do make you afraid and sad, then seek and desire absolution and forgiveness and of your sins of the ministers which have received a commission and commandment from Christ himself to forgive men their sins; and then your consciences shall have peace, tranquillity, and quietness.

But he that doth not obey this counsel, but being either blind or proud doth despise the same, he shall not find forgiveness of his sins, neither in his own good works, nor yet in painful chastise-ments of his body, or any other things whereto God hath not promised remission of sins, wherefore despise not absolution, for it is the commandment and ordinance of God.

From a Catechism German Lutheran Jonas Justus, and put forth by Cranmer's authority, and dedicated to King Edward VI, in 1548

Emerging Church Revisionists: Preaching Mystery? | TheResurgence

Emerging Church Revisionists: Preaching Mystery? | TheResurgence

Lighten our darkness, O Sovereign Lord, and protect from the dangers and perils of the present hour for the love and sake of Thy only Son, our only High Priest, Prophet, and King, who liveth and reigneth with Thee, the Father, and Thee, the Holy Spirit, one God, now and evermore, world without end. Amen.

Anglican Evangelicals and the Idea of Holiness « The Barnabas Project

Anglican Evangelicals and the Idea of Holiness « The Barnabas Project

What Evangelical Religion is not
According to J. C. Ryle, Bishop of Liverpool 1880–1900

‘Last, but not least, I say that Evangelical Religion does not undervalue Christian holiness and self-denial. It is not true to say that we do. We desire as much as any to promote habitual spirituality of heart and life in Christians. We give place to none in exalting humility, charity, meekness, gentleness, temperance, purity, self-denial, good works, and separation from the world. With all our defects, we are second to no section of Christ’s Church in attaching the utmost importance to private prayer, private Bible-reading, and private communion with God.

‘But we steadily deny that true holiness consists in calling everything “holy” in religion, and thrusting forward the word “holy” with sickening frequency at every turn. We will not allow that it is really promoted by an ostentatious observance of Lent, by keeping Ecclesiastical fasts and saints’ days, by frequent communion, by joining Houses of mercy, by doing penance, by going to confession, by wearing peculiar dresses, by decorating our persons with enormous crosses, by frequent gestures, and postures expressive of humility, in public worship, by walking in procession and the like. We believe, on the contrary, that such holiness (so-called) too often begins from the outside, and is a complete delusion. It has a “show of wisdom,” and may satisfy silly young women and brainless young men, who like to compound for races and balls one part of their week, by asceticism and will-worship at another. But we utterly deny that it is the holiness recommended by St. Paul and St. Peter, St. James and St. John.

‘I leave my list of negatives here. I have not time to dwell on them further. The sum of the whole matter is this:—we give all lawful honour to learning, the Church, the ministry, the Sacrament, Episcopacy, the Prayer-book, Church ornament, unity, and holiness; but we firmly decline to give them more honour than we find given to them in God’s Word.

‘We dare not take up any other position, because of the plain teaching of the Scriptures. We read there how the ark itself was utterly useless to Israel when trusted in as a saviour, and exalted into the place of God. We read there how God Himself has said, that the sacrifices and feasts which He Himself had appointed, were “abominations” and a “weariness” to Him, when rested on as ends and not as means.—We read there how the very temple itself, with all its divinely ordained services, was denounced as a “den of thieves,” by Christ Himself. (1 Sam. iv. 1-11; Isa. 1. 11-15; Luke xix. 46.)

‘And what do we learn from all this? We learn that we must be very careful how we give primary honour to things invented by man, or even to things which, though ordained by God, are secondary things in religion. We learn, above all, that those who accuse us of undervaluing the things I have mentioned, because we refuse to make them idols, are only exposing their own ignorance of Scripture. They know not what they say, nor whereof they affirm. We may listen to their slanderous charges and misrepresentations with calm indifference. Let them show us that we do not estimate learning, the Church, the Ministry, the Sacraments, the Prayer-book, Episcopacy, unity, and holiness, with the estimate of Scripture, and we will confess that we have erred. But till they can do that, we shall firmly maintain that we are right and they are wrong.’

Westminster Shorter Catechism: 33

Shorter Catechism, week 22 « Daily Confession

Q. 33. What is justification?

A. Justification is an act of God’s free grace,[91] wherein he pardoneth all our sins,[92] and accepteth us as righteous in His sight,[93] only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us,[94] and received by faith alone.[95]

John Woodhouse on 1 Samuel at Christ the Center : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

John Woodhouse on 1 Samuel at Christ the Center : Anglican Church League, Sydney, Australia

Recently Moore College Principal John Woodhouse was interviewed on 1 Samuel for the Christ the Center programme.

For the interview, the URL has it.

It’s at 21MB download – see the small [»] play and [↓] download links at the top of this page. Variable audio quality, but well worth hearing.

“Any faithful exposition of God’s word will proclaim Chrust.”

Anglicans Ablaze: Exploding the Myth of the Anglican ‘Via Media’

Anglicans Ablaze: Exploding the Myth of the Anglican ‘Via Media’

Exploding the Myth of the Anglican ‘Via Media’ by Robin Jordan, an uncommonly good writer on Anglicanism.

The doctrine of the post-Reformation Church of England puts it squarely in the Reformed camp with Geneva. The Edwardian and Elizabethan Reformers saw the post-Reformation English Church as a Reformed Church like the French and Swiss Reformed Churches. The continental Reformers, in turn, recognized the Church of England as a Reformed Church. The main differences between the Church of England and the Church of Geneva were “the shape of the Church-State link and the acceptance of episcopacy.”

Something Old, Something New by Eric Watkins: New and Old Calvinists

Something Old, Something New by Eric Watkins Reformed Theology Articles at Ligonier.org

Kevin D. Johnson: The Reformed Nature of Anglican Orthodoxy, circa 1559.

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/note.php?note_id=396126118994&id=1023978751&ref=nf

"Diarmaid MacCulloch and Scott Wenig have recently restated the old Tractarian canard that the Elizabethan Church of England sought to achieve a middle way between Rome and Geneva, the so-called Anglican via media. According to MacCulloch, the Settlement of 1559 represents a "theological cuckoo in the nest." That is to say, the Church of England was an essentially "Catholic" structure operated by a "Reformed" clerical leadership. On this view of the matter, "the story of Anglicanism, and the story of the discomfiture of Elizabeth's first bishops, is the result of the fact that this tension between Catholic structure and Protestant theology was never resolved." According to this interpretation of the Elizabethan Settlement, the criticism levelled against the Establishment by such radical critics as Thomas Sampson, Laurence Humphrey, and Robert Crowdley is taken to be representative of Reformed orthodoxy. On our reading of Vermigli's and Bullinger's contribution to the vestarian controversy, however, as well as to the discourse on the relation between civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction more generally, the question plainly arises whether the claim to Reformed orthodoxy may in fact lie more plausibly with the Queen and her loyal bishops. For as we have seen, it is the latter who succeeded in enlisting the two pre-eminent Reformed divines of Zurich in support of the key elements of the Elizabethan Settlement of 1559. Vermigli's letter to Hooper, along with Bullinger's to Sampson and Humphrey, suggests that far from intruding a evangelical cuckoo into a Romish nest, the architects of the Elizabethan Settlement may very well have succeeded in demonstrating--at least to their sixteenth century contemporaries--the essential consistency of the ecclesiology of the Settlement with the principles of magisterial Reformed orthodoxy as formulated by the Schola Tigurina."

Torrance Kirby, _The Zurich Connection and Tudor Political Theology_, pp. 219-220.