Pro Rege

For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen. —Romans 11:36

  • Against the “Apostolic” Authority of the Roman Pope and See

    Against the “Apostolic” Authority of the Roman Pope and See

    Extracted from An Exposition of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians, John Davenant, Chapter 1, p. 3-4, 9-19.

    The name, then, of Apostle, according to the use of sacred Scripture, belongs to those only, First, who had received an immediate call from God to preach the Gospel, He chose twelve, whom he named Apostles (Luke 6:13); As my Father hath sent me even so send I you (John 20:21). Secondly, who had received a certain and infallible knowledge of evangelical doctrine, by the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Christ promised this to them, The Spirit of truth shall guide you into all truth (John 16:13); this he fulfilled in Acts 2.1 Thirdly, who had received an authority, not restricted to one place, or to a certain church, but plenary and universal; Teach all nations (Matt. 28). Preach to every creature (Mark 16).

    Now, in the last place, it will not be foreign to our purpose to scrutinize that apostolic dignity which the Pope claims to himself. For on all occasions he vaunts about the Apostolic See, Apostolic Benedictions, Apostolic Anathemas; in short, boasts of every thing Apostolic. Wherefore from what has been explained above concerning the nature of an Apostle, this question arises. Whether the Pope of Rome has, or has not, the apostolic dignity and authority?

    Bellarmin,2 De pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 9, asserts the apostolic authority to be permanent in the successor of Peter alone, because supreme and universal power was given to Peter as to an ordinary Pastor3 who should have successors; but to the other Apostles, as to delegates, who should not. The Pope of Rome is therefore alone the Apostolic Pontiff, his only the Apostolic See, and his office that of Apostle.

    But on the contrary, the nature of an Apostle demands that a man be immediately called by God to that office ; that he be also instructed in evangelical truth immediately, by the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit: but this is more than the advocates of the Papacy themselves dare arrogate to the Pope. He is not immediately called by God, but chosen by the Cardinals, and that very often through the intervention of intrigue and the basest fraud. His knowledge of sacred learning (if he has any) is acquired by study and industry, not inspired like that of the Apostles. Therefore although they may call him an Apostle, we shall conclude with Tertullian, advers. Marc. lib. 1, “The name is assigned in mockery to him to whom the nature implied in the name is denied.”

    Secondly, an Apostle is bound to the preaching of the Gospel (Woe is me, if I preach not the Gospel), and that not in any one particular church, but every where: but the Roman Pontiffs do not think themselves obliged to preach through all the world, neither do they exercise that office at all : therefore they either lie when they call themselves Apostles, or act wickedly in neglecting to discharge the peculiar functions of an Apostle.

    But perhaps it will be said, they send out preachers by their authority, and gather new churches in the Indies, and in the most remote parts of the world; and this property belongs to apostolic authority.

    I answer, Nothing is less apostolic than to remain at home at ease, and send out others to labour: the Apostles indeed had inferior ministers under them, whose assistance they made use of; but they themselves in the mean time did not omit the preaching of the Gospel. Since therefore the apostolic work is not found in the Pope, neither is the apostolic nature : for every thing evinces its own proper nature by its operations.4 Add to this that he hath neither the power of working miracles, nor of conferring the Holy Spirit; and yet these were united in all who received apostolic authority from Christ. When the advocates of the Pontiffs are pressed with these clear reasons, they are compelled to shuffle, and to attribute a sort of half and mutilated apostolic authority to their Pope. So Bellarmine, lib. ii. de Rom. Pont. cap. 12, says, Three things are comprised of the Apostleship: First, that a man be immediately called and taught by God; and this he confesses that his Romish Apostle hath not: Secondly, that he should establish churches in those places where they never were: Thirdly, that he should have the chief power over all churches, and be the Ordinary of the whole Church: and he says these two marks of the Apostleship do meet in the Roman Pontiff. But Cajetan, in tract. 3, de Rom. Pont, institut. confesses, “If we must speak formally and exactly, Peter had no successor in his Apostleship more than the rest of the Apostles : but beyond this Apostleship he was the ordinary Pastor of the whole world: in this office of superintending the universal Church the Pope succeeds him, and so far his chair is called Apostolic.”5

    But neither must we concede this to the defenders of the Papacy. First, because God doth not set over the Catholic Church any universal Bishop fortified with apostolic authority, who may err, and draw those under him into errors. With this argument Gregory checked the pride of John of Constantinople. He says, Epist. lib. 4, cap. 76, “The Catholic Church must needs miscarry, when he falls who is called Universal.”6 But it is agreed amongst the defenders of the Papacy themselves, that the Pope may become an heretic, and in such case ought to be deposed. Distinct. 40, Can. Si Papa.

    Secondly, he is not the universal Pastor of the Church, who, by virtue of his ordination, is bound to his own particular See: but the Roman Bishop, like any other, is bound down to his See, and to his Church of Rome; or, if he hath any more extended prerogative, he hath it by human, not by Divine right. And yet it is not of men, but of God alone to confer apostolic authority. So Cyprian, “No one of us appoints himself a Bishop of bishops. Be he whom you will, he has but the free control over his own jurisdiction.” Afterwards he subjoins that “the authority of the African Bishops is no less than that of the Roman.”7 If however they will not hear Cyprian, yet they will not reject the Council of Nice, which restricts that (Ecumenical Bishop within his own limits; vide Can. 6.8

    Lastly, an universal and apostolic Bishop may every where ordain Bishops and Pastors of his own right: but if the Pope should ordain a Bishop out of his own province, that would not be a lawful ordination; for so it was held by the Synod above-mentioned. It is quite clear that if any one be made a Bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan, that Synod determined him not to be a Bishop.9 Cajetan meets this argument ridiculously, by saying, “It is one thing to speak concerning authority, and another thing concerning the execution of it: that the Pope hath the authority of ordaining in the provinces of other Bishops; but that custom has established his non-exertion of this authority.” If he hath this authority by right, it could not be so abolished by custom as to make that ordination actually unlawful which he might effect without the consent of the Metropolitan; for custom does not prescribe where a thing is forbidden by an express law, says Hostiensis.10 We do not deny that prerogatives have been conceded to the Roman Church, and to the Bishop of Rome, by the ancients; but not because of his being the ordinary Pastor of the whole Church, and armed with apostolic authority by right Divine, but on account of the sobriety, the consistency, and the distinguished learning of those who, in the earliest times, were set over that Church; on account of the dignity of the city of Rome, which was the seat of empire; and, lastly, as Gerson says, by the gracious and voluntary concession of other churches.

    Now let us sift a few arguments of our opponents.

    1. Bellarmine, lib. 2, De Rom. Pont. cap. 12, says, Peter had the government of the whole church committed to him; but some one ought to succeed therein as supreme head by Divine right; and this successor can be no other than the Pope.

    I answer, there is nothing solid in this argument. First, as it regards Peter, to whom they say the government of the whole church was committed when it was said to him alone, John 21:15-17, Feed my sheep. I confess, in his character of Apostle, the power of feeding the flock of Christ every where was given to Peter; but this was common to him with the rest of the Apostles, to whom also it was said, Go, teach all nations, (Matt. 28:19). Secondly, we deny that successors were appointed in this apostolic power either to Peter or any one of the Apostles; for not fresh Apostles, but Bishops, succeeded to Apostles. Thirdly, if we allow a successor to Peter in apostolic power, he will not be, by Divine authority, the Roman Pontiff; because no Divine authority appropriated the Roman See to Peter. Whence even Cusa11 does not hesitate to confess, that, “if a Bishop of Treves should he chosen for the head of the Church, he would be more properly the successor of Peter than the Roman Bishop.”

    1. They argue, the Church is one body, and hath one head on earth besides Christ: but any other head on earth besides the Pope is assigned by no one; therefore he is the head and sovereign of the whole Church. And that it has a head on earth, he—Bellarmine—proves from those words, The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you (1 Cor. 12:21); but Christ can say this; therefore there is a head in the Church besides Christ.

    I answer, Although the Church be one body, and militant here in earth, yet no necessity obliges us to confess any earthly head of the whole Church; because Christ, who is ascended into heaven, is also in the world by his Spirit, and quickens and rules the whole Church ; but he forms particular churches, and governs them by particular prelates and ministers. The plea, however, which he brings from the Scripture is futile and childish : for the Apostle means not by the head and the feet, the Pope and the Church; but by the head, any man in the church endowed with eminent gifts; by the feet, any humble or inferior person. This will readily appear if we weigh the scope of the passage. For he is not cautioning Peter against lording it over the Church; but he is warning those who were distinguished by spiritual gifts among the Corinthians, against despising their inferiors; as Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Aquinas explain it.12

    1. The Church would not be governed in the best way unless it were governed by one supreme spiritual head; but Christ left the Church instituted and governed in the best manner; therefore by one.

    I answer, Christ alone is the spiritual Sovereign of the whole Church; but to institute an earthly sovereign, on whose will the whole Church should depend, would be the worst mode of governing the Church; because no mortal can discharge that office even moderately well. For how shall the Pope sitting in the Vatican, take care of the churches of the Indians or the Ethiopians? But that Pontiff does not aim at the care of churches, but at empire.

    1. The Church is always increasing, and it must increase until the Gospel be preached in all the world: but this cannot be done unless there be one chief president, on whom the apostolic charge and trouble of preserving the whole Church and of extending it, may devolve; for no one ought to preach unless he be sent; and no particular Bishop can send beyond his own province.

    I answer, To send preachers to infidel nations is not now the work of apostolic power, but of Christian charity. Every Bishop therefore in the vicinity of any heathen nation, may, from the duty of charity, either by himself, or by others, preach the Gospel to them; and, if they should embrace the Christian faith, what is to hinder Bishops and ministers being set over them—if they require it—legitimately ordained by any other Bishop? To extend the Church therefore there is no need of a new Apostle.

    We conclude, then, since the Pope of Rome is not immediately called by Christ—nor embued with Evangelical knowledge by direct and extraordinary inspiration of the Holy Spirit—nor endowed with universal power over the whole Church, he can by no mode of reasoning be styled an Apostle, or Apostolic Bishop.13

    Footnotes

    1. By the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. ↩︎
    2. Bellarmine. The greatest champion of the Church of Rome, whose folio volumes have been an exhaustless armoury whence her modern defenders have supplied themselves with weapons, though they have found it convenient seldom to imitate his ingenuousness ; for his works are honourably distinguished for the full and candid way in which the Protestant views are stated. The celebrity of his labours may be evinced by the circumstance that all the most learned and eminent of the Reformed Advocates deemed it right to direct their powers against this famous controversialist. Yet notwithstanding his pre-eminence among her vindicators, it has been rightly observed by a living Prelate, that ” Bellarmine was not in the best odour with the See of Rome; his notions of the Papal prerogative not being sufficiently high to reach the views there entertained of the Pope’s supremacy.” (Bp. Van Mildert’s speech before the House of Lords, 1825). Bellarmine was a Jesuit of Tuscany raised first by ClementVIII, in 1599, to a Cardinalate, and afterwards to the Bishopric of Capua ; which See he resigned to be near the Pope’s person, and devote himself entirely to the affairs of the church. He died in 1621, in his seventy-first year ; “bequeathing one half of his soul,” says Du Pin, ” to the Virgin, and the other to Jesus Christ!” thus affording a melancholy testimony of the power with which the superstition of the Church of Rome enchains her members: for this same strenuous defender of the doctrines of his Church, in the tranquility of private meditation, comes to this conclusion in his book, De just, lib. v. c. 7 prop. 3, “Because of the uncertainty of our own righteousness, and the danger of vain-glory, it is the safest way to place our entire trust in the alone mercy and benignity of God.” His devotional writings evince him to have been a man of undoubted piety; and, at his death, so impressed were the people with the idea of his sanctity, that it was necessary to place guards to keep off the crowds which pressed round to touch his body, or procure some relic of his garments. ↩︎
    3. It is necessary for the reader, not versed in technical terms, to bear in mind here the Ecclesiastical meaning of the word “Ordinary.” Williams, in his “Laws of the Clergy,” thus defines it: ” Ordinary, ordinarius (which is a word we have received from the Civil law) is he who has the proper and regular jurisdiction, as of course and of common right; in opposition to persons who are extraordinarily appointed.” ↩︎
    4. It may be seen by a reference to the history of the proceedings of their Missionaries in China, since Davenant wrote the above, and by the report of the Abbe Dubois, more recently, as to the result of his preaching in Hindostan, both on what anti-apostolic principles their preachers proceed, and what a different success attended them; and late statements from South America exhibit a woeful description of their Priests and churches there. It has been asserted lately that the present Pope expends more money from his own coffers in promoting Missionary efforts of one kind or other than is raised by all the Missionary Societies among Protestants. If this be the case, whilst the above allusion to the results should satisfy Christians of the want of the main thing, yet such zeal, and sacrifice, and effort should, at the same time, reprove our lukewarmness and niggardliness For an ample account of Popish zeal, see “Adams’s Religious World Displayed”, vol. i. p. 323. A statement of Dr. Milner of America, given in the Missionary Register for June, 1830, and an article in the Christian Examiner for August, 1830, p. 611, both on the subject of papal zeal at the present time, are worth the reader’s consultation. They contain important and instructive details. ↩︎
    5. Cajetan; otherwise Thomas de Vio, of Gaeta, another eminent defender of the Papacy, who flourished prior to Bellarmine. Besides the work above-mentioned, he wrote notes on Aristotle and Aquinas, and an Exposition on almost all the Books of the Old and New Testament, which Mosheim describes as brief and judicious. Though an amiable man, he entertained such lofty ideas of papal authority, that in his efforts to reclaim Luther, he became a strenuous opposer of that Reformer; and in his proceedings both greatly lost his temper, and threw a cloud over his other excellencies. He was made a Cardinal, and afterwards Archbishop of Palermo; and accounted by Papists the oracle of his day. ↩︎
    6. The well-known letter in which this sentence was given by Pope Gregory, commonly styled the Great, may be found at the end of all the complete copies of Brent’s Translation of F. Paul’s History of the Council of Trent. It must be admitted, that, viewed with reference to his character, there appears as much of personal ambition as of piety in this famous Epistle ; for Gregory was remarkable for his earnestness in exalting his See. Hence it has been justly remarked, that “there is no word in all the writings of Gregory wherein he more proudly boasts of the greatness of his Supremacy, than where he says, that he knew no Bishop who was not subject to the See Apostolic.” Nay, this very letter is filled with assumptions of the same lofty kind; as where he asserts, that “to St. Peter was given the care and principality of the whole Church;” and that “the title of Universal Bishop was offered to the Bishop of Rome, by the Council of Chalcedon, and refused;” which appears to be altogether untrue. It is evident, however, that although pride and ambition were beginning to work in the Church on either hand, the grand principle on which all is built that has since brought the Church of Rome into such melancholy distinction was not, up to this period, admitted; for Gregory, in arguing with John of Constantinople against his adoption of the obnoxious title—Œcumenicus, or Universal—urges, that it was never given to St. Peter; none of the Bishops of Rome had ever assumed it; it was contrary to the Canons, to the Decrees of the Fathers, and an affront to Almighty God himself.” But, in fact, through the letter, whilst he quarrels with the usurpation of the Name by his rival prelate, Gregory unreservedly claims the Thing both for himself and his See; to secure which he did not scruple to stoop to base flattery of the bloody usurper Phocas. Mr. Blanco White, in his interesting “Practical Evidences against Catholicism,” imputes to Gregory that neglect of ancient literature, and the substitution of scholastic learning, by which the corruptions of Popery and the religious darkness of the world were fostered; and gives some extraordinary instances of his illiterateness; and it is the testimony of Ridley concerning Gregory, in his treatise against the errors of Transubstantiation, that “in his days both corruption of doctrine and tyrannical usurpation did chiefly grow.” He was the inventor of the magnificent and pompous ceremonies attending the celebration of the Mass, if not of the Mass itself. The Translator cannot avoid adducing here the existing evidence of a fact communicated to him by a friend, who, on visiting Rome in 1825, observed in the Church of St. Maria della Modestia (formerly a Temple of Romulus), in the Via Sacra, an inscription in Italian literally thus: “The portrait of the most blessed Mary over the high altar spoke to Pope St. Gregory saying, ‘Wherefore dost thou no longer do me reverence?’ The Saint asked pardon, and granted to those who celebrate Mass at this altar the liberation of a soul from purgatory, ie. of that soul for which the Mass is said.” It is thus the Church of Rome has drawn to herself that wealth whereby she has maintained her power. Gregory was most severe in the point of celibacy of priests; but discouraged the persecution of the Jews. ↩︎
    7. Cyprian was Bishop of Carthage about the middle of the third century. The whole passage from which the above sentence is cited runs thus: “Neque enim quisquam nostrun Episcopum se Episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adiget.” It contains, as Bishop Kaye, in his Ecclesiastical History, p. 239, well observes, “remarkable expressions,” and is evidently “aimed at some Bishop who had called himself Episcopus Episcoporum.” ↩︎
    8. Council of Nice: Canon 6. “Let ancient customs prevail; as for instance, those in Egypt, Lylia, and Pentapolis: That the Bishop of Alexandria have power over all these, since the same is customary for the Bishop of Rome. Likewise in Antioch and other provinces, let the privileges be secured to the Churches. This is as manifest as any thing at all, that if any be made a Bishop, without the consent of his Metropolitan, this Great Synod has determined that such an one ought not to be a Bishop. If any two or three, out of affectation of dispute, do contradict the Suffrage of the Generality, when duly passed according to Ecclesiastical Canon, let the Votes of the Majority prevail.” [From a Translation of the Canons from the original Greek, by John Johnson, MA. Proctor for the Clergy of the Diocese of Canterbury, in the Clergyman’s Vade Mecum by him. 1714.] ↩︎
    9. The celebrated Translator of Josephus and Eusebius from Greek into Latin, Ruffinus, a Priest, who flourished a little after this period towards the close of the fourth century, in giving his sense of the 6th Canon of this Synod, is admitted to have stated it truly and clearly; viz. That the ancient custom be kept both in Alexandria and Rome; that he (the Bishop of Alexandria) have the care of Egypt; the other (the Bishop of Rome) of the Suburbicary Churches, i.e. over all those places in Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, etc. over which the Prefect, or the Vicar of the City of Rome, had jurisdiction in temporal affairs. And even the old Latin paraphrastical Version of these Canons confines the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome to the Suburbicary Churches. And not only these two Editions of the Canons, but those of other writers on them, call the several districts in which the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria exercised their jurisdiction, Provinces; whereas the district of a Patriarch was always called his Diocese, that of an inferior Bishop his Parish: And therefore by Metropolitans here must be meant those who had the largest Provinces, or were the most remarkable on account of the largeness of cities, and had a proportionable deference paid to them. The reason why such particular care was taken of the privileges of the Bishop of Alexandria was, that Meletius, Bishop of Lycopolis, being deposed about twenty years before this Council, by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, in a provincial Synod, for idolatry and other crimes, did yet ordain several Bishops and Clergymen in Egypt, without the consent, and in opposition to the sentence passed against him by the Bishop and Synod. Against this the 4th Canon of the Council was probably framed : —” A Bishop ought to be constituted by all the Bishops that belong to the Province; but if this be not practicable, by reason of urgent necessity, or the length of the way, Three must by all means meet together, and when they have the consent of those that are absent, signified by letter, then let them perform the ordination; and the ratification of what is done must be allowed to the Metropolitan in every Province.”

      Let it further be observed, that the authority of Metropolitans must have been much older than this Synod; for here their privileges are called ancient customs. Vide Johnson’s Clergyman’s Vade Mecum. ↩︎
    10. Hostiensis. The author here cited by Bishop Davenant is Henry de Suza, a celebrated Civilian and Canonist of the 13th century, of such repute as to have been called “the source and splendor of the Law.” He was first created Archbishop of Embrun, and then Cardinal-Bishop of Ostiensis; whence he derived the appellation of Ostiensis, or Hostiensis which title he is frequently cited, and by Davenant in the latter mode of orthography. ↩︎
    11. Cusa was a profound Lawyer and Divine, created a Cardinal by Pope Nicholas V. in 1448, and afterwards Bishop of Brixia. It is said that he was the author of a Refutation of the Koran, addressed to Pius II, and highly esteemed as a very learned production. A treatise of his concerning “Learned Ignorance,” in which he aimed to correct and reform the disorders and abuses which the Scholastic Divines had introduced into the Seminaries, is still extant. Yet this erudite man, notwithstanding the bold admission also above made, in order to sustain the Papacy set up the notion of a running sense of Scripture, which might be suited to the various occasions of the Church, and adapted to every new rite. Vide Dr. Wright’s Sermon at Salter’s Hall, in 1734—5, on “Scripture and Tradition.” ↩︎
    12. Though the champions for the Papacy in former ages of comparative darkness might think to impose upon the ignorant and unwary by such “futile and childish” modes, as even Bellarmine for want of better could employ in the plea here refuted; yet in these days one would hardly imagine they would have the effrontery to risk it. However, in 1810, a Roman Catholic Priest in Lancashire, sent forth two octavo volumes of “Sermons” and in one of them, in support of Papal Supremacy, revived an old gloss upon Scripture, much akin in fallacy and plausibility to the one above, but managed with more ingenuity. For, with the most artful sophistry, carried on through two pages, he labours to prove that the words of our Lord to Peter, recorded John 21:15-17, “Feed my lambs; feed my sheep,” were a commission to Peter, in the first place to govern the faithful intended by the lambs; in the next, a jurisdiction over the pastors of the faithful, conveyed in the words “Feed my sheep.” The consequence, he concludes is, that “since Christ gives Peter a superintendence over his whole flock, he confers upon him a jurisdiction distinct from that of the rest of the Apostles—a jurisdiction more enlarged than theirs—a jurisdiction reaching over the whole body of the Church, over the taught and the teachers, over the governed and the governors.” So that, as the Rev. Joseph Fletcher, in his excellent volume of “Lectures on the Principles and Institutions of the Roman Catholic Religion,” justly observes, “according to this arguing the ‘lambs’ mean the ‘sheep,’ and the ‘sheep’ mean the shepherds!!!” It is to be believed, that this is the general mode of Popish instruction. The recently published discourses of a neighbouring Priest, under every cautionary restraint, might be adduced as containing abundant evidence of the truth of the assertion; and, more recently still, a distinguished Papal Orator, in the town where the Translator writes, was heard, in his ordinary pulpit exercises, labouring to establish his auditory in the belief of the doctrine of Transubstantiation, by attempting to prove, that it was the uniform and universal belief of the Christians of the first four centuries of the Christian era!!! ↩︎
    13. The grand point at issue between Rome and her opponents, is the question of infallibility: therefore, to the refutation of this from the actual history and tendency of her doctrines, Mr. Garbett’s “powerful and valuable work”—as it has been justly styled—the “Nullity of the Roman Faith” is directed, and contains in its pages a refutation of the main arguments of their most famous modern defense, namely Bishop Milner’s “End of Controversy.” Upon the whole difficulties of their system, it seems almost needless to refer to the well known volume of Mr. [George] Faber [the Difficulties in Romanism] in answer to the Bishop of Strasburg. For the recent attempts to remove the mass of crime that lies against their Church, Mr. Townsend’s “Accusations of History” is quite sufficient. The present revival of this great controversy, and the modern garb in which their advocates have cloaked the Papal tenets, have induced the Translator to refer the uninformed reader to works which appear to him to meet more especially the existing state of the discussion; and the study of which will leave him void of excuse if he be entangled in the mazes of this never-slumbering and artful enemy. ↩︎
  • The Excellencies of the Knowledge of the Covenant of Grace

    The Excellencies of the Knowledge of the Covenant of Grace

    Selected from Patrick Gillespie’s Ark of the Testament Opened, Chapter 1: Of the dignity and excellency of the subject matter; or of the desireableness and usefulness of the doctrine and knowledge of the Covenant of Grace.

    Transcribed and edited by Dakota Michael.

    should not think the introduction were unsuitable to the treatise, if in the entry I could so commend the excellency and usefulness of the doctrine of the Covenant of Grace, as to render the knowledge thereof in higher esteem and more desired. That I may then waken up in myself and others an eagerness of desire, and even a hungering and thirsting after the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus (Phil. 3:8), who is the marrow and sum of the Gospel Covenant, whom God hath given for a Covenant to the people (Isa. 42:6) and a diligent searching after the hidden wisdom of God’s covenant dealings with his people, as for hid treasures (1 Cor. 2:6; Prov. 2:4), let the dignity and desirableness, the excellency and usefulness of the subject matter be well weighed.

    Some things have an intrinsic value which God has stamped upon them—it results from the nature of the things: gold is more excellent than stones. For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron (Isa. 60:17). Other things have no value but extrinsic. The applauses, excellent elogies, praises, titles and honors given unto men, are merely extrinsic, they add no intrinsic worth to the creature to whom they are given; he remains the same, though he passes at a higher rate: For when he dieth he shall carry nothing away: his glory shall not descend after him. Man that is in honour, and understandeth not, is like the beasts that perish (Psal. 49:17, 20). This made the Philosopher say, honor est in honorante non in honorato. Some things, again, have an intrinsic value, and a supervenient worth also stamped upon them, which flows from their usefulness; and these are the most excellent: bread has an intrinsic worth stamped upon it by God, that man might live by it (Luk. 4:4), and it has a supervenient worth also stamped upon it by the necessity of hungry man, to whom a piece of bread is more useful and excellent than so much gold; this additional value of esteem is supervenient to the intrinsic value thereof: The full soul loatheth an honeycomb; but to the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet (Prov. 27:7); And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom. And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me? (Gen. 25:30-32). 

    The subject matter of which I intend to treat, may be will accounted amongst the most excellent things which partake of intrinsic worth stamped upon it by God, and of a supervenient worth also in regard of its usefulness to lapsed man, which has raised the rate and value thereof, and brought it in high esteem among persons knowing in this mystery: The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward (Psal. 19:7-11); Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation and all my desire, although he make it not to grow (2 Sam. 23:5); Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord (Phil. 3:8); Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and the man that getteth understanding. For the merchandise of it is better than the merchandise of silver, and the gain thereof than fine gold. She is more precious than rubies: and all the things thou canst desire are not to be compared unto her (Prov. 3: 13-15).

    (1) First, of the dignity and excellency of the knowledge of the Covenant of Grace, which may and ought to render it desirable: all knowledge is desirable according to its excellency. Knowledge is dignified with intrinsic and real excellency, or is in esteem and high account among men, from various grounds, all which meet together, and are much more eminently in the knowledge of the Covenant of Grace.

    First, knowledge is dignified and esteemed from the rareness of it; that knowledge which every one has attained, no man has in esteem; the commonness of things derogates much from their value among men—though I know not why it should—but if any knowledge receives value from rareness, this ought much more, for it is of all knowledge the rarest. The saving knowledge of the Gospel Covenant, is no common knowledge, but a rare thing, not communicated to all men, but to some only: it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given (Matt. 13:11): not communicated to the greater part of men, but only to a small remnant according to the election of grace (Rom. 11:5); Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you (John 14:17), and thine they were, and thou gavest them me, and they have kept thy word: for I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me, and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me (John 17:6, 8). Yea, this knowledge is so rare, that it is not—for most part—communicated to the men of greatest knowledge, and who have greatest advantages of knowledge of all other men: O father, … thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes (Matt. 11:25); Which none of the princes of this world knew (1 Cor. 2:8); and but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; for ye see your calling brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called (1 Cor 1:23, 26). 

    Secondly, knowledge is had in esteem from the manner of acquiring it: if there is anything rare and singular, in the way of coming at it, this raises the rate of that knowledge by fifty on the hundred. Hence are these enquiries, Whence hath this man this wisdom? (Matt. 13:54). We ask how men come to have this knowledge and lay at wait to value it accordingly: hence are despisings, We know this man whence he is (John 7:27). We decry home-bred knowledge in most sciences—I would there were reason for it. We cry up that which is from far, though it were no better than that which is at our door. We ask where such a person studied, and look not what knowledge he brings, but from whence. But if anything in the way of acquiring knowledge may commend it, there is more of that kind in the knowledge of Christ and the Covenant of Grace than in any knowledge beside. For first, it was brought from far, it came from heaven. This knowledge came out from God, from the bosom of the father (John 1:18). All other knowledge, the farthest fetched is but from beneath, this only is from above (John 8:23). Secondly, he is a great doctor that teaches this knowledge. There is no rabbi like unto him: no man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him (John 1:18); the secret of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant (Psal. 25:14); Rabbi, we know we know that thou art a teacher come from God (John 3:2) and Nathaniel answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel (John 1:49). Thirdly, no knowledge is acquired in so excellent a way as this: saving knowledge of this subject comes by revelation: but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit (1 Cor. 2:10); flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven (Matt. 16:17).

    Thirdly, knowledge is had in esteem and veneration among men; with some, for antiquity, with others, for novelty. There is an excess of itching after and dotage upon both extremes, any practice or opinion how unwarrantable and corrupt soever, if it can but lay claim to antiquity, is had in veneration with some men; and any new-coined fancy, or the same old errors put in a new dress, if they can but lay claim to new light, or put on that mask, go current with others. But if the measuring things whether by novelty or antiquity may usher in the esteem and reception of any doctrine, here is a satisfaction to both humors. In the Gospel Covenant are things new and old, which every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven…bringeth forth out of his treasure (Matt. 13:52). Here the greatest antiquity and greatest novelty meet together, and yet no wonder, for the doctrine of the Covenant of Grace, is the everlasting gospel (Rev. 14:6), the same doctrine that was preached to Abraham: And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham (Gal 3:8), yea, to Adam in the promise of the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15). This is the same doctrine in substance, which was spoken by the mouth of God’s holy prophets, which have been since the world began (Luk. 1:70); That which was from the beginning declare we unto you (1 John 1:1, 3), and yet the same doctrine of Christ and the Covenant of Grace is a new thing and often so called (Jer. 31:22, Isa. 43:19). It is news, and the preaching of it shall continue to be fresh, good news while the world endures (Isa. 52:7): How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace and bring good tidings of good things (Rom. 10:15); And the Angel said unto them, behold I bring you good tidings of great joy which shall be to all people (Luk. 2:10); and this not only to them who never heard this doctrine before, but to the believer who has heard it and received it. The doctrine of the Covenant, that brings righteousness and life to sinners through Christ shall be a new fresh mercy as often as it is heard and received, for Christ is a spring, and the Covenant of Grace is a well wherein new, fresh, sweet waters are to be found every moment: the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life (John 4:14); With joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation (Isa. 12:3). It is by this Covenant of Grace that the LORD’s mercies are new every morning (Lam. 3:22-23). Hence the same Covenant of Grace for substance, is both the Old Covenant and the New Covenant throughout (Heb. 8): the Old or first Testament, and the New Testament (Heb. 9:15, 18; 1 Cor 3:14). Hence Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world (Rev. 13:8), and he who appeared in the end of the world to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself (Heb. 9:26). Upon the same account also, the Covenant of Grace is the good old way which we are commanded to ask after (Jer. 6:16), and the same is also the new and living way which Christ has consecrated for us (Heb. 10:20), and the commands of this Covenant are new commandments, and yet no new commandments, but old (1 John 2:7-8; John 13:34) for it is his covenant which he commanded for ever (Psal. 119:9) and the word which he commanded to a thousand generations (1 Chr. 16:15) and must therefore be very old, but always fresh and new.

    Fourthly, knowledge receives excellency from the subject and according to the excellency thereof so is the knowledge dignified: therefore we ask, Wherein is a man skilled and knowing? In what subject has he knowledge and skill? This gives real excellency to knowledge and the Covenant of Grace, and things therein contained, being without dispute incomparably the most excellent subject of knowledge, like unto which, heaven and earth do not afford another: For who in the heaven can be compared unto the LORD? Who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the LORD (Psal. 89:6), and whom have I in heaven but thee? And there is none upon earth that I desire besides thee (Psal. 73:25); My beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among ten thousand. His mouth is most sweet, yea, he is altogether lovely (Song 5:10, 16); Thou art fairer than the children of men, grace is poured into thy lips, therefore God hath blessed thee forever, etc. (Psal. 45). The knowledge of God in Christ, and the knowledge of the gospel way of righteousness and life, must needs be the most excellent knowledge, and upon that account should be had in esteem above other knowledge: Yea, doubtless and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord (Phil. 3:8); this is the Pearl of greatest price and value, for purchasing whereof, all other things may be easily forgone (Matth. 13:45-46). Even Aristotle could say that “a little knowledge, though conjectural about heavenly things, is to be preferred above much knowledge thou certain, about inferior things.”

    Fifthly, knowledge is had in esteem, according to the certainty that is attainable in it. The greater certainty that is attainable in any science, the more it is partaker of excellency, and ought to be dignified. Now of all knowledge the greatest certainty is attainable in the knowledge of God through Christ, and in the knowledge of the substantial truths of the Covenant of Grace. For first, here is the greatest certainty of the subject matter, and things treated of, that they are in being: That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life. That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us (1 John 1:1-3); He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him (Heb. 11:6). [2] Here is the greatest certainty of the mind of man, and the highest assurances that are attainable about anything: And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him (1 John 3:19); Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith (Heb. 10:22); For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, etc. (Rom 8:38). [3] Here are the clearest and most firm demonstrations whereby one thing gives evidence to another, as is certainly inferred from another, the like are not to be found in any science: Hereby know we that we know him, etc. (1 John 2:3); we know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. Hereby we perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren (1 John 3:14, 16); and hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit (1 John 4:13, 15). Yea, all other knowledge is but conjectural, the politicians’ knowledge, the jurists’ knowledge, the physicians’ knowledge, etc. all is but conjectural. Only the knowledge of the gospel and of God in Christ, that is certain and infallible; man cannot possibly reach such a certainty in any knowledge as in this, for herein his knowledge and assurances may rise above deceit and delusion, above mistake, above disputing, above doubting, above daring once to doubt, and to enquire further: For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth (Job 19:25); Therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed (Isa. 50:7); And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God (John 6:69); and none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord (John 21:12).

    Sixthly, knowledge is in esteem according to the perfection that is attainable in it: that knowledge is of least value, in which there can be no perfection attained, and that most valuable in which perfection is attainable, and the more valuable by how much it is possible, speedily and easily to attain perfection therein. This also dignifies the doctrine and knowledge of the Covenant of Grace, and gives it the crown above all humane knowledge; for as much as there is no perfection attainable in any other knowledge: That which is crooked cannot be made straight, and that which is wanting cannot be numbered (Eccl. 1:15). Whosoever he be that knows anything in the same, is notwithstanding ignorant of more than he knows, but he that knows God in Christ, and knows the mystery of the Gospel Covenant in the meanest degree of saving knowledge, he knows more than he knows, that he knows: And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? (John 14:4-5). Such a one knows more than all the wise men of the world know: Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and has revealed them unto babes (Matth. 11:25); Which none of the princes of this world knew (1 Cor. 2:8). In the study of this knowledge only, perfection is attainable, and whosoever will apply himself unto the study of it, shall be proficient, though it were in vita Minerva, yea, and shall be perfected in the knowledge of that mystery. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ (Eph. 4:13); But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known (1 Cor. 13: 10, 12).

    Seventhly, knowledge is in esteem, and ought to be so, according to its usefulness. That knowledge that is good for nothing, is not worth the searching after, that which is useful and profitable for anything, is to be esteemed, and according to the usefulness of any knowledge, so it is proportionably to be had in esteem, and that which is good for most intents, is deservedly in highest esteem. Therefore we ask concerning any piece of knowledge, Wherefore is it good? And, For what is it useful and profitable? And in this respect, the knowledge of the Covenant of Grace carries away the crown and preference from all other knowledge; for whatsoever be the advantage and usefulness of other good knowledge for some ends and purposes; yet the knowledge of no other subject, no other understanding, nor humane science is good for all things, this is peculiar to the saving knowledge of Christ, and of the Gospel Covenant, to be useful and profitable for all things necessary for salvation, whether they concern the being, or well and comfortable being of a Christian: only this knowledge is profitable to make the man of God perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works (2 Tim 3:17). For this cause David says of the Covenant, this is all my salvation (2 Sam. 23:5): and when God comes to enter into this Covenant with Abraham, he tells him, that he is God Almighty, and all-sufficient (Gen. 17:1-2), and that he was his Shield and exceeding great reward (Gen. 15:1). What good thing and useful can any soul think of or desire for this life, or that which is to come, but he who knows the Covenant of Grace well can find it promised therein, and he who can practically improve that knowledge can draw his supply of that useful things from the grace of that Covenant: For the LORD God is a sun and shield: the LORD will give grace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly (Psal. 84:11); But godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come (1 Tim. 4:8): but of the usefulness of the Covenant of Grace, more particularly in a distinct section.

    Eighthly, knowledge is esteemed and searched after according to its mysteriousness. The most profound knowledge is in greatest account: all men itch after hidden and secret things, they desire to pry into them. The statesman desires to know the secrets of state, and lays out himself in searching after them. The schoolman loves to agitate profound questions. The natural man desires to know the secrets of nature. The merchant desires to know the secrets of commerce and trade. Yea, the very craftsman desires to know the secrets and hidden things of his own art. Only the Christian comes short in a better and more approved curiosity.Yet, he searches not into the mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven, he pries not as he ought into the secrets and hidden things of the Covenant of Grace. Yet herein are more mysteries to be searched into, and more profound knowledge to be had than anywhere else: But we speak of the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: which none of the princes of this world knew (1 Cor. 2:7-8). There is a considerable scripture for this: the secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant (Psal. 25:14). Where the secret of the Lord and his Covenant are one and the same thing, as interpreters note upon the place: the Covenant of Grace is God’s great secret and mystery, wherein he communicates with his people, and which is made known only to those whom he admits to an intimate familiarity with himself. His covenant is his sod or ‘secret’: a word used for privy councils, because of the secrecy, Aquila renders it ἀπόρρητος, or “secret that cannot be uttered”; Symmachus ὁμιλία—“conversation, or conference, or fellowship” with God; Theodotio μυστήριον, the mystery of God; Hierome secretum Domini, and he expounds it of the New Testament or Covenant, which was hid and wrapt up under the veil of the Law. God speaks there as a great king, although he is good to all, and the influence of his good providence extends to all men, yet they who are in his church, his court, his house, have more special privileges. But as all his subjects are not of his court, so all that are of his court, are not of his privy council. These only whom he honors with great trust and intimate familiarity, these are upon his sod, his secret, to whom he shews his Covenant. And indeed the Covenant of Grace contains great mysteries and secrets, the greatest that are in the world, greater than these that men pry most into, greater than natural eyes or carnal minds can see into. For discovering how great a secret this Covenant is, let me instance upon some few of the many mysteries and secrets that are wrapt up in it, and the light that is needful for discovering them.

    Are there any mysteries so great? Any secrets so deep as these of the Covenant of Grace? Is not the incarnation of the Son of God a great mystery? The union of the divine and human natures in one person, the two natures that were at so vast distance and variance: yea, without controversy, says the Apostle, great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim. 3:16). God’s being in the form of a servant (Phil. 2:7), the killing of the Prince of life (Acts 3:15), the shedding of the blood of God (Acts 20:28), the humiliation of the high and lofty one (Isa. 57:15; Phil. 2:7), the shame and disgrace of the Lord of glory (Isa. 50:6), the childhood of the Ancient of days (Dan. 7:9; Luk. 2:27), the curse upon God blessed for ever (Gal. 3:13; Rom. 9:5), the condemning of the holy one and the just (Acts 3:14; 2 Cor. 5:21), the justifying of the ungodly, etc. (Rom 4:5), are not these great mysteries? Is not the design of love that acted Christ all along, in laying down his life for his enemies, a great mystery (Rom. 5:7)? Is not our union with Christ a great mystery? The inhabitation of the Spirit in the believer a great mystery (John 6:57, 14:20)? Is not faith a great mystery (1Tim. 3:9; Heb. 11:1)? Regeneration, a great mystery (John 3:3-4)? Is not the love of God a great mystery (1 John 3:1), and the objects of his choice upon whom he has set his love a great mystery? Upon fallen men, not angels (Heb. 2:16). And among men, upon the most despicable, not upon the rich, the noble, the wise, etc. (1 Cor. 1:20; 2 Sam. 7:18)? Where are there any such secrets to be searched into?These are mysteries and secrets which need a pure and clear light to discover them: in thy light shall we see light (Psal. 36:9). Secrets that cannot be opened without the help of him who opened the seals of the Book of the Covenant (Rev. 5:2-9), for the secret of the Covenant transcends [1] Nature’s light, that is too dim and dark a light for opening and discovering so hidden knowledge, yea, it is utterly blind and can reveal nothing to us of Christ and the Covenant of Grace. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14). This light when it was perfect in Adam before his fall, could not discover this secret, far less the remainders of it that are in us. [2] Nor can all that art can superadd to nature make a discovery of this secret; reason elevated, by all the precepts of morality and rules of virtue above the vulgar capacity, cannot teach this secret, it is a depth and height of knowledge that transcends the most excellent natural spirit of man, the profoundest wits, that have far outstript others in knowledge. The state wits fail here; for this is the subject, which none of the princes of this world knew (1 Cor. 2:8). Yea, and the school wits too, for this was foolishnessto the learned Greeks (1. Cor. 1:23). And if angelic knowledge were superadded to the best humane understandings, all could not do, these also should go to school to study and learn, if not at the church, yet with the church to learn—I say—from a great rabbi and maker the knowledge of this secret: which things the angels desire to look into (1 Pet. 1:12); To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God (Eph. 3:10); Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God (1 Cor. 2:11-12); Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God (John 3:2).

  • Dickson, The Covenant of Redemption Opened

    Dickson, The Covenant of Redemption Opened

    From David Dickson’s Therapeutica Sacra, Chapter IV.

    Originally titled: Of divine covenants about the eternal salvation of men; and in special, of the Covenant of Redemption, shewing that there is such a Covenant, and what are the articles thereof.

    BECAUSE THE HEALING OF the sickness of the conscience comes by a right application of divine Covenants about our salvation: therefore it is necessary, that some measure, of the knowledge thereof be opened up.

    1. A divine covenant we call, a contract or paction, wherein God is at least the one party contractor. Of this sort of covenants about the eternal salvation of men (which sort chiefly belong to our purpose) there are three. The first is, the Covenant of Redemption, past between God and Christ—God appointed Mediator, before the world was, in the council of the Trinity. The second is, the Covenant of Works, made between God and men, in Adam in his integrity, endued with all natural perfections, enabling him to keep it, so long as it pleased him to stand to the condition. The third is, the Covenant of Grace and Reconciliation through Christ, made between God and believers (with their children) in Christ.

    2. As to the Covenant of Redemption; for clearing the matter, we must distinguish the sundry acceptions of the word ‘redemption’: for, 1. Sometimes it is taken for the contract and agreement of selling and buying-back to eternal salvation, of lost man, looked upon as in the state of sin and misery. In which sense, we are said to be bought by Christ, both souls and bodies: Ye are not your own; for ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). And this may be called redemption by paction and agreed bargain. 2. Sometimes ‘redemption’ is taken for the paying of the price agreed upon. In which sense, Christ is said to have redeemed us, by suffering of the punishment due to us, and ransoming of us: Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (Galatians 3:13). 3. Sometimes ‘redemption’ is taken for the begun application of the benefits purchased in the covenant by the price paid: In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins, according to the riches of His grace (Ephesians 1:7). 4. Sometimes ‘redemption’ is taken for the perfect and full possession of all the benefits agreed upon between the Father and Christ His Son the Mediator. In which sense, we are said to be sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession (Ephesians 1:14) and, it is said, Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption; which is the Day of Judgment, when Christ shall put us in full possession of all the blessedness which He purchased by bargain and payment for us (Ephesians 4:30).

    In this place we take ‘redemption’ in the first sense, for the covenant passed between the Father and Christ His Son, designed Mediator, about our redemption.

    3. When we name the Father as the one party and His Son Christ as the other party in this covenant, we do not seclude the Son and Holy Spirit from being the party offended; but do look upon the Father, Son and Spirit, one God in three persons, as offended by man’s sin; and yet all three contented to take satisfaction to divine justice for man’s sin in the person of the Son, as designed Mediator, to be incarnate. Whereby the Son is both the party offended as God, one essentially with the Father and Holy Spirit; and the party contractor also, as God designed Mediator personally for redeeming man, who with consent of the Father and Holy Spirit, from all eternity willed and purposed in the fullness of time, to assume the human nature in personal union with Himself, and for the elect’s sake to become man, and to take the cause of the elect in hand, to bring them back to the friendship of God, and full enjoyment of felicity for evermore.

    When therefore we make the Father the one party, and the Son designed mediator the other party, speaking with the Scripture, for the more easy uptaking of the covenant, let us look to one God in three persons, having absolute right and sovereign power according to His own pleasure to dispose of men, looked upon as lying before God (to whom all things are present) in sin and death, drawn on by man’s own deserving, and yet for the glory of His grace resolving to save the elect, so as His justice shall be satisfied for them, in and by the second person of the Trinity, the co-eternal and co-essential Son of the Father.

    4. This Covenant of Redemption then may be thus described: it is a bargain, agreed upon between the Father and the Son designed Mediator, concerning the elect (lying with the rest of mankind in the state of sin and death, procured by their own merit) wisely and powerfully to be converted, sanctified and saved, for the Son of God’s satisfaction and obedience (in our nature to be assumed by Him) to be given in due time to the Father, even unto the death of the cross.

    In this bargain or agreement, the Scripture imports clearly a selling and a buying of the elect: Feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased by His own blood (Acts 20:28), ye are bought with a price (1 Cor. 6:20), and 1 Peter 1:18. The seller of the elect is God; the buyer is God incarnate; the persons bought, are the church of the elect; the price is the blood of God, to wit, the blood of Christ, who is God and man in one person.

    This Covenant of Redemption, is in effect one with the eternal decree of redemption, wherein the salvation of the elect, and the way how it shall be brought about is fixed in the purpose of God, who worketh all things according to the counsel of His own Will, as the Apostle sets it down (Ephesians 1:1-15).

    And the decree of redemption is in effect a covenant, one God in three persons agreeing in the decree, that the second Person, God the Son, should be incarnate, and give obedience and satisfaction to divine justice for the elect: unto which piece of service the Son willingly submitting Himself, the decree becometh a real covenant indeed.

    But for further satisfaction, that there is such a covenant between the Father and the Son, as we have said, for redeeming of the elect, Scripture gives us evidence six ways.

    The first way is by expressions, which import and presuppose a formal covenant between the parties, buying and selling; the second way is, by styles and titles given to Christ the Redeemer; the third is, by expressions relating to an eternal decree for execution and performance of the Covenant of Redemption; the fourth is, by representation of this covenant in the Levitical types; the fifth is, by Christ the Redeemer now incarnate, His ratification of the covenant; and the sixth way is, by holding forth to us the heads and articles agreed upon, wherein the covenant consists.

    I’ll be publishing the proofs of this Covenant from scripture and the rest of this chapter from Therapeutica Sacra over the next few days. Stay tuned!

    For other installments in the series, see below.

  • Tri-Covenantalism in Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8

    Tri-Covenantalism in Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8

    From David Dickson’s Therapeutica Sacra, Chapter VII.

    Originally titled: For a further clearing and confirmation of the doctrine about the three covenants, from Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8.

    The prophet Jeremiah gives us a short compend of the former doctrine anent these three covenants, (e.g. Jeremiah 31:31, etc.) whereof the Apostle gives a clear commentary, (Hebrews 8:6-7, etc.).

    The Covenant of Redemption

    As to the Covenant of Redemption, it is here presupposed to be past, as the Apostle, expounding this place of Jeremiah, gives us to understand, while he shows us, that the Covenant of Grace was no other ways purchased, than by the mediation of our Lord Jesus, transacting about the Covenant of Redemption with the Father. And that he may give us to understand this:

    1. Christ is called the mediator of a better covenant (Hebrews 8) to wit, of the Covenant of Grace.
    2. The Covenant of Grace is designed by the name of a testament, which gives us to understand, that Christ the Mediator, did not obtain the making of this covenant on a lesser price than the laying down of his life, that all the benefits contained in these better promises, might first be his goods, to dispose upon, as he pleased; and that he being resolved to die, did make his testament, and leave them all in legacy to the redeemed, his heirs and assignees, designed from eternity.
    3. The Mediator making his testament, is called Jehovah, not a mere man, but God to be incarnate, making an unchangeable latter-will or testament, which of necessity required the death of the testator, that it might be ratified, Hebrews 9:15-16, and the death of a testator not a mere man, but the Son of God to be incarnate and to die, who had life in himself, that he might lay down his life, and take it up again.
    4. The goods which he purchased according to the Covenant of Redemption, and left in legacy to his heirs, are all and every blessing which do belong to godliness and life eternal, as remission of sin, and writing of the law in their hearts, etc.
    5. The redeemed, and designed heirs, are not all and every man, but the elect only, these that were to be saved only, and who were to be effectually called, and indued with the saving knowledge of God, who from the least to the greatest, were all of them to know the Lord: not such as were the reprobate fathers, nor their unbelieving children, but the chosen society of the Israel of God and of Christ’s family, the house of Judah, which is the tribe of Christ; for, the Apostle doth extend these promises unto the covenant between God and the elect, to be gathered under the evangel unto Christ, out of Jews and Gentiles.

    The Covenant of Works

    As to the Covenant of Works, it is certain:

    1. First, that God made a Covenant of Grace in substance, and upon the mater with the fathers that were brought out of Egypt, as we may gather from the consideration of the parties and articles of that covenant: for, albeit God repeated the Covenant of Works, and declared the force of the law, for binding the curse upon all transgressors thereof; yet he did press the law on them in order unto their reconciliation, by the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, to be in due time offered up, and did teach them, that Christ was the end of the law, for righteousness to every one that believed.
    2. It is certain, that in the framing of this Covenant of Grace, between God and the visible church of the fathers, God did make the promises of righteousness and eternal life and spiritual blessings, under the vail of temporal types, upon conditions more hard and difficult in appearance, than the new covenant requires: for, this the Apostle shows to us plainly, Hebrews 8:6.
    3. It is certain, that the unbelieving fathers did not take up, nor understand the Covenant of Grace, but turned it over in a Covenant of Works, which is manifest by comparing the words of Jeremiah and the commentary thereupon by the Apostle: For, Jeremiah says, that they did transgress the covenant, albeit God did show himself a husband unto these unbelieving fathers; that is, they changed the Covenant of Grace in a Covenant of Works of their own framing, and transgressed that covenant also. And the Apostle says, they did not continue in that covenant, because they changed it to themselves in a Covenant of Works, according to which Covenant God did deal with them: for, instead of being a husband to them, he exacted of them the penalty of the broken Covenant of Works, and lorded it over them, and did not regard them (Hebrews 8:6). For, they sought after the righteousness of works, and not to have righteousness by faith; and therefore did he despise them, and dealt with them after the tenor of the Covenant of Works. And it is observable, that the words of Jeremiah do comprehend the Apostle’s meaning; for, the words may bear both, that God was a husband unto them to wit, in making a Covenant of Grace with them; and that he dealt with them as a Lord over them, by exacting of them the penalty of the broken Covenant of Works, and of the rejected Covenant of Grace.

    The Covenant of Grace

    As to the Covenant of Grace, the Apostle speaks of it in express terms, first, by God’s promising that he would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah.

    Secondly by his setting better promises before them then these were which were made to the Fathers in the wilderness.

    Thirdly, by his giving no other cause of bestowing so great blessings on them, but his own good-will and pleasure.

    Fourthly, by his requiring no other condition of them but says, that they who feel in themselves, the want and need of the promised blessings, and are convinced of their own unworthiness, might give credit unto God that makes the promise, and so embrace the promises, and apply them to their own use.

    The External Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace

    As to the external dispensation of the covenant, it is certain,

    1. First, that it was common to all that were externally called, to all the members of the visible church: for, the covenant made in the wilderness with the elect fathers and reprobate, with the believers and unbelievers, with those that rejected the Covenant of Grace and the offer of righteousness by faith, and with those who looked through the veil afar off to Christ coming, and were saved, was one and the same.
    2. It is certain, that the external form of the Covenant of Grace, was more obscure and veiled over by the types and figures of the Levitical ceremonies before Christ came; but after his coming, it was propounded in clearer and better promises.
    3. A day is set, to wit, the fulness of time, when these shadows and typical figures should be abolished, and the grace of God should be set before his people, to be looked upon with open face.
    4. And yet, the grace of God was not so hid and obscurely propounded to the Church before Christ’s coming, as it could not be taken up by the children of God; for in the midst of the shadows and dark types the starlight of gracious promises did shine, and the doctrine of the New Covenant, was in substance holden forth by the prophets; and one instance thereof doth appear in this place of Jeremiah.
    The Internal Covenant of Grace

    As to the internal Covenant of Grace:

    1. First, these things which are promised in that Covenant, do declare in what state God finds men whom he converts and draws into covenant with himself; for, when the Lord takes in hand, that he will write his law in their heart, that he will teach them himself to know him, by the teaching of his Word and Spirit; and that he will forgive their sins, he presupposes, that lawless rebellion did reign in them, with blindness of mind and hardness of heart; and that the elect, by nature, are without law, without God, without faith, before he reforms them according to the articles, or tenor of the Covenant of Redemption.
    2. Albeit, by nature, the law be written in men’s hearts, as to the knowledge of sundry moral duties, and so far as is sufficient to make them inexcusable for their contravening these sparks of light, Romans 1:20; 2:14-15. Yet, the writing of the law, here promised is spiritual and supernatural, enlightening their minds by the light of God’s Spirit, and renewing their heart; and, in effect, the thing promised is actual conversion of them.
    3. And seing conversion is here promised by Christ the testator absolutely, he has taken in hand absolutely to effectuate it: for, it is not said, I will put my law in their heart if they please to suffer me, but determinately, I will put my law, I will write my law in their heart and inward parts, that is, I will make them willing who were averse, and obedient to my law who were rebellious.
    4. Christ, the Testator, does in all this, not satisfy himself by promising the illumination of the mind and the inclining of the heart, for a time; but promises also to make a solid and permanent work of it, by making them persevere, which is imported in the words I will put, and I will write it; for, to write it, is as much as to fix and engrave it, that it may remain.
    5. The chief head of the covenant, and which in substance contains all blessings, is set down in these words, I will be their God, and they shall be my people: for, by this promise, right is granted unto the true heart-convert and confederate, first, unto God himself, then unto all his benefits, whereof he has need, in order to righteousness and eternal life: for, they whose God the Lord is, they do live, and shall live for ever, as Christ says, God is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Matthew 22:32). And all particular promises, what are they else but explications of this great and first promise, and applications thereof to his children’s cases in particular?
    6. Gifts of the Spirit are promised here, and inducements whereof disciples have need, whereof pilgrims going home to that heavenly city have need: yea, the Spirit himself is promised to them, who is to remain with them to the end of their life, as a director and leader, They shall all know me, says the Lord, that is, as Christ interprets it, *They shall be all taught of God (*John 6:45).
    7. The Lord shows here, that he will deal with men, in their regeneration and reconciliation, as with reasonable creatures, by preserving and not destroying them in their simple naturals, by maintaining and not overturning the liberty of their freewill; I will make a covenant, says he, with the house of Judah. Now a covenant is a free and voluntary contract.
    8. He shows, that he is Lord and Overruler of man’s will, who can turn it about as he pleases, and that he is not hindered nor impeded to execute and bring to pass, whatsoever he has purposed to do, by the variable contingency or difference of man’s will, but can work upon the will of man, and by the will of man, what pleases him; and by second causes, whether working freely and contingently, or by a natural necessity, can wisely, holily and powerfully bring about his own purpose in his set time; the days come, says he, wherein I will make a covenant with the house of Israel. Wherein he taketh upon him the effectual work of covenanting, promising not only for his own part, but also for the elect of Israel and Judah’s part; for, his promise is, that it shall come to pass, that by inclining their will unto reconciliation, they shall willingly consent unto a covenanting with God: for, he says, I will make a covenant with them; he says not, “if they will,” but absolutely, “I will make them close a covenant with me heartily”.
    9. The party to be converted and to enter in covenant, is not all men, nor every society, but the Church, God’s own family; not every nation, but God’s people, chosen out of all nations on the whole earth, I will make a covenant with the house of Israel: as it is also cleared (Deuteronomy 7: 6-8).
    10. The Church of Christ under the Gospel, as the Apostle looks on this place, is comprehended under the name of Israel and Judah; partly, because Israel has the priority of all other people in God’s covenant; and partly, because all the Christian church of the Jews and Gentiles, is comprehended under the name of the house of Judah, which is Christ’s tribe, whereof he came, who is the prince and head of all believers and confederate persons, reconciled to God; and partly, because the Israelites or Jews, have this prerogative above all other people and nations on the earth, that of that race of people, the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, there shall be in all ages some elected persons till the great bulk of the now scattered people turn Christians, and till the end of the world (Romans 11:5).
    11. No age, old nor young, no sex, man nor woman, nor any external difference of men that can be put between one and another in this life, excludes any man from the benefit of this covenant, or commend a man to God that his person should be respected of God, but all and every one whom God shall externally call, may safely accept the offer of grace, and join themselves to Jesus Christ; for, the grace of God here, is extended unto all degrees and sorts of men, from the least to the greatest.
    12. In the mean time God knows his own, man be man, both great and small, and with the same love, embraces them all; for, the promise is, that all those elect who are known to God, shall know him from the greatest even to the least.
    13. The great obstacle which may be supposed to exclude any from coming in to God through Christ, is here removed; to wit, the greatness and multitude of bygone sins, cast up against the incoming of some when they are called: The mercy and grace of Christ the testator, takes this doubt out of the way, saying, I will forgive their iniquity, and their sins I will no more remember (Jeremiah 31:34).
    14. This promised remission, the Lord will not have limited nor abridged, neither by the number of sins, nor grievousness thereof, nor kinds of sins, but he purposes and promises to take away all iniquity by forgiveness, and to forget their bygone sins (Jeremiah 31:34). And confirms this by repeating the promise of not casting them off who shall acknowledge him (Jeremiah 31:37).
    15. From this promise the Apostle (Hebrews 10) draws this consequence, that under the Gospel, or New Covenant, there is but one offering for sin; which offering cannot be repeated, in regard that full remission thereby is purchased: For, he says, by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified (Hebrews 10:14), and this he proves from the words of the covenant whence he concludes, Now, where remission of these are, there is no more offering for sin (Hebrews10:15-17).
    16. If any shall ask for the cause of so rich mercy and grace covenanted, he shall find none in man at all. The only cause is set down here, to wit, the will and good pleasure of God, I will forgive their iniquity, says the Lord, and their sins will I remember no more, that is, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.
    17. Because the Lord our God and Mediator, is here making his testament, wherein also he takes upon him to be executor of his own latter will, and to perform all that is promised, therefore in confirmation, he subscribes and sets down his name Thus says the Lord (Jeremiah 31:35). And that his subscription may be of weight with all men, he designs himself by his stately styles or titles, taken from his creation and government of the creatures, Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name. This he says, lest the faith of his people should be shaken by their looking to impediments and difficulties, and that they may gather strength and courage to go on in the Lords way constantly, when they consider the power of God in the workmanship and government of the world.
    18. Unto his subscription, he adds, both witnesses and pledges of his promises: If those ordinances depart from before me, says the Lord, then the seed of Israel [which comprehends the seed of Abraham’s faith] shall cease from being a nation before me forever (Jeremiah 31:36).
    19. Last of all, lest any man, in the consideration of the grievousness of his sin, or of the apparent impossibility of performing these promises, should doubt, of remission of sins to be granted to the confederate, or of the perseverance of the true believer, or of the perpetuation of the church, the Lord bids his people that come in to him, be confident and quiet, saying, If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord (Jeremiah 31:36). Now, both these are impossible, that we can measure the heavens, or search the bottom of the earth: therefore it is impossible, that this covenant and the promises made therein, should fail.

    The manner of dispensing the New Covenant outwardly and inwardly.

    As to the dispensation of this covenant, both outwardly and inwardly:

    1. This promise of a new covenant, is a challenge against the misbelieving fathers, who slighted the offer of grace and followed after the Covenant of Works, seeking righteousness by works; which Covenant of Works, they were not able to perform and it served unto them only for their condemnation. This the Apostle collects from this place of Jeremiah and Hebrews 8:8, He found fault with the fathers.
    2. The Apostle observes the wonderful mercy of God, that while he is finding fault with the incredulity of the fathers, who lived under this old covenant, he will avenge this their incredulity, ignorance, foolishness and ingratitude, by telling them, that he will make a new covenant and give them that were then living a taste of it, for recovering them, finding fault with them, he says, the days come, that I will make a new covenant.
    3. This Covenant of Grace made with the church, is procured by Christ, to this end, that the Covenant of Redemption might be brought unto a real accomplishment by the Covenant of Grace. This observation is grounded upon this, that Christ is called the Mediator of this better covenant (Hebrews 8:6). For, he will draw up a clear Covenant of Grace with his people, that the blessings purchased unto them according to the Covenant of Redemption, may be applied unto them by this Covenant of Grace and reconciliation.
    4. The preaching of the promise of this new covenant, is a most fit mean to draw on and close this Covenant of Grace between God and his people, who are the called according to his purpose: this observation is gathered from Jeremiah’s preaching and Paul’s preaching of this unto the hearers of the Gospel, to this very intent and purpose.
    5. In the promising and preaching of this Covenant of Grace, God will have all men’s opinions, thoughts and conceptions about this mystery, limited unto, and depending upon, his mouth alone, revealing the same in his Word: this observation is gathered from the Lord’s invitation of all men to take heed what he is to say, and what he is to let forth in this mater, Behold the days come, says the Lord, wherein I will do such and such things, which now I foretell I will do.
    6. Both the making and way of making a covenant with man, depends absolutely on God either to make a covenant or not, to make what covenant he pleases to make, upon what conditions he pleases, and with what persons he pleases to make his covenant. No man ever preveened God, desiring him to make a covenant, but God did preveen all men, he preveened Adam once before his fall, and again by preaching the Gospel in his audience after the fall, he preveened the fathers in the wilderness, he preveened his posterity, that have lived or shall live in the latter days, promising to make a covenant with those who were not come into the world, but were to come long after the promise.
    7. The Lord will have all men to understand, that the end of his covenanting with men, both in that old dark form, and in the new clear form, is his own glory: for, he has made all things for himself, even the wicked for the day of evil. This observation is gathered, partly, from this, that the Lord brings forth his sovereignty for a reason of his rejecting of the misbelieving fathers in the wilderness, I despised them, I regarded them not; I Lorded it over them, as the original may bear. And partly, from this, that he brings forth his own will and pleasure, for a reason of his showing grace to their posterity, I will forgive their sins, etc.
    8. He shows also, that in his works he does not depend upon man, but that all his works are known unto him from the beginning, and that it is determined by himself, what, and how, and by what means, he will do everything. This may appear from this, that he foretells what he is to do about the saving of his elect, Jews and Gentiles, being no less certain to do what he promised about the posterity to come, than he was certain of what was passed already about their incredulous fathers.
    9. The Lord will have us to know, that laying aside the consideration of his decrees, it is simply in the power of God to punish sin—in whom he will, and to pardon sin through a Mediator—to whom he will; that is, to have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and to pardon whom he will pardon. This is collected from this, that the fathers do sin in the wilderness and justly perish and the posterity do sin and are graciously pardoned.
    10. In all this proceeding, no violence is used upon the will of men, whether of them that perish, or of them that are saved. The saved do walk freely and willingly in the way of salvation, as their hearty choice; and these that perish, walk willingly in the way of perdition. God proceeds with both by a voluntary covenant, as this place shows.
    11. In them that perish the meritorious and culpable cause of their perdition is in themselves; but in them that are saved, no cause is found at all, but the cause is found in God’s grace allenarly. This is collected from this, that the Lord gives the reason of the perdition of the misbelieving fathers, from their sins and transgression of covenant: they transgressed my covenant, and I despised them; and of the salvation of their posterity, no other cause but this: their sins I will not remember any more.
    12. The Lord’s justice is cleared in the perdition of them that perish, because he gave precepts and promises, and other moral motives, to hinder them from sinning, and to move them to keep his ways, albeit he did not effectually impede their running on to sin according to their inclination, and proneness to follow their own way. This is collected from this, that the Lord says, he made a covenant with their fathers, and they did break it.
    13. It pleases God, not only to give his precepts unto men, concerning their duty, but also to condescend so far unto them as to open up in a part his decrees and deep designs about men’s salvation, that they, being admitted somewhat near to the treasures of His wisdom, goodness, justice and mercy, might be so much the more wise, and the more stirred up to discharge their duty, and make use of his dispensation. This we collect from his revealing of the decree of election of the posterity of Israel, and drawing them effectually into a Covenant of Grace with himself.
    14. The Lord reveals to the world the doctrine of election unto life, only in the general, and does not descend to the nomination of them in particular. This is collected from this, that he doth promise to convert and draw into a new Covenant of Grace, the posterity of Israel and Judah, without naming particularly these that were designed for that salvation.
    15. Albeit the Lord keeps up the names of the elect (except of some few) before their conversion, yet, he gives forth marks and evidences whereby after their conversion they may be known both to themselves and others. This we collect from this, that He sets down infallible marks of the elect, who are to be God’s covenanted people or worshipers of God, that they do know God, and have his law written in their hearts and inward parts.
    16. As for the reprobation of any man, the Lord has given no certain mark as long as they live, (except that malicious and willful rejecting and opposing of known Christ Jesus) to the intent that none should dare to exclude, either themselves or others from repentance and hope of mercy, so long as the day of God’s long-suffering and patience lasts. This is collected from this, that God does not make mention of the reprobation of these misbelieving fathers, while they are living, but now long after they are dead; and this mention-making of them, is in general only, and not by naming them particularly.
    17. Albeit in the dispensation of the Covenant of Grace, for application of saving mercies, the matter be so wisely carried by God, that both the decree and Covenant of Redemption is kept close, as to particular names, and yet it is effectually made out in the applying of grace to individual persons, as the agreement is made between God and Christ Mediator; yet, the Covenant of Redemption, is made this far clear, that it did not pass for the conversion and salvation of all and every man by this evidence, that not so much as the offer of the Covenant of Grace and reconciliation shall be made to all and every nation, far less to all and every singular person: but that the people and nation of Israel and Judah is chosen out of all people and nations in the world, comprehending such others as should be called unto their society, and the fellowship of the olive tree among them, as Psalm 147:19-20 holds forth. And in this place the whole elect, under the Gospel, are taken up under the name of this one nation.
    18. That the decree of election of some, may both be kept up as to particular nomination, and yet have certain execution and be performed, the Lord takes up all his confederates whether in the letter or spirit also, under the same common name. This is gathered from this, that the misbelieving Israelites that perished in the desert, with whom God made a covenant and they did break it, are designed under the common name of fathers, and are taken up in that covenant under the name of spouse (Jeremiah 31:32) and the elect posterity are taken up under the common name of the house of Israel and Judah.
    19. Such as the covenanters are, in regard of their inward estate, such is the covenant wherein they really are, or such is the covenant in relation to their persons. Unto the reprobate who do change for their part, the Covenant of Grace into the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Grace becomes in effect the Covenant of Works, and is rendered void to them, as the Apostle threatens the Galatians (Galatians 5:4) and as did befall the pharisaical fathers, who are here declared as instances; but the Covenant of Grace unto the elect and true believers, remains still the Covenant of Grace, from which they do not fall, nor can altogether fall, as the comparison here between the fathers in the wilderness and their elect posterity makes evident.
    20. The Lord has wisely joined life with the means and way to life and death with the way to death, and will not have that separated which he has joined. This is collected from this, that the fathers by not continuing in the covenant, are despised and rejected of God, and so perished; but their elect posterity, having the law of God in their hearts, and cleaving constantly unto the Lord, are saved.
    21. The Lord will have this doctrine taught where His word is preached, concerning the election of some, and reprobation of other some; of God’s covenanting with some people and persons, and not offering a covenant to other some; of covenanting with some in the letter, and with other some in the spirit also, to this end and intent, that men, leaving the searching in particular of that which God has kept secret in the particular, may follow commanded duties, repent their sins and flee to Christ offered unto them, and take up his yoke upon them, and beware that they neither despair, nor yet presume, or turn the grace of God into wantonness. This we gather from this, that God sends forth Jeremiah to preach these things, not only to the visible Church of the Jews going into exile and captivity, but also to all who shall hear this doctrine from him to the end of the world. And the Apostle, repeating this doctrine for the use of the Christian Church of Jews and Gentiles, confirms this.
  • The Invisible Things of God, Clearly Seen

    The Invisible Things of God, Clearly Seen

    Matthew Barker, Natural Theology: Or, the Knowledge of God from the Works of Creation; Accommodated and Improved to the Service of Christianity, Chapter I

    For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

    Romans 1:20
    The Scope of the Text:
    How the Gentiles though without the written Law yet are under Sin.

    The scope of the Apostle in the first part of this epistle, is to assert and prove the great doctrine of justification by faith, and not by the works of the Law. And to make his way to it, he first proves all men to be under sin. And all mankind being divided into Jew and Gentile, he first proves the Gentile to be under sin, in this first chapter; and the Jew in the second. And those that are under sin, cannot be justified by the works of the Law, and therefore must of necessity have recourse to the righteousness of faith, being convicted of sin by the Law.

    Now lest it might be argued, “How could the Gentile be under sin, not having the written Law made known unto them?”1 for it was the Jew to whom were committed the oracles of God; and where there is no Law, there is no transgression. The Apostle therefore in this chapter tells us, they had the Law of Nature, which was God’s Law; which though it is not written in ink and paper, yet it is written in the hearts of all men, and in the visible works of God’s creation: and the Gentiles thereupon are convicted to be under sin, not following the light and conduct of that Universal Law.

    For as a law is directive and preceptive, it ministers knowledge, and commands practice: so was the Law of Nature to the Gentiles; it had a light in it whereby they might attain some knowledge of God; and it had a force in it to urge them upon the performance of duty and service to Him, answerable to that knowledge.

    But, because they darkened this light in themselves, as in Romans 1:21, their foolish heart was darkened, and they did not follow the conduct of it, but retained the truth in unrighteousness; hereupon they are convinced of sin; for they did neither take up those worthy conceptions of God’s being, which the Law of Nature might direct them to; as the Apostle speaks in Romans 1:21-22, neither did they manage their conversation towards men with that justice, sobriety, equity, and charity, as that Law did both direct and urge them to; as the Apostle at large declares in the enumeration of those several vices, which they lived in the practice of, in the last part of the chapter.

    Now this Law of Nature, as written in the hearts of Men, he speaks of in the verse before the text; calling it: that which may be known of God, manifest in them. And as written in the works of creation, he speaks it of these words of the text, For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal Power and Godhead. And hence he infers they are without excuse. And so I am come to the text.

    What the Law of Nature is. How Adam had the knowledge of his Creator.

    I, having already spoken from another scripture at large of the Glory of God, as manifested in Christ; and of the Glory of Christ, as manifested in the gospel-ministration; my intention from this text is, to set forth the glass of the world’s creation; wherein we may behold, and from whence we may evince, both the being of God, or his deity; and many attributes and properties of his being.

    And whereas all theology consists of two parts; either that which is called natural, or that which consists of supernatural revelation; the former I shall here speak of.

    By natural theology, that all may understand, I mean that knowledge of God, and our duty to Him, which the light of nature may lead man up to, and which is concreated with his soul. The image of God upon man in his first creation, consisted in knowledge as well as holiness; and the knowledge Adam had of his creator, was partly by the character of his being engraven upon his soul, which is by some styled an implanted word; and partly by what the large power of his intellectual faculty might gather from the works of creation; by both which he was led to God as his ultimate end. Now the light of nature, as it is now found in man, is the dark and weak remainders of this image still; which the Apostle says the heathens had, who had nothing of the external Word, either by writing, or any other way of revelation.

    The text may seem a paradox; for it speaks of things invisible that are seen: If seen, how are they invisible? And if invisible, how are they seen? And therefore I must explain the text.

    1. And first I shall shew what are the invisible things of God, spoken of in the text.
    2. How these invisible things are seen, and understood, from the creation of the world; and the things that are made.
    3. How upon the account thereof, the gentiles are said to be without excuse.
    What is meant by the “invisible things of God”

    For the first: by the invisible things of God are meant his being, and the properties and attributes of his being; and which is expressed in the Arabic version. These are called the things of God2; not as if in God there was thing and thing, or any multiplicity, diversity, or variety in his being, as there is in the beings of men: where the mind is one faculty, and the will another; the faculty is one thing, and the act another; wisdom is one thing, and power another; habit is one thing, and operation another; the whole is one thing, and parts another. For the nature of God is perfect unity, identity, simplicity, without any division or composition3; where mind is the same with will, act with power, wisdom with goodness, etc. but God speaking to men, speaks of himself, as we are able to understand. And therefore we read of attributes and properties in his being, as if these were distinct things; which yet are all one in Him; and are his essence and being, rather than the attributes of it. Now these are the invisibles of God.

    As God himself is said to be the King eternal, immortal, and invisible4; and to dwell in light inaccessible5, whom no eye hath seen, or can see: so are all the attributes of his being, in themselves invisible. Though his goodness, power, and wisdom, are visible in their effects; yet as they are in God they are invisible. For God being a spirit, cannot be seen by a corporeal faculty; for all sensation is made by a suitableness of the object to the sense. Nay, the soul itself, though it is a spirit, while it dwells and acts in the body, cannot see God as he is, because it acts here according to the law and capacity of its present state: which is to understand, and see things by those species and images which are presented to it from the phancy [imagination], and conveyed to the phancy from the sense. But how it may see God, and understand in its separate state, is not my present work to enquire; for the Apostle speaks in the text, of man in his present state; and so these things of God are invisible to him, as to any immediate and intuitive sight of them. For they are not absolutely invisible; for the soul, when it is fortified and fitted, may be capable of seeing them but it cannot in its present state; propter excessum intelligibilis supra intellectum6,because of the excess of the object above the faculty, as the light of the sun is to the eyes of a bat.

    Though invisible, yet how seen

    How are these invisible things of God said to be clearly seen from the creation of the world? The Greek word καθοραω7, which we render clearly seen, will not well bear that interpretation: neither can I find it so in any other translation. For the clear sight of God, and of his attributes, is rather to be seen in Christ, than in the works of creation; who is called, the brightness of his Father’s glory, Hebrews 1:3. Or, it is rather reserved for the future, than attained in this present state. But yet these invisible things of God, though more darkly, may be seen from the creation of the world, and the things that are made; as the apostle here asserts.

    What is meant by the creation of the world

    Now by the creation of the world8, is either here meant the beginning of its being, and so the beginning of time; and then the apostle means, that those invisible things of God have been discovered and seen, a constitutione Mundi, from the first beginning of the world, in the things that are made. Those attributes of his that were invisible, did then manifest themselves in visible effects, and not before.

    And this sense the Syriac, and some other translations do seem to follow; though disapproved by most of others: as also by most of our modern expositors9; Doctor Hammond excepted.

    Therefore by the creation of the world, I conceive, is meant the things created, especially the first mass and chaos; which alone was properly and strictly, the effect of God’s creating power10. Now here is seen God’s eternal power, considering that he did create, not with labor and difficulty, but by his word; not out of preexistent matter, but out of nothing.

    What difference betwixt the creation of the world, and things made.

    Question: When the apostle speaks of these invisible things as seen; does he speak of the sight of the body, or of the mind?

    Answer: He speaks of both, though chiefly of the latter; for the eye of the body beholding this visible world, the mind thence, by the help of the sense, is enabled to infer and conclude, that this must be the effect of some infinite power; and so the mind sees this power: for when the mind, by reasoning, has found out effects in their cause, it has an intellectual sight of what it has discovered. And that seeing is here to be chiefly taken for the sight of the mind, the next words more clearly show, “being understood by the things that are made,” which run thus in the Greek, τοις ποιημασιν νοουμενα. And νοεω implies the acts of the mind, as it raises itself up to the knowledge of things, by its agitations and exercise: and so it sees the invisible things of God, in the things that are made, as it ascends from finite, to that which is infinite; from visible, to that which is invisible; from corporeal, to that which is incorporeal; from temporal, to that which is eternal.

    By the next words, “the things that are made,” in the Greek, ποιημα, we may understand the works of creation, as they were formed out of the first chaos, which was the proper object of creation. So that we may distinguish in the text between the creation of the world, and the things which are made; taking the word κτισις, or creation, as expressing the first matter of all things; and ποιημα, things made: the several creatures, both animate, and inanimate, that were educed out of that first matter.

    Or, as the former word doth properly express11, the producing of all things out of nothing; so the latter word, the curious frame and order, wherein all things were made.

    As when the apostle speaks of the new creation, which believers have in Christ; he makes use of both these words of the text (Ephesians 2:10). We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works. To show the excellent frame of this spiritual work, it is called ποιημα, the workmanship of God. And to shew the power of God manifested therein, it is said to be created, κτι𝜁ω.

    Why the Apostle only mentions God’s eternal power and god-head.

    Question: But why doth the apostle only mention God’s eternal power? Are not other attributes of his being to be seen in the works of creation, as his wisdom and goodness, as well as his eternity and power?

    Answer: The apostle mentions the power of God, because of all God’s attributes, it seems to be most eminent and conspicuous in the work of creation. For it was properly an act of power, to make all things out of nothing; though his wisdom was seen in the guiding of his power, and his goodness in making all things good. And the apostle mentions God’s eternity in the text, which is another attribute, when he calls his power eternal: and by this he shews, that as the world had its being in time, so that God who made it, was before it, or else he could not have made it, as the cause must needs be before the effect; and what is before the creation of the world, and every thing that is made, must needs be before all time, (which came in with the creature, as the measure of its duration) and so be eternal.

    But yet though only God’s power and eternity be here mentioned; yet, as a learned expositor observes12, his other attributes are included in the word God-head. As if the apostle should have said, “In the creation of the world are seen God’s power, and God’s eternity: but what need have I to particularly mention any more attributes of his being, when his Godhead itself, which comprehends them all, is manifested therein.”

    How the gentiles are without excuse by the light of nature.

    The last particular to be explained is: How are the Gentiles hereupon said to be without excuse?

    A man may be said to be without excuse, when he hath no apology to make for himself, as the word in the text signifies; and that either with respect to malum culpæ, the fault committed by him: or, malum pœnæ, the punishment inflicted upon him. In both, the Gentiles were without excuse.

    1. As to the malum culpæ, or the evil of sin they were guilty of: for they had such means of knowledge ministered to them, by the light and law of nature, that might have led them to more venerable thoughts of God, and a more honorable worship of him, than was practiced by them: and also to a more righteous and blameless conversation amongst men: so that thereupon they were without excuse.
    2. And then as to the evil of punishment, inflicted for their sin; God would be justified therein, and they left without excuse, when he should proceed to judgment.

    For God does, and will manage his judgments in such righteousness towards all men, with respect to their several capacities and conditions in this world, that every man may be found without excuse that falls under them.

    How far the light and law of nature may lead a man towards his salvation, I shall not here dispute: all that the apostle asserts here concerning the gentiles, is, that they were αναπολογητος, or without excuse thereby.

    And the apostle Paul deals with the gentiles thus particularly, because the ministry of the uncircumcision was more peculiarly committed to him than the other apostles. And he does it rather in this epistle to the Romans, than in any other, because Rome was the chief seat of the gentiles empire in the apostles time; and where idolatry and moral wickedness also did most abound, as it usually does in such great cities; and as their own historians do abundantly declare concerning it.

    Footnotes
    1. Understand it of Gentiles without the Church. ↩︎
    2. Proprietates ejus quae non sunt visae. Arab. ↩︎
    3. Mens soluta et libera, segregata ab omni Concretione. As Cicero speaks of God. Tusc. q. lib. 1. p. 118. ↩︎
    4. 1 Timothy 1:17; 1 Timothy 6:16 ↩︎
    5. Operationes Dei descendunt ad nos, essentia tamen manet inaccessa, the works of God descend to us, yet His essence remains inaccessible. ↩︎
    6. Aquinas ↩︎
    7. The Greek word may be best rendered, Despiciuntur; As seen here below. ↩︎
    8. κτισις κοσμου ↩︎
    9. The beginning of the world is sometimes expressed by καταβολῆς κόσμου (Eph. 1:4), or by ἀρχῆς κτίσεως (Mark 13:19), but not by κτισις κοσμου. ↩︎
    10. Creatio est emanatio universalis entis ex nihilo, creation is the emanation of universal being from nothing . Aquinas ↩︎
    11. A work curiously wrought, is either properly called ποιημα, if we derive it from ποιος, as some do; or else κατ’ ἐξοχήν; and so words and syllables set together in meter, are called ποίημα, or a poem; or the producing of any work, secundum praecepta artis, according either to the precepts of rhetoric, music, architecture, etc. as critics tell us. ↩︎
    12. Estius in Loc. ↩︎

  • Directory for Family Worship

    Directory for Family Worship

    ASSEMBLY AT EDINBURGH (Westminster Assembly), August 24, 1647, Sess. 10.

    ACT for observing the Directions of the GENERAL ASSEMBLY for secret and private Worship, and mutual Edification; and censuring such as neglect Family worship.

    The General Assembly, after mature deliberation, doth approve the following Rules and Directions for cherishing piety, and preventing division and schism; and doth appoint ministers and ruling elders in each congregation to take special care that these Directions be observed and followed; as likewise, that presbyteries and provincial synods enquire and make trial whether the said Directions be duly observed in their bounds; and to reprove or censure (according to the quality of the offence), such as shall be found to be reprovable or censurable therein.  And, to the end that these directions may not be rendered ineffectual and unprofitable among some, through the usual neglect of the very substance of the duty of Family worship, the Assembly doth further require and appoint ministers and ruling elders to make diligent search and enquiry, in the congregations committed to their charge respectively, whether there be among them any family or families which use to neglect this necessary duty; and if any such family be found, the head of the family is to be first admonished privately to amend his fault; and, in case of his continuing therein, he is to be gravely and sadly reproved by the session; after which reproof, if he be found still to neglect Family-worship, let him be, for his obstinacy in such an offence, suspended and debarred from the Lord’s supper, as being justly esteemed unworthy to communicate therein, till he amend.

    DIRECTIONS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, CONCERNING SECRET AND PRIVATE WORSHIP, AND MUTUAL EDIFICATION; FOR CHERISHING PIETY, FOR MAINTAINING UNITY, AND AVOIDING SCHISM AND DIVISION.

    BESIDES the publick worship in congregations, mercifully established in this land in great purity, it is expedient and necessary that secret worship of each person alone, and private worship of families, be pressed and set up; that, with national reformation, the profession and power of godliness, both personal and domestick, be advanced.

    I.

    And first, for secret worship, it is most necessary, that every one apart, and by themselves, be given to prayer and meditation, the unspeakable benefit whereof is best known to them who are most exercised therein; this being the mean whereby, in a special way, communion with God is entertained, and right preparation for all other duties obtained: and therefore it becometh not only pastors, within their several charges, to press persons of all sorts to perform this duty morning and evening, and at other occasions; but also it is incumbent to the head of every family to have a care, that both themselves, and all within their charge, be daily diligent herein.

    II.

    The ordinary duties comprehended under the exercise of piety which should be in families, when they are convened to that effect, are these: First, Prayer and praises performed with a special reference, as well to the publick condition of the kirk of God and this kingdom, as to the present case of the family, and every member thereof. Next, Reading of the scriptures, with catechising in a plain way, that the understandings of the simpler may be the better enabled to profit under the publick ordinances, and they made more capable to understand the scriptures when they are read; together with godly conferences tending to the edification of all the members in the most holy faith: as also, admonition and rebuke, upon just reasons, from those who have authority in the family.

    III.

    As the charge and office of interpreting the holy scriptures is a part of the ministerial calling, which none (however otherwise qualified) should take upon him in any place, but he that is duly called thereunto by God and his kirk; so in every family where there is any that can read, the holy scriptures should be read ordinarily to the family; and it is commendable, that thereafter they confer, and by way of conference make some good use of what hath been read and heard. As, for example, if any sin be reproved in the word read, use may be made thereof to make all the family circumspect and watchful against the same; or if any judgment be threatened, or mentioned to have been inflicted, in that portion of scripture which is read, use may be made to make all the family fear lest the same or a worse judgment befall them, unless they beware of the sin that procured it: and, finally, if any duty be required, or comfort held forth in a promise, use may be made to stir up themselves to employ Christ for strength to enable them for doing the commanded duty, and to apply the offered comfort. In all which the master of the family is to have the chief hand; and any member of the family may propone a question or doubt for resolution.

    IV.

    The head of the family is to take care that none of the family withdraw himself from any part of family-worship: and, seeing the ordinary performance of all the parts of family-worship belongeth properly to the head of the family, the minister is to stir up such as are lazy, and train up such as are weak, to a fitness to these exercises; it being always free to persons of quality to entertain one approved by the presbytery for performing family-exercise. And in other families, where the head of the family is unfit, that another, constantly residing in the family, approved by the minister and session, may be employed in that service, wherein the minister and session are to be countable to the presbytery. And if a minister, by divine Providence, be brought to any family, it is requisite that at no time he convene a part of the family for worship, secluding the rest, except in singular cases especially concerning these parties, which (in Christian prudence) need not, or ought not, to be imparted to others.

    V.

    Let no idler, who hath no particular calling, or vagrant person under pretence of a calling, be suffered to perform worship in families, to or for the same; seeing persons tainted with errors, or aiming at division, may be ready (after that manner) to creep into houses, and lead captive silly and unstable souls.

    VI.

    At family-worship, a special care is to be had that each family keep by themselves; neither requiring, inviting, nor admitting persons from divers families, unless it be those who are lodged with them, or at meals, or otherwise with them upon some lawful occasion.

    VII.

    Whatsoever have been the effects and fruits of meetings of persons of divers families in the times of corruption or trouble, (in which cases many things are commendable, which otherwise are not tolerable,) yet, when God hath blessed us with peace and purity of the gospel, such meetings of persons of divers families (except in cases mentioned in these Directions) are to be disapproved, as tending to the hinderance of the religious exercise of each family by itself, to the prejudice of the publick ministry, to the rending of the families of particular congregations, and (in progress of time) of the whole kirk. Besides many offences which may come thereby, to the hardening of the hearts of carnal men, and grief of the godly.

    VIII.

    On the Lord’s day, after every one of the family apart, and the whole family together, have sought the Lord (in whose hands the preparation of men’s hearts are) to fit them for the publick worship, and to bless to them the publick ordinances, the master of the family ought to take care that all within his charge repair to the publick worship, that he and they may join with the rest of the congregation: and the publick worship being finished, after prayer, he should take an account what they have heard; and thereafter, to spend the rest of the time which they may spare in catechising, and in spiritual conferences upon the word of God: or else (going apart) they ought to apply themselves to reading, meditation, and secret prayer, that they may confirm and increase their communion with God: that so the profit which they found in the publick ordinances may be cherished and promoved, and they more edified unto eternal life.

    IX.

    So many as can conceive prayer, ought to make use of that gift of God; albeit those who are rude and weaker may begin at a set form of prayer, but so as they be not sluggish in stirring up in themselves (according to their daily necessities) the spirit of prayer, which is given to all the children of God in some measure: to which effect, they ought to be more fervent and frequent in secret prayer to God, for enabling of their hearts to conceive, and their tongues to express, convenient desires to God for their family. And, in the meantime, for their greater encouragement, let these materials of prayer be meditated upon, and made use of, as followeth.

    “Let them confess to God how unworthy they are to come in his presence, and how unfit to worship his Majesty; and therefore earnestly ask of God the spirit of prayer.

    “They are to confess their sins, and the sins of the family; accusing, judging, and condemning themselves for them, till they bring their souls to some measure of true humiliation.

    “They are to pour out their souls to God, in the name of Christ, by the Spirit, for forgiveness of sins; for grace to repent, to believe, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly; and that they may serve God with joy and delight, walking before him.

    “They are to give thanks to God for his many mercies to his people, and to themselves, and especially for his love in Christ, and for the light of the gospel.

    “They are to pray for such particular benefits, spiritual and temporal, as they stand in need of for the time, (whether it be morning or evening,) as anent health or sickness, prosperity or adversity.

    “They ought to pray for the kirk of Christ in general, for all the reformed kirks, and for this kirk in particular, and for all that suffer for the name of Christ; for all our superiors, the king’s majesty, the queen, and their children; for the magistrates, ministers, and whole body of the congregation whereof they are members, as well for their neighbours absent in their lawful affairs, as for those that are at home.

    “The prayer may be closed with an earnest desire that God may be glorified in the coming of the kingdom of his Son, and in doing of his will, and with assurance that themselves are accepted, and what they have asked according to his will shall be done.”

    X.

    These exercises ought to be performed in great sincerity, without delay, laying aside all exercises of worldly business or hinderances, not withstanding the mockings of atheists and profane men; in respect of the great mercies of God to this land, and of his severe corrections wherewith lately he hath exercised us. And, to this effect, persons of eminency (and all elders of the kirk) not only ought to stir up themselves and families to diligence herein, but also to concur effectually, that in all other families, where they have power and charge, the said exercises be conscionably performed.

    XI.

    Besides the ordinary duties in families, which are above mentioned, extraordinary duties, both of humiliation and thanksgiving, are to be carefully performed in families, when the Lord, by extraordinary occasions, (private or publick,) calleth for them.

    XII.

    Seeing the word of God requireth that we should consider one another, to provoke unto love and good works; therefore, at all times, and specially in this time, wherein profanity abounds, and mockers, walking after their own lusts, think it strange that others run not with them to the same excess of riot; every member of this kirk ought to stir up themselves, and one another, to the duties of mutual edification, by instruction, admonition, rebuke; exhorting one another to manifest the grace of God in denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, and in living godly, soberly and righteously in this present world; by comforting the feeble-minded, and praying with or for one another. Which duties respectively are to be performed upon special occasions offered by Divine Providence; as, namely, when under any calamity, cross, or great difficulty, counsel or comfort is sought; or when an offender is to be reclaimed by private admonition, and if that be not effectual, by joining one or two more in the admonition, according to the rule of Christ, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

    XIII.

    And, because it is not given to every one to speak a word in season to a wearied or distressed conscience, it is expedient, that a person (in that case,) finding no ease, after the use of all ordinary means, private and publick, have their address to their own pastor, or some experienced Christian: but if the person troubled in conscience be of that condition, or of that sex, that discretion, modesty, or fear of scandal, requireth a godly, grave, and secret friend to be present with them in their said address, it is expedient that such a friend be present.

    XIV.

    When persons of divers families are brought together by Divine Providence, being abroad upon their particular vocations, or any necessary occasions; as they would have the Lord their God with them whithersoever they go, they ought to walk with God, and not neglect the duties of prayer and thanksgiving, but take care that the same be performed by such as the company shall judge fittest. And that they likewise take heed that no corrupt communication proceed out of their mouths, but that which is good, to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace to the hearers.

    The drift and scope of all these Directions is no other, but that, upon the one part, the power and practice of godliness, amongst all the ministers and members of this kirk, according to their several places and vocations, may be cherished and advanced, and all impiety and mocking of religious exercises suppressed: and, upon the other part, that, under the name and pretext of religious exercises, no such meetings or practices be allowed, as are apt to breed error, scandal, schism, contempt, or misregard of the publick ordinances and ministers, or neglect of the duties of particular callings, or such other evils as are the works, not of the Spirit, but of the flesh, and are contrary to truth and peace.

  • The Raising of Lazarus

    The Raising of Lazarus

    B.B. Warfield, The Emotional Life of our Lord, Chapter II

    When Jesus saw Mary weeping — or rather “wailing,” for the term is a strong one and implies the vocal expression of the grief — and the Jews which accompanied her also “wailing,” we are told, as our English version puts it, that “he groaned in the spirit and was troubled”; and again, when some of the Jews, remarking on his own manifestation of grief in tears, expressed their wonder that he who had opened the eyes of the blind man could not have preserved Lazarus from death, we are told that Jesus “again groaned in himself.” The natural suggestion of the word “groan” is, however, that of pain or sorrow, not disapprobation; and this rendering of the term in question is therefore misleading. It is better rendered in the only remaining passage in which it occurs in the New Testament, Mk. xiv. 5, by “murmured,” though this is much too weak a word to reproduce its implications. In that passage it is brought into close connection with a kindred term which determines its meaning. We read: “But there were some that had indignation among themselves . . . and they murmured against her.” Their feeling of irritated displeasure expressed itself in an outburst of temper. The margin of our Revised Version at John 11:33, 38, therefore, very properly proposes that we should for “groaned” in these passages, substitute “moved with indignation,” although that phrase too is scarcely strong enough. What John tells us, in point of fact, is that Jesus approached the grave of Lazarus, in a state, not of uncontrollable grief, but of irrepressible anger. He did respond to the spectacle of human sorrow abandoning itself to its unrestrained expression, with quiet, sympathetic tears: “Jesus wept” (John 11:36). But the emotion which tore his breast and clamored for utterance was just rage. The expression even of this rage, however, was strongly curbed. The term which John employs to describe it is, as we have seen, a definitely external term. “He raged.” But John modifies its external sense by annexed qualifications: “He raged in spirit,” “raging in himself.” He thus interiorizes the term and gives us to understand that the ebullition of Jesus’ anger expended itself within him. Not that there was no manifestation of it: it must have been observable to be observed and recorded; it formed a marked feature of the occurrence as seen and heard. But John gives us to understand that the external expression of our Lord’s fury was markedly restrained: its manifestation fell far short of its real intensity. He even traces for us the movements of his inward struggle: “Jesus, therefore, when he saw her wailing, and the Jews that had come with her wailing, was enraged in spirit and troubled himself’ . . . and wept. His inwardly restrained fury produced a profound agitation of his whole being, one of the manifestations of which was tears.

    Why did the sight of the wailing of Mary and her companions enrage Jesus? Certainly not because of the extreme violence of its expression; and even more certainly not because it argued unbelief — unwillingness to submit to God’s providential ordering or distrust of Jesus’ power to save. He himself wept, if with less violence yet in true sympathy. with the grief of which he was witness. The intensity of his exasperation, moreover, would be disproportionate to such a cause; and the importance attached to it in the account bids us seek its ground in something less incidental to the main drift of the narrative. It is mentioned twice, and is obviously emphasized as an indispensable element in the development of the story, on which, in its due place and degree, the lesson of the incident hangs. The spectacle of the distress of Mary and her companions enraged Jesus because it brought poignantly home to his consciousness the evil of death, its unnaturalness, its “violent tyranny” as Calvin (John 11:38) phrases it. In Mary’s grief, he “contemplates” — still to adopt Calvin’s words (John 11:33), — “the general misery of the whole human race” and burns with rage against the oppressor of men. Inextinguishable fury seizes upon him; his whole being is discomposed and perturbed; and his heart, if not his lips, cries out, —

    “For the innumerable dead
    Is my soul disquieted.”

    It is death that is the object of his wrath, and behind death him who has the power of death, and whom he has come into the world to destroy. Tears of sympathy may fill his eyes, but this is incidental. His soul is held by rage: and he advances to the tomb, in Calvin’s words again, “as a champion who prepares for conflict.” The raising of Lazarus thus becomes, not an isolated marvel, but — as indeed it is presented throughout the whole narrative (John 11:24-26) — a decisive instance and open symbol of Jesus’ conquest of death and hell. What John does for us in this particular statement is to uncover to us the heart of Jesus, as he wins for us our salvation. Not in cold unconcern, but in flaming wrath against the foe, Jesus smites in our behalf. He has not only saved us from the evils which oppress us; he has felt for and with us in our oppression, and under the impulse of these feelings has wrought out our redemption.

  • The Family: An Institute of Instruction

    The Family: An Institute of Instruction

    John L. Girardeau

    Family Religion (Sermon)

    Let us, first, contemplate the family as an Institute of Instruction.

    It is not necessary to spend time in discussing the question of the natural obligation resting upon parents to teach their children. Whether they do or do not address themselves formally and methodically to the discharge of this parental function they are, from the nature of the case, teachers, and teachers exerting a prodigious influence upon their children. The school is one of nature’s construction, and not a product of conventional arrangement. The pupils are born into it, have no vacations, and never leave it until they arrive at an age when they are prepared to become teachers in a similar school with similar students. The near and tender relations involved, the almost god-like authority of the parent, the assimilating disposition of the child causing it with sponge-like facility to absorb the influence of the daily words, and acts and life of the father and mother, —all these considerations show that the family is necessarily a potent institute of instruction. This is obvious. But the duty resting upon the parent in a stricter and more formal sense to teach his children will also be generally conceded. As, however, in consequence of our weakness and imperfection we are liable to the neglect of even admitted duties, let us look at some of the reasons which bind us to the conscientious performance of this obligation.

    The Scriptures are not silent in regard to this primal duty of religion. There can be no doubt that the first family which existed on earth was a school of religious indoctrination. The narrative in Genesis confirms the antecedent probabilities in the case. The pious Abel conformed his practice to the evangelical instructions of his parents when he offered in his worship an animal as significant of his faith in the Lamb of God, who should, in accordance with the purpose of redemption, render himself a propitiatory sacrifice for sin; and his wicked brother sinned against the gospel delivered to him by the same instructions, when he furnished the first and leading instance of will-worship in his infidel presentation of a bloodless offering. Through the Patriarchal dispensation believing parents handed down to their children, generation by generation, the first glorious promise of redemption; and even when the professed people of God had lapsed into an almost universal apostasy from the truth, there remained one family in which the torch was still kept burning that was kindled at the altar of Adam and Eve. The same sacred light shed its rays in the ark when shut in by God’s hand, and when borne upward by the swelling waters of a mighty deluge, with the corpses of a drowned world floating around it and heaved up against its sides. That family school, thus miraculously preserved, became the distributing centre of gospel truth to a new world, alas, so soon by the force of corruption to repeat the crime of its predecessor, and in the face of its doom to plunge into an idolatrous apostasy from God ! Yet here and there in that desert of defection the truth of the gospel maintained its supremacy in some family seminary. The venerable patriarch of Uz taught his children the scheme of salvation in which all his personal hopes were grounded. Abraham, when called of God to be the founder of the church under new sanctions, became an exemplar of fidelity in the duty of parental instruction. By express and solemn statute, the Mosaic code constituted every family in Israel a school of religious training. “Only take heed to thyself and keep thy soul diligently lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them, thy sons and thy sons’ sons.” “And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.” The illustrious captain who led the host of Israel across Jordan into the promised land, said in his last, affecting address to his countrymen : “Choose you this day whom we will serve. . . As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

    The royal Psalmist declared that he would “walk within his house with a perfect heart,” implying that he would in his family both inculcate by precept and exemplify in his conduct the principles of the religion he professed. His son, the wisest of men, who well knew, from his own experience, the benefits of family tuition and the disastrous effects of its neglect, furnishes the salutary admonition : “Train up a child in the way he should go,” and appends the promise that “when he is old he will not depart from it;” intimating that the habits engendered in the young by faithful parental instruction may ordinarily be expected to bear corresponding fruits in maturer life. The same great man, speaking by the Holy Ghost, also charmingly counsels the young: “My son, keep thy father’s commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother: bind them continually upon thine heart, and tie them about thy neck. When thou goest it shall lead thee; when thou sleepest it shall keep thee; and when thou awakest it shall talk with thee. For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life.” The evangelic prophet records “the writing of Hezekiah, king of Judah, when he had been sick, and was recovered of his sickness,” in which the restored monarch says: “The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day; the father to the children shall make known thy truth,” as though he esteemed it one of the chief offices for which his life was prolonged to impress upon his children the ways of the Lord. It is worthy of notice that the last of the prophets, in the very closing words of the Old Testament Scriptures emphasizes the discharge or neglect of parental and filial obligations and the consent or disagreement of parents and children in supporting the true religion, as conditioning God’s blessing or His curse: “Behold, I will send you Elijah, the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: and he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.” The practice of the pious in training their children in the knowledge of the Scriptures, after the Old Testament canon was completed, is evinced by the case of Timothy, to whom Paul says : “And that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus;” and he had previously intimated who Timothy’s instructors were when he alluded to the unfeigned faith which dwelt in his grandmother Lois, and his mother Eunice. The Spirit of New Testament teachings on this subject is expressed in Paul’s exhortation to parents to “bring up” their children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord”; that is, to give them a Christian education —to train them in the school and for the service of Christ, their Savior and Lord.

    Having taken this hasty survey of Scripture teachings on this subject, let us also look at some of the considerations which exhibit the inexpressible importance of the family as a school, and the gigantic responsibilities of parents as its divinely appointed preceptors.

    The most superficial attention to the matter must impress upon us the fact that the family school exerts an incalculable influence, because it is the very first in which human beings are trained for time and eternity. From the nature of the case, it takes chronological precedence of all others, secular or ecclesiastical. It is one into which the pupils enter at birth. Their first sense-perceptions are connected with the faces and the voices of their mothers and their fathers. From them they acquire, by absorption, their vernacular tongue With all the ideas which it symbolizes. Their first type of thinking is assimilated involuntarily from that of their parents. They know them before they know God, and derive their first knowledge of God Himself from them. They are in a school in which their teachers are their parents. Their parents are to them the first interpreters alike of nature and the Bible. The conditions of instruction are the most favorable that can be conceived. On the one hand, there is the forming and impressible state of childhood, its boundless credulity as yet unchecked by the experience of untruth and deception, its readiness to accept the testimony of all with whom it comes in contact ; and on the other, the undisputed authority and influence of its parental instructors, founded in admittedly superior will and wielded in tenderness and love. No wonder it has passed into a proverb, that our earliest impressions are the strongest. Like the bottom inscriptions upon some old parchments, however overlaid and crossed, they remain clear when the later are obscured, or abide when they are obliterated. As the experienced Christian turns in the mysterious process of death to the happy time when first he knew the Lord, so it is an affecting natural fact that on the dying bed men reproduce, in imagination, the scenes of early life. Even the abandoned profligate who has gone through gulfs of impurity, and whose mind and conscience are defiled, reverts at last to the sweet associations of his boyhood’s home, and “babbles o’ green fields” over which he once roamed an uncontaminated child. Who can measure the influence of that first school in which we receive our earliest and profoundest impressions? A fragment of Scripture, a bit of a hymn, a scrap of a prayer, taught by a mother’s lips to the child lying in her lap or bowing at her knee, sometimes comes up to the consciousness of the despairing sinner in life’s last struggles, and leads to the clutch of faith upon the promise of salvation through the merits of Christ. And, on the contrary, the remembrance of wicked words and infidel expressions which fell from a parent’s lips upon the ready ear of the child, may arise into the latest consciousness of life to deepen unbelief and thicken the gloom of death.

    This leads to the further remark, that the school of childhood is not only a source of enduring impressions, but a nursery of fundamental and regulative ideas. Is not this abundantly attested by facts? The child is almost sure, unless through the operation of some exceptional and revolutionary force, to adopt and maintain the doctrines, views and opinions of its parents. They are absorbed without difficulty and, almost as a matter of course, are incorporated into his intellectual being, and stamp the complexion of his future thinking. The child of the Pagan naturally becomes a Pagan; the child of a Mohammedan, a believer in the Koran. He who is so unfortunate as to be born of an Atheist naturally acts upon the testimony of his earthly father that he has no heavenly. John Stuart Mill, having been bred in a family school in which Atheism was taught, naturally became an Atheist. One who is taught by nominally Christian parents absorbs, in accordance with the same law, nominally Christian views; and it is a matter of the commonest observation that the sects and denominations into which nominal Christianity is divided, in the main perpetuate their existence by virtue of birth and education, rather than by the examination of evidence and judgment rendered upon it. It is true —and God be praised that it is ! —that the almighty grace of the ever-blessed Spirit is not tied to the laws of a merely natural development, but sovereignly operates not only to the reversal of false regulative ideas and views which are derived from education, but to the destruction of the fundamental principle of inherent sin itself, from which all religious errors and all actual transgressions of the divine law proceed. It is left on record for our instruction that Saul, the persecuting inquisitor, was thus miraculously converted; and without this doctrine delivered to us clearly in God’s word, the whole cause of foreign missions would be a wild vagary. But while this is true, and must be insisted on, it must also be admitted that ordinarily the operations of God’s saving grace are concurrent with the line of family descent and family culture. The promise of salvation by Jesus Christ is indeed unto all that are afar off, even to as many as the Lord our God shall call, but it is chiefly and emphatically to those who profess the true religion and to their children.

    It must also be remarked, by way of qualification, that the correct views and principles instilled by parental instruction into their children cannot be expected of themselves to preserve them in future life from the addition of erroneous opinions or the formation of evil characters. That result might fairly be looked for if their development were unimpeded by antagonistic forces. But that development is counteracted and hindered by the all-conditioning law of inherent depravity, which can only be overcome by supernatural grace. Still, with all the limitations which justice requires to be imposed upon it, the position in the main is unquestionably true, that the doctrines, ideas and opinions which the parent inserts into the mind of the child are fundamental and regulative in their influence. Beyond doubt, they exercise a powerful influence upon the future career of the child. If right, they act as barriers in the way of the development of wickedness both in speculation and in practice; and they become the moulds to which a true religious system easily adjusts itself, the forms in which a true religious life finds its legitimate expression. If wrong, they fall in with the fatal tendency to sin, and hasten it to its consummation in open heresy or immorality.

    This becomes still more evident when we consider the implicit faith of the child in the authority of the parent as a teacher. Not yet arrived at that period of mental growth when he becomes individually responsible for his beliefs and opinions in consequence of his ability to investigate evidence and his obligation to follow it, he looks up to his parent as being to him the vicar and representative of God. He has not the right to question the parent’s authority. To him his father is infallible. There is no appeal possible to any higher human authority, for there is to him no higher human authority. If the father should teach his young child that the Bible does not deliver the doctrine of the deity of Christ, or of an expiatory atonement, or of the supernatural grace of the Holy Spirit, or of the eternal punishment of the wicked, how, in his immature condition, could the child possibly know the incorrectness of these instructions? Would they not be the Bible’s teachings to him? Is not his father the unerring expounder of truth to him? No scholars are so ready to imbibe the views of teachers as are the young members of the family school those of their parents. They listen to them as they would to God.

    This implicit faith is moreover enhanced immensely by the love and veneration which the youthful learner cherishes for his parent. And as he grows there naturally springs up a partisan feeling of prodigious power which leads him to maintain and vindicate the ideas and opinions received from so dear and so venerable a source. The tendency, even when started by conviction, to depart from them is held in check by the almost irresistible feeling that injustice would be done to his parents and duty to them would be infringed by a breach with their instructions; a sentiment which is heightened if they be dead, and can no more speak for themselves. Their graves are seals of their instructions, and the monuments above them are protests against their abandonment. He who in mature life embraces truth in opposition to error taught by a parent’s lips, pays as striking a tribute as can well be furnished on earth to the majestic authority of evidence, and the imperious force of conviction. It will readily be conceded by us who profess to be Christians, that our little children are bound by filial dependence and obligation to accept the Bible at our hands, and to receive those interpretations of its meaning which we put upon it. But if we take a broad view of the subject, we must also allow that the general rule holds in regard to the religious instruction of all children by their parents. The child of the Mohammedan, in his tender and unthinking years, is bound to comply with the authority of his father which delivers to him the Koran as his directory of faith and duty. The rule holds in the various special applications of which it is capable. The mere child has no right to affirm independence of his father’s instructions. It may be questioned whether he has the right to adopt opinions from any human quarter which contradict those of his parents. Indeed, from the nature of the case, it is difficult to see how he could. The conditions do not exist for an intelligent comparison of opinions and tenets. He is the helpless receiver of his father’s faith. His religion is determined by the nod of his father’s head. If this be true, it is seen that the responsibility of the parental teacher is nothing less than tremendous. His magisterial authority may, no doubt often does, project his child into a path of development, the logical result of which is hell. Oh, how urgent is the necessity for the parent to settle the views which he impresses upon the plastic mind of his child upon candid and patient examination of the truth, with humble dependence upon God and earnest supplication for His guidance ! He cannot, if wrong, plead the authority of his own parents. That plea will vanish into smoke at the touch of the last fire. The religious beliefs of the adult man are not evolved, like the instincts of animals, by a law of imminent necessity operating along the line of parental propagation. A point is inevitably reached in the progress of every human individual when his own personal responsibility emerges for the kind of religion which he adopts.

    But, when that point has been reached, the question presses, What value ought to be attached to the religious ideas which have been derived from parental instruction? I venture to answer that they ought not to be held as settled and ultimate conclusions in accordance with which one’s personal faith and practice must be determined. Nor, on the other hand, ought they to be treated as possessed of no value. They are venerable presumptions which must, on solid grounds of evidence, be rebutted before they can be legitimately discarded. They are tentative, working hypotheses which are to be tested by comparison with facts, and sustained or rejected in view of the whole evidence which is accessible to the inquirer after truth. The mind ought to hold the position of neutrality, of indifference —not to the truth, for that, as the very end of the inquiry, is of supreme consequence —but of indifference as to what shall prove to be the truth amidst the rival claims of conflicting opinions after an unprejudiced and sober, a painstaking and prayerful examination. Even when these conditions are complied with —as complied with they certainly ought to be the inquirer starts out with the weight of presumption vastly preponderating in favor of opinions sanctioned and, as it were, consecrated by parental authority and by filial obedience and love. Here again we cannot fail to be struck by the responsibility of the parent. But it is a fact that in the great majority of instances no guilt. such investigation is instituted. The man is content with the views which as a child he received from the lips of his father and mother, lips, perhaps, mute in the grave, and he goes on treading the path beaten by the generations which preceded him. Like herds of cattle following other herds of cattle, the mass of men tramp on until the light of eternity blazes upon them and reveals, when too late, their suicidal folly and In this view of the subject no language can exaggerate the awful accountability resting upon parents for the instruction they communicate to their children.

    In connection with this strain of remark we cannot but be impressed by the thought that in the family school, more by far than in any other, the force is peculiarly felt of teaching by example. Allusion is not here made to the concurrence of example with didactic precept, though that is worthy of serious reflection, but to the powerful teaching of example itself. The child is imitative, and very naturally copies the example of the parent. It is to this law Paul adverts when he exhorts Christians to be “imitators of God as dear children.” The life of his parents is a daily study to the child. It is ever before him. The words spoken, the acts done by the father and the mother in the unrestrained freedom of the family circle are like a steady rain falling, not upon the rock, but upon the thirsty earth. They are drunk in and appropriated by the imitative and assimilating powers of the child. This aspect of the subject might be copiously illustrated, but time would fail, and it is so plain to the barest observation as to render expansion almost needless.

    I cannot dismiss this special topic without calling attention to the enormous diffusive and traditional influence of the family as an institute of instruction. Each family tends to diffuse its influence by ramifying its connections through intermarriage, until a congeries of circles is formed intersecting one another and widening out, who can calculate whither? The ideas and doctrines asserted in one family may in this way receive a dissemination which will reach to the ends of the earth.

    The traditional power of the family is equally incalculable. The sacrifice offered by Noah in the bosom of his family on Mount Ararat has by this power impressed itself upon the nations, and continues to affect their religious views and rites to the present hour. The usages of Abraham’s family are observed by the Jews to this day. The ideas and doctrines once taught in the family school are handed down from father to son to distant generations. Those, my brethren, which we deliver to our families will project themselves into the future, and will affect the immortal destinies of souls. The stream of traditional influence, running through successive family lines, will not cease until it ripples against the judgment throne; nor will it be arrested there, but rolling around it, it will flow on forever, either mingling with the waters of the river of life proceeding from the blest seat of God and the Lamb or with the Styx and the Acheron of Hell.

    Who was John Girardeau?

    Who Was John Lafayette Girardeau? (Ligonier)

  • The Building of Eve & Why the Rib?

    The Building of Eve & Why the Rib?

    Henry Smith

    A Preparative for Marriage PP. 8-13

    Before God made the woman (Genesis 2:21), it is said, that he cast the man into a sleep, and in his sleep he took a rib out of his side, and as he made the man of earth, so he made the woman of bone, while Adam was a sleep. This teaches us two things: as the first Adam was a figure of the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45), so the first Adam’s sleep was a figure of the second Adam’s sleep, and the first Adam’s spouse was a figure of the second Adam’s spouse. That is, as in the sleep of Adam, Eve was borne; so in the sleep of Christ, the Church was borne: as a bone came out of the first Adam’s side, so blood came out of the second Adam’s side. As Adam’s spouse received life in his sleep; so Christ’s spouse received life in his sleep: that is, the death of Christ is the life of the Church; for the Apostle calls Death a sleep, but Christ which died is called Life, showing that in his death we live (Ephesians 5:14; John 14:6). Secondly, this sleep which the man was cast into, while his wife was created, teaches us that our affections, our lusts, and our concupiscences, should sleep while we go about this action. As the man slept while his wife was making, so our flesh should sleep while our wife is choosing, least as the love of Venison won Isaak to bless one for another (Genesis 27:3), so the love of gentry, or riches, or beauty make us take one for another.

    To honor marriage more yet, or rather to teach the married how to honor one another, it is said that the wife was made of the husband’s rib (Genesis 2:22; Ephesians 5:23): not of his head, for Paul calls the husband the wife’s head: nor of the foot for he must not set her at his foot: the servant is appointed to serve, and the wife to help. If she must not match with the head, nor stoop at the foot, where shall he set her then? He must set her at his heart, and therefore she which should lie in his bosom, was made in his bosom, and should be as close to him as his rib of which she was fashioned. Lastly, in all nations the day of marriage was reputed the most joyful day in all their life, and is reputed still of all, as though the Sun of happiness began that day to shine upon us, when a good wife is brought unto us. Therefore one saith, that marriage means ‘merry-age’, because a playfellow is come to make our age merry.

    Solomon considering all these excellencies, as though we were more indebted to God for this than other temporal gifts, says, “House and riches are the inheritance of the fathers: but a prudent wife comes of the Lord” (Proverbs 14:14). House and riches are given of God, and all things else, yet he says, house and riches are given of parents, but a good wife is given of God: as though a good wife were such a gift, as we should account from God alone, and accept as if he should send us a present from heaven, with this name written upon it, the gift of God.

    Beasts are ordained for food, and clothes for warmth, and flowers for pleasure, but the wife is ordained for man, like little Zoar, a City of refuge to flee to in all his troubles (Genesis 29:20), and there is no peace comparable unto her, but the peace of conscience.

  • Saul and the Witches at Leo-Cedarville

    Saul and the Witches at Leo-Cedarville

    Witches in Fort Wayne?

    A group in Fort Wayne has recently decided they want to use one of our public parks for a witchcraft demonstration. They are calling this coven the Witchy Women in Leo. They advertise the event as a new-age therapy session focused on “grounding, growing and gathering.” Should this be allowed in our nation’s public spaces? Is there any safe amount of witchcraft around the Halloween season? Can there be anything wrong with some innocent fall fun like this? They say they’ll be reconnecting themselves to nature and other likeminded women, but could they be connecting, instead, with something far more sinister?

    The "Witchy Women in Leo"

    Define Our Terms

    What is Witchcraft? Witchcraft is the joining of society, or making a covenant with Satan and his demons in order to perform some work. There are those that explicitly (purposefully) bind themselves with Satan and his demons, and others who pretend or who don’t know that they have thus bound themselves. But in either case, Scripture is clear that Satan and his demons are joined to the practitioners of both styles. This is why so often, in the Authorized Version, these diviners or witches are associated with “familiar spirits” (Acts 16:16-18). Many of them, arguably like the witch of Endor (1 Samuel 28) or Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24) don’t know that they are consulting spirits/demons. Many of them like that witch Saul consulted may just think it’s a way to defraud and con. Were they, like her, to be confronted with the true nature of their practice, like her, they might cry out in alarm. So much for an innocent, nature-friendly non-supernatural Wicca. You can read more about implicit/unintentional leagues with Satan/devils here in the words of William Perkins: https://purelypresbyterian.com/2023/04/10/of-explicit-implicit-satanic-covenanting-and-good-bad-witches/

    This alone, the definition of witchcraft, should be enough to convince you, but to be thorough, let’s set down the case that it is expressly forbidden by scripture in a way that the magistrate must also forbid it. The nation of Israel is no more as it was under Moses, David, or Solomon. Since Christ came and fulfilled the law, its civil/judicial laws have been abolished, no longer binding Christians and nations in the same way they did in Old Testament Israel. However, the moral principle which stands behind the law, or general equity, is forever binding on Christians and nations alike.

    For instance, the specific laws about different types of murder/manslaughter, making restitution for the goring of someone by your beast, etc. We’re no longer bound to put the exact same laws into our nations. But we are to preserve the moral principle behind the murder, manslaughter, theft and other laws in the same way. We’re required to still have laws forbidding murder and punishing it with appropriate severity, even if we’re not using the exact same laws set out in Leviticus. The classic example is the law from Deuteronomy 22:8 regarding building a parapet (fence) around the roof of your house. We don’t have flat roofs where people congregate anymore, so it would be silly to needlessly build a parapet around the rim of the roof of a colonial house for instance. However, the moral principle behind that law was that you must set up your property in such a way that human life is protected. So, today, if you have a pool, you might put a fence around that. Or you may be required to put railings on stairs or balconies, etc. We can see that it is good and right for nations to carry over the moral principles behind the civil laws even today. You can read more about the idea of general equity as it applies to the judicial laws of Israel here: https://purelypresbyterian.com/2015/08/20/the-judicial-law-general-equity-vs-particular-equity/.

    Witchcraft, though, is a different case from the parapet. There was no particular circumstance in Israel leading to the prohibition of witchcraft. Rather, it was forbidden because it is itself a violation of the moral law of God. There are several ways to prove this. For one, witchcraft is forbidden in both testaments–Old and New. In Exodus 22:18, we have the command, “suffer not a witch to live.” This tells us that witchcraft is of the most serious sins, even deserving the death penalty. Israel was to completely cleanse their land of all witches (both sexes) because it was such a spiritually and socially destructive evil. But Galatians 5:19-21 also reaffirms that this is just as serious a sin even in our New Testament kingdom under Christ: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” This is the equivalent in the New Testament as the death penalty. It is spiritual death. Therefore, witchcraft was not just a violation of the civil code in Israel, it is a violation of the moral law of God. There are many, many more verses condemning witchcraft of all varieties, here is a small sampling: Leviticus 19:31, 20:6; Deuteronomy 18:10-12, 14; 1 Samuel 15:23, 28:7-25.

    What is the moral principle behind the law? The nature of witchcraft is to get something without going through God’s appointed means, whether you’re looking for your future or the will of God, or trying to charm or hex someone. In this way it is a violation of the third commandment, which requires of us that, “the name of God, his titles, attributes, ordinances, the word, sacraments, prayer, oaths, vows, lots, his works, and whatsoever else there is whereby he makes himself known, be holily and reverently used in thought, meditation, word, and writing”. The prohibitions of the command, then, include the following:

    All sinful cursings, oaths, vows, and lots… murmuring and quarreling at, curious prying into, and misapplying of God’s decrees and providences; misinterpreting, misapplying, or any way perverting the Word, or any part of it, to profane jests, curious or unprofitable questions, vain janglings, or the maintaining of false doctrines; abusing it, the creatures, or any thing contained under the name of God, to charms, or sinful lusts and practices…

    If you lookup the text of the catechism elsewhere, you’ll see a multitude of scripture references brought in to back this up. It would be worth your time to examine these

    Statecraft and Witchcraft

    Paul, in Romans 13:4, sums up the role of civil rulers as follows: “[they] are the minister of God to thee for good” and “a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” The civil rulers are, very simply, to punish evil and reward good. How are good and evil defined? Only by God’s standard which is set down in God’s word. In Proverbs 8, among many other beautiful roles of the Wisdom which comes from God (many commentators see this Wisdom as Christ himself) is this: “By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earth.” It is very clear from just these two passages alone, that the only standard by which rulers are to bind the consciences of men is the perfect moral standard of God.

    Therefore, if the prohibition of witchcraft is part of that general equity, the abiding, never-changing moral standard God has revealed in his word; and if it is true that it is the role of the magistrate to uphold that law—punishing those that violate it and rewarding those who keep it. Then it must be the role of the magistrate to punish all those who make a public display of their witchcraft.

    The United States is a representative republic. Civil rulers are to govern according to the will of the people, by the people, for the good of the people. The government is to be held accountable to the will of the people. If the people of Fort Wayne, for instance, oppose the practice of witchcraft in their public spaces, the civil rulers must take this into account and govern accordingly, shutting down and punishing all public displays of witchcraft. If Christians don’t make their voice heard, how can the civil rulers operate according to that principle? Our rulers are to govern by the people. Civil rulers in their private capacity as Christians, must carry their convictions into their public roles. Especially given that in this case, witchcraft should be opposed at the civil level. If you are a civil ruler who is a Christian, you have the obligation to see to it that, as far as your sphere of influence extends, this practice is stopped and penalized. Be a terror to evil. The rulers in America are to rule for the good of the people. If there are eternal consequences—and temporal judgements—for tolerating gross civil sins like widespread abortion or the practice of witchcraft in public spaces, you are not protecting those within your sphere of influence by tolerating these.

    Interestingly, in 1 Samuel 28 (Saul with the witch at Endor), Saul makes an oath as a civil ruler not to penalize the witch for her actions. As a ruler, it was his responsibility to root her out, to not suffer her to live, but instead of sentencing her to justice in the name of the Lord, Saul took the name of the Lord in vain as he swore by Jehovah not to punish her. Magistrates today, by using their office to create safe space and toleration for cults, devil-worship, and false religion, are similarly taking his name in vain. This goes beyond just this witch meeting in Leo, Indiana. The President of the United States just recently lit a Diwali candle. We should expect and demand more from those who rule over us in God’s name.

    Application

    I end with several ideas for “[bringing] forth therefore fruits meet for repentance” (Matthew 3:8). Go out and do something about this. We may not be able to stamp out all irreligion and the monuments of idolatry, but we can start with what’s in front of us. If you have been convicted that you’ve similarly broken the third commandment, or that you shouldn’t practice whatever form of witchcraft you have in the past, repent. You can find forgiveness for the sin of witchcraft in Christ.

    Halloween comes around every year at the same time, and it is a timely season to remind the unbelieving world that God “hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained” (Acts 17:31). “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:31). What could strike more horror into you than the thought of standing naked and exposed before our God who is “a consuming fire?” (Deuteronomy 4:24, Hebrews 12:29). If we join in with the world in their celebration of Halloween each year, how are we being salt and light? If we treat lightly things which God has said he detests (e.g. witchcraft, speaking to the dead/necromancy, devils, demons) how can we turn around and tell the world they should take these things seriously? If we teach our children to giggle at these things, how can we expect them to eschew the occult as they grow older, or to take seriously things God loves like holiness and faithfulness?

    Instead, there is no other time when you are so freely able to spread the gospel. Odds are that there will be many families and children coming directly to your door with whom you can easily give a short gospel presentation and send them home with a tract. Redeem this time, for truly October 31st is a day filled with much evil. Talk about the evils of Antichrist seen each year as papists celebrate the idolatrous mass of All Saints’ Day by doing such things as worshipping the breast milk of Mary, saying mass for and praying for the dead, veneration of Saints etc. Tell people about Martin Luther, that brave monk who stood up to the Pope of Rome, that man of lawlessness. The Reformation which began with Martin Luther nailing up his 95 Theses on October 31st.

    More directly to what kicked off this article, post on the social media page of this event. Reach out to me. I’d love to include you in any ongoing efforts to root out witchcraft and the public expression of false religion. Reach out to churches in the Leo-Cedarville area to let them know this is going on in their community. Pray against all those who would turn our public parks into a forum to practice devilry and the worship of idols, and pray that those who won’t help us end this would either repent and join our efforts, or that God in his providence would replace them.

    “To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:17); “If thou faint in the day of adversity, thy strength is small. If thou forbear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain; if thou sayest, Behold, we knew it not; doth not he that pondereth the heart consider it? and he that keepeth thy soul, doth not he know it? and shall not he render to every man according to his works?” (Proverbs 24:10-12); “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.” (Ephesians 5:11-13).

    Resources:

    On witches:

    https://purelypresbyterian.com/2023/04/10/of-explicit-implicit-satanic-covenanting-and-good-bad-witches/

    https://www.berithpress.com/digitaldownloads/p/digital-download-a-dialogue-about-witches-by-lambert-daneau-1535-1595

    https://purelypresbyterian.com/2023/04/13/lawful-unlawful-remedies-against-witchcraft/

    https://purelypresbyterian.com/2023/03/23/satans-evil-wonders/

    On civil rulers and the moral law:

    https://purelypresbyterian.com/2021/10/25/the-importance-of-godly-rulers-francis-turretin/

    https://purelypresbyterian.com/2017/05/10/calvin-on-the-death-penalty-for-heresy/

    On Halloween

    Rev. David Silversides on Halloween

    https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermons/1031061678

    Brian Schwertley on Halloween

    Part 1

    Part 2

    Part 3

    Part 4