Worship
Category

By In Culture, Family and Children, Theology, Worship

Thomas Chalmers and the Recovery of the Parish

Chalmers 09 Sepia

By guest contributor, Dr. George Grant.

The great Scottish pastor, social reformer, educator, author, and scientist Thomas Chalmers was born on March 17, 1780 at Anstruther on the Fife coast. His father was a prosperous businessman in the town and Thomas grew up as the sixth in a large family of fourteen children—he had eight brothers and five sisters.

Showing early signs of prodigy, at the age of three, he went to the local parish school to learn the classical trivium of grammar, logic, and rhetoric in English, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. His parents were people of strong Calvinist conviction and keen that their family should grow up to bear witness to a lively and relevant Christianity. Piety and intellectual rigor marked their daily lives.

Before he was twelve, he had sufficiently mastered language, literary, and philosophical skills that he was recommended to advance his studies at the University of St Andrews. His brother, William, who was just thirteen, accompanied him. At the time, Thomas was the second-youngest student at St Andrews and widely recognized as a student with extraordinary promise. Although a great part of his time in the first two sessions at the university were apparently occupied in boyish amusements, such as golf, soccer, and hand-ball—in which he was remarkably expert, owing to his being left-handed—he had already begun to demonstrate the great intellectual power which was to be one of his chief characteristics throughout adult life. For mathematics he developed special enthusiasm and to its study he gave himself with great energy and dedication. Ethics and politics were also themes of special interest to him as he sought to integrate his life and faith with the evident woes of the world around him.

In 1795, now fifteen years-old, he sensed a call into the ministry—though as yet still quite immature in his faith—and so he was enrolled as a student of Divinity. That session, he actually studied very little theology because having recently taught himself sufficient French to use the language for study, he pursued his researches into theoretical mathematics with renewed vigor. Nevertheless, towards the end of the session he was deeply stirred by the power of the writings of Jonathan Edwards and came to an intellectual grasp of the magnificence of the Godhead and of the providential subordination of all things to His one sovereign purpose.

During these years another part of his great talent began to come into prominence. On entry to the University his expressive proficiency in English grammar and rhetoric was at best immature, but after two years of study, there was a perceptible change. The gifts of powerful, intense and sustained expression revealed themselves with freedom, spontaneity and beauty. Student Debating Societies, class discourses, and daily prayers in the University were all enriched by his tasteful, capable and eloquent participation.

By 1798, having just reached the age of eighteen, he had completed his course of studies at the University of St Andrews. The foundations were laid for his future development. As his biographer Hanna would later assert, “The intensity of his nature, the redundant energy that hardly knew fatigue, the largeness of his view, the warmth of his affection, the independence of his judgement, and the gushing impetuosity of his style, were already manifest from these college days.”

In July 1799, he was licensed to preach after a special dispensation exempted him from the qualifying condition of having reached the age of twenty-one. At the same time, he became a teaching assistant at the University of Edinburgh in the widely varied disciplines of Mathematics, Chemistry, Natural and Moral Philosophy and Political Economy.

During the winter of 1801, he was offered a post as Assistant in the Mathematics Department at St Andrews as well as the pastorate of the small parish church in Kilmany. And thus began his remarkable dual career as an ecclesiastic and an academic. Over the next forty-four years Thomas Chalmers gave himself to public service. Twenty of these years were spent in three parishes: first at Kilmany and then later at, the Tron Church and St John’s Church, both in Glasgow. The remaining twenty-four years were spent as a professor in three different chairs, Moral Philosophy in St Andrews, Professor of Divinity in Edinburgh, and Principal and Professor of Divinity in the Free Church Theological Institution, Edinburgh, later known as New College. Often, he served both church and university simultaneously, evoking the wonder of the entire world.

As a teacher, he aroused the enthusiasm of his students. One of them later commented, “Under his extraordinary management, the study of Mathematics was felt to be hardly less a play of the fancy than a labor of the intellect—the lessons of the day being continually interspersed with applications and illustrations of the most lively nature, so that he secured in a singular manner the confidence and attachment of his pupils.” Likewise, his parishioners found his sermons to be both erudite and winsome, aimed at both orthodoxy and orthopraxy. His reputation was soon spread throughout Scotland.

The years of work given to parish ministry were extremely significant in the life of Thomas Chalmers. The mental capacity that he had shown in academic pursuits and his youthful strength of spirit were now brought to the test of service to rural and urban communities at a time of extremely significant social change, and the ever transforming power of the Gospel was to prove itself in and through his life and service.

Family bereavements brought Chalmers to reflect more seriously about a dimension of life which, on his own confession, he had not fully considered. His brother, George, three years older, and his sister, Barbara, some five years older, both died within the space of two years. George had been the captain of a merchant ship, but succumbed to tuberculosis and returned home at the age of twenty-nine to die. He awaited the end calmly, his trust resting firmly in Christ. Each evening he had read to him one of John Newton’s sermons and obviously derived especial comfort therein. His quiet and assured faith challenged his younger brother. Barbara, likewise, suffering the same disease, showed great fortitude and confidence in the face of death. The nature of these circumstances brought him to question his previous conceptions.

After Barbara’s death, Thomas, who had been commissioned to write several articles for the Encyclopaedia Britannica on mathematical subjects, wrote to the editor and asked that the article on Christianity should also be allocated to him. Before finishing the article and just after he had made his maiden speech in the General Assembly of 1809, he himself fell gravely ill. Ill-health dogged him for months—at one point being so severe that his family despaired of his very life. The combination of his illness and the loss of his siblings signaled a profound change in his life. He wrote to a friend, “My confinement has fixed on my heart a very strong impression of the insignificance of time—an impression which I trust will not abandon me though I again reach the heyday of health and vigor. This should be the first step to another impression still more salutary—the magnitude of eternity. Strip human life of its connection with a higher scene of existence and it is the illusion of an instant, an unmeaning farce, a series of visions and projects, and convulsive efforts, which terminate in nothing. I have been reading Pascal’s Thoughts on Religion: you know his history—a man of the richest endowments, and whose youth was signalized by his profound and original speculations in mathematical science, but who could stop short in the brilliant career of discovery, who could resign all the splendors of literary reputation, who could renounce without a sigh all the distinctions which are conferred upon genius, and resolve to devote every talent and every hour to the defense and illustration of the Gospel. This, my dear sir, is superior to all Greek and Roman fame.”

Yet another influence on his spiritual development at this time was the reading of William Wilberforce’s Practical View of Christianity. Again, he wrote, “The deep views he gives of the depravity of our nature, of our need of an atonement, of the great doctrine of acceptance through that atonement, of the sanctifying influence of the Spirit—these all have given a new aspect to my faith.”

Chalmers now had his priorities set in order before him. He gladly recognized God’s claim to rule the affections of his heart and command his life’s obedience. The remainder of his ministry in Kilmany was profoundly affected by the experience of a vital Christian walk. His preaching had new life and concern, proclaiming what he had formerly disclaimed. His pastoral visitation and his instruction in the homes of his parish showed greater ardor than ever before. From outside the region many came to hear the Word, and heard it gladly. There were innumerable converts to this living Christianity.

Chalmers became an earnest student of the Scriptures and also set aside one day each month when, before God, he reviewed his service to Him and sought, with confession and thanksgiving, the blessing of God on his work and on the people entrusted to his pastoral care. These years were also those of the Napoleonic Wars and Chalmers joined the volunteers, holding commissions as a chaplain and lieutenant, though he was never deployed on the continent.

He completely abandoned himself to the covenantal community there at Kilmany. He married and had his first children there. He established a classical school at the heart of the parish. He set about a reform of the ministry to the poor, the widows, and the orphans. He established a pioneer missionary society and a Bible society. In addition, Chalmers began his prodigious and prolific publishing career.

It was inevitable that a man of such gifts would not long be underutilized in the small environs of the Fife seacoast. In July 1815, when news of the victory at Waterloo was scarcely a month old, he preached the last sermon of his twelve-year ministry in Kilmany. His final exhortation was: “Choose Him, then, my brethren. Choose Him as the Captain of your salvation. Let him enter into your hearts by faith, and let Him dwell continually there. Cultivate a daily intercourse and a growing acquaintance with Him. O you are in safe company, indeed, when your fellowship is with Him.”

Thomas Chalmers went to Glasgow at the invitation of the Magistrates and Town Council of Glasgow. He served first in the Tron Church until 1819, and then, by the election of the Town Council, he was transferred to the newly-created parish of St John’s, a poorer parish with a very high proportion of factory a workers, a parish in which he had the freedom to develop the ideas which he had long been maturing.

In the later years at Kilmany, Chalmers had made conscience of his work as a parish minister and had come to know the problems of working a rural parish. Now with his newly expanded duties in Glasgow, he came to grips with the difficulties of work in a city parish and applied his intelligence and strength to new problems.

From the beginning of his ministry in the city his preaching was fully appreciated, and many attended from throughout Glasgow, but Chalmers was concerned that his ministry should first and foremost be to the parish—where some eleven or twelve-thousand people lived and worked. He commenced a program of visitation from house to house which took two years to complete. He organized the eldership to co-operate in this task and developed Sabbath evening schools. Commencing with thirteen children, the schools grew until within two years they had twelve hundred children under instruction. His awareness of the situation of the people gave him an acute understanding of the problems of illiteracy and poverty in the parish and he could not rest until he had found some means of remedying these. His interest in the working-man furthered his reflections on the economic situation; his interest in the sciences led to the Astronomical Discourses, a series of Thursday afternoon sermons delivered once every two months during 1816. Many businessmen and others left their place of work to hear these and during 1817 nine editions of some 20,000 copies were published.

In 1816, the University of Glasgow unanimously conferred on him the degree of Doctor of Divinity. The Lord High Commissioner at the General Assembly in the same year invited him to preach in Edinburgh at the time of the Assembly. Hard work and new-found fame were joined in the experience of Chalmers, but he was dissatisfied.

He was convinced that the Christian church had as yet unfulfilled responsibilities to all those who lived and worked in the local parish, not merely to those who attended the local place of worship. In the development of Sabbath School work Chalmers discovered that many children had great difficulty in reading. He resolved to remedy the defect by setting up classical schools throughout the parish—especially for the poor and neglected. Provision for the needs of the poor was also made, not from the poor-rate levy, but from funds administered by the church of the parish through its deacons who were given special training for this work. Relatives of the needy were encouraged to assume responsibility and the government’s poor relief costs for the parish were reduced by more than eighty per cent within three years. And as if all this were not enough, by correspondence he maintained a ministry with many others beyond the bounds of Glasgow, writing on average some fifty letters a week—and they were for the most part, letters of great substance.

The years of his ministry in Glasgow were very significant. There was no class of persons untouched by his labors. Before his time many had fallen away from all Christian belief and observance, but under his ministry public sentiment turned decisively to evangelical liveliness. By his labors living faith in Christ was restored and many men and women throughout the city gave themselves for Christian service.

When he was invited to return to his former University, St Andrews, as Professor of Moral Philosophy, he accepted because he saw it as a position of wider usefulness and also because he felt that the pressure of life in Glasgow which had progressively increased was making excessive demands on him. But his concerns for the urban parishes remained undiminished. His interest for instance, in dealing with the problem of poverty led to an invitation to London by the Parliamentary Committee on the Irish Poor Law. In 1840 he gave a paper at the British Association for the Advancement of Science recommending the system of voluntary assistance to the poor. He was well informed on the major public issues of his day—Roman Catholic Emancipation, the Reform Bill and the Corn Laws and his opinion was valued by great and small alike on all of these problems. In 1832 the Bishop of London recommended the President of the Royal Society to invite Dr Chalmers to prepare a treatise in proof of the wisdom and benevolence of God shown in the works of creation. It was published in the following year with funds from the legacy of the Earl of Bridgewater and was known as the Bridgewater Treatise.

Amongst the honors that had come his way in the same year was his election as Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. He had previously formed part of a delegation on William IV’s accession in 1830 and had been named as one of His Majesty’s Chaplains in Scotland. He was later to present a loyal address on behalf of the University of Edinburgh to Queen Victoria on her accession in 1837. In January 1834, Dr Chalmers was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and the following year became one of its Vice-Presidents. The Royal Institute of France honored him with the title of corresponding member and four years later, in 1838, he visited France and read a lecture on the “Distinction both in principle and effect between a legal charity for the relief of indigence and a legal charity for the relief of disease.” His many books and sermons were invariably best-sellers for years on end.

Thus, his reputation was well-established, his contribution to the life of Scotland, England and Ireland fully recognized, and his fame spread around the world when he found himself not only involved in, but leading, a movement that was to divide the Church of Scotland, and to set him in apparent disregard of the authority of the highest civil court in the land.

With the disappearance of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland as a spiritual force in the sixteenth century, the Presbyterian Church had assumed the right to be the Church of Scotland. Its struggle for spiritual independence had been a long and costly one under the leadership of John Knox, Andrew Melville and Alexander Henderson amongst others. At long last, in 1690, the Presbyterian Church was legally recognized by the crown as the established Church of Scotland, but in this recognition by the state there was no question of the church surrendering any aspect of its independence. It was free to follow the guidance of the Divine Head in every aspect in which He had expressed His will.

Patronage, or the right of landowners to bring to a parish a minister who might or might not be acceptable to the elders and members of it, had been brought in by Act of Parliament in 1712. But in 1838, in two cases in particular, those of Auchterarder and Marnoch, ministers were forced on congregations opposed to their settlement and the Court of Session and the House of Lords ratified these decisions. Many in the church were seriously perturbed.

There were other areas of concern as well. It was decided that the Church did not have the power to organize new parishes nor give the ministers there the status of clergy of the Church. She had no authority to receive again clergy who had left it. And perhaps worst of all a creeping liberal formalism was slowly smothering the evangelical zeal of the whole land. Alas, despite repeated requests, the Government refused to take action to deal with the threat of spiritual atrophy. After a ten year long struggle to regain the soul of the church, the evangelical wing, led by Chalmers and others laid a protest on the table of the Assembly some four hundred ministers and a like number of elders left the established Church of Scotland on May 18, 1843, to form the Free Church.

When the General Assembly of the Free Church was constituted that grave morning, Thomas Chalmers was called to be its Moderator. He was the man whose reputation in the Christian world was the highest; he was also the man whose influence in directing the events leading to what would eventually be called the Disruption had been greatest.

The ministers who left the Established Church with Chalmers that day sacrificed much. In the personal sphere their houses and financial security were set aside, their work had to be reorganized and new centers for preaching found. Chalmers, in this respect, also suffered loss. He was no longer Professor of Divinity at the University of Edinburgh and the influence and prestige of that position went to another. But the Church realized that, without continued pastoral training, its future was bleak. A center for theological study, the Free Church Theological Institute, was opened and Chalmers was appointed Principal and Professor of Divinity.

A few years before, when Chalmers had completed his sixtieth year, he looked forward to a “sabbatical decennium,” a seventh decade of life that would be spent as “the Sabbath of our earthly pilgrimage—as if on the shore of the eternal world.” The years before 1843 had brought him little of the rest and peace that he hoped for and, of course, after the Disruption, he had even more to do.

His lectures continued, but there was also the concern of finding a site and constructing a building to house the New College. In 1846, after much personal sacrifice and intense labor, Chalmers laid the foundation-stone of the new building. “We leave to others the passions and politics of this world, and nothing will ever be taught, I trust, in any of our halls which shall have the remotest tendency to disturb the existing order of things, or to confound the ranks and distinctions which at present obtain in society. But there is one equality between man and man which will strenuously be taught—the essential equality of human souls; and that in the high count and reckoning of eternity, the soul of the poorest of nature’s children, the raggedest boy that runs along the pavement, is of like estimation in the eyes of heaven with that of the greatest and noblest of our land.”

The means for supporting the ministers of the church following the Disruption had to be found and Chalmers dedicated much of his time and energy to the setting up of a Sustentation Fund. By the end of 1844 it was clear that the cost of maintaining spiritual independence would involve foregoing any financial assistance given by the State. It was under his leadership that this problem was confronted and resolved. In addition, new sites for some 700 churches and manses had to be found for the congregations that were formed, and there were difficulties with several landowners in getting sites. In many cases Chalmers was able to give assistance through his personal influence. His own home in Morningside was used as a place of worship for years afterward.

All this effort was not dedicated simply to perpetuating an idea, for Chalmers had a vision of Scotland in which all her people from those of highest to those of lowest rank would know and love the Lord Jesus Christ. Perhaps the dearest example of the outworking of this vision is seen in the West Port experiment in Edinburgh, “a fourth part of the whole population being pauper and another fourth street beggars, thieves and prostitutes.” The population amounted to upwards of 400 families of whom 300 had no connection with the Church. Of 411 children of school age, 290 were growing up without any education. The plan of Chalmers was to divide the whole territory into twenty districts each containing about twenty families. To each district a discipler was appointed whose duty was to visit each family once a week. A school was provided. By the end of 1845, 250 scholars had attended the school. A library, a savings bank, a wash-house and an industrial school had been provided, and there was a congregation served by a missionary-minister. Chalmers often attended the services there and would take part as a worshipper alongside the people of the district.

Thomas Carlyle said of him “What a wonderful old man Chalmers is. Or rather, he has all the buoyancy of youth. When so many of us are wringing our hands in hopeless despair over the vileness and wretchedness of the large towns, there goes the old man, shovel in hand, down into the dirtiest puddles of the West Port of Edinburgh, cleans them out, and fills the sewers with living waters. It is a beautiful sight.”

At the end of the College Session in 1847 Chalmers, by now exhausted in his ceaseless labors, went to London on the business of the Church. He returned to his home in Morningside to prepare for the General Assembly on the following Monday. It was after family worship on Sunday evening May 30 that he said goodnight. He went to sleep in Morningside, but he awoke in Heaven.

The funeral was held on the following Friday, June 4. The Magistrates and Town Council, the members of Assembly, the Professors of New College, ministers, probationers, students, the Rector and Masters of the High School and many thousands more joined the funeral procession, paying their tribute, as they followed the cortege to Grange Cemetery. According to Carlyle, “There was a moral sublimity in the spectacle. It spoke more emphatically than by words of the dignity of intrinsic excellence, and of the height to which a true man may attain. It was the dust of a Presbyterian minister which the coffin contained, and yet they were burying him amid the tears of a nation, and with more than kingly honors.”

 

George Grant is the author of more than five dozen books, serves as pastor of Parish Presbyterian Church, and is the founder of King’s Meadow Study Center, the Chalmers Fund, New College Franklin, the Comenius School, and Franklin Classical School. This post originally appeared on his blog, Grantian Florilegium.

Read more

By In Books, Worship

Looking to Aslan

My daughter and I have been reading through The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis. It’s a wonderful story, but it is also a wonderful theology of humanity. Lucy, the youngest of the four, finds herself in a game of hide and seek. She finds refuge in a wardrobe. The wardrobe becomes the secret pathway to a new world called Narnia. Upon arriving in this new world, she meets Mr. Tumnus, a faun.a Mr. Tumnus discovers that Lucy is a daughter of Eve and further that she is not a threat to his well-being. He invites her for a cup of tea. Lucy, initially hesitant, accepts his kind request. Lucy enjoys the hospitality of the faun and falls peacefully asleep in the comfort of his home. Upon awaking, Mr. Tumnus is full of grief.  He belittles himself for making a pact with the Witch.  The deal was that he was to inform the Witch if he ever met a human. Lucy’s grace to the faun changes him. The Witch shows no grace, but Lucy does. Grace changes the faun. Once Mr. Tumnus gets a taste of the good, namely Lucy, he turns away and devotes himself to the good. Yet, he will soon discover that though he is forgiven, there is always pain when you associate yourself with evil.

Later in the story, Edmund, Lucy’s older brother, also enters the land of Narnia. He was mistrusting of Lucy’s original assertion that such a land existed beyond the wardrobe. Edmund is initially met by the Witch herself. Humans have always been a threat to the Witch’s rule over Narnia. She whispers words of deceit to Edmund. She tempts Edmund to accept her gifts. Edmund willingly takes it and offers her all the information she desires. The information undoubtedly will out all of Edmund’s siblings at risk, including little Lucy. The offer from the witch is equivalent to a type of wilderness offer where the devil offers food and royalty in exchange for loyalty.

The point of the story is that there is redemption from evil, even when you have made an alliance with evil. The redemption from evil begins when your heart starts to turn towards the good; we can say to be more precise, when your heart begins to turn towards God himself.

We know that there is redemption for Edmund in C.S. Lewis’ story. Later on he is known as King Edmund, the Just. But before he could become a Just King he needed to be humbled by a Just Lion named Aslan. Edmund, as you may remember, was full of doubt. He rejected the supernatural and even mocked Lucy; in essence, he mocked the good, true, and beautiful. Edmund cared nothing about others. He was merely concerned about his needs above anything else.  The good news is that his heart began to turn towards Aslan. Aslan is pictured in C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles as a messianic figure; a tender leader and a great warrior.

The prophet Joel provides a tender picture of how Yahweh receives repentant sinners.

Joel begins with this apocalyptic promise of doom for Israel. Locusts will come and devour everything. But Yahweh says, “Change your ways and I will receive you.”

Joel 2:13 reads:

Tear your heart, and not your garments,
and turn to Yahweh, your God;
for he is gracious and merciful,
slow to anger, and abundant in loving kindness…

Yahweh is asking for the heart of a people. He wants their inner disposition to be changed towards him.

All these outwards signs that Joel speaks of matter little if the heart is not changed. What Yahweh is after is allegiance. Yahweh is a jealous God. “Turn to me,” Yahweh says. “Hear my voice and I will receive you and show you abundant love.”

There is a lovely little narrative later in Edmund’s story that makes this point. When Edmund finally meets Aslan in the story Edmund is encouraged by a forgiving leader. When Edmund is confronted by the Witch, she accuses him. The Witch is unaware of Edmund’s change of heart. The Edmund who naively accepted Turkish delight from evil has matured into accepting the delight that comes by embracing the good.

“You have a traitor there, Aslan,” said the Witch. Of course everyone present knew that she   meant Edmund. But Edmund had got past thinking about himself after all he’d been through and after the talk he’d had that morning. He just went on looking at Aslan. It didn’t seem to matter what the Witch said. (13.37)

Edmund’s conversation with Aslan dispels all the after-effects of his betrayal. Edmund has begun to change radically and forever, and part of that change is that he’s not thinking about himself all the time. Edmund has begun to see that one voice echoes abundant love and mercy and another voice is deceitful.

Joel reminds the people of God to remember God’s mercy. And in very Narnia-like language Joel writes that Yahweh will turn the death of the land into a flourishing land where God abides:

Do not be afraid, you wild animals,
for the pastures in the wilderness are becoming green.
The trees are bearing their fruit;
the fig tree and the vine yield their riches.
23 Be glad, people of Zion,
rejoice in the Lord your God,
for he has given you the autumn rains
because he is faithful.
He sends you abundant showers,
both autumn and spring rains, as before.

This is not just the language of national repentance, but of personal repentance. During this season, God is calling us to know that when we confess our sins, He is faithful and just and full of mercy and grace and abundant in love. When we confess our sins, God is there to speaking to us words of grace and comfort. At that moment it doesn’t matter what evil may be speaking and accusing us as long as we keep looking to Jesus, our advocate.

“And as the Witch was speaking, Edmund just went on looking at Aslan. It didn’t seem to matter what the Witch said.” No. It shouldn’t matter. It really shouldn’t.

  1. The faun is a half human–half goat (from the head to the waist being human, but with the addition of goat horns) manifestation of forest and animal spirits that would help or hinder humans at whim  (back)

Read more

By In Worship

The Optimism of Christmas Hymns

Have you noticed the optimistic nature of Christmas hymns? A few examples will suffice:a

The very famous Isaac Watts Joy to the World! which says:

No more let sins and sorrows grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He comes to make His blessings flow,
Far as the curse is found.

He rules the world with truth and grace,
And makes the nations prove,
The glories of His righteousness,
And wonders of His love.

R.J. Rushdoony commented on this hymn when he wrote:

“The Christian religion is a faith of ultimate victory, where the very gates of hell cannot prevail against Christ and His chosen people (Matt. 16:18).”

Another great hymn filled with Gospel hope is “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day,” which says:

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep,
God is not dead, nor doth He sleep.
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail,
With Peace On Earth, Good Will To Man.

Or the language of Isaiah 11 is made clear in that famous hymn: “It Came Upon a Midnight Clear”, where the final verse boldly rejoices:

For lo, the days are hast’ning on,
By prophet bards foretold,
When with the ever circling years
Comes round the age of Gold,
When peace shall over all the earth
Its ancient splendor fling,
And the whole world give back the song
Which now the angels sing.

“Hark! the Harold Angels Sing”, also joins in with the testimony of carols to the Kingship of Christ:

Joyful, all ye nations rise,
Join the triumph of the skies,
With angelic host proclaim,
Christ is born in Bethlehem.

The tidings of great joy are not good feelings during the Christmas Season; the tidings of great joy are comfort and joy to the world. This is what animated these hymn writers as they echoed the biblical message. And this is what exhorts us to sing loudly and confidently the words of the incarnation. “Give ye heed to what we say: Jesus Christ is born today…calls you one and calls you all to gain His everlasting hall.”<>online gameпроверить рейтинг а в google

  1. Mainly taken from Rushdoony’s piece found here: http://bluebannermedia.com/the-postmillennial-character-of-christmas-carols/  (back)

Read more

By In Books, Theology, Worship

The End of the World as We Know It

“The implication of a true eschatological perspective will be missionary obedience, and the eschatology which does not issue in such obedience is a false eschatology.” -Lesslie Newbigin

In his brilliant new book A New Heaven and a New Earth: Reclaiming Biblical Eschatology, J. Richard Middleton points out that Revelation 21:3 shifts from the singular to the plural in reference to God’s people:

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them [singular], and they will be his peoples [plural], and God himself will be with them as their God.  

This shift, says Middleton, shows “the general thrust of the biblical story, which expands the boundaries of the covenant people to include all humanity.”

In the Old Testament, we learn that the children of Abraham will be as many as the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore (Gen 22:17). The shocking surprise of the New Testament is that, through the New Covenant, those children will be made up of every tribe, tongue, and nation (Rev 5:9). Thus, the biblical story, from Abraham forward, can be summed up as: person (Abraham) to people (Israel) to person (Jesus) to peoples (the multi-ethnic church).

Currently, we’re living in the “peoples” part of the story, the final and climactic act. This can be seen by looking at where the church is located globally (26% in Europe, 37% in the Americas, 24% in sub-Saharan Africa, and 13% in Asia and the Pacific). Of course, you can see the same reality by looking at local churches in which multiple families, races, and cultures are represented. This diversity, Revelation 21:3 reminds us, is not a result of socio-economic or political realities. No, this diversity is nothing less than a sign of the present in-breaking of Christ’s inclusive reign. It’s a sign that when Christ went down to the grave he secured the treasure once buried in a field.  It’s a sign that the leaven of the kingdom is working its way through the dough of the world. It’s a sign that Heaven’s seed has been planted, and the fruits of its tree are abundant enough to feed the nations. Indeed, the melting of homogeneous worship can only mean the Spring of Pentecost is here; the King is summoning his peoples! <>racer game onlineкоэффициент конверсии это

Read more

By In Theology, Worship

The Purple Christ at Advent

Advent-Wreath-first-candle-Advent-Sunday

The Incarnation of Color

Sunday was the first Sunday in the 2014 Advent season and the beginning of a new liturgical year. For many Christians, this was marked by advent candles, purple vestments, and hymns longing for the coming of our savior. In Advent, we remember that the God who created all things, descended down into our world and became one of us. Through the divine mystery of the incarnation, the Almighty communicates his transcendence through the physical world around us.

A long study can and has been made about the coordination of particular colors with the seasons of the year and nearly every historic branch of Christianity has embraced both a liturgical Calendar with symbolic colors to mark the days. As we look back to a time when the darkness of man was pierced by the advent of a new and great light – we should see the new redeemed world as the refracted beauty of Christ’s perfect light. It is not merely from darkness to light – but from the utter darkness to the light of lights. The light of God’s promise was once raised colorfully above Noah and is now is the light of the world and the light of life. Christ has moved the world from a dark and cold blackness into the warm spectrum of hope.

A Horse of a Different Color

St. John’s work uses color to invoke particular ideas to the mind of his readers. In Revelation, a white horse is not merely descriptive, but instead serves as a reminder of the holy victory of Christ to a people nearing a time of great persecution. White becomes more than a color and embodies a feeling or encapsulates an idea. For this same reason, white continues to invoke the queenly idea of purity and beauty as a bride wears her dress down the aisle. To the first century Jewish reader, white is the Diamond of Naphtali and the clear Jasper of the New Jerusalem and this beauty of the kingdom is conveyed through a color.

Dr. Peter Leithart describes this phenomenon in relation to the essence of who our God is, “God is a communicative being. He doesn’t just use words; He is the Word. He made us in His image and likeness, as communicative beings. Even if we keep our mouths firmly shut, we cannot avoid saying something; we cannot not communicate. ”

The Calendar and the tone of the Gospel

Christ’s Church, through the use of vestments and paraments, has employed liturgical colors in accordance with the church calendar to focus our devotion on particular themes and tones of the Gospel.

In the Advent season, the color purple is used to symbolize the coming of a royal Messiah, our King Jesus. It is the beginning of the church year, just as the birth of Christ is the start of the gospel. In Advent we prepare for our Lord’s coming in three ways: celebrating his incarnation at Christmas, remembering his coming into our hearts, and anticipating his coming again to judge the quick and the dead. During Advent we recall Israel penitently waiting before the Messiah appeared. As the prophet Isaiah said,

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.” (Isaiah 9:6-7)

The color purple should always remind you of this Scripture. During Advent we should place both this scripture and the color purple before the eyes of the people.

The Purple Christ at Advent

aachaliceThe wine our Lord chooses to demonstrate his real presence is purple and Melchizedek teaches us that wine itself is a kingly substance. Wine is symbolically identified with the blessings of the kingdom throughout the Scripture. This is what James B. Jordan calls “the eschatological Messianic kingdom feast.” The promised land in the Old Testament and the kingdom of our Lord in the New Testament are richly portrayed as places abounding with wine. Thus the color and substance work together, developing a rather pointed imagery – particularly relevant to the time of Advent.

The Bible describes the high priest’s clothing as fine linen and purple, and our Lord makes a reference to this in his parable of the rich man and Lazarus.  The rich man is dressed in purple and fine linen — Jesus’ hearers would have seen an allusion to the high priest here. Christ’s reference to purple draws a literary connection in the minds of listeners. Christ’s nature as a our high priest is shown in biblical imagery as well; as when He was arrested, the Roman soldiers girded him in a purple robe. The color is not meaningless, but rather directs us to the notion that our high priest was to be the sacrifice, the royal sacrifice.

Christ Cleanses the Temple From What is Common

Attention to liturgical detail is in no way foreign to Christian thought or an innovation of Roman authorities. A familiarity with the Pentateuch reveals that God has plenty to say about the way he would like to be worshiped and these ceremonies were revealing the beauty of Christ. As Percy Dearmer rightly points out,

“Our Lord attended the ritualistic services of the Temple; nay, He was careful to be present at those great feasts when the ceremonial was most elaborate. Yet no word of censure ever escaped His lips. This was the more remarkable, because He was evidently far from ignoring the subject. No one ever appreciated the danger of formalism so keenly as He: He did condemn most strongly the vain private ceremonies of the Pharisees. Also, on two occasions He cleansed the Temple, driving out, not those who adorned it with ceremonial, but those who dishonoured it with commercialism. That is to say, His only interference with the ritualistic worship of the Temple was to secure it against profane interruption.” (The Parson’s Handbook)

Thus the richness of the church calendar is ever present. I pray that during Advent – we may be penetrated visually by the truth of God’s Word. May the purple of this season remind us of our High Priest and King Lord Jesus. May we be intentional in demonstrating God’s truth in all areas of life, both in the church and in our homes.<>рерайтер копирайтерстатистика ключевых слов в google

Read more

By In Theology, Worship

The Sacrament of Music: Why Your Church Worship Should Be Pagan

Todd Pruitt writes that worship music is often viewed as “a means to facilitate an encounter with God,” or as a means of drawing close to God. He believes this to be a great theological error and that it resembles “ecstatic pagan practices,” though he provides no evidence for this assertion. Quite profoundly, Pruitt critiques non-sacramental Christians for attributing a sacramental status to music. He then presents several problems with emotionally-driven worship.

There ought to be no disagreement with Pruitt on the dangers of emotionally-driven worship. When edible bread and wine are replaced by audible beats and melodies, God’s people will become malnourished. Yet, at the same time, the error is an imbalance of sensory stimulation, not the idea that music facilitates an encounter with God. (more…)

Read more

By In Worship

The Weapons of Our Warfare: Children in Worship

Romanino Girolamo (Italian artist, c 1484-ca 1559). Presentation of Jesus in the Temple - 1529.The enemies of Jesus don’t like it when children get involved, because God has designed them as a weapon and as a reminder of God’s strength. If children are increasing, and if they are present amongst the worshipers, then they spell the coming doom of God’s enemies. They display the faith of his people, both in being faithful hearts themselves, and in showing off the trust their parents have in God. They are a tangible threat to godlessness. This is attested in multiple instances in scripture.

Let’s look together at a short Psalm (Ps 8) that helps us to see down into the inner workings of the war to build God’s kingdom – we will find out that one of the largest gears in the mechanism, one of the most powerful and necessary components in the wheels of the church, is the presence of children in God’s service of worship.

I expect this Psalm to be a good tool for talking to your children about their special job in the church service – and that job is: “to silence the enemy and the avenger.”

Before we can get a hold of this Psalm, we need a moment’s look at how God instructed rulership and kingdom expansion to come about in the first place – so turn to page one of the Bible and look down at verse 28.

God’s first command for his King, Adam, on how to rule was through a process of childbearing, and working with your children to bring the world under God’s reign.

Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth,” (Gen 1.28).

See this list of five:

  1. be fruitful
  2. multiply
  3. fill the earth/land
  4. subdue
  5. rule

 

PSALM 8 – The Weapons of Our Warfare

Psalm 8 is a worship song which is all about this very passage. Psalm 8 is about Genesis 1.27-28. Psalm 8 is about creation (“the work of your fingers,” v.3). It specifically mentions the principalities made on day 4, the moon and the stars, which Genesis 1 says are made over the earth to “rule over the day and night.” This is no coincidence: they are symbols of dominion, and the theme is all about dominion and ruling over the earth in this Psalm. Verse 6 says, “You have given [man] dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet…” And then it lists land, sky, and sea creatures. Just like Gen 1.28 does! This is a Psalm about taking God’s majesty and the glory of his name and his rule outward to the whole earth!

But remember, in Genesis 1.28, in order to rule, you have to be fruitful and multiply. In order to take dominion, the church has to have babies. And Psalm 8 dives right into baby-having as the first related action to the bringing of the kingdom of God’s majestic name:

“O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!
You have set your glory above the heavens.
2 Out of the mouth of babies and infants,
you have established strength because of your foes,
to still the enemy and the avenger.”

God gets the war for his glory underway this way – when the doctor spanks the newborn covenant member, that first gasp for air and the subsequent screaming – that is holy music. It shuts the devil up.

He can hear the majesty of God’s covenant name displayed over another life, and he is dumbfounded.

And we, like David, who sang to shut the mouth of the demons of the king of Israel, we sing. We sing David’s words to shut the mouths of the demons. We sing David’s words in Psalm 8 about the dominion of Genesis 1. And when we sing in church to make his name glorious with Psalm 8, then we confess in music that our babies are made as the work horses of the front line.

Tell your kids they have a job. That God has chosen them for glorious array in battle. That he has spectacles to make of enemies, and mouths of devouring adversaries that need to be shut. Tell them that they are needed in the Lord’s service of worship, and that no one else can take their place, and tell them that this we know for the Bible tells us so.

And if your toddlers are too young to follow the words of the Psalms in church, then have them make a joyful noise and hum. And if your babies are too young to hum along to the tune, just bring them to show them off. Show off your faith, and show off God’s promise. And don’t worry, they’ll make plenty of noise. You won’t have to manufacture that part.

Oh church! Oh holy dominion takers – open your ears for battle, listen as the kingdom comes at the noise of covenantal invaders, born to take up seating space in the sanctuary with car seats and diaper bags. Born to take up space in the worship of the King, edging out darkness with the chosen praise, ordained for your Sunday morning brush with the power of God saving the world.

And if you are unable to have children, or more children. If you are older, or widowed. If you are caught lonely and wondering what to do – then pray that the Lord would bring the kingdom, and that he would send a blessing of childbearing to your church. Help the parents of children to feel comfortable with the hard process of teaching babies to get a little more mature each Sunday. Help them not to fear the noise their children make.

Oh church, the noise of children in the sanctuary has at times been treated as a little lower than the angels. But let’s make it our job instead to crown it with glory and honor, as we hear the kingdom come.

—-

Luke Welch has a master’s degree from Covenant Seminary and preaches regularly in a conservative Anglican church in Maryland. He blogs about Bible structure at SUBTEXT. Follow him on Twitter: @lukeawelch<>реклама в интернетераскрутка а дешево

Read more

By In Culture, Worship

Leithart: High Tech Medievalism

 

Peter Leithart I heard a revealing statement recently while visiting a home-bound Roman Catholic woman. She was upset that she couldn’t make it to Mass. Not to worry, she added warmly, “I’ll watch a Mass on television.” That got me to thinking. Of course, this woman had no choice. She was too ill to get to church. But the thousands in TV “churches” who do not have the same excuse, What are they thinking? What do they expect to get out of watching a Mass or a worship service on TV?

This woman’s view of the Mass is nothing new, of course. During the Middle Ages, the “worshippers” would mill around in the back of the cathedral striking business deals and catching up on the latest gossip. Then, a bell would ring from the altar. Everyone would stop and look, standing on tiptoe and pressing forward. The host was being elevated held up before the congregation by the presiding priest. The people believed that they could receive grace by just viewing the consecrated bread. In fact, that was about all they were allowed to do. It was one of the main achievements of the Reformers to include the congregation in the celebration of the communion.

So, there’s nothing new about TV Masses. The TV Mass is just a high-tech resurgence of the worst of medieval spirituality. Television raises questions, however, that would challenge even the most ingenious scholastic. Medieval theologians seriously debated whether or not a mouse eating a piece of consecrated bread received the body of Christ. Modern scholastics will be faced with equally taxing questions. Can grace be communicated by satellite? Can a Mass be taped, or does it have to be live? What about Cable? VCRs? Does replaying of taped Mass have any effect on the grace communicated?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not taking potshots at the Roman Catholic Church. After all, they’re relative newcomers to the TV world. Protestants (can we really divide Western Christianity into Catholic and Protestant?) have grasped the telecommunications opportunity with gusto, long before the Catholic church showed a glimmer of interest. But, then, Protestants invented the “drive-in” Church. (I’ve always wondered if the deacons (-esses) wear roller skates as they distribute the elements.) Before that, Protestants invented the camp meeting and a host of other grotesque distortions of Christian worship. One pastor told me that he had heard a TV evangelist tell his audience to go to the fridge, get some bread and grape juice, and join the – what should I call it? – the studio congregation in a celebration of communion!

There’s a serious point here. Really, there is, I’m not just venting my spleen…

The crucial question: What is TV evangelism all about anyway? I write this with a straight face. What is the point of TV ministries? The Bakkers hinted at their answer on Nightline. They told Ted Koppel that they had been offered a guest spot on The Late Show. That’s the show Joan Rivers left. It is without doubt one of the most distasteful and anti-Christian shows on television. And the Bakkers were seriously thinking about taking the offer! A TV station in Tennessee was thinking about picking up the old Jim and Tammy show! And Jim and Tammy talk incessantly about returning to their ministry at PTL (or whatever it’s called). Clearly, for the Bakkers, their TV “ministry” is just a form of entertainment. They’re just another celebrity couple, like the ones who are featured in People and National Enquirer. (Maybe Jim and Tammy have been featured too; I haven’t been grocery shopping lately.)

So, what’s all this mean? Does it mean we abandon the mass media? Turn it over to the devil? Of course not, in His providence, the Lord has given us valuable tools for reaching vast numbers of people with the gospel. And we should use these tools.

What it does mean is that there are inherent limitations to what we can do through the mass media (or the ‘Mass’ media for that matter). We shouldn’t use our tools uncritically. The medium of television, for all its power of persuasion, simply cannot take the place of the church as the agency of Christian dominion. After all, it’s primarily a medium of entertainment. Of passivity. More than that, there is an inescapable and irreducible personal dimension to the Christian life that is lacking in television “churches.” It centers in the personal fellowship with the other members of Christ’s body, fellowship around His Table.

I know, I know. I sound like a reactionary traditionalist – I know. I should come into the twentieth century. The century of the sleek, high-tech Church. Perhaps there is some nostalgia lurking behind my reaction to the Bakkers. But let’s not be deceived. A Christian civilization is not built by dramatic media splashes, as important as they can be in the short run. A Christian civilization is built by faithful men and women who week-by-week reconsecrate themselves to the Lord in Word and Sacrament, and who day-by-day seek to obey the Lord and take dominion in their particular callings. Some sincere and faithful men and women have been and will be called to work in mass media. For that we should praise God, but let’s not expect too much of them.

Published with written permission from Dr. Peter Leithart. Edited and Updated from The Geneva Review, September 1987.

<>поисковая оптимизация интернет магазина

Read more

By In Culture, Worship

Liturgy as Emotional Discipline

Moderns tend to view emotions as inevitable. We cannot help what we feel. Paul says, “Not so fast.” Throughout Paul’s epistles he encourages us to feel certain things and to not feel other things.  One of the best examples is Romans 12:15 where Paul encourages us to rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep.  Here are two expressions of emotion that Paul commands us to feel. Come on Paul, you know I cannot just conjure up weeping! There are numerous other examples as well. Our emotions are not a runaway semi careening towards the bottom of the hill. We are to corral our emotions, to discipline them, so that we feel what is appropriate to each circumstance. There are times we are supposed to feel anger, joy, love, etc. Christians often speak of training our minds to think righteous thoughts (Romans 12:2), but we do not speak of training our emotions to feel righteous feelings (Romans 12:10-12).  Our whole life is to be brought into conformity to God’s Word, including our emotions.

One of the main ways we learn emotional discipline is through a fixed liturgy (worship service) that includes a variety of tones. At my church, we walk through the same basic pattern every week in worship. God calls us. We confess our sins. We hear God’s Word read and preached. We eat together at the Lord’s Supper. Finally we leave with God’s blessing to go out and bless the world with the gospel. Each step has its own tone. The call is exciting, the confession of sin more sad, the forgiveness of sins is filled with joy, and so on. The tone is not dictated by the feelings of the person in the pew or by the pastor. The tone is dictated by what we are supposed to feel at each part of the worship service.

When we enter God’s presence we should be excited that God has called us into his presence. We may not feel excited when we enter God’s house. We may feel discouraged or distracted or apathetic. Yet the minister does not change the call to worship to match our feelings. At our church the call to worship is a Scripture reading usually followed by a response of the people. Here is one example. I read Psalm 96:1-4 and then we have this exchange:

Minister: In the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit

People: Amen!                                                                                                               Matthew 28:19

 Minister: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ

People: And also to you.                                                                                        Romans 1:7

 Minister: I will sing unto the Lord

People: For He has dealt bountifully with me.                                      Psalm 13:6

The congregation (or the minister) may not feel like they are getting grace and peace from God. They may not feel like God has dealt bountifully with them. But their feelings do not dictate truth. God does. By opening our service this way, the minister is saying, “This is what you are supposed to feel because this is truth.” He is saying bring your emotions in line with the truth.

The same could be said of each part of our worship service. We kneel each week and confess our sins.  Does every member of my congregation feel like they are sinner each week? Do we always want to get down and declare “Almighty and most merciful Father, we have erred and strayed from your ways like lost sheep?” Well no, of course not. After we get done publicly reading God’s Word the whole congregation says, “Thanks be to God.” Do we always feel like giving thanks for God’s Word? Maybe the reading was too long, too boring, or I just don’t want to hear God’s Word this week. On one level that does not matter. We are to be thankful for God’s Word no matter how we feel. More than that we are train our emotions to be thankful for the Word. We may not feel like eating the Lord’s Supper with our brothers and sisters in Christ, but we do it anyway. We may not feel blessed by God at the end of service and yet a benediction (blessing) from God comes anyway whether we want one or not. Why? Because how we feel at the end does not dictate the truth.

A good liturgy will force us to examine our emotions. We will have to do and say things we don’t feel like doing. But a good liturgy should do more. It should train us to feel what we ought to feel when we are confronted with our sin, God’s Word, our brothers, and interacting with the world. A consistent liturgy with the proper Biblical tone for each part will discipline us emotionally. We will not just learn to think Biblically, but we will are also learn to feel Biblically. A good liturgy will help bring our emotions in line with the reality of God’s Word.<>game online mobileрекламма

Read more

By In Theology, Worship

What the Priesthood of All Believers is NOT

Two Controversial Concepts

There are few ideas as likely to breed contention as the two I intend to discuss below. Both relate to how a Christian is counted in the body of Christ and both speak to how we understand the Church’s catholicity. The first idea, sure to cause a stir anywhere it may appear, is the notion of hierarchy. Merely mentioning the existence of such a dirty thing as hierarchy comes across as un-American and surely anti-Christian in many modern circles, but if we take our Bibles seriously, we must recognize that hierarchy is inescapable. The second idea, which sorely needs to be discussed in Christendom, is the pernicious heresy of individualism. An idea which again brings forward, in American Christians, a tenet that may be seen as central to our faith and devotion. Yet despite the number of “Independent Bible Churches” erected, the nature of this oxymoron remains glaring. A Christian cannot be born, exist, or grow independent of the body.

These two concepts, hierarchy and individualism, are often given the syncopated resolution of the “priesthood of all believers.” In the minds of many, this doctrine is understood to mean that all the priestly functions of the clergy are available to all those who are believers, that our equal access to God means that we all have equal roles and rights in the Church. I believe much of this is due to our strong apprehension to any thing “Roman Catholic-y.” The result is the deletion of any distinction between the ordained ministry and the laity. This flattened view of the Apostolic order either obliterates the concept of ordination or undermines the meaning of the sacraments, oftentimes accomplishing both.

Understanding the “priesthood of all believers” begins with recognizing what this concept is not.

Pope Francis What the Priesthood of All Believers is NOT

The priesthood of all believers in NOT the Papacy of all believers.

The Papacy does not have its own direct divine revelation from God, the Pope is not infallible, the Pope does not have universal jurisdiction, and neither do we. The priesthood of all believers is not an opportunity for each individual Christian to develop their own theology. No believer today comes to Christ through their own innovation, for we all must come to Christ through the historic community of believers. Too often have I heard, “All I need is my Bible.” This is the formula for a new cult, not orthodox Christianity. “My Bible” through the work of the Holy Ghost was given to the care of the Church. As the body of Christ, the Church has recognized, preserved, taught, translated, printed, and distributed “my Bible” to the Christians of the world throughout history.

“Me and my Bible” individualistic Christianity does not promote the purity of the Gospel, but serves instead to create mini-popes. If we are entitled to our own interpretation, who is to say what is correct? Like the Pope, we don’t speak ex cathedra. We have the received faith of the Bible, of the Creeds, and of the Church. Which in the progression of history have served to conciliate each other against individualism.

Snake Bible What the Priesthood of All Believers is NOT

The priesthood of all believers in NOT the Presbytery of all believers.

What is the true Church?  Who are the True Christians? Are Roman Catholics Christians? How about Mormons?

The priesthood of all believers is not an invitation for Christians to sit in judgement of the salvation of other Christians or to develop their own standards for what constitutes a Christian Church. For those unfamiliar with the term, a presbytery (or classis) is a leadership council of higher ranking clergy that rule over various issues that may arise from the church. As a human institution, the Church will always face a degree of scandal throughout history, but Christ appointed Apostles who appointed Overseers, Presbyters and Deacons to handle human conflict that may arise in the church.

This hierarchy was established to protect the unity of the Church and the verity of the Holy Gospel. Returning again to the idea of a received faith, the Bible serves as the ultimate authority in establishing the various Church officers and our historic faith outlines the basics of what it means to be a Christian.  It is this emphasis on our continuity with the historic Church that explicitly limits women and homosexuals from serving as Overseers, Presbyters and Deacons. To ordain a woman or a homosexual not only serves as a contradiction to the Bible, but is also against the accepted order of ministry we have in the writings of those serving at the time of the Apostles through the Ecumenical councils and to very recent Christian history.

Remembering that the intention of the Reformation was to restore the Holy Catholic and Apostolic church, not to create a new Church. Their goal was to return to the undivided Church of the Creeds. No Christian alone acts as an Ecumenical council and cannot impose their particular dogmas upon the conscience of otherwise faithful Christians. The “priesthood of all believers” does not give me the authority to excommunicate a papist unsubmissive to the five points of Calvinism, and it does not give Rome the right to excommunicate me for refusing to acknowledge the immaculate conception of Mary. Yet, refusing to recognize a Biblically ordained hierarchy creates this exact situation. To receive the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is to recognize that the councils of the first five centuries have spoken to all things necessary to salvation and upon these I can add no extra burdens.

St. Augustine Snake Bible What the Priesthood of All Believers is NOT

The priesthood of all believers in NOT the Piety of all believers.

Authority and hierarchy were quickly challenged after the establishment of the early Church. Roman persecution tested the integrity of the men assigned to protect the faith and while many were heroically martyred – some fled or gave over Bibles to the Romans. These leaders were then labeled, “traditoresand their entire ministry was called into question. Was their ordination invalidated by their lack of moral character? Was someone baptized by one of the “traditores” really baptized? In the 4th century, a group under the leadership of Bishop Donatus leveled such a charge and denied the ordination and authority of a Bishop who didn’t meet their new standard. This small North Africa sect inserted a division in a way that many modern Christians seem to employ regularly: priesthood by piety.

Against the Donatist idea of the priesthood by piety, St. Augustine drew a distinction between the visible and the eschatological church, not as two churches but rather as two moments in one and the same church. His position was that here on earth the church is holy, but not all its members are holy; it is the Body of Christ, but still having wheat and tares. Instead of deriving the piety of the Church from the level of  virtue of its individual members, he maintained that the piety of the Church is based entirely on the holy nature of its Head, Jesus Christ.

In it is this framework that we can trust nothing more than the authority and hierarchy of the Church. In the balance of authority between the Overseers, Presbyters, Deacons of the universal Church against the Councils and Creeds in light of the Holy Writ, there is the surest form of appeals we can hope for on Earth. Every just sphere of authority whether it be civil or familial follows the church’s example in this hierarchical process of appeals. Our faith is then put into the received faith and order of Christ and his Apostles and not the trust of mere men. Modern individualism imbibes all the dangers of Donatism by refusing either the authority of Ancient Christianity and the hierarchy of its living church.

St. Augustine Snake Bible What the Priesthood of All Believers is NOT

The Priesthood is His Priesthood

The Priesthood of All Believers is to be primarily understood in relation to worship. The Reformation wrestled some very important aspects of worship back from Rome. The first is the participation in worship, much of the medieval mass is done at the altar by a particular priest at the exclusion of the congregation. Even singing and the recitation of scripture was taken over by lectors and choirs. The reformers gave the music, singing, and scripture responses back to the church and returned congressional participation to the liturgy. The priesthood must be more than simply participation for it to be a true priesthood, it must have initiation and rites attached to its purpose. Like the Aaronic line, we are brought into the priesthood through a rite of baptism. Through baptism one is granted the authority to come to the Lord’s table and commune with Christ. This idea of eating the “sacrifice” should in itself remind us of the priestly language of the Old Testament. We are made partakers of the Sacrament by the nature of our priesthood. Thus, the nature of the “priesthood of all believers” is primarily sacramental.

By partaking of the sacramental body of Jesus Christ, we are exercising the true meaning of our priesthood. By eating his body together, we become part of the one body of the Church with Christ as its head. The sacramental meal in the Eucharist is the ultimate rejection of the individual as we all partake of one body together and in subordination to the hierarchy as our pastor acts as Christ feeding us the body of Christ. As we all partake of the one loaf, we become one body, one priesthood of all believers.<>siteаудит а онлайн

Read more