Resources

Reformation Tour Address: Rev HM Cartwright

Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:18:39 +0000

John Knox and some Fellow Reformers
An informal talk

An old historian claims that Athe Reformation of the sixteenth century is, next to the introduction of Christianity, the greatest event in history.... It was not a superficial amendment, not a mere restoration, but a regeneration; ... a vast progress beyond any previous age or condition of the church since the death of St. John. It went, through the intervening ages of ecclesiasticism, back to the fountainhead of Christianity itself, as it came from the lips of the Son of God and His inspired apostles. It was a deeper plunge into the meaning of the Gospel than even St. Augustine had made. It brought out from this fountain a new phase and type of Christianity, which had never as yet been fully understood and appreciated in the Church at large. It was, in fact, a new proclamation of the free Gospel of St. Paul, as laid down in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians".

It is one of the mysteries of providence that over a period of 1500 years, from so soon after its New Testament institution, the history of the Church was one generally of degeneracy and apostasy from Biblical Christianity, and that since the 7th century the Church in the West was almost entirely dominated by Rome, and those who maintained Biblical truth were opposed as heretics. The Church in Scotland may have preserved a measure of independence from Roman dominion, however lifeless it was ultimately, until Malcolm Canmore took Margaret as his Queen about 1069 A.D. Margaret, an English princess born in Hungary, made it the mission of her life, says one historian, “to bring into the bosom of the Church of Rome the one country in Western Europe which had lain hitherto outside its communion” (Duke, p.72). The Church established and endowed with much wealth by Margaret and her sons existed till it was overthrown at the Reformation in 1560.We know little as to the existence of real religion during the subsequent dark centuries. In T.M. Lindsay's view the pre-Reformation Church in Scotland “was perhaps more corrupt than anywhere out of Italy”.

The wealth of the church contributed to the introduction of many totally unsuitable though well-connected persons to responsible ecclesiastical positions so that they could draw the revenues. The result was a complete breakdown of discipline amongst the clergy, who were so ignorant that Archbishop Hamilton had to produce a simple catechism for them and exhort them to go over the reading of the service beforehand so as not to expose themselves to ridicule by their stammering. The priests were so immoral that the statute book of the land contained numerous laws against them having concubines and engaging in other immoral practices. A council of bishops and clergy which met in Edinburgh in 1549 traced the rise of what they called heresy (i.e. Protestant truth) to the “corruption of morals, and profane lewdness of life in churchmen of almost all ranks, together with the crass ignorance of literature and of all the liberal arts” (Hay Fleming). Fundamental to this state of affairs was the perversion by the Roman Church of basic Gospel doctrines, perversion formally adopted by Rome at the Council of Trent which was meeting in the middle of the 16th Century to specifically oppose the work of Reformation throughout Europe. It was recovery of the Gospel which promoted reformation and holiness.

When we think of the sixteenth century Reformation we tend to think of certain prominent individuals. We think of Luther as the Reformer of Germany, Calvin of Geneva, Zwingli of Zurich ... and Knox of Scotland. These men were raised up by God at a particular time to do decisive work for which he equipped them. John Knox is pre-eminently the Reformer of Scotland to whom the Church and Nation of Scotland owe more than to any other public figure in Scottish history. But there were others, before him and along with him and after him, who were instrumental in promoting this work of God.

We also tend to identify the Reformation with certain highly significant dates or events. We think of 1560 as the year of the Reformation in Scotland and that was the year which marked the public triumph of the Reformed Faith with such events as the sitting of the first Reformed Church of Scotland General Assembly, the production of the Scots Confession and the adoption by the Scottish estates or Parliament of the Reformed Faith as the Creed of the nation. But much had taken place previously in God’s grace and providence which prepared the way for these events and much was still to be done before the Reformed faith was secure in the life of the nation. Apart from a period in the mid-seventeenth century the Presbyterian Church was to contend for its existence against hostile forces for over a century and a quarter from 1560. One of the most notable secondary factors in preparing for Reformation in Scotland was the notoriously corrupt state of the Church and the ignorance and immorality of its ministers.

There were also other forces operating in the providence of God which were to assist the work of Reformation when His time came. The invention of printing opened the way for Bibles and books to be introduced from the Continent and from England by merchant seamen and invading English soldiers. An increasingly educated lesser nobility became more unwilling to kowtow to authoritarianism in church or state. Social changes made the younger nobles, the burghs and the artisans more vocal in asserting their independence. National and International politics led to a swing away from alliance with Romanist France to a more agreeable (or at least less hostile!) relation with Protestant England. The religious situation was very much intertwined with the political situation because of the involvement of the Roman Church in the activities of the state. But the Reformation in Scotland was primarily a religious movement. There is no doubt that it was a spiritual movement largely accounted for by God's blessing on His written and preached word. We must not ignore the influence of intellectuals like George Buchanan [1507-82] on intellectuals, or the effect of the Good and Godly Ballads of the Wedderburn’s on the common people. But the main instrument was the reading and preaching of the Word of God.

Thinking loosely of Knox’s fellow reformers, some were his predecessors, some were his contemporaries and some were his successors. We shall say just a little about his predecessors and himself, even less about his successors, and most about some of his contemporaries. Many who were not ministers helped to forward the work of Reformation but we shall keep to those who were preachers of the Word.

Predecessors
Undoubtedly in all generations there were those even amidst the deepest darkness who knew and loved the Lord and, even if amidst much ignorance, endeavoured to live so as to please Him. Long before the Reformation of 1560 there are evidences of opposition to the prevailing religion and the existence of persons devoted to the truth. During the 14th and 15th centuries there are records which demonstrate that popes and ecclesiastical and civil authorities were alarmed by the existence of what they called heresy and took steps to suppress it and those who promoted it, even burning those in Scotland who preached the doctrines associated with John Wycliffe who was himself burned at Oxford in 1384. In the early sixteenth Century William Tyndale's English New Testament was brought into Scotland by traders and Lutheran doctrines began to be broadcast in the country by books from abroad and by preachers. Patrick Hamilton, a member of a noble family, born in 1504, and destined for promotion in the Church, came under the influence of the teaching of Luther and Melancthon when studying on the continent. He was burned at St Andrews on the last day of February 1528 - a martyrdom which made many enquire into the reason for his death and resulted in the further broadcasting of his doctrine. One who at first argued publicly with him, Alexander Alane, known also as Alesius, or the Wanderer, was himself convinced of the scriptural truth of Hamilton's doctrine and eventually became a teacher of Lutheran doctrine in German Universities.

George Wishart (1513-46), at first a teacher in the grammar school at Montrose, became a preacher under Latimer in England. After a time on the continent, where he came into contact with Calvin and some of the Swiss Reformers, and after another year in Cambridge, he returned to Scotland and was the means of introducing the Reformed (or Calvinistic) rather than the Lutheran theology into the country. He preached with great spiritual effect throughout the east and south of Scotland and helped to consolidate the groups which were meeting to worship God according to his word. His last sermon was preached in Haddington and he was put to death on 1st March 1546. Dr. A.F. Mitchell is of the opinion that Patrick Hamilton laboured to the last for the revival of Scriptural teaching and Christian living within the old church rather than apart from her. “But Wishart, and those who came under his influence, seem to have abandoned this struggle, and to have striven for the formation of a new organisation apart from the old one. He formed kirks or congregations - at least in Montrose and Dundee; the former consisting probably mainly of the lesser gentry in the adjacent districts of Angus and Mearns, and the latter chiefly of the substantial burghers of the town of Dundee. I suppose”, continues Mitchell, “that some forms of discipline began to be put in practice in the Dundee congregation, and that it was on this account, as well as from the remarkable revival which had taken place under his ministrations, that the town came to be spoken of as the Scottish Geneva” (The Scottish Reformation, pp. 75 ff). Before 1560, Dundee was the first town in Scotland to have a completely organised Protestant Church with a regular minister and the sacraments, though there were what came to be called Aprivy kirks@ in various places - groups meeting together for prayer, reading of Scripture and discussion of the Scripture read.

Much of John Knox’s initial preparation for his work as the Reformer of Scotland consisted in his close association with George Wishart. This former priest, who heard the gospel from a converted friar, first appears amongst the Reformers as companion and bodyguard to Wishart during his preaching tour of the Lothians after an attempt had been made on his life at Dundee. One only needs to read Knox's references to Wishart to appreciate the affection and respect he had for him as a man and as a preacher. He must certainly have learned much from Wishart not only with regard to preaching but also with regard to the doctrine and discipline of the Reformed Churches. Later he spent time in England where he saw the effects of a less than thorough reformation, then in Frankfurt where he saw the impossibility of compromise with Anglican Ritualism, and finally in Geneva where he saw what he regarded as the best example of a Reformed Church and society.

As everyone knows Knox was born in the Haddington area in 1505 or 1514 and died in 1572. Almost nothing is known of his first thirty or forty years. It would not be easy to overestimate his contribution to the Scottish Church and Nation over the past 450 years. He was the principal means in God's hand of restoring Biblical Christianity. What he was, and was enabled to do, as a Christian, preacher and pastor, churchman and citizen, has left its mark. The personal holiness of life which prevented his enemies while he lived from reproaching his character gave power to his testimony amongst his contemporaries. He taught the Church again that the Bible must not only govern the Church doctrine and worship and discipline and government, but also the education and life of each individual. He was instrumental in ensuring that the theology of the Scottish Church would be, what we call for convenience, Calvinistic, as appears, for example, in the Scots Confession for which he was so largely responsible. By example as well as by precept and action he restored preaching to its central place in the work of the minister and the worship of the Church.

Knox saw the necessity of organising the Church along Scriptural lines, in its government, discipline and worship. Had he preached without organising the Church the Reformation movement would soon have come to nought. Had he organised it along accommodating lines the fruits of the preaching would not have been consolidated as they were. To Knox also we owe the position which the Scottish Church has taken up regarding the independence of Church and State in their own spheres under Christ and the duty of mutual helpfulness laid upon Church and State. As well as his main work of preaching the gospel to the people he was foremost in withstanding the encroachments of civil authority upon the Church and bringing the civil authorities to at least formally recognise their responsibility towards the truth of God and the church which maintained it.

Contemporaries
That there were others engaged in the work of Reformation is seen in that while awaiting the meeting of the Reformation Parliament in 1560 a committee was appointed, consisting of commissioners from the burghs and some nobles and barons to see to the distribution of ministers. John Knox was appointed to Edinburgh, Christopher Goodman to St. Andrews, Adam Heriot to Aberdeen, John Row to Perth, Paul Methven to Jedburgh, William Christison to Dundee, David Fergusson to Dunfermline and David Lindsay to Leith. John Spottiswood was appointed Superintendent for Lothian, John Winram for Fife, John Willock for Glasgow, John Carswell for Argyll and the Isles, and John Erskine of Dun for Angus and the Mearns. The Superintendents were a temporary expedient. They were ordinary ministers, subject like other ministers to their brethren, but they were responsible for establishing and supervising churches and ministries across a wide geographical area. Other preachers were licensed by the General Assembly when it met in December 1560.

While John Knox was undoubtedly the chief of those who drafted the Scots Confession he was one of a Committee consisting also of John Willock, John Winram, John Spottiswood, John Row and John Douglas. This same Committee drew up what became known as the First Book of Discipline - a book which set out the aims of the Reformers with regard to organisation of the Church and its ministry, eldership, diaconate and form of discipline, as well as their ideals for the provision of schools and universities. John Row's son - also John - said that the ministers drawing up these documents “took not their pattern from any Kirk in the world, no, not from Geneva itself; but, laying God's Word before them, made reformation according thereunto, both in doctrine first, and then in discipline” (Row's History, Wodrow Society, p.12). This does not mean that they were not indebted to others for many of their insights into the truth. Knox himself had been a close associate of Wishart who had translated the First Helvetic Confession of 1536. He had been involved in the preparation of the Church of England's Articles in Edward's reign, and of the Confession of Faith of the English Congregation in Geneva. In England and in Frankfort he had associated with John a Lasco, the Polish Reformer, who had prepared a Catechism, modelled on Calvin's, which was part of the basis of the Heidelberg Catechism. And of course he was well acquainted with Calvin himself and his writings, and consulted him on various subjects.

What is generally regarded as the first General Assembly of the Reformed Church of Scotland met from 20th December 1560, and of the forty-two members it seems that only six were already recognised as ministers, though it is a bit difficult to be sure which of the Commissioners who were later ministers were recognised as such by this time. The reasons for the absence of some of the ministers just mentioned are not known, but possibly they had gone to their spheres of service - and travel was not so easy in those days.

Perhaps we can glance briefly at some of these early preachers of the Word and get some idea of the variety of means which the Lord used in the Reformation. I do not expect you to remember the details any more than I would myself if they were not written in front of me, but perhaps we will get a general impression.

John Willock (d. 1585) Willock had been a friar in Ayr but had fled to England in the 1530s to escape persecution when he began to preach Biblical doctrine. He was imprisoned for a time in London for preaching against popish practices in the Church. Later he had to flee to Holland for supporting the claims of Lady Jane Gray to the English throne in place of Mary, who was to be responsible for the deaths of many faithful Protestants. He was involved in encouraging the privy kirks. At the time when the Reformation struggle was coming to a head he was outlawed along with some of his brethren as a rebel for not appearing for trial in Stirling to answer charges of preaching without being in ministerial office. This was though the Queen Regent, taking fright at the approach of a large unarmed company of their supporters, begged them not to come, promising that the proposed trial would be abandoned. He assisted Knox in Edinburgh for a little time and after the Reformation was formally recognised he was settled in Glasgow, first as minister and then as superintendent. He continued to be high profiled and frequently fell foul of the authorities and had to flee to England from time to time.

John Winram (c. 1492-1582)Winram was a well educated man who had been prominent in the unreformed Church and its Councils. A sub-Abbot in St Andrews he had preached at the trial of George Wishart in 1546 and had been involved in the execution of Protestant martyrs during the 1550s. He had heard John Knox preach his first sermon in St Andrews in 1547 and got a telling off from the Archbishop for doing so and not preventing Knox from preaching. No doubt the Lord was working in him over a period. By 1560 he had so cast in his lot with the Protestant cause that he was involved in drawing up the Reformation documents we have mentioned and was settled as superintendent of Fife and Strathearn. His brother Robert was a Commissioner from Ratho, near Edinburgh, at the first General Assembly, which suggests that he also originated in Ratho.

John Spottiswood (1510-88) Spottiswood, from Berwickshire, sympathised with the earlier alleged heretics to the extent that he abandoned his plans of taking office in the Roman church and went to England where he was influenced by Archbishop Cranmer. He became minister of Mid-Calder and superintendent of Lothian. He contributed to the Scots Confession and to the First Book of Discipline. Having officiated at the coronation of the infant James VI in 1567 he continued to support the king’s party in the later civil war and seems to have fallen somewhat out of favour for not actively opposing attempts to reimpose a nominal episcopacy. The excuse for giving episcopal titles to certain ministers was that thereby they could draw legally for the church=s benefit from the revenues attached to many of the positions and properties of the pre-Reformation Church. The so-called bishops and archbishops were to have no more authority in the church than other ministers. But the more consistent Presbyterians saw this as a compromise of principle, opening the door to the reimposition of a full episcopal system, as indeed was the case.

John Row (c. 1525-80) Very much an ecclesiastical lawyer Row, from near Stirling, had functioned in the papal court at Rome, from which he returned only in 1559. His appointment to investigate the spread of the Protestant “heresy”, some say as official Papal Nuncio to Scotland, led to his conversion to the truth. He was often in John Knox’s company and he contributed to the production of the Second Book of Discipline, 1578, drawn up largely by Andrew Melville, which developed the teaching of the First Book of Discipline on the Presbyterian system of Church Government. He was minister in Perth (known then as St Johnston) from 1560 until his death. He strongly opposed episcopacy. He was a member of the first General Assembly. His son John, the Covenanting minister of Carnock, wrote what those who know it regard as one of the most accurate contemporary histories of the time.

John Douglas (c. 1494-1574) Qualified in medicine and theology Douglas held prominent positions in St Andrews University and had been involved with Winram in the trial and condemnation of at least one pre-Reformation martyr, the aged Walter Milne, in 1558. It is thought that he contributed significantly to the section in the First Book of Discipline on the universities. He continued in the University and did not have a charge, though he acted as an elder on the local kirk session. He fell in with the attempts to reimpose episcopacy, even accepting the nominal office of archbishop , much to the displeasure of John Knox and frequent General Assemblies.

Christopher Goodman (1519-1603) Goodman was very close to John Knox. An Englishman, he had been with Knox in Frankfurt when exiled from England in 1553 and supported him against those there who wished to reintroduce aspects of the English Church Liturgy. They had been colleagues in the English Congregation in Geneva. He advocated resistance to oppressive powers, even to the extent of revolution. In Scotland he ministered briefly in Ayr before being settled as minister in St Andrews, a University town where it was thought that he, an academic and had taught briefly at Oxford, would be suited. He was involved with Knox in producing the Book of Common Order, and was also involved with the Geneva Bible and the metrical psalms. He returned to England in 1565. His sermons in St Andrews on the Book of Revelation greatly impressed young John Napier of Merchiston Castle, Edinburgh, the mathematician and scientist who invented logarithms. Napier was thoroughly Protestant and himself wrote a book on Revelation showing that Babylon was the Church of Rome.

Adam Heriot (c. 1514-1574) Heriot had been a friar in the St Andrews Abbey of which John Winram had been a sub-abbot, and he became minister in Aberdeen. Thomas M’Crie makes the point that several of the Scottish clergy, who were favourable to the Protestant doctrine, had “contrived to retain their places in the Church by concealing their sentiments, or by securing the favour of some powerful patron” (Life of John Knox, p. 157). While commending those Protestant preachers who had valiantly gone throughout the country preaching the Gospel amidst much danger, M’Crie urges us not to “load with heavy censure, or even deprive of all praise, such as, less enlightened, or less courageous, were tardy in appearing for the Cause. He who ‘knew what is in man’ has taught us not to reject such disciples, in the dawn of light, and in perilous times. Nicodemus, who at first ‘came to Jesus by night’, and Joseph of Arimathea, who was his disciple, ‘but secretly for fear of the Jews’, afterwards avouched their faith in him, and obtained the honour of embalming and interring his body, when all his early followers had forsaken him and fled”. In this category he puts Winram, Heriot, Spottiswood and Carswell. An old book of the Annals of Aberdeen tells that Adam Heriot received a stipend of ,200 from the revenues of the town, plus a black suit of clothes and other necessities annually to the value of ,30, plus ,10 for house rent. More importantly he is described as having a reputation for learning and being an eloquent preacher, and esteemed highly for his distinguished humanity, probity and general worth.

Paul Methven Methven, who died in 1606, was a baker from Falkland in Fife who was influenced in early life by Miles Coverdale in England. He was active from 1558 in preaching and administering the sacraments in Fife and Angus and encouraging the breaking up of images. He built up the privy kirk in Cupar, and was chosen as minister of the Protestant Congregation in Dundee, the first openly functioning Protestant Church in Scotland. Like John Willock he was condemned as a rebel for preaching without ministerial licence. He was described by a contemporary as a “mild man, preaching the evangel of grace and the remission of sins in the blood of Christ”. In 1560 he was appointed minister in Jedburgh. Sadly he was deposed from the ministry and excommunicated only a few years later, accused of adultery. He became a clergyman in the Church of England.

William Christison Christison, a native of Fife, was appointed minister of Dundee from the time of the Reformation, we are told Ato the great joy of the inhabitants@. Having been influenced by Lutheranism while resident in Norway he must have been noted for preaching before that time as he was, along with Willock and Methven declared a rebel for preaching without being in what was recognised by the authorities as ministerial office. He was one of the men associated with Andrew Melville in drawing up the Second Book of Discipline.

David Fergusson (c. 1525-98) Fergusson has been described as “one of the most notable Reformation ministers”. Originally a maker and seller of gloves in Dundee and never graduating from any college he was not without learning and has been described as a Latin scholar. He was very much devoted to the use and improvement of the Scottish language. He began to preach among the privy kirks and at the Reformation was settled as minister in Dunfermline. He wrote in defence of the Protestant view of the mass as idolatry and later against the greed of the Scottish nobility on depriving the Reformed Church of revenues which would enable it to put the proposals of the Books of Discipline for the Church and Education into fuller effect. He preached a sermon in Leith in 1571 before the General Assembly and the nobility from Malachi 3: 7-12. It was described as characterised by sound doctrine, faithfulness and good Scottish composition, and contained pointed rebukes to the nobles for not making available the funds needed to finance the Church, the care of the poor and education. John Knox very much approved of it.

At a Synod meeting in Fife in 1596 when the Church was facing a very testing time Fergusson, the oldest minister there, tried to urge them to go forward. He spoke of a time when there were only six Reformed ministers and they had gone forward without fear and care of the world and prevailed - when there was no word of a stipend and the ecclesiastical and civil authorities were opposed to them. But now he saw that the fear of man, flattery and the fear of losing stipend was weakening their hearts. He used to have conversations with James VI on his frequent visits to Dunfermline. James VI rather liked him. On one occasion James asked him why he could not have bishops in Scotland as in England. Fergusson said that he could have bishops here, but “remember, you must make us all bishops, else you will never content us”! James said the trouble was that none of them liked to have any one above him. Fergusson said that they were Paul’s kind of bishops, Christ’s bishops. James reply included the use of the devil’s name and Fergusson told him that he should not swear. There was much greater familiarity then between monarch and subject, which should be remembered when John Knox’s exchanges with Mary are considered.

David Lindsay (c. 1531-1613) Connected with the aristocracy Lindsay had travelled in France and Switzerland and returned as a Protestant in 1560, whatever was true of him previously, and was appointed minister in Leith, which for a time after the Reformation also incorporated the parish of Restalrig. In his earlier years he was one of the leading advocates of Presbyterianism but he became more “moderate” in his later years, seemed ready to keep in with the king and those in authority, and was given the nominal position of bishop of Ross in 1600 for his services to James VI, though he still at times spoke out even at the Privy Council in defence of more throughly Presbyterian ministers who were being oppressed for their resistance to the Stewarts’ attempts at imposing episcopacy. Lindsay was involved in producing the Second Book of Discipline, though he had defended the nominal episcopacy proposed for the Church in 1573- which was of course intended as a first step towards a more thoroughgoing episcopal system.

John Carswell (d. c. 1572) Carswell is thought to have been descended from a Border family which settled in Argyll and was not particularly well-to-do. Having the Earl of Argyll as his patron he held legal and administrative offices in the Roman Church in Argyll and became the clergyman of the parish of Kilmartin by 1553. Argyll and Carswell both adhered to the Reformation and Carswell was made Superintendent of Argyll in 1560 and Bishop of the Isles in 1565. He is most noted for having translated Knox’s Book of Common Order into a literary style of Gaelic in 1567, and this is said to be the first printed book to appear in either Irish or Scottish Gaelic - a book printed in Edinburgh by Robert Leprevik. It seems that Carswell’s translation did not wholly follow the original but adapted it somewhat to the situation in Argyll and perhaps to his own inclination for some aspects of the old order and for the authority of the state in the church, although, says James Kirk, “he tried to communicate the fundamental principles of the reformed faith, as well as to remove any obvious traces of Catholicism which might remain in the minds of the people”. He did not translate the psalms which were appended to the Book of Common Order. What effect his book had on the Highlands is hard to say.

Support for the Reformation was originally strongest on the east coast of Scotland and in places like Ayr which had trade by sea with England and overseas. Towns and seaports were much more open to Reforming influences. Argyll was the first area in the Highlands to be open to Protestantism, largely due to the early and active adherence of the Campbell Earls of Argyll to the Protestant cause. However, it must be said in passing that there is evidence that the Reformed Church in the first decade of its existence did not neglect the mainland Highlands but provided ministers or readers for most parishes, with greater or lesser success.

John Erskine (1509-90). Erskine was laird of Dun, near Montrose, from his infancy as his grandfather and father were killed at Flodden in 1513. Erskine adopted Reformed views early in life and had connections with George Wishart, whom he protected, though it was through the preaching of Knox in 1555 that he was persuaded to break with Rome. His connection with the gentry and his marriage to a French women who came to Scotland with Mary of Guise helped to protect him and indeed involved him very much in the politics of the time leading to the Reformation. He was a leader among the gentry who supported and protected the Protestant preachers. It was at Dun that Knox conducted one of the early pre-Reformation celebrations of the Lord’s Supper according to Reformation principles. Erskine himself became a preacher and was made Superintendent of Angus and the Mearns. Even Queen Mary described him as “a mild and sweet-natured man, with true honesty and uprightness”, though John Knox, with whom he was closely associated is said to have thought that he was too moderate in his attachment to the cause.

From these potted biographical notices we see how varied were the backgrounds, experiences and gifts of those used to establish the Gospel in the parishes of Scotland at the Reformation. The treasure was in earthen vessels but the vessels were fashioned in such a way as to equip the Church and glorify the Lord – “that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us” (2 Corinthians 4:7)

Successors
You are probably already weary enough and it is impossible to spend time, as one would like, considering the character and contribution of all those men who were prominent in the early days of the Reformation from popery. There was George Buchanan (1506-1582), usually referred to as a distinguished Scottish humanist, friend and tutor of royalty, university professor, Assembly moderator though not a minister, and advocate of a constitutional monarchy; John Craig (1512-1600), Knox's colleague in St. Giles; James Lawson, Knox's successor; John Welsh, Knox's son in law, minister during times of revival in Ayr, imprisoned and exiled for attending an Assembly banned by the king in 1605, and father of John Welsh the Covenanter; Robert Rollock, Edinburgh College principal and preacher; John Davidson, minister in turn of Liberton, the Canongate Kirk and Prestonpans, a faithful contender for the liberties of the church who suffered much for his pains; Robert Bruce, minister in Edinburgh, supply in Larbert, moderator of the General Assembly of 1588, only one year after being chosen as minister of St Giles, the spiritual father of Alexander Henderson the distinguished leader of the second Reformation, noted for preaching which was blessed to thousands, sermons on the sacraments which are still referred to, and a ministry during exile in Inverness which had repercussions in the Highlands for centuries. But one whom we cannot ignore at this point is Knox's immediate successor as leader of the Reforming movement, Andrew Melville. If you can you should read his biography by Dr. M’Crie, which is full of useful information, especially concerning the religion and education of the times, as well as concerning Melville himself.

Principal John MacLeod claims that “when the Reformer laid down his armour in 1572 he left behind him in the Scottish ministry no outstanding man to carry on his work. The work, however, was not of man and it was to be carried on, and if a man was needed to champion the good cause the Scottish Church had not long to wait for him. The times called for a man of grit, and a man of grit came forward. This was Andrew Melville”. Melville, who was just 15 years of age in 1560, was a highly academic man who completely reformed the educational methods of the University of Glasgow while he was Principal there, before going on the preside over St Mary’s College, St Andrews, which was a training ground for the rising ministry. I do not think that Melville was noted as a great popular preacher himself but he made a tremendous contribution to the preaching of Scotland by providing for a solid academic and theological grounding for the rising ministry. He is probably more commonly remembered for the strong leadership which he gave to the Church, at the cost of much personal suffering, in endeavouring to withstand the monarchs and the civil authorities in their attempts, too often successful, to bring the church into bondage to the state. In The Second Book of Discipline, 1578, “the banner of the freedom the Church was definitely unfurled”, says Principal John MacLeod. Rallying to that banner brought suffering and death to many.

I have taken longer than intended but my aim was just to illustrate that while God raises up great men for great works at critical times in the history of the Church, His work is ongoing and he uses many instruments, some well-polished and others more rough and ready, some in the public eye and others much more obscure, some whose early promise is realised and others who do not live up to expectations. I am sure that behind those who were used in the work of reformation were many praying people whose names are not recorded on earth. The Church never gets beyond the need of reforming and, as in the sixteenth century, reformation is not by innovation but by returning more faithfully to the sources - continually bringing ourselves to the standard of God’s Word. As we continue to sink more deeply into the spiritual and moral depths from which the Reformation delivered us it becomes us to join with the psalmist: “O God, how long shall the adversary reproach? Shall the enemy blaspheme thy name for ever? Why withdrawest thou thy hand, even thy right hand? pluck it out of thy bosom” (Ps. 74: 10, 11).

Competition Resources: Robert Bruce ‘B’

Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:17:31 +0000

Some extracts from a sermon by Robert Bruce preached before the King James VI

Extract 1.
So the first lesson we have to learn is this – measure not the favour of God by any external thing in the earth, whether it be prosperity or adversity. The second thing that you learn here is this – you see that kings may take the botch. There is no prince in the earth exempt from the judgements of God, when he pleases to apply them.

Extract 2.
Now, observe
where my note rises; he is scarcely free from the fearful wars, when he falls into a terrible pestilence. We see, then, that the estate of the godliest and best princes is to be subject to continual temptation, affliction
and vexation, so that the end of one trouble is the beginning of another; so it pleases the Lord to exercise them. And for what end, I ask you? It is to the end that this life, with the pleasures and glory of it, may become bitter to their taste, and so they may be moved to seek for a better one. And this lesson appertains to all Christians; for, if you be a Christian, you must look for trouble, of necessity you must take up your daily cross and follow Christ.

Extract 3.
Now in this extremity, the prophet visits him and in the name of the Lord enjoins two things to him: first, to take order with his house; next, to prepare him for death and to pull his heart the more from all present things and all earthly comfort, assures him of death shortly. And for his further assurance, he doubles the word saying, “Thou shalt die, and not live.” It is so hard a thing to get the hearts of kings pulled
from their wealth and from their glory.

Extract 4.
But it is not possible that words can make men prepare themselves for death! The readiest way to eschew the horror of death is to think upon death; and yet, notwithstanding all the great spectacles (surrounding death)
that we daily see, we are never moved the slightest.
Always, the readiest way, as I have said, is to take up such a life, presently, as may best agree with that life which we intend
unto. You must take up a new course, you must conform your life here with the life to come, that a harmony being between the two lives, death may be to thee an entry into that everlasting joy. You must bid all your foul affections good night, for you and they cannot come both to heaven. You must bid sin, to which you are a slave, and an ordinary servant, farewell; for except you are this way altered, you must not think that death shall be to you a passage to heaven. Learn then, you that would have death pleasant, so to rule and square this life that it may agree in some measure with the life to come.

Extract 5.
Application Then I say, praised be the living God, our king is not diseased, but surely his country is heavily diseased. For so long as Papists and Papistry remain in it, so long as these pestilent men remain in it, and so long as these floods of iniquity which flows from the great men remains, there is a heavy judgement hanging over this country; and in my conscience, I cannot but look for a heavy judgement until these things be removed. There is no great man but whatsoever he likes, he thinks he has licence to do. And not only is this in this part of the land, but in all other parts of this nation gross iniquities are committed, and the kirk is made a prey to all men; there is such disdain and contempt for the Word in all the estates. Except these things be purged, I cannot expect but that the Lord shall raise some, as it were from the furthest Indies, to plague this land. Although I doubt not but that the liberty of the kirk here, and the sobs and sighs of the godly here, have delayed the judgement from the whole land, yea, I am assured of it.

And therefore I pray God that he may so work in your heart, Sir, by grace that you may put your hand to remove
your part of the grievance.
The Lord of his mercy establish your heart by grace, that for no man’s pleasure you communicate with other men’s sins. Three ways we are said to communicate with other men’s sins: first, when both with heart and hand we do one thing with them, secondly, when we consent with our heart only; thirdly, when we oversee where we should reprove, and forbear where we should punish. And in this way magistrates are only guilty. Thus far for the application. Now I go forward to my text.

Extract 6.
Now, would to God I might obtain this from office-bearers in kirk and state,
that they would now seek
in their life to have the approbation of their conscience in the time of their death. The Lord grant it to all of them that seek to serve him, but especially the Lord make you (Sir) so to walk in your life that you may have a joyful testimony of your conscience in your death. That being approved with your own conscience, in the mouth of these two faithful witnesses your salvation may be sure, not in yourself but in the blood of Christ Jesus, whose mercy alone is our merit. As this is craved for him,
so it is craved for the rest of the office-bearers: Lord grant that they may follow such a trade of life that in their death their conscience may make mention of their deeds to their joy. Thus far for this part of his behaviour.

Extract 7.
May the Lord work this in you (Sir), that as he has honoured you in your birth, so you may honour him in your doings in your government! Lord, of his mercy give us hearts to crave this! Lord give us hearts to sigh for the things we cannot amend! Lord give us grace to have recourse to Christ Jesus, and in his mercy to enter into that city, for outwith it there is nothing but swine and dogs, nothing but papistry and idolatry. Let us, I say, have recourse to this God, who is only able to preserve both kirk and country. To this God be all honour, praise and glory, for now and ever. Amen.

Competition Resources: Robert Bruce ‘A’

Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:14:29 +0000

Sermons preached in the Kirk of Edinburgh by Master Robert Bruce, Minister of Christ’s Evangel there:
as they were received from his mouth: meet to comfort all such
as are troubled either in body or mind

Originally printed in Edinburgh in 1591

DEDICATION

To the Right Honourable, my Lord Provost, Bailies,
Counsel and Session of the Kirk of Edinburgh:

Mr Robert Bruce,
Minister of Christ’s Evangel there,

Wishes grace, mercy and peace from God the Father, etc

Right honourable and worthy Senators, you may claim justly the fruits of my labours if their value was great: For why? My first public ministry I discharged it with you; you were the hearers of these sermons, and at your request they come forth. So if there were any profit to be reaped of such-like stuff, it justly appertains to you. And in respect that they are the first-fruits, suppose things are not so well digested, and so thoroughly
advised, as they should be, yet I doubt not but you will bear with it. And when it pleases God to mend with me, and to multiply his talent further on me, it shall be good reason that I mend with you. For among the many distractions and weighty affairs wherewith we have been burdened these bygone years, as yourselves know perfectly, it was much for me to possess a quiet and sanctified mind, to get any little thing done. Always they will serve to confirm your memories of such things as you have heard of before, and to comfort in some small measure, all such as it shall please God to touch with such troubles of mind. The Lord bless you in your affairs; and as your duty is, be instant for me, that the Lord would open to me a further door of utterance, and continue his favourable countenance with me unto the end; and that to his Majesty’s glory, and to the fulfilling of my ministry, which I have received of the Lord; to whom be all praise, honour and glory, for ever and ever, Amen.
From Edinburgh, the sixth of December, 1591

The First Sermon

Upon the 38th Chapter of the Prophecy of Isaiah,

Preached in the presence of the King’s Majesty

Isaiah XXXVIII

1. About that time was Hezekiah sick unto death. And the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz came unto him, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Put thine house in an order: for thou shalt die, and not live.
2. And Hezekiah turned his face unto the wall, and prayed to the Lord,
3. And said, I beseech thee, Lord, remember now how I have walked before thee in truth, and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight. And Hezekiah wept sore.

______________

In the words which I have presently read, (well-beloved in Christ Jesus,) the heavy disease where-into this godly king fell is at length described, and the manner of his behaviour under this disease is well set down. It pleased the Lord to exercise this godly king with this heavy temptation, amongst many more; and suppose it be true that diseases are common to all flesh, yet the manner how to behave ourselves under diseases is not common. Therefore, let all men
take heed to the parts of this history, that they may learn how to behave themselves in the day of their misery; that, taking up this king’s behaviour, they may in the end obtain his comfort.

In the beginning of this chapter, the king is brought under a heavy disease.
Firstly, the kind and manner of this disease is concealed, although it may be gathered from the penultimate verse of the chapter, and therefore I note it here.
Secondly, the time when he fell in this disease is also noted.
Thirdly, the gravity and weight of this disease is likewise noted.
And, last of all, the manner of the king’s behaviour under so terrible a disease is at length set down.

1. The kind of disease Hezekiah suffered from

To return to the first: The kind of the disease, as you may gather out of that verse, was a contagious
boil, for the name which is given to that boil is that same name which is given to the botch of Egypt, that same name which is expressed in Exodus 9:9,
a purulent
kind of boil, striking out in many heads or in many spots
; for so the nature of the word signifies: the most dangerous and deadly kind of pest and boil that was in the days of that king. Indeed, since
the world has grown in wickedness, so it has brought forth more dangerous kinds of botches than before; the experience whereof this town has had. For as man is ingenious to invent new sins to provoke God to wrath, the Lord being both just and prudent on the other part, devises new botches and plagues to punish these new sins of men; for the storehouse of the Lord’s judgement can never be emptied. But surely it is a wonderful matter that he should have visited so godly a king with so terrible a botch when this plague proceeds commonly from his hot rage and wrath. For from his wrath it takes its name often, as when it is called the finger of the Lord, his fear by night, his flying arrow by day, and the devouring plague.

Now, I say, the matter is wonderful, that he, loving this king so well, should so extremely have plagued in the sight of the whole world. What should this teach us? This visitation of the King, teaches us two necessary lessons: First, it teaches us not to measure the favour and hatred of God by any external thing in the earth; for if we look to the visitation of God upon his children, if we look to the nature of the plague and affliction, either in quantity or quality, if we look to the long lasting and the daily trouble
from the plague, in the judgement of man, and in the judgement of him that is afflicted, some time it shall come to pass, that he will think himself to be in a worse case than any of the reprobate. But however it be so esteemed in the heart and judgement of man, yet it is far otherwise in the judgement and heart of God; for there lurks one thing in the heart of God concerning us that are his children, and another thing concerning the reprobate, in such sort that suppose affliction be common to us and them, yet the cause from which the affliction proceeds nor the end to which it tends is not common. For as to us, our affliction flows from the favour, love, and mercy of God in Christ Jesus, and tends to our great profit and advantage,
that we being corrected here should not perish hereafter with the wicked world. But as to the affliction of the reprobate, it flows from the hot wrath and indignation of God, and from him as a righteous judge; beginning their punishment here, which will last for ever. So affliction which is to them a part of his justice, to us is a merciful correction.

The prophet Isaiah in his 27th chapter expresses this matter in so lively a manner that I think there is no part of Scripture in which there is greater comfort. In the 4th and 7th verses of that chapter he says to the kirk, I am not, saith he, in fury, I am not in rage, supposing I strike thee; yea, supposing I strike thee, saith he, I strike not thee as I strike them that strike thee. I slay not thee as I slay them that slay thee; for in striking thee I purge thee from thine iniquity, in striking thee I remove thy sins from thee; but I do not so with the rest.

So the first lesson we have to learn is this – measure not the favour of God by any external thing in the earth, whether it be prosperity or adversity. The second thing that you learn here is this – you see that kings may take the botch. There is no prince in the earth exempt from the judgements of God, when he pleases to apply them.
Thus far for the name of the disease

2. The time when Hezekiah suffered from this disease

The second thing that is noted here is the time when the king fell in this disease. There is no certain time set down here, but the time that is specified is relative to the previous history. It is relative to the time when the king of Assyria took up arms against him, which was the thirteenth year of his reign; so it was the fourteenth year of his reign that he fell in this disease; for this godly king reigned twenty-nine years, fifteen of them were given to him after his disease. In the fourteenth year of his reign the wars began, and this time is relative to that history; so it must be in the fourteenth of his reign that he fell in that disease. Whether the disease was after the siege or in the middle of it, the judgement of the learned varies; although in 2 Chronicles 32 it appears that he fell in this disease after the siege and time of his delivery. For we read in that history that the king, in the middle of the siege, was building
up the ruinous walls, was stopping the conduits of the waters, was sending messages to Isaiah, and was resorting to the temple. These are all arguments that he was a healthy and well-disposed king, and there is no argument of infirmity here; so it appears that it was after the siege that he fell in this disease.

Now, observe
where my note rises; he is scarcely free from the fearful wars, when he falls into a terrible pestilence. We see, then, that the estate of the godliest and best princes is to be subject to continual temptation, affliction
and vexation, so that the end of one trouble is the beginning of another; so it pleases the Lord to exercise them. And for what end, I ask you? It is to the end that this life, with the pleasures and glory of it, may become bitter to their taste, and so they may be moved to seek for a better one. And this lesson appertains to all Christians; for, if you be a Christian, you must look for trouble, of necessity you must take up your daily cross and follow Christ. As for the cattle-marts
of this world, the Lord in his righteous judgement has appointed them for slaughter. But if you be one of them whom he has not appointed for slaughter, you must be subject to a continual exercise, either in soul or in body, in family or fame; one way or other, you must be subject to a continual exercise. For there is no way to pierce the clouds but by a continual tribulation, and seeing it is so, it becomes us not to be grunting like swine in
this earth, but it becomes us to have our hearts elevated,
and our minds lifted up to the heavens, where our Master reigns in glory, and to use the things of this world as they may best further us to the next world. Otherwise, terrible is the judgement and disadvantage
that the things of this world will bring upon us.
Thus far concerning the time

3. The gravity of Hezekiah’s disease

As to the gravity of the disease, I find it noted in the verse which I have read, by sundry things. Firstly, the prophet shows the gravity of the disease when he says he was “sick unto death.” Secondly, the gravity of his disease is aggravated
in that the prophet gets a command in the name of the Lord to assure him of death. And thirdly, the boil itself which struck out was deadly and shows also the weight of the disease.

Now in this extremity, the prophet visits him and in the name of the Lord enjoins two things to him: first, to take order with his house; next, to prepare him for death and to pull his heart the more from all present things and all earthly comfort, assures him of death shortly. And for his further assurance, he doubles the word saying, “Thou shalt die, and not live.” It is so hard a thing to get the hearts of kings pulled
from their wealth and from their glory.

The prophet in visiting the king teaches us a point of duty towards our diseased brethren; a point whereunto we are bound by nature, by charity, and by all sorts of laws, but chiefly we, who have the care of souls and represent Isaiah in our office. At this time chiefly, we are bound to visit our brethren, for at such times the devil is most busy, the bodies of men being abstracted from the hearing of the preached word, and old sins begin to revive and return to their memories, and therefore at this time there is a great need of comfort.

We are also informed here by the prophet how to propose our comfort, lest we spend our time in idle and unprofitable talk, as worldly men do. First of all we are to bid our patient to order his house, that is, make his testament, and lay aside the worldly part, that his heart may be ready to go when the Lord calls on his soul. The most part of the world are so negligent in this point of duty, that there are very few that have their hearts free when the Lord visits.
They are compelled to leave their heart behind them, where their earthly treasure
is, or where they love best, and that because they set themselves here as in a permanent city. And in their lifetime they will not so much as once think of death, but dream to themselves length of days.

That which I wonder most of is that there is not a man about them that will do so much as once put them in mind of death, not even when the Lord begins to strike. Some say, “It will trouble him and make him weep;” others come in and say, “They would do it, but they cannot for tears and sorrow;” the doctor says, “Nature is strong enough; be of good comfort!” So if the pastor leaves this point of duty, there is almost not a friend that begins to admonish a man, while his outward senses begin to leave him. Now, as it becomes the pastor to propose this, so it becomes the patient to obey it; for this command is not given by men but by God. Isaiah gives it in God’s name, and it is not only given to kings, but it reaches to all masters of families whoever they be, for the Lord wills them to have a care for their families, not only in their lifetime, but in their death also, that by this means all occasions of quarrels and debates might be cut off after their disease. The patriarchs, the godly kings have left their example concerning this point, so that I will not insist at the present any further on it.

Now the worldly part being set aside and the conscience put at rest, the soul is prepared to hear of death; and so the prophet comes in the second place, with the denunciation of death. Indeed, Isaiah appears in his denunciation to be very peremptory
; but however peremptory he may be, he has his warrant. We do not have the same warrant, therefore we ought not to use the same strictness towards the patient; although we may generally exhort him to exonerate
his conscience, to unburden his soul, and to make ready for whenever it will please the Lord to call. So, in a word, the chief points of our visit stands in these two: first to bid the patient lay aside the worldly part; and secondly to prepare for the heavenly part.

But before I leave the denunciation, there appear in the denunciation three difficulties.

Objection 1 – This denunciation of death is too hard
First, it appears that the prophet in his denunciation, is over-rigorous against so godly a king, and handles the king excessively in this heavy disease. He cuts from him, at first, all hope of this present life; he does far beyond what our doctors of medicine do. If they see any certain sign of death they will not show it to the patient himself, but to some of his friends; he, on the contrary, denounces death to him, constantly affirming that he will die. Now, this appears to be too hard; but I answer, if this denunciation had been used against the heathen or a licentious person, in truth it would have been a hard denunciation. For as to a heathen, he has his hope only in the earth, it is not possible for him to make his hope to mount above the earth, so that he thinks when he is gone, all is lost to him.

Secondly, this denunciation would appear too hard and extreme to them that live according to the flesh; for, oh! How bitter the death is, says Solomon, to them that live according to the flesh. And, I pray you, what is the cause that death is so bitter to them? Because in the agony of death, they feel another thing beside this violent separation of the soul from the body; for besides this they feel a conscience of iniquity gnawing them. They also feel the heavy wrath of God kindled against their sin and iniquity, and the sense of this wrath strikes such a horror in their souls, that at the very thought
of death they tremble. Therefore I say, to such kind of person as these, this would have been a hard kind of threatening; but to the Christian, and namely to such a godly king as this was, it was no hard language.

For we who are Christians, we must not look at death as she is in her own nature; but we must look to her as she is made to us by the benefit and mercy of God in Christ Jesus. Looking on death this way, is not death spoiled of her sting? Is she not sanctified to us in the death of Christ? Is she not made to us an entry to everlasting felicity? Is she not a returning from our banishment, and passing to our everlasting heaven? So, looking on death, not in its own nature, but as she is made to us in Christ, at the voice of death we ought to lift up our eyes and be glad that the redemption of our soul is so near. When the separation will be made, and the Lord will call on us, we ought to rejoice, seeing he has made death to us a further step to joy, and an agent of a closer conjunction.

But it is not possible that words can make men prepare themselves for death! The readiest way to eschew the horror of death is to think upon death; and yet, notwithstanding all the great spectacles (surrounding death)
that we daily see, we are never moved the slightest.
Always, the readiest way, as I have said, is to take up such a life, presently, as may best agree with that life which we intend
unto. You must take up a new course, you must conform your life here with the life to come, that a harmony being between the two lives, death may be to thee an entry into that everlasting joy. You must bid all your foul affections good night, for you and they cannot come both to heaven. You must bid sin, to which you are a slave, and an ordinary servant, farewell; for except you are this way altered, you must not think that death shall be to you a passage to heaven. Learn then, you that would have death pleasant, so to rule and square this life that it may agree in some measure with the life to come.

Objection 2 – The denunciation of death is superfluous
The second difficulty
that appears in this denunciation is this, it appears to be superfluous. Why? The kind of pestilence assured him of his death, the physicians assured him, and the weakness of his own nature assured him that he would die; so the denunciation appears to be superfluous. But it is not superfluous in fact. If we will examine our own nature, how loath all sorts of men are to die; for we know by experience that there are some who will scarcely take death to them even at the last gasp. What love we have to this life is known to all men. Therefore the prophet so strictly denounced death; that by this strait denunciation the king may be moved to lift his hope above nature, and all natural means
and of God only to seek support, where nature had denied him. And so the denunciation is not superfluous; it is the ready way to make him to run the right way.

Objection 3 – The Lord appears to dissemble
Now the last difficulty that appears in this denunciation is this; that the Lord appears by his prophet to dissemble. Is not this a high dissimulation to say that he will die and in the mean time to mean the contrary? So there appears a great dissimulation on God’s part denounced by his prophet, that he should die instantly, and yet he is of mind that he should live fifteen years after this! To answer to this, this general point must be laid down as foundational,
that to all the threatenings and promises of God there is a condition annexed, which condition is either secretly enclosed in the promise or threatening, or else it is openly expressed. That this is true you see in Ezekiel 18 and in Daniel 4 v 27 where this condition is found.

Then this being the nature of the threatenings of God, this terrible denunciation, how terrible so ever it appears, yet it has a condition in it. (That condition is,)
except he repent, except he seeks me and make his recourse to me by prayer. For without doubt the Lord was of a mind to punish Nineveh, except they had prevented him by repentance. So I say, all the promises and threatenings of God have a condition annexed which is either openly expressed, or covertly to be understood. And therefore the denunciation has a secret condition, and this condition made the king to live. For suppose it to be simply proposed, yet it is not to bring him to despair, but only to make him the more instant to seek grace and health at the hands of the living God.

Now I have touched on the gravity, the time and the kind of the disease. Let us make our profit of this; for it is necessary that this doctrine be applied to our times.

Application
Then I say, praised be the living God, our king is not diseased, but surely his country is heavily diseased. For so long as Papists and Papistry remain in it, so long as these pestilent men remain in it, and so long as these floods of iniquity which flows from the great men remains, there is a heavy judgement hanging over this country; and in my conscience, I cannot but look for a heavy judgement until these things be removed. There is no great man but whatsoever he likes, he thinks he has licence to do. And not only is this in this part of the land, but in all other parts of this nation gross iniquities are committed, and the kirk is made a prey to all men; there is such disdain and contempt for the Word in all the estates. Except these things be purged, I cannot expect but that the Lord shall raise some, as it were from the furthest Indies, to plague this land. Although I doubt not but that the liberty of the kirk here, and the sobs and sighs of the godly here, have delayed the judgement from the whole land, yea, I am assured of it.

And therefore I pray God that he may so work in your heart, Sir, by grace that you may put your hand to remove
your part of the grievance.
The Lord of his mercy establish your heart by grace, that for no man’s pleasure you communicate with other men’s sins. Three ways we are said to communicate with other men’s sins: first, when both with heart and hand we do one thing with them, secondly, when we consent with our heart only; thirdly, when we oversee where we should reprove, and forbear where we should punish. And in this way magistrates are only guilty. Thus far for the application. Now I go forward to my text.

4. The king’s behaviour in this disease

The last thing that we have to speak of is the manner of the king’s behaviour under so terrible a disease. We have in the second and third verses his behaviour expressed in a very lively manner. As to his behaviour, I speak only of it as the text speaks; I doubt not but he reasoned otherwise, and gave other answers to Isaiah; but I content myself with that which the text says.

1. His Praying
In his behaviour we see, first that he retires himself to seek God by prayer; and to testify that he prays from the heart, it is said that he wept bitterly. Surely this is an evident argument that his prayer flowed from his heart and was directed
by a right spirit. For if God leaves us to our own natural spirit, we know neither what to pray or how to pray; but, as it is said in Romans 8 v 26, it is the Spirit of God that directs our prayer, that raises our sighs, and these sobs; that makes our heart to melt in these tears that he likes. So it appears here, by the earnestness of his prayer that it flowed from the right fountain and therefore it cannot but have been pleasing to God

This prayer and manner of his behaviour brings us to two things: First, it makes us certain of his faith and secondly it makes us certain of his repentance. I say it makes us certain of his faith; for how is it possible that I can crave any thing at the hands of him in whom I trust not? Or how can we call upon him (says the apostle) in whom we believe not? Prayer to God, then, is an evident argument that we trust in God. So I say it is an argument of his faith, and where faith is, of necessity repentance must be, for these two companions, faith and repentance, are inseparable, as Peter testifies in the 15th chapter of Acts;
for so far as the heart is purged, so far is the life renewed; so faith and newness of life go together. So his prayer testifies to his faith, his faith testifies to his repentance and his repentance testifies to the secret condition enclosed in the threatening; and the condition being fulfilled, the threatening cannot strike. So by this deduction, it may appear, that suppose the prophet denounced very strictly, yet under the denunciation there was a condition contained, which condition takes effect in the king. Thus far concerning his behaviour.

2. His Gesture
Now as to his gesture, I will be short on it. It is said that he turned himself to the wall. He has done this out of question, for two reasons: First, that he might weep the more bitterly, for it is said that he poured forth his soul in tears, and so he desired not that he should be seen; secondly, he turned himself to the wall, to the end that his eyes should not carry his mind from God. We know how easily, when any of us is making our prayer in any public place, there is no incident that falls before our senses but it will draw us from that communion which we have with God. So it is necessary for them that would pray earnestly, to draw themselves to a secret place, according as our Master commanded his disciples to enter into their secret chamber. Thus far for his gesture.

3. The Words of his Prayer
As to the words of the prayer, they are set down in the third verse. In his prayer he suppresses his petition (for his petition is for the prolonging of his days) according to the custom of the godly men of old, as Daniel 9 v 4; and, in place of the petition he sets down the reasons why his petition should be heard. As to the reasons, they are three in number.
The first is, “Remember, Lord that I have walked in thy truth.” Secondly, “I have walked with an upright heart.” Thirdly, “I have done that which is good in thy sight.” In all these three, it would appear that he is boasting of his own merits; for the words appear to be full of ostentation and pride. But to answer to this, the Lord measures not ostentation and pride by words, but by the heart from which these words proceed. A broken, a contrite and a humble heart are ever acceptable to him, use what form of words it will. But a proud heart is ever unpleasant to him, use what form of words it will.

Now, what is he doing here? He is not vaunting himself or bragging of his works only. He is showing to God that however great was his plague, yet he had a good conscience, the testimony whereof upheld him; in such sort that suppose all outward things said that God was angry at him, yet he could not be persuaded in his conscience but that he was his friend. Therefore in his whole prayer he reasons as though he would speak after this manner:

“Lord, thou knowest that the profane men of this country will think it an extreme curse that I shall die without children, and by this they will esteem the deeds to be accursed which I have performed before. They will curse and damn the religion that I have reformed, and the order of the house which I have begun. Yet, notwithstanding, I am assured in my conscience that I have the warrant of the law in all that I have done, for I sought not myself, but thee only; therefore Lord deliver me.” So this kind of reason comes neither of ostentation or pride. “Now, as to myself,” (he might say) “when I examine my doings, I find my conscience so pure, that in all my proceedings I had a good warrant, and in all my doings I sought not mine own but thy glory. And therefore, Lord, remember me, and take not my life from me, that I be not a stumbling-block to the weak ones, and rejoicing to mine enemies.”

This is the only thing which we are taught here. We see this good king, when all worldly comfort fails him, and in his great extremity, he reposes himself upon the testimony of his own conscience. This is the only thing that sustains him; this is the only thing that comforts him, and in which he has now, in the very article of death, to glory. Surely when I read through the Bible, I find that all the servants of God, in their greatest troubles had recourse to this testimony of conscience. You see Moses when he has to do with Korah, Dathan and Abiram, he has recourse to the testimony of his conscience.
You see David when he has to do with Saul; he has recourse to this testimony of conscience.
You see Nehemiah makes recourse to this
and Daniel makes recourse to this (vi. 22)
The apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 4 makes his recourse to this and says, “I pass very little your judgement, or any man’s judgement; my glory is the testimony of mine own conscience.”
The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in his last chapter, “I am assured, (says he) that I have kept a good conscience in all things.”
So, go through all the servants of God, and you will see they ever had recourse to the testimony of conscience; and blessed is that man that is not condemned in his doings by his own conscience. For if we are not able to eschew
the condemnation of our own heart, how will we be able to eschew the condemnation of God, who sees all the secrets of the heart? So that man is more than blessed that is not condemned by his own heart; for as for his conscience, it is a faithful pledge-keeper;
the pledges
that is receives it renders. Of good turns, it gives a good
testimony; of evil turns it gives a bitter testimony.

Application
Suppose that the most part of our deeds be now covered from the eye of man, and her testimony for the most part hidden from ourselves, yet there is a day coming which now is at hand, in the which all these things that are now hidden under darkness shall come to light, and the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed. The books of conscience shall be cast open and he that brings not in these books the discharge of his sins in register, purchased by the blood of Christ Jesus, whereby our conscience alone is washed from these dead works; he that brings not this discharge with him, to him shall all his sins present themselves; so that not only shall he be judged by the sentence of the righteous judge; but his own conscience, which in this life prejudged him, shall condemn him there. And all the angels of God, with his elect children, shall justify his judgement. Therefore it is time that we had our discharge registered.

Now, would to God I might obtain this from office-bearers in kirk and state,
that they would now seek
in their life to have the approbation of their conscience in the time of their death. The Lord grant it to all of them that seek to serve him, but especially the Lord make you (Sir) so to walk in your life that you may have a joyful testimony of your conscience in your death. That being approved with your own conscience, in the mouth of these two faithful witnesses your salvation may be sure, not in yourself but in the blood of Christ Jesus, whose mercy alone is our merit. As this is craved for him,
so it is craved for the rest of the office-bearers: Lord grant that they may follow such a trade of life that in their death their conscience may make mention of their deeds to their joy. Thus far for this part of his behaviour.

4. His Repentance
Now there remains one thing to say, and so I will end. Take up the manner of his behaviour under his disease; he is straitened with an extremity of his disease on the one side, and with the Lord’s threatening on the other side; what does he do in this strait? He seeks by prayer to the same God that struck him, and now by his prophet threatens him. This is wonderful. For if he had had to do with any other person, namely if he had had to do with the king of Assyria, as before, it had been an easy matter to have retired to God; but now, having to do with God, and God apparently his enemy, it is wonderful that he should have recourse to God. This is a notable faith in him; for he hopes against hope and he runs to the same God that threatens
him. So, notwithstanding that he threatens him with death, yet he runs to him and he appeals from his justice to his mercy in the merits of Christ. He appeals from God as a righteous Judge to him as a Redeemer in Christ, and his appeal is heard. For, as we will hear hereafter, (by God’s grace) he is healed. Thus far concerning his repentance.

5. His liberty in seeking the prolonging of his days
Now, as to the prolonging of his days, the question might arise, whether there was a liberty
given him to crave it or not. I will touch this only generally. And firstly, I say, in Hezekiah it is very lawful, for he lacked posterity, and in this the promise of God had not taken effect in him. So it was lawful for him to seek the accomplishment of the Lord’s promise made to his father David; and also, the reformation of the kirk was just newly begun and the commonwealth was not as yet established and all these things craved the presence of the king. So if we look to the particular case, it was a liberty for him.

I come now to the general: there is a liberty at some times to seek from God the prolonging of our days and my reason is this; length of days is one of the greatest temporal blessings that we have as it is annexed to the command as a promise.
The apostle in the second chapter to the Philippians and at verse 27 makes mention of the disease of Epaphroditus and he says, “No doubt he was sick, very near unto death, but the Lord had mercy on him, and not only on him, but on me also.” So he counts the prolonging of days a special mercy. And there is no mercy or benefit from God but it may be craved so long as it be craved for a right end. For we, directing our life to the glory of God, and using it as pilgrims and strangers seeking our home, and having it ready to lay down into the hands of God at his pleasure, why is it not our liberty to crave it?

Objection – “he that loveth his life shall lose it”
But, John in the 12th chapter of his gospel and at verse 25 seems to contradict
this when he says, “he that loveth his life shall lose it.” This may soon be explained.
There is a love of this life which is commendable and there is a love which is worthy of reproof, whereof John speaks. There is an extraordinary love and such a love whereby we place our whole felicity in this life, not looking for a better after this; so this love is condemned
by John. The other love, which is of God, is when we are ready to lay down our life at his majesty’s feet, and seek the prolonging of our life out of no respect but for his glory as the king did (as he shows clearly in the end by his own words in verse 18 and 19). Thus far concerning the petition.

Conclusion

So if we respect God and his glory, we may seek his blessing. Although you see, in his greatest extremity, the only comfort he had is the testimony of a good conscience; and this ought to uphold us when we are threatened by God either with a disease or any other calamity.

Well, as I said at the beginning, if it were possible that the Lord’s threatenings could make us recourse to him, that he might cleanse our consciences in time, we should have as great comfort in our troubles as this king had. Would to God he would give us melting hearts!

May the Lord work this in you (Sir), that as he has honoured you in your birth, so you may honour him in your doings in your government! Lord, of his mercy give us hearts to crave this! Lord give us hearts to sigh for the things we cannot amend! Lord give us grace to have recourse to Christ Jesus, and in his mercy to enter into that city, for outwith it there is nothing but swine and dogs, nothing but papistry and idolatry. Let us, I say, have recourse to this God, who is only able to preserve both kirk and country. To this God be all honour, praise and glory, for now and ever. Amen.

End of the first sermon

Monarchy Project: Hints and Suggestions

Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:22:28 +0000

Important Days in the Life of James VI

August 1582 ‘The Ruthven Raid’
James VI was kidnapped while out hunting in Atholl, by some nobles including the Earls of Angus, Gowrie and Mar. By keeping him they had political power. James was forced to sign an order demanding that Regent Lennox must leave Scotland and that James himself was a free king. At this he burst into tears. He is very unhappy and afraid during his captivity but escapes in May 1583. He bears a grudge for the rest of his life particularly against the house of Gowrie. Is the ‘Gowrie Conspiracy’ later in his life (when the two young Gowrie earls are killed), the revenge of the king?
• Find out where James was taken to and how he was treated.
• Find out more about his kidnappers and their political opinions
• Find pictures and maps of this period and the people involved.
• How old was James when this happened and who helped him escape?
• What happened to Regent Lennox after James was declared a free king?
• Imagine a day when James plans his escape and perhaps his revenge

7th August 1588 Defeat of the Spanish Armada
On this date the assembled fleet of Philip of Spain was defeated by English naval forces in the English Channel. The stormy weather and the failure of the Spanish to take control of the Channel meant that they had to retreat round the north of Scotland. The English pursued them as far as the Firth of Forth (near Edinburgh) and many of the Spanish ships were wrecked at different points round the coast. This wonderful victory was seen as God’s deliverance and special services of Thanksgiving were held in Scotland as well as in England. Rev Robert Bruce preached two sermons on Psalm 76 in Edinburgh which James VI would have heard.
• How did the Spanish and English naval forces compare in 1688?
• What would have happened if the Spanish had not been defeated?
• Apart from the Scots, which other country supported England?
• Find out about naval ships at this period and how the battle went on 7th August
• What happened to the survivors of the wrecked ships in Scotland?
• What were Robert Bruce’s sermons on the day of Thanksgiving like?
• Explain how great the deliverance from Spain was for Scotland

May 17th 1590 Coronation of Queen Ann
James’ marriage to the Protestant Princess Ann of Denmark was due to take place in Scotland but a storm during the Princess’ voyage, which forced her to land in Norway, prevented this. James eventually sailed in rough seas to marry Ann in Oslo (Norway) and remained there for 5 months. During his absence he left the government in the hands of the Council and included Rev Robert Bruce among his councillors. He wrote letters to him about the government. On his return, Ann was crowned queen in a joyful ceremony. James received a very large dowry of £150,000 for marrying Ann and this helped his government finances.
• Find out about the kind of boats used and the effect of the storm
• Try to find out more about Princess Ann and her family in Denmark
• Imagine what James must have thought when he decided to sail to Norway
• What did James think of Rev Robert Bruce and what did he write to him about?
• What were weddings like in 1589 in Scotland?
• Did James make plans for his Queen’s coronation?
• What was the coronation ceremony like and who was involved?

March 1591 Robert Bruce preaches on Hezekiah’s sickness
Robert Bruce was minister of St Giles and for the first few years of his ministry was in great favour with James. However, because he refused to believe the king’s story about how James was nearly killed by the Earl of Gowrie, James had him banished to Inverness! But when he was still in favour, he used to preach before James and several of his sermons survive. Six sermons on Hezekiah’s sickness (Isaiah 38) are among the surviving sermons and contain some interesting details about life in Edinburgh at this time. James could be very rude and disrespectful during the preaching and at times the minister had to rebuke him. Robert Bruce was not afraid to give him warnings and rebukes from the pulpit during his preaching.
• How was Sabbath kept in Edinburgh in 1591? Did everyone go to Church?
• What was St Giles (the Church in which Robert Bruce preached) like inside and outside?
• What kind of things did Robert Bruce warn James about during his sermons?
• What other sermons are preserved which Robert Bruce preached in St Giles during this period?
• What did James think of the Scottish ministers?
• Find pictures of St Giles, Robert Bruce and copies of his sermons
• Look for descriptions of Edinburgh city life during this period – especially Sabbath worship

5th August 1600 The ‘Gowrie Conspiracy’
While riding near Falkland Palace James met Alexander Ruthven, brother of the Earl of Gowrie who told that someone has been caught trying to hide a large quantity of gold coins. James comes with him to see the criminal and somehow gets locked in the tower of Gowrie House and is heard to cry for help from the window to his nobles. James claimed that he was about to be murdered. Both the Gowrie brothers are killed by the nobles who help the king. The king later claimed that they had conspired to assassinate him and he compelled the ministers to accept his version of events. While most do this, many don’t really believe him and think that he was himself the conspirator seeking revenge on the Gowrie family to whom he also owed £80,000. The mystery is still unsolved and the fact that James became the owner of all the Gowrie property after their death may suggest that his story is not entirely to be believed.
• Find out what the Gowrie brothers were like and what were their opinions about religion and politics
• Why might James want rid of them?
• Find out about the king’s version of events at the tower
• Why did Robert Bruce not believe the king’s version at first
• What did the king do to persuade people that his version was the correct one?
• Imagine what James might write in his secret diary if he was really telling lies
• Imagine what he might write in his diary if he was telling the truth and was upset that people didn’t believe him
• Find pictures of Falkland palace, maps of the area, and perhaps gold coins from this period

May 1596 Andrew Melville confronts James at Falkland
A group of ministers had come to speak to the King about the danger of his policy in allowing some Roman Catholic noblemen back into the country. Among them was Andrew Melville, the Professor of Divinity in the College at St Andrews. The king began to accuse the minister of holding seditious meetings and Andrew Melville, who had been silent until this point, stood forward and grabbed the king by his coat sleeve, calling him “God’s sillie vassal,” and made a very pointed and rousing speech which has become famous. Thomas M’Crie, who wrote Andrew Melville’s biography, says that it was the bravest speech that a monarch ever heard from a man who would have willingly died in defence of his king’s person and honour.
• Find the exact words of Andrew Melville’s speech before king James
• What did Andrew Melville mean when he said that there were “Two kingdoms in Scotland”?
• What effect did his speech have at the time and what effect did it have later on?
• How would James have thought about it later that day?
• What would others have to say about the ministers and their boldness in rebuking the king
• Do you think it was a good speech?
• Find pictures of the encounter between the king and Andrew Melville
• What happened to Andrew Melville later on in his life?

The Geneva Catechism

Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:07:05 +0100

THE GENEVA CATECHISM

by John Calvin 1509-1564

Catechism of  The Church of Geneva
Being a form of instruction for children in the doctrine of Christ

HISTORICAL NOTE
In 1536 Calvin published a little "Confession of Faith." It is probably to this work that Beza refers as "a short formula of Christian doctrine"; to which, he adds, Calvin "appended a Catechism, not the one we now have, in the form of question and answer, but another much shorter, containing only the leading heads of religion." This other "Catechism" Calvin published in French in 1541, and then with slight differences in Latin in 1545, hoping that in that more international from it might also serve the cause of unity between the Churches. It is a translation of the Latin Catechism that is given here.

DEDICATION.
JOHN CALVIN TO THE FAITHFUL MINISTERS OF CHRIST  THROUGHOUT EAST FRIESLAND, WHO PREACH THE  PURE DOCTRINE OF THE GOSPEL.
SEEING it becomes us to endeavour by all means that unity of faith, which is so highly commended by Paul, shine forth among us, to this end chiefly ought the formal profession of faith which accompanies our common baptism to have reference. Hence it were to be wished, not only that a perpetual consent in the doctrine of piety should appear among all, but also that one CATECHISM were common to all the Churches. But as, from many causes, it will scarcely ever obtain otherwise than that each Church shall have its own Catechism, we should not strive too keenly to prevent this; provided, however, that the variety in the mode of teaching is such, that we are all directed to one Christ, in whose truth being united together; we may grow up into one body and one spirit, and with the same mouth also proclaim whatever belongs to the sum of faith. Catechists not intent on this end, besides fatally injuring the Church, by sowing the materials of dissension in religion, also introduce an impious profanation of baptisM. For where can any longer be the utility of baptism unless this remain as its foundation-that we all agree in one faith?
Wherefore, those who publish Catechisms ought to be the more carefully on their guard, lest, by producing anything rashly, they may not for the present only, but in regard to posterity also, do grievous harm to piety, and inflict a deadly wound on the Church.
This much I wished to premise, as a declaration to my readers, that I myself too, as became me, have made it my anxious care not to deliver any thing in this Catechism of mine that is not agreeable to the doctrine received among all the pious. This declaration will not be found vain by those who will read with candour and sound judgment. I trust I have succeeded at least so far that my labour, though it should not satisfy, will be acceptable to all good men, as being in their opinion useful.
In writing it in Latin, though some perhaps will not approve of the design, I have been influenced by many reasons, all of which it is of no use to detail at present. I shall only select such as seem to me sufficient to obviate censure.
First, In this confused and divided state of Christendom, I judge It useful that there should be public testimonies, whereby churches which, though widely separated by space, agree in the doctrine of Christ, may mutually recognise each other. For besides that this tends not a little to mutual confirmation, what is more to be desired than that mutual congratulations should pass between them, and that they should devoutly commend each other to the Lord? With this view, bishops were wont in old time, when as yet consent in faith existed and flourished among all, to send Synodal Epistles beyond sea, by which, as a kind of badges, they might maintain sacred communion among the churches. How much more necessary is it now, in this fearful devastation of the Christian world, that the few churches which duly worship God, and they too scattered and hedged round on all sides by the profane synagogues of Antichrist, should mutually give and receive this token of holy union, that they may thereby be incited to that fraternal embrace of which I have spoken?
But if this is so necessary in the present day, what shall our feelings be concerning posterity, about which I am, so anxious, that I scarcely dare to think? Unless God miraculously send help from heaven, I cannot avoid seeing that the world is threatened with the extremity of barbarisM. I wish our children may not shortly feel that this has been rather a true prophecy than a conjecture. The more, therefore, must we labour to gather together, by our writings, whatever remains of the Church shall continue, or even emerge, after our death. Writings of a different class will show what were our views on all subjects in religion, but the agreement which our churches had in doctrine cannot be seen with clearer evidence than from catechisms. For therein will appear, not only what one man or other once taught, but with what rudiments learned and unlearned alike amongst us, were constantly imbued from childhood, all the faithful holding them as their formal symbol of Christian communion. This was indeed my principal reason for publishing this Catechism.
A second reason, which had no little weight with me, was, because I heard that it was desired by very many who hoped it would not be unworthy of perusal. Whether they are right or wrong in so judging is not mine to decide, but it became me to yield to their wish. Nay, necessity was almost laid upon me, and I could not with impunity decline it. For having seven years before published a brief summary of religion, under the name of a Catechism, I feared that if I did not bring forward this one, I should cause (a thing I wished not) that the former should on the other hand be excluded. Therefore if I wished to consult the public good, it behoved me to take care that this one which I preferred should occupy the ground.
Besides, I deem it of good example to testify to the world, that we who aim at the restitution of the Church, are everywhere faithfully exerting ourselves, in order that, at least, the use of the Catechism which was abolished some centuries ago under the Papacy, may now resume its lost rights. For neither can this holy custom be sufficiently commended for its utility, nor can the Papists be sufficiently condemned for the flagrant corruption, by which they not only set it aside, by converting it into puerile trifles, but also basely abuse it to purposes of impure and impious superstition. That spurious Confirmation, which they have substituted in its stead, they deck out like a harlot, with great splendour of ceremonies, and gorgeous shows without number; nay, in their wish to adorn it, they speak of it in terms of execrable blasphemy, when they give out that it is a sacrament of greater dignity than baptism, and call those only half Christians who have not been besmeared with their oil. Meanwhile, the whole proceeding consists of nothing but theatrical gesticulations, or rather the wanton sporting of apes, without any skill in imitation.
To you, my very dear brethren in the Lord, I have chosen to inscribe this work, because some of your body, besides informing me that you love me, and that the most of you take delight in my writings, also expressly requested me by letter to undertake this labour for their sake. Independently of this, it would have been reason sufficient, that what I learned of you long ago, from the statement of grave and pious men, had bound me to you with my whole soul. I now ask what I am confident you will of your own accord do-have the goodness to consult for the utility of this token of my goodwill towards you! Farewell. May the Lord increase you more and more in the spirit of wisdom, prudence, zeal, and fortitude, to the edification of his Church.
GENEVA, 2d December, 1545.
TO THE READER.
It has ever been the practice of the Church, and one carefully attended to, to see that children should be duly instructed in the Christian religion. That this might be done more conveniently, not only were schools opened in old time, and individuals enjoined properly to teach their families, but it was a received public custom and practice, to question children in the churches on each of the heads, which should be common and well known to all Christians. To secure this being done in order, there was written out a formula, which was called a Catechism or Institute. Thereafter the devil miserably rending the Church of God, and bringing upon it fearful ruin, (of which the marks are still too visible in the greater part of the world,) overthrew this sacred policy, and left nothing behind but certain trifles, which only beget superstition, without any fruit of edification. Of this description is that confirmation, as they call it, full of gesticulations which, worse than ridiculous, are fitted only for apes, and have no foundation to rest upon. What we now bring forward, therefore, is nothing else than the use of things which from ancient times were observed by Christians, and the true worshippers of God, and which never were laid aside until the Church was wholly corrupted.

CATECHISM OF THE CHURCH OF GENEVA

OF FAITH.
Master. - What is the chief end of human life?
Scholar. - To know God by whom men were created.
Master. What reason have you for saying so?
Scholar. - Because he created us and placed us in this world to be glorified in us. And it is indeed right that our life, of which himself is the beginning, should be devoted to his glory.
Master. - What is the highest good of man?
Scholar. - The very same thing.
Master. - Why do you hold that to be the highest good?
Scholar. - Because without it our condition is worse than that of the brutes.
Master. - Hence, then, we clearly see that nothing worse can happen to a man than not to live to God.
Scholar. - It is so.
Master. - What is the true and right knowledge of God?
Scholar. - When he is so known that due honour is paid to him.
Master. - What is the method of honouring him duly?
Scholar. -To place our whole confidence in him; to study to serve him during our whole life by obeying his will; to call upon him in all our necessities, seeking salvation and every good thing that can be desired in him; lastly, to acknowledge him both with heart and lips, as the sole Author of all blessings.
Master. - To consider these points in their order, and explain them more fully-What is the first head in this division of yours?
Scholar. - To place our whole confidence in God.
Master. - How shall we do so?
Scholar. - When we know him to be Almighty and perfectly good.
Master. - Is this enough?
Scholar. - Far from it.
Master. - Wherefore?
Scholar. - Because we are unworthy that he should exert his power in helping us, and show how good he is by saving us.
Master. - What more then is needful?
Scholar. - That each of us should set it down in his mind that God loves him, and is willing to be a Father, and the author of salvation to him.
Master. - But whence will this appear?
Scholar. - From his word, in which he explains his mercy to us in Christ, and testifies of his love towards us.
Master. - Then the foundation and beginning of confidence in God is to know him in Christ?
Scholar. - Entirely so.
Master. - I should now wish you to tell me in a few words, what the sum of this knowledge is?
Scholar. - It is contained in the Confession of Faith, or rather Formula of Confession, which all Christians have in common. It is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, because from the beginning of the Church it was ever received among all the pious, and because it either fell from the lips of the Apostles, or was faithfully gathered out of their writings.
Master. - Repeat it.
Scholar. - I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried: he descended into hell; the third day he arose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholick Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.
Master. - To understand each point more thoroughly, into how many parts shall we divide this confession?
Scholar. - Into four leading ones.
Master. - Mention them to me.
Scholar. - The first relates to God the Father; the second to his Son Jesus Christ, which also embraces the whole sum of man's redemption; the third to the Holy Spirit; the fourth to the Church, and the Divine blessings conferred upon her.
Master. - Since there is no God but one, why do you here mention three, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?
Scholar. - Because in the one essence of God, it behoves us to look on God the Father as the beginning and origin, and the first cause of all things; next the Son, who is his eternal Wisdom; and, lastly, the Holy Spirit, as his energy diffused indeed over all things, but still perpetually resident in himself.
Master. - You mean then that there is no absurdity in holding that these three persons are in one Godhead, and God is not therefore divided?
Scholar. - Just so.
Master. - Now repeat the first part.
Scholar. - " I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth."
Master. - Why do you call him Father?
Scholar. - Primarily with reference to Christ who is his eternal Wisdom, begotten of him before all time, and being sent into this world was declared to be his Son. We infer, however, that as God is the Father of Jesus Christ, he is our Father also.
Master. - In what sense do you give him the name of Almighty?
Scholar. - Not as having a power which he does not exercise, but as having all things under his power and hand; governing the world by his Providence, determining all things by his will, ruling all creatures as seems to him good.
Master. - You do not then suppose an indolent power in God, but consider it such that his hand is always engaged in working, so that nothing is done except through Him, and by his decree.
Scholar. - It is so.
Master. - Why do you add "Creator of heaven, and earth ?"
Scholar. - As he has manifested himself to us by works, (Rom. i. 20,) in these too we ought to seek him. Our mind cannot take in his essence. The world itself is, therefore, a kind of mirror in which we may view him in so far as it concerns us to know.
Master. - Do you not understand by "heaven and earth" all creatures whatever that exist?
Scholar. - Yes, verily; under these two names all are included, because they are either heavenly or earthly.
Master. - But why do you call God a Creator merely, while it is much more excellent to defend and preserve creatures in their state, than to have once made them?
Scholar. - This term does not imply that God created his works at once, and then threw off the care of them. It should rather be understood, that as the world was once made by God, so it is nowpreserved by him, and that the earth and all other things endure just in as far as they are sustained by his energy, and as it were his hand. Besides, seeing that he has all things under his hand, it follows, that He is the chief ruler and Lord of all. Therefore, by his being "Creator of heaven and earth," we must understand that it is he alone who by wisdom, goodness, and power, guides the whole course and order of nature: who at once sends rain and drought, hail and other storms, as well as calm, who of his kindness fertilizes the earth, and on the contrary, by withholding his hand, makes it barren: from whom come health and disease; to whose power all things are subject, and whose nod they obey.
Master. - But what shall we say of wicked men and devils? Shall we say that they too are under him?
Scholar. - Although he does not govern them by his Spirit, he however curbs them by his power as a bridle, so that they cannot even move unless in so far as he permits them. Nay, he even makes them the ministers of his will, so that unwilling and against their own intention, they are forced to execute what to him seems good.
Master. - What good redounds to you from the knowledge of this fact?
Scholar. - Very much. It would go ill with us could devils and wicked men do any thing without the will of God, and our minds could never be very tranquil while thinking we were exposed to their caprice. Then only do we rest safely when we know that they are curbed by the will of God, and as it were kept in confinement, so that they cannot do any thing unless by his permission: the more especially that God has engaged to be our guardian, and the prince of our salvation.
Master. - Let us now come to the second part.
Scholar. - It is that we believe "in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord."
Master. - What does it chiefly comprehend?
Scholar. - That the Son of God is our Saviour, and it at the same time explains the method by which he has redeemed us from death, and purchased life.
Master. - What is the meaning of the name Jesus which you give to him?
Scholar. - It has the same meaning as the Greek word (Soter.) The Latins have no proper name by which its force may be well expressed. Hence the term Saviour (Salvator) was commonly received. Moreover, the angel gave this appellation to the Son of God, by the order of God himself (Matt. i. 21.)
Master. - Is this more than if men had given it?
Scholar. - Certainly. For since God wills that he be called so, he must absolutely be so.
Master. - What, next, is the force of the name Christ?
Scholar. - By this epithet, his office is still better expressed-for it signifies that he was anointed by the Father to be a King, Priest, and Prophet.
Master. - How do you know that?
Scholar. - First, Because Scripture applies anointing to these three uses; secondly, Because it often attributes the three things which we have mentioned to Christ.
Master. - But with what kind of oil was he anointed?
Scholar. - Not with visible oil as was used in consecrating ancient kings, priests, and prophets, but one more excellent, namely, the grace of the Holy Spirit, which is the thing meant by that outward anointing.
Master. - But what is the nature of this kingdom of his which you mention?
Scholar. -Spiritual, contained in the word and Spirit of God, which carry with them righteousness and life.
Master. -What of the priesthood?
Scholar. - It is the office and prerogative of appearing in the presence of God to obtain grace, and of appeasing his wrath by the offering of a sacrifice which is acceptable to him.
Master. - In. what sense do you call Christ a Prophet?
Scholar. - Because on coming into the world he declared himself an ambassador to men, and an interpreter, and that for the purpose of putting an end to all revelations and prophecies by giving a full exposition of his Father's will.
Master. - But do you derive any benefit from this?
Scholar. - Nay, all these things have no end but our good. For the Father hath bestowed them on Christ that he may communicate them to us, and all of us thus receive out of his fulness.
Master. - State this to me somewhat more fully.
Scholar. - He was filled with the Holy Spirit, and loaded with a perfect abundance of all his gifts, that he may impart them to us,-that is, to each according to the measure which the Father knows to be suited to us. Thus from him, as the only fountain, we draw whatever spiritual blessings we possess.
Master. - What does his kingdom bestow upon us?
Scholar. - By means of it, obtaining liberty of conscience to live piously and holily, and, being provided with his spiritual riches, we are also armed with power sufficient to overcome the perpetual enemies of our souls-sin, the world, the devil, and the flesh.
Master. - To what is the office of priest conducive?
Scholar. - First, by means of it he is the mediator who reconciles us to the Father; and, secondly, access is given us to the Father, so that we too can come with boldness into his presence, and offer him the sacrifice of ourselves, and our all. In this way he makes us, as it were, his colleagues in the priesthood.
Master. - There is still prophecy.
Scholar. - As it is an office of teaching bestowed on the Son of God in regard to his own servants, the end is that he may enlighten them by the true knowledge of the Father, instruct them in truth, and make them household disciples of God.
Master. - All that you have said then comes to this, that the name of Christ comprehends three offices which the Father hath bestowed on the Son, that he may transfuse the virtue and fruit of them into his people?
Scholar. - It is so.
Master. - Why do you call him the only Son of God, seeing that God designs to bestow this appellation upon us all?
Scholar. - That we are the sons of God we have not from nature, but from adoption and grace only, in other words, because God puts us in that place, (John i. 1;) but the Lord Jesus who was begotten of the substance of the Father, and is of one essence with the Father, (Eph. i. 2,) is by the best title called the only Son of God, because he alone is his Son by nature, (Heb. i. 1.)
Master. - You mean then, that this honour is proper to him, as being due to him by right of nature, whereas it is communicated to us by gratuitous favour, as being his members?
Scholar. - Exactly. Hence with a view to this communication he is called the First-born among many brethren. (Rom. viii. 29.)
Master. - In what sense do you understand him to be "our Lord ?"
Scholar. - Inasmuch as He was appointed by the Father to have us under his power, to administer the kingdom of God in heaven and on earth, and to be the Head of men and angels. (Col. i. 15, 18.)
Master. - What is meant by what follows?
Scholar. - It shows the manner in which the Son was anointed by the Father to be our Saviour-namely, that having assumed our nature, he performed all things necessary to our salvation as here enumerated.
Master. - What mean you by the two sentences-"Conceived of the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary ?"
Scholar. - That he was formed in the womb of the virgin, of her substance, to be the true seed of David, as had been foretold by the Prophets, and that this was effected by the miraculous and secret agency of the Spirit without human connection. (Ps. cxxxii. 11 ; Matt. i. I ; Luke i. 32.)
Master. - Was it of consequence then that he should assume our nature?
Scholar. - Very much so; because it was necessary that the disobedience committed by man against God should be expiated also in human nature. Nor could he in any other way be our Mediator to make reconciliation between God and man. (Rom. iii. 24; 1 Tim. ii. 5; Heb. iv. 15; v. 7.)
Master. - You say that Christ behoved to become man, that he might, as it were, in our person accomplish the work of salvation?
Scholar. - So I think. For we must borrow of him whatever is wanting in ourselves: and this cannot be done in any other way.
Master. - But why was that effected by the Holy Spirit, and not by the common and usual form of generation?
Scholar. - As the seed of man is entirely corrupt, it was necessary that the operation of the Holy Spirit should interfere in the generation of the Son of God, that he might not be affected by this contagion, but endued with the most perfect purity.
Master. - Hence then we learn that he who sanctifies us is free from every stain, and was possessed of purity, so to speak, from the original womb, so that he was wholly sacred to God, being unpolluted by any taint of the human race?
Scholar. - That is my understanding.
Master. - How is he our Lord?
Scholar. -He was appointed by the Father to rule us, and having obtained the empire and dominion of God both in heaven and on earth, to be recognised as the head of angels and good men. (Eph. i. 21 ; Col. i. 18.)
Master. -Why do you leap at once from his birth to his death, passing over the whole history of his life?
Scholar. -Because nothing is treated of here but what so properly belongs to our salvation, as in a manner to contain the substance of it.
Master. - Why do you not say in one word simply "was dead," (died,) but also add the name of the governor under whom he suffered?
Scholar. - That has respect not only to the credit of the statement, but also to let us know that his death was connected with condemnation.
Master. -Explain this more clearly.
Scholar. - He died to discharge the penalty due by us, and in this way exempt us from it. But as we all being sinners were obnoxious to the judgment of God, he, that he might act as our substitute, was pleased to be sisted in presence of an earthly judge, and condemned by his mouth, that we might be acquitted before the celestial tribunal of God.
Master. - But Pilate pronounces him innocent, and therefore does not condemn him as a malefactor. (Matt. xxvii. 24.)
Scholar. - It is necessary to attend to both things. The judge bears testimony to his innocence, to prove that he suffered not for his own misdeeds but ours, and he is formally condemned by the sentence of the same judge, to make it plain that he endured the sentence which he deserved as our surety, that thus he might free us from guilt.
Master. - Well answered. Were he a sinner he would not be a fit surety to pay the penalty of another's sin; and yet that his condemnation might obtain our acquittal, he behoved to be classed among transgressors?
Scholar. - I understand so.
Master. - Is there any greater importance in his having been crucified than if he had suffered any other kind of death?
Scholar. - Very much greater, as Paul also reminds us, (Gal iii. 13,) when he says, that he hung upon a tree to take our curse upon himself and free us from it. For that kind of death was doomed to execration. (Deut. xxi. 23.)
Master. - What? Is not an affront put upon the Son of God when it is said that even before God he was subjected to the curse?
Scholar. - By no means; since by undergoing he abolished it, and yet meanwhile he ceased not to be blessed in order that he might visit us with his blessing.
Master.. - Go on.
Scholar. - Since death was the punishment imposed on man because of sin, the Son of God endured it, and by enduring overcame it. But to make it more manifest that he underwent a real death, he chose to be placed in the tomb like other men.
Master. - But nothing seems to be derived to us from this victory, since we still die?
Scholar. - That is no obstacle. Nor to believers is death now any thing else than a passage to a better life.
Master. - Hence it follows that death is no longer to be dreaded as if it were a fearful thing, but we should with intrepid mind follow Christ our leader, who as he did not perish in death, will not suffer us to perish?
Scholar. - Thus should we act.
Master. - It is immediately added, "he descended into hell." What does this mean?
Scholar. - That he not only endured common death, which is the separation of the soul from the body, but also the pains of death, as Peter calls them. (Acts ii. 24.) By this expression I understand the fearful agonies by which his soul was pierced.
Master. - Give me the cause and the manner of this.
Scholar. - As in order to satisfy for sinners he sisted himself before the tribunal of God, it was necessary that he should suffer excruciating agony of conscience, as if he had been forsaken of God, nay as it were, had God hostile to him. He was in this agony when he exclaimed, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt. xxvii. 46.)
Master. - Was his Father then offended with him?
Scholar. - By no means. But he exercised this severity against him in fulfilment of what had been foretold by Isaiah, that "he was smitten by the hand of God for our sins and wounded for our transgressions." (Is. liii. 4, 5.)
Master. - But seeing he is God, how could he be seized with any such dread, as if he were forsaken of God?
Scholar. - We must hold that it was in respect to the feelings of his human nature that he was reduced to this necessity: and that this might be, his divinity for a little while was concealed, that is, did not put forth its might.
Master. - How, on the other hand, is it possible that Christ, who is the salvation of the world, should have been subjected to this doom?
Scholar. - He did not endure it so as to remain under it. For though he was seized with the terrors I have mentioned, he was not overwhelmed. Rather wrestling with the power of hell he subdued and crushed it.
Master. - Hence we infer that the torture of conscience which he bore differs from that which excruciates sinners 'when pursued by the hands of an angry God. For what was temporary in him is perpetual in them, and what was in him only the prick of a sting, is in them a mortal sword, which, so to speak, wounds the heart.
Scholar. - It is so. The Son of God when beset by this anguish, ceased not to hope in the Father. But sinners condemned by the justice of God, rush into despair, murmur against him, and even break forth into open blasphemies.
Master. - May we hence infer what benefit believers receive from the death of Christ?
Scholar. - Easily. And, first, we see that it is a sacrifice by which he expiated our sins before God, and so having appeased the wrath of God, restored us to his favour. Secondly, That his blood is a layer by which our souls are cleansed from all stains. Lastly, That the remembrance of our sins was effaced so as never to come into the view of God, and that thus the handwriting which established our guilt was blotted out and cancelled.
Master. - Does it not gain us any other advantage besides?
Scholar. - Yes, indeed. For by its benefit, if we are members of Christ, our old man is crucified, and the body of sin is destroyed, so that the lusts of a depraved flesh no longer reign in us.
Master. - Proceed with the other articles.
Scholar. - The next is, "On the third day he rose again from the dead." By this he declared himself the conqueror of sin and death. By his resurrection he swallowed up death, broke the fetters of the devil, and annihilated all his power.
Master. - How manifold are the benefits resulting to us from the resurrection?
Scholar. - Threefold. For by it righteousness was acquired for us; it is also a sure pledge to us of our immortality; and even now by virtue of it we are raised to newness of life, that by living purely and holily we may obey the will of God.
Master. - Let us follow out the rest.
Scholar. - ''He ascended into heaven."
Master. - Did he ascend so that he is no more on the earth?
Scholar. - He did. For after he had performed all the things which the Father had given him to do, and which were for our salvation, there was no need of his continuing longer on earth.
Master. - What good do we obtain from this ascension?
Scholar. - The benefit is twofold. For inasmuch as Christ entered heaven in our name, just as he had come down to earth on our account, he also opened up an access for us, so that the door, previously shut because of sin, is now open. Secondly, he appears in the presence of God as our advocate and intercessor.
Master. - But did Christ in going to heaven withdraw from us, so that he has now ceased to be with us?
Scholar. - Not at all. On the contrary, he has engaged to be with us even to the end of the world. (Matt. xxviii. 20.)
Master. - When we say he dwells with us, must we understand that he is bodily present?
Scholar. - No. The case of the body which was received into heaven is one thing; that of the virtue which is everywhere diffused is another. (Luke xxiv. 51; Acts i. 11.)
Master. - In what sense do you say that he "sitteth on the right hand of the Father?"
Scholar. - These words mean that the Father bestowed upon him the dominion of heaven and earth, so that he governs all things. (Matt. xxviii. 18.)
Master. - But what is meant by "right hand," and what by "sitteth?"
Scholar. - It is a similitude taken from princes, who are wont to place those on their right hand whom they make their vicegerents.
Master. - You therefore mean nothing more than Paul says, namely, that Christ has been appointed head of the Church, and raised above all principalities, has obtained a name which is above every name. (Eph. i. 22; Phil. ii. 9.)
Scholar. - It is as you say.
Master. - Let us pass on.
Scholar. - "From thence he will come to judge the quick and the dead." The meaning of these words is, that he will come openly from heaven to judge the world, just as he was seen to ascend. (Acts i. 11.)
Master. - As the day of judgment is not to be before the end of the world, how do you say that some men will then be alive, seeing it is appointed unto all men once to die? (Heb. ix.
Scholar. - Paul answers this question when he says, that those who then survive will undergo a sudden change, so that the corruption of the flesh being abolished, they will put on incorruption. (1 Cor. xv. 51; 1 Thess. iv. 17.)
Master. - You understand then that this change will be like death; that there will be an abolition of the first nature, and the beginning of a new nature?
Scholar. - That is my meaning.
Master. - Does it give any delight to our conscience that Christ will one day be the judge of the world?
Scholar. - Indeed singular delight. For we know assuredly that he will come only for our salvation.
Master. - We should not then tremble at this judgment, so as to let it fill us with dismay?
Scholar. - No, indeed; since we shall only stand at the tribunal of a judge who is also our advocate, and who has taken us under his faith and protection.
Master. - Let us come now to the third part.
Scholar. - It relates to faith in the Holy Spirit.
Master. - What do we learn by it?
Scholar. - The object is to let us know that God, as he hath redeemed and saved us by his Son, will also by his Spirit make us capable of this redemption and salvation.
Master. - How?
Scholar. - As we have purification in the blood of Christ, so our consciences must be sprinkled by it in order to be washed. (1 Peter i. 2; 1 John i. 7.)
Master. - This requires a clearer explanation.
Scholar. - I mean that the Spirit of God, while he dwells in our hearts, makes us feel the virtue of Christ. (Rom. viii. 11.) For when our minds conceive the benefits of Christ, it is owing to the illumination of the Holy Spirit; to his persuasion it is owing that they are sealed in our hearts. (Eph. i. 13.) In short, he alone makes room in us for them. He regenerates us and makes us to be new creatures. Accordingly, whatever gifts are offered us in Christ, we receive by the agency of the Spirit.
Master. - Let us proceed.
Scholar. - Next comes the fourth part, in which we confess that we believe in one Holy Catholic Church.
Master. - What is the Church?
Scholar. - The body and society of believers whom God hath predestined to eternal life.
Master. - Is it necessary to believe this article also?
Scholar. - Yes, verily, if we would not make the death of Christ without effect, and set at nought all that has hitherto been said. For the one effect resulting from all is, that there is a Church.
Master. - You mean then that we only treated of the cause of salvation, and showed the foundation of it when we explained that by the merits and intercession of Christ, we are taken into favour by God, and that this grace is confirmed in us by virtue of the Spirit. Now, however, we are explaining the effect of all these things, that by facts our faith may be made more firm?
Scholar. - It is so.
Master. - In what sense do you call the Church holy?
Scholar. - All whom God has chosen he justifies, and forms to holiness and innocence of life, (Rom. viii. 30,) that his glory may be displayed in them. And this is what Paul means when he says that Christ sanctified the Church which he redeemed, that it might be a glorious Church, free from all blemish. (Eph. v. 25.)
Master. - What is meant by the epithet Catholic or Universal?
Scholar. - By it we are taught, that as all believers have one head, so they must all be united into one body, that the Church diffused over the whole world may be one-not more. (Eph. iv. 15; 1 Cor. xii. 12.)
Master. - And what is the purport of what immediately follows concerning the communion of saints?
Scholar. - That is put down to express more clearly the unity which exists among the members of the Church. It is at the same time intimated, that whatever benefits God bestows upon the Church, have a view to the common good of all; Seeing they all have communion with each other.
Master. - But is this holiness which you attribute to the Church already perfect?
Scholar. - Not yet, that is as long as she has her warfare in this world. For she always labours under infirmities, and will never be entirely purged of the remains of vice, until she adheres completely to Christ her head, by whom she is sanctified.
Master. - Can this Church be known in any other way than when she is believed by faith?
Scholar. - There is indeed also a visible Church of God, which he has described to us by certain signs and marks, but here we are properly speaking of the assemblage of those whom he has adopted to salvation by his secret election. This is neither at all times visible to the eye nor discernible by signs.
Master. - What comes next?
Scholar. - I believe in "the forgiveness of sins."
Master. - What meaning do you give to the word forgiveness?
Scholar. - That God of his free goodness forgives and pardons the sins of believers that they may not be brought to judgment, and that the penalty may not be exacted from them.
Master. - Hence it follows, that it is not at all by our own satisfaction we merit the pardon of sins, which we obtain from the Lord?
Scholar. - That is true; for Christ alone gave the satisfaction by paying the penalty.
Master. - Why do you subjoin forgiveness of sins to the Church?
Scholar. - Because no man obtains it without being previously united to the people of God, maintaining unity with the body of Christ perseveringly to the end, and thereby attesting that he is a true member of the Church.
Master. - In this way you conclude that out of the Church is nought but ruin and damnation?
Scholar. - Certainly. Those who make a departure from the body of Christ, and rend its unity by faction, are cut off from all hope of salvation during the time they remain in this schism, be it however short.
Master. - Repeat the remainder.
Scholar. - I believe in "the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting."
Master. - To what end is this article set down in the Confession of Faith?
Scholar. - To remind us that our happiness is not situated on the earth. The utility and use of this knowledge is twofold. First, we are taught by it that we are to live in this world as foreigners, continually thinking of departure, and not allowing our hearts to be entangled by earthly thoughts. Secondly, however the fruit of the grace of Christ bestowed upon us may escape our notice, and be hidden from our eyes, we must not despond, but patiently wait for the day of revelation.
Master. - In what order will this resurrection take place?
Scholar. - Those who were formerly dead will recover their bodies, the same bodies as before, but endued with a new quality, that is, no longer liable to death or corruption. (1 Cor. xv. 53.) Those who survive God will miraculously raise up by a sudden change.
Master. - But will this be common to the righteous and the wicked?
Scholar. - There will be one resurrection of all, but the condition will be different: some will rise to salvation and blessedness, others to death and extreme misery.
Master. - Why then is eternal life only here mentioned, and is there no mention of hell?
Scholar. - Because nothing is introduced here that does not tend to the consolation of pious minds; accordingly, only the rewards are enumerated which the Lord hath prepared for his servants, and nothing is added as to the doom of the wicked, whom we know to be aliens from the kingdom of God.
Master. - As we understand the foundation on which faith ought to rest, it will be easy to extract from it a true definition of faith.
Scholar. - It will. It may be defined-a sure and steadfast knowledge of the paternal goodwill of God toward us, as he declares in the gospel that for the sake of Christ he will be our Father and Saviour.
Master. - Do we conceive faith of ourselves, or do we receive it from God?
Scholar. - Scripture teaches that it is the special gift of God, and this experience confirms.
Master. - What experience do you mean?
Scholar. - Our mind is too rude to be able to comprehend the spiritual wisdom of God which is revealed to us by faith, and our hearts are too prone either to diffidence or to a perverse confidence in ourselves or creatures, to rest in God of their own accord. But the Holy Spirit by his illumination makes us capable of understanding those things which would otherwise far exceed our capacity, and forms us to a firm Persuasion, by sealing the promises of salvation on our hearts.
Master. - What good accrues to us from this faith, when we have once obtained it?
Scholar. - It justifies us before God, and this justification makes us the heirs of everlasting life.
Master. - What! are not men justified by good works when they study to approve themselves to God, by living innocently and holily?
Scholar. - Could any one be found so perfect, he might justly be deemed righteous, but as we are all sinners, guilty before God in many ways, we must seek elsewhere for a worthiness which may reconcile us to him.
Master. - But are all the works of men so vile and valueless that they cannot merit favour with God?
Scholar. - First, all the works which proceed from us, so as properly to be called our own, are vicious, and therefore they can do nothing but displease God, and be rejected by him.
Master. - You say then that before we are born again and formed anew by the Spirit of God, we can do nothing but sin, just as a bad tree can only produce bad fruit? (Matt. vii. 18.)
Scholar. - Altogether so. For whatever semblance works may have in the eyes of men, they are nevertheless evil, as long as the heart to which God chiefly looks is depraved.
Master. - Hence you conclude, that we cannot by any merits anticipate God or call forth his beneficence; or rather that all the works which we try or engage in, subject us to his anger and condemnation?
Scholar. - I understand so; and therefore mere mercy, without any respect to works, (Titus iii. 5,) embraces and accepts us freely in Christ, by attributing his righteousness to us as if it were our own, and not imputing our sins to us.
Master. - In what way, then, do you say that we are justified by faith?
Scholar. - Because, while we embrace the promises of the gospel with sure heartfelt confidence, we in a manner obtain possession of the righteousness of which I speak.
Master. - This then is your meaning-that as righteousness is offered to us by the gospel, so we receive it by faith?
Scholar. - It is so.
Master. - But after we have once been embraced by God, are not the works which we do under the direction of his Holy Spirit accepted by him?
Scholar. - They please him, not however in virtue of their own worthiness, but as he liberally honours them with his favour.
Master. - But seeing they proceed from the Holy Spirit, do they not merit favour?
Scholar. - They are always mixed up with some defilement from the weakness of the flesh, and thereby vitiated.
Master. - Whence then or how can it be that they please God?
Scholar. - It is faith alone which procures favour for them, as we rest with assured confidence on this-that God wills not to try them by his strict rule, but covering their defects and impurities as buried in the purity of Christ, he regards them in the same light as if they were absolutely perfect.
Master. - But can we infer from this that a Christian man is justified by works after he has been called by God, or that by the merit of works he makes himself loved by God, whose love is eternal life to us?
Scholar. - By no means. We rather hold what is written-that no man can be justified in his sight, and we therefore pray, Enter not into judgment with us." (Ps. cxliii. 2.)
Master. - We are not therefore to think that the good works of believers are useless?
Scholar. - Certainly not. For not in vain does God promise them reward both in this life and in the future. But this reward springs from the free love of God as its source; for he first embraces us as sons, and then burying the remembrance of the vices which proceed from us, he visits us with his favour.
Master. - But can this righteousness be separated from good works, so that he who has it may be void of them?
Scholar. - That cannot be. For when by faith we receive Christ as he is offered to us, he not only promises us deliverance from death and reconciliation with God, but also the gift of the Holy Spirit, by which we are regenerated to newness of life; these things must necessarily be conjoined so as not to divide Christ from himself.
Master. - Hence it follows that faith is the root from which all good works spring, so far is it from taking us off from the study of them?
Scholar. - So indeed it is; and hence the whole doctrine of the gospel is comprehended under the two branches, faith and repentance.
Master. - What is repentance?
Scholar. - Dissatisfaction with and a hatred of sin and a love of righteousness, proceeding from the fear of God, which things lead to self-denial and mortification of the flesh, so that we give ourselves up to the guidance of the Spirit of God, and frame all the actions of our life to the obedience of the Divine will.
Master. - But this second branch was in the division which was set down at first when you showed the method of duly worshipping God.
Scholar. - True; and it was at the same time added, that the true and legitimate rule for worshipping God is to obey his will.
Master. - Why so?
Scholar. - Because the only worship which he approves is not that which it may please us to devise, but that which he hath of his own authority prescribed.

OF THE LAW, THAT IS, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.
Master. - What is the rule of life which he has given us?
Scholar. - His law.
Master. - What does it contain?
Scholar. - It consists of two parts; the former of which contains four commandments, the latter six. Thus the whole law consists of ten commandments in all
Master. - Who is the author of this division?
Scholar. - God himself; who delivered it to Moses written on two tables, and afterwards declared that it was reduced into ten sentences. (Exod. xxiv. 12; xxxii. 15; xxxiv. 1; Deut. iv. 13; x. 4.)
Master. - What is the subject of the first table?
Scholar. - The offices of piety towards God.
Master. - Of the second?
Scholar. - How we are to act towards men, and what we owe them.
Master. - Repeat the first commandment or head.
Scholar. - Hear, 0 Israel, I am Jehovah thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage: thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Master. - Now explain the meaning of the words.
Scholar. - At first he makes a kind of preface to the whole law. For when he calls himself Jehovah, he claims right and authority to command. Then in order to procure favour for his law, he adds, that he is our God. These words have the same force as if he had called himself our Preserver. Now as he bestows this favour upon us, it is meet that we should in our turn show ourselves to be an obedient people.
Master. - But does not what he immediately subjoins, as to deliverance and breaking the yoke of Egyptian bondage, apply specially to the people of Israel, and to them alone?
Scholar. - I admit this as to the act itself; but there is another kind of deliverance which applies equally to all men. For he has delivered us all from the spiritual bondage of sin, and the tyranny of the devil.
Master. - Why does he mention that matter in a preface to his law?
Scholar. - To remind us that we will be guilty of the greatest ingratitude if we do not devote ourselves entirely to obedience to him.
Master. - And what does he require under this first head?
Scholar. - That we maintain his honour entire and for himself alone, not transferring any part of it elsewhere.
Master. - What is the honour peculiar to him which it is unlawful to transfer elsewhere?
Scholar. - To adore him, to put our confidence in him, to call upon him, in short to pay him all the deference suitable to his majesty.
Master. - Why is the clause added, "Before my face ?"
Scholar. - As nothing is so hidden as to escape him, and he is the discerner and judge of secret thoughts, it means that he requires not the honour of outward affection merely, but true heartfelt piety.
Master. - Let us pass to the second head.
Scholar. - Thou shalt not sculpture to thyself the image, or form any of those things which are either in heaven above or on the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore nor serve them.
Master. - Does it entirely prohibit us from sculpturing or painting any resemblance?
Scholar. - No; it only forbids us to make any resemblance's for the sake of representing or worshipping God.
Master. - Why is it unlawful to represent God by a visible shape?
Scholar. - Because there is no resemblance between him who is an eternal Spirit and incomprehensible, and a corporeal, corruptible, and lifeless figure. (Deut. iv. 15; Acts xvii. 29; Rom. i. 23.)
Master. - You think then that an insult is offered to his majesty when he is represented in this way?
Scholar. - Such is my belief.
Master. - What kind of worship is here condemned?
Scholar. - When we turn to a statue or image intending to pray, we prostrate ourselves before it: when we pay honour to it by the bending of our knees, or other signs, as if God were there representing himself to us.
Master. - We are not to understand then that simply any kind of picture or sculpture is condemned by these words. We are only prohibited from making images for the purpose of seeking or worshipping God in them, or which is the same thing, for the purpose of worshipping them in honour of God, or abusing them in any way to superstition and idolatry.
Scholar. - True.
Master. - Now to what end shall we refer this head?
Scholar. - As under the former head he declared that he alone should be worshipped and served, so he now shows what is the correct form of worship, that he may call us off from all superstition, and other vicious and carnal fictions.
Master. - Let us proceed.
Scholar. - He adds the sanction that he is Jehovah our God, a strong and jealous God, who avengeth the iniquity of the fathers upon the children of them who hate him, even to the third and fourth generation.
Master. - Why does he make mention of his strength?
Scholar. - He thereby intimates that he has power enough to vindicate his glory.
Master. - What does he intimate by the term jealousy?
Scholar. - That he cannot bear an equal or associate. For as he has given himself to us out of his infinite goodness, so he would have us to be wholly his. And the chastity of our souls consists in being dedicated to him, and wholly cleaving to him, as on the other hand they are said to be polluted with idolatry, when they turn aside from him to superstition.
Master. - In what sense is it said that he avengeth the iniquity of fathers on children?
Scholar. - To strike the more terror into us, he not only threatens to inflict punishment on those who offend him, but that their offspring also will be cursed.
Master. - But is it consistent with the justice of God to punish any one for another's fault?
Scholar. - If we consider what the condition of mankind is, the question is answered. For by nature we are all liable to the curse, and we have nothing to complain of in God when he leaves us in this condition. Then as he demonstrates his love for the righteous, by blessing their posterity, so he executes his vengeance against the wicked, by depriving their children of this blessing.
Master. - Go on.
Scholar. - To allure us by attractive mildness, he promises that he will take pity on all who love him and observe his commands, to a thousand generations.
Master. - Does he mean that the innocence of a pious man will be the salvation of all his posterity, however wicked?
Scholar. - Not at all, but that he will exercise his benignity to believers to such a degree, that for their sakes he will show himself benign also to their children, by not only giving them prosperity in regard to the present life, but also sanctifying their souls, so as to give them a place among his flock.
Master. - But this does not always appear.
Scholar. - I admit it. For as he reserves to himself liberty to show mercy when he pleases to the children of the ungodly, so he has not so astricted his favour to the children of believers as not to repudiate at pleasure those of them whom he will. (Rom. ix.) This, however, he so tempers as to show that his promise is not vain or fallacious.
Master. - But why does he here say a thousand generations, whereas, in the case of punishment, he mentions only three or four?
Scholar. - To intimate that he is more inclined to kindness and beneficence than to severity. This he also declares, when he says that he is ready to pardon, but slow to wrath. (Ex. xxxiv. 6; Ps. ciii. 8; cxlv. 8.)
Master. - Now for the third commandment.
Scholar. - Thou shalt not take the name of Jehovah thy God in vain.
Master. - What is the meaning?
Scholar. - He forbids us to abuse the name of God, not only by perjury, but by swearing without necessity.
Master. - Can the name of God be lawfully used in making oath?
Scholar. - It may indeed, when used on a fit cause: first, in asserting the truth; and secondly, when the business is of such importance as to make it meet to swear, in maintaining mutual love and concord among men..
Master. - But does it not go farther than to restrain oaths, by which the name of God is profaned, or his honour impaired?
Scholar. - The mention of one species admonishes us in general, never to utter the name of God unless with fear and reverence, and for the purpose of honouring it. For while it is thrice holy, we ought to guard, by all means, against seeming to hold it in contempt, or giving others occasion to contemn.
Master. - How is this to be done?
Scholar. - By never speaking or thinking of God and his works without honour.
Master. - What follows?
Scholar. - A sanction, by which he declares that he shall not be guiltless who taketh his name in vain.
Master. - As he, in another place, declares that he will punish the transgressors of his law, what more is contained here?
Scholar. - He hereby meant to intimate how much he values the glory of his name, and to make us more careful of it, when we see that vengeance is ready for any who may profane it.
Master. - Let us come to the fourth commandment.
Scholar. - Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Master. - Does he order us to labour on six days, that we may rest on the seventh ?
Scholar. - Not absolutely; but allowing man six days for labour, he excepts the seventh, that it may be devoted to rest.
Master. - Does he interdict us from all kind of labour?
Scholar. - This commandment has a separate and peculiar reason. As the observance of rest is part of the old ceremonies, it was abolished by the advent of Christ.
Master. - Do you mean that this commandment properly refers to the Jews, and was therefore merely temporary?
Scholar. - I do, in as far as it is ceremonial.
Master. - What then? Is there any thing under it beyond ceremony?
Scholar. - It was given for three reasons.
Master. - State them to me.
Scholar. - To figure spiritual rest; for the preservation of ecclesiastical polity; and for the relief of slaves.
Master. - What do you mean by spiritual rest?
Scholar. - When we keep holiday from our own works, that God may perform his own works in us.
Master. - What, moreover, is the method of thus keeping holiday?
Scholar. - By crucifying our flesh,-that is, renouncing our own inclination, that we may be governed by the Spirit of God.
Master. - Is it sufficient to do so on the seventh day?
Scholar. - Nay, continually. After we have once begun, we must continue during the whole course of life.
Master. - Why, then, is a certain day appointed to figure it?
Scholar. - There is no necessity that the reality should agree with the figure in every respect, provided it be suitable in so far as is required for the purpose of figuring.
Master. - But why is the seventh day prescribed rather than any other day?
Scholar. - In Scripture the number seven implies perfection. It is, therefore, apt for denoting perpetuity. It, at the same time, indicates that this spiritual rest is only begun in this life, and will not be perfect until we depart from this world.
Master. - But what is meant when the Lord exhorts us to rest by his own example?
Scholar. - Having finished the creation of the world in six days, he dedicated the seventh to the contemplation of his works. The more strongly to stimulate us to this, he set before us his own example. For nothing is more desirable than to be formed after his image.
Master. - But ought meditation on the works of God to be continual, or is it sufficient that one day out of seven be devoted to it?
Scholar. - It becomes us to be daily exercised in it, but because of our weakness, one day is specially appointed. And this is the polity which I mentioned.
Master. - What order, then, is to be observed on that day?
Scholar. - That the people meet to hear the doctrine of Christ, to engage in public prayer, and make profession of their faith.
Master. - Now explain what you meant by saying that the Lord intended by this commandment to provide also for the relief of slaves.
Scholar. - That some relaxation might be given to those under the power of others. Nay, this, too, tends to maintain a common polity. For when one day is devoted to rest, every one accustoms himself to labour during the other days.
Master. - Let us now see how far this command has reference to us.
Scholar. - In regard to the ceremony, I hold that it was abolished, as the reality existed in Christ. (Col. ii. 17.)
Master. - How?
Scholar. - Because, by virtue of his death, our old man is crucified, and we are raised up to newness of life. (Rom. vi. 6.)
Master. - What of the commandment then remains for us?
Scholar. - Not to neglect the holy ordinances which contribute to the spiritual polity of the Church; especially to frequent sacred assemblies, to hear the word of God, to celebrate the sacraments, and engage in the regular prayers, as enjoined.
Master. - But does the figure give us nothing more?
Scholar. - Yes, indeed. We must give heed to the thing meant by it; namely, that being engrafted into the body of Christ, and made his members, we cease from our own works, and so resign ourselves to the government of God.
Master. - Let us pass to the second table.
Scholar. - It begins, "Honour thy father and thy mother."
Master. - What meaning do you give to the word "honour?"
Scholar. - That children be, with modesty and humility, respectful and obedient to parents, serving them reverentially, helping them in necessity, and exerting their labour for them. For in these three branches is included the honour which is due to parents.
Master. - Proceed.
Scholar. - To the commandment the promise is added, "That thy days may be prolonged on the land which the Lord thy God will give thee."
Master. - What is the meaning?
Scholar. - That, by the blessing of God, long life will be given to those who pay due honour to parents.
Master. - Seeing this life is so full of troubles, why does God promise the long continuance of it as a blessing?
Scholar. - How great soever the miseries to which it is liable, yet there is a blessing from God upon believers, when he nourishes and preserves them here, were it only for this one reason, that it is a proof of his paternal favour.
Master. - Does it follow conversely, that he who is snatched away from the world quickly, and before mature age, is cursed of God?
Scholar. - By no means. Nay, rather it sometimes happens that the more a man is loved by God the more quickly is he removed out of this life.
Master. - But in so acting, how does he fulfil his promise?
Scholar. - Whatever earthly good God promises we must receive under this condition, viz., in so far as is expedient for the good and salvation of our soul. For the arrangement would be very absurd if the care of the soul did not always take precedence.
Master. - What of those who are contumacious to parents?
Scholar. - They shall not only be punished at the last judgment, but here also God will take vengeance on their bodies, either by taking them hence in the middle of their days, or bringing them to an ignominious end, or in other manners.
Master. - But does not the promise speak expressly of the land of Canaan?
Scholar. - It does so in as far as regards the Israelites, but the term ought to have a wider and more extensive meaning to us. For seeing that the whole earth is the Lord's, whatever be the region we inhabit he assigns it to us for a possession. (Ps, xxiv. 1; lxxxv. 5; cxv. 16.)
Master. - Is there nothing more of the commandment remaining?
Scholar. - Though father and mother only are expressed, we must understand all who are over us, as the reason is the same.
Master. - What is the reason?
Scholar. - That the Lord has raised them to a high degree of honour; for there is no authority whether of parents, or princes, or rulers of any description, no power, no honour, but by the decree of God, because it so pleases him to order the world.
Master. - Repeat the sixth commandment.
Scholar. - Thou shalt not kill.
Master. - Does it forbid nothing but the perpetration of murder?
Scholar. - Yes, indeed. For seeing it is God who speaks, he here gives law not only to outward works, but also to the affections of the mind, and indeed to them chiefly.
Master. - You seem to insinuate that there is some kind of secret murder from which God here recalls us.
Scholar. - I do. For anger, and hatred, and any desire to hurt, is murder in the sight of God.
Master. - Is it enough if we do not hate any one?
Scholar. - By no means. Since the Lord, by condemning hatred and restraining us from any harm by which our neighbour may be injured, shows at the same time that he requires us to love all men from the heart, and study faithfully to defend and preserve them.
Master. - Now for the seventh commandment.
Scholar. - Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Master. - Explain what the substance of it is.
Scholar. - That all kinds of fornication are cursed in the sight of God, and therefore as we would not provoke the anger of God against us we must carefully abstain from it.
Master. - Does it require nothing besides?
Scholar. - Respect must always be had to the nature of the Law-giver, who, we have said, not only regards the outward act, but looks more to the affections of the mind.
Master. - What more then does it comprehend?
Scholar. - Inasmuch as both our bodies and our souls are temples of the Holy Spirit, (1 Cor. iii. 16; vi. 19,) we must observe a chaste purity with both, and accordingly be chaste not only by abstaining from outward flagitiousness, but also in heart, speech, bodily gesture, and action, (2 Cor. vi. 16;) in short, our body must be free from all lasciviousness, our mind from all lust, and no part of us be polluted by the defilements of unchastity.
Master. - Let us come to the eighth commandment.
Scholar. - Thou shalt not steal.
Master. - Does it only prohibit the thefts which are punished by human laws, or does it go farther?
Scholar. - Under the name of theft, it comprehends all kinds of wicked acts of defrauding and circumventing by which we hunt after other men's goods. Here, therefore, we are forbidden either to seize upon our neighbour's goods by violence, or lay hands upon them by trick and cunning, or get possession of them by any other indirect means whatever.
Master. - Is it enough to withhold your hand from the evil act, or is covetousness also here condemned?
Scholar. - We must ever return to this-that the law given, being spiritual, intends to check not only outward thefts, but all counsels and wishes which incommode others in any way; and especially covetousness itself; that we may not long to enrich ourselves at the expense of our brethren.
Master. - What then must be done to obey this commandment?
Scholar. - We must endeavour to let every man have his own in safety.
Master. - What is the ninth commandment?
Scholar. - Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Master. - Does it prohibit perjury in court only, or any kind of lying against our neighbours?
Scholar. - Under one species the general doctrine is comprehended, that we are not to charge our neighbour falsely, nor by our evil speaking and detraction hurt his good name, or harm him in his goods.
Master. - But why does it expressly mention public perjury?
Scholar. - That it may inspire us with a greater abhorrence of this vice. For it insinuates that if a man accustom himself to evil speaking and calumny, the descent to perjury is rapid if an opportunity is given to defame his neighbour.
Master. - Does it mean to keep us from evil speaking only, or also from false suspicion and unjust and uncharitable judgment?
Scholar. - It here condemns both, according to the view already stated. For whatever it is wrong to do before men, it is wrong to wish before God.
Master. - Explain then what it means in substance.
Scholar. - It enjoins us not to think ill of our neighbours, or be prone to defame them, but in the spirit of kindness and impartiality to think well of them as far as the truth will permit, and study to preserve their reputation entire.
Master. - Repeat the last commandment.
Scholar. - Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Master. - Seeing that the whole law is spiritual, as you have so often said before, and the above commandments are set down not only to curb outward acts, but also correct the affections of the mind, what more is added here?
Scholar. - The Lord meant to regulate and govern the will and affections by the other commandments, but here he imposes a law even on thoughts which carry some degree of covetousness along with them, and yet come not the length of a fixed purpose.
Master. - Do you say that the least degrees of covetousness which creep in upon believers and enter their minds are sins, even though they resist rather than assent?
Scholar. - It is certainly clear that all vitious thoughts, even though consent is not added, proceed from the depravity of our nature. But I only say this-that this commandment condemns vicious desires which tickle and solicit the heart of man, without however drawing him on to a firm and deliberate act of will.
Master. - You understand then that the evil affections in which men acquiesce, and by which they allow themselves to be overcome, were prohibited before, but that the thing now required of us is such strict integrity that our hearts are not to admit any perverse desire by which they may be stimulated to sin?
Scholar. - Exactly so.
Master. - Can we now frame a short compendium of the whole law?
Scholar. - Very easily, since we can reduce it to two heads. The former is to love God with all our heart, and soul; and strength-the latter, to love our neighbours as ourselves.
Master. - What is comprehended under the love of God?
Scholar. - To love him as God should be loved-that is, recognising him as at once our Lord, and Father, and Preserver. Accordingly, to the love of God is joined reverence for him, a willingness to obey him, trust to be placed in him.
Master. - What do you understand by the whole heart, the whole soul, and the whole strength?
Scholar. - Such vehemence of zeal, that there be no place at all in us for any thoughts, desires, or pursuits, adverse to this love.
Master. - What is the meaning of the second head?
Scholar. - As we are by nature so prone to love ourselves, that this feeling overcomes all others, so love to our neighbour ought to have such ascendency in us as to govern us in every respect, and be the rule of all our purposes and actions.
Master. - What do you understand by the term neighbour?
Scholar. - Not only kindred and friends, or those connected with us by any necessary tie, but also those who are unknown to us, and even enemies.
Master. - But what connection have they with us?
Scholar. - They are connected by that tie by which God bound the whole human race together. This tie is sacred and inviolable, and no man's depravity can abolish it.
Master. - You say, then, that if any man hate us, the blame is his own, and yet he is nevertheless our neighbour, and as such is to be regarded by us, because the divine arrangement by which this connection between us was ratified stands inviolable?
Scholar. - It is so.
Master. - Seeing that the law of God points out the form of duly worshipping him, must we not live according to its direction?
Scholar. - We must indeed. But we all labour under infirmity, owing to which no man fulfils, in every respect, what he ought.
Master. - Why then does God require a perfection which is beyond our ability?
Scholar. - He requires nothing which we are not bound to perform. But provided we strive after that form of living which is here prescribed, although we be wide of the mark, that is, of perfection, the Lord forgives us what is wanting.
Master. - Do you speak of all men in general, or of believers only?
Scholar. - He who is not yet regenerated by the Spirit of God, is not fit to begin the least iota of the law. Besides, even were we to grant that any one is found to obey the law in any respect, we do not think that he has performed his part before God. For the law pronounces all cursed who have not fulfilled all the things contained in it. (Deut. xxvii. 26; Gal. iii. 10.)
Master. - Hence we must conclude, that as there are two classes of men, so the office of the law is twofold?
Scholar. - Exactly. For among unbelievers it does nothing more than shut them out from all excuse before God. And this is what Paul means when he calls it the ministry of death and condemnation. In regard to believers it has a very different use. (Rom. i. 32; 2 Cor. iii. 6.)
Master. - What?
Scholar. - First, while they learn from it that they cannot obtain righteousness by works, they are trained to humility, which is the true preparation for seeking salvation in Christ. Secondly, inasmuch as it requires of them much more than they are able to perform, it urges them to seek strength from the Lord, and at the same time reminds them of their perpetual guilt, that they may not presume to be proud. Lastly, it is a kind of curb, by which they are kept in the fear of the Lord. (Rom. iii. 20; Gal. ii. 16; iii. 11; iv. 5.)
Master. - Therefore, although in this earthly pilgrimage we never satisfy the law, we cannot judge that it is superfluous to require this strict perfection from us. For it shows the mark at which we ought to aim, the goal towards which we ought to press, that each of us, according to the measure of grace bestowed upon him, may endeavour to frame his life according to the highest rectitude, and, by constant study, continually advance more and more.
Scholar. - That is my view.
Master. - Have we not a perfect rule of righteousness in the law?
Scholar. - So much so, that God wishes nothing else from us than to follow it; and, on the other hand, repudiates and holds void whatever we undertake beyond its prescription. For the only sacrifice which he accepts is obedience. (1 Sam. xv. 22.)
Master. - To what end, then, the many admonitions, precepts, exhortations, which both Prophets and Apostles are continually employing? (Jer. vii. 12.)
Scholar. - They are nothing but mere expositions of the law, which lead us by the hand to the obedience of the law, rather than lead us away from it.
Master. - But he gives no command concerning the private case of each individual?
Scholar. - When he orders us to render to every one his due, it is obvious to infer what the private part of each is in his own order and condition of life, and expositions of particular precepts, as has been said, he scattered throughout Scripture. For what the Lord has summarily comprised here in a few words, is given with more fulness and detail elsewhere.

OF PRAYER.
Master. - As the second part of Divine Worship, which consists in service and obedience, has been sufficiently discussed, let us now proceed to the third part.
Scholar. - We said it was invocation, by which we flee to God in any necessity.
Master. - Do you think that he alone is to be invoked?
Scholar. - Certainly; for he requires this as the proper worship of his Divinity.
Master. - If it is so, how can we beseech men to assist us?
Scholar. - There is a great difference between the two things. For when we invoke God, we testify that we expect no good from any other quarter, and that we place our whole defence in no other, and yet we ask the assistance of men, as far as he permits, and has bestowed on them the power of giving it.
Master. - You say, then, that in having recourse to the faith and help of men, there is nothing that interferes with our invocation of God, seeing that our reliance is not fixed on them, and we beseech them on no other ground, than just because God, by furnishing them with the means of well-doing, has in a manner destined them to be the ministers of his beneficence, and is pleased by their hands to assist us, and draw out, on our account, the resources which he has deposited with them?
Scholar. - Such is my view. And, accordingly, whatever benefits we receive from them, we should regard as coming from God, as in truth it is he alone who bestows all these things upon us by their instrumentality.
Master. - But are we not to feel grateful to men whenever they have conferred any kindness upon us. This the mere equity of nature and law of humanity dictates?
Scholar. - Certainly we are; and were it only for the reason that God honours them by sending to us, through their hands, as rivulets, the blessings which flow from the inexhaustible fountain of his liberality. In this way he lays us under obligation to them, and wishes us to acknowledge it. He, therefore, who does not show himself grateful to them by so doing, betrays his ingratitude to God.
Master. - Are we hence at liberty to infer, that it is wrong to invoke angels and holy servants of the Lord who have departed this life?
Scholar. - We are not at liberty; for God does not assign to saints the office of assisting us. And in regard to angels, though he uses their labour for our salvation, he does not wish us to ask them for it.
Master. - You say, then, that whatever does not aptly and fitly square with the order instituted by God, is repugnant to his will?
Scholar. - I do. For it is a sure sign of unbelief not to be contented with the things which God gives to us. Then if we throw ourselves on the protection of angels or saints, when God calls us to himself alone, and transfer to them the confidence which ought wholly to be fixed upon God, we fall into idolatry, seeing we share with them that which God claimed entirely for himself.
Master. - Let us now consider the manner of prayer. Is it sufficient to pray with the tongue, or does prayer require also the mind and heart?
Scholar. - The tongue, indeed, is not always necessary, but true prayer can never be without understanding and affection.
Master. - By what argument will you prove this to me?
Scholar. - Since God is a Spirit, he requires men to give him the heart in all cases, and more especially in prayer, by which they hold communion with him. Wherefore he promises to be near to those only who call upon him in truth: on the other hand, he abominates and curses all who pray to him deceitfully, and not sincerely. (Psalm cxlv. 18; Isaiah xxix. 13.)
Master. - All prayers, then, conceived only by the tongue, will be vain and worthless?
Scholar. - Not only so, but will be most displeasing to God.
Master. - What kind of feeling does God require in prayer?
Scholar. - First, that we feel our want and misery, and that this feeling beget sorrow and anxiety in our minds. Secondly, that we be inflamed with an earnest and vehement desire to obtain grace from God. These things will also kindle in us an ardent longing to pray.
Master. - Does this feeling flow from the temper natural to man, or does it proceed from the grace of God?
Scholar. - Here God must come to our aid. For we are altogether stupid in regard to both. (Rom. viii. 25.) It is the Spirit of God who excites in us groanings which cannot be uttered, and frames our minds to the desires which are requisite in prayer, as Paul says. (Gal. iv. 6.)
Master. - Is it the meaning of this doctrine, that we are to sit still, and, in a kind of vacillating state, wait for the motions of the Spirit, and not that each one is to urge himself to pray?
Scholar. - By no means. The meaning rather is, that when believers feel themselves cold or sluggish, and somewhat indisposed to pray, they should forthwith flee to God, and beseech him to inflame them by the fiery darts of his Spirit, that they may be rendered fit to pray.
Master. - You do not, however, mean that there is to be no use of the tongue in prayer?
Scholar. - Not at all. For it often helps to sustain the mind, and keep it from being so easily drawn off from God. Besides, as it, more than other members, was created to display the glory of God, it is right that it be employed to this purpose, to the whole extent of its capacity. Moreover, vehemence of desire occasionally impels a man to break forth into utterance with the tongue without intending it.
Master. - If so, what profit have those who pray in a foreign tongue not understood by them?
Scholar. - It is nothing else than to sport with God. Christians, therefore, should have nothing to do with this hypocrisy. (1 Cor. xiv. 15.)
Master. - But when we pray do we do it fortuitously, uncertain of success, or ought we to feel assured that the Lord will hear us?
Scholar. - The foundation of our prayer should always be, that the Lord will hear us, and that we shall obtain whatever we ask, in so far as is for our good. For this reason Paul tells us, that true prayer flows from faith. (Rom. x. 14.) For no man will ever duly call upon him, without previously resting with firm reliance on his goodness.
Master. - What then will become of those who pray in doubt, and without fixing in their minds what profit they are to gain by praying, nay, are uncertain whether or not their prayers will be heard by God?
Scholar. - Their prayers are vain and void, not being supported by any promise. For we are ordered to ask with sure faith, and the promise is added, that whatever we shall ask, believing, we shall receive. (Matt. xxi. 22; Mark xi. 24; James i. 6.)
Master. - It remains to be seen wherein we have such great confidence, that while unworthy, on so many accounts, of appearing in the presence of God, we however dare to sist ourselves before him.
Scholar. - First, we have promises by which we must simply abide, without. making any reference to our own worthiness. Secondly, if we are sons, God animates and instigates us by his Spirit, so that we doubt not to betake ourselves to him in a familiar manner, as to a father. As we are like worms, and are oppressed by the consciousness of our sins, God, in order that we may not tremble at his glorious majesty, sets forth Christ as a Mediator, through whom we obtain access, and have no doubt at all of obtaining favour. (Psalm iv. 15; xci. 15; cxlv. 18; Isaiah xxx. 19; lxv. 1; Jer. xxix. 12; Joel ii 32; Rom. viii. 25; x. 13.)
Master. - Do you understand that we are to pray to God only in the name of Christ?
Scholar. - I so understand. For it is both so enjoined in distinct terms, and the promise is added, that he will by his intercession obtain what we ask. (1 Tim. ii. 5; 1 John ii. 1.)
Master. - He is not then to be accused of rashness or presumption, who, trusting to this Advocate, makes a familiar approach to God, and holds forth to God and to himself Christ as the only one through whom he is to be heard? (Heb. iv. 14.)
Scholar. - By no means: For he who thus prays conceives his prayers as it were at the lips of Christ, seeing he knows, that by the intercession of Christ, his prayer is assisted and recommended. (Rom. viii. 15.)
Master. - Let us now consider what the prayers of believers ought to contain. Is it lawful to ask of God whatever comes into our mind, or is a certain rule to be observed?
Scholar. - It were a very preposterous method of prayer to indulge our own desires and the judgment of the flesh. We are too ignorant to be able to judge what is expedient for us, and we labour under an intemperance of desire, to which it is necessary that a bridle be applied.
Master. - What then requires to be done?
Scholar. - The only thing remaining is for God himself to prescribe a proper form of prayer, that we may follow him while he leads us by the hand, and as it were sets words before us.
Master. - What rule has he prescribed?
Scholar. - The doctrine on this subject is amply and copiously delivered in the Scriptures. But to give us a surer aim, he framed, and, as it were, dictated a form in which he has briefly comprehended and digested under a few heads whatever it is lawful, and for our interest to ask.
Master. - Repeat it.
Scholar. - Our Lord Jesus Christ being asked by his disciples in what way they ought to pray, answered, when ye would pray, say ye, (Matt. vi. 9; Luke xi. 2,) "Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."
Master. - That we may the better understand what it contains, let us divide it into heads.
Scholar. - It contains six parts, of which the three first respect the glory of God alone as their proper end, without any reference to us: the other three relate to us and our interest.
Master. - Are we then to ask God for any thing from which no benefit redounds to us?
Scholar. - He indeed of his infinite goodness so arranges all things that nothing tends to his glory without being also salutary to us. Therefore when his name is sanctified, he causes it to turn to our sanctification also; nor does his kingdom come without our being in a manner sharers in it. But in asking all these things, we ought to look only to his glory without thinking of advantage to ourselves.
Master. - According to this view, three of these requests have a connection with our own good, and yet their only aim ought to be, that the name of God may be glorified.
Scholar. - It is so; and thus the glory of God ought also to be considered in the other three, though they are properly intended to express desire for things which belong to our good and salvation.
Master. - Let us now proceed to an explanation of the words; and, first, Why is the name of Father, rather than any other, here given to God?
Scholar. - As security of conscience is one of the most essential requisites for praying aright, God assumes this name, which suggests only the idea of pure kindness, that having thus banished all anxiety from our minds, he may invite us to make a familiar approach to him.
Master. - Shall we then dare to go to him directly without hesitation as children to parents?
Scholar. - Wholly so: nay, with much surer confidence of obtaining what we ask For as our Master reminds us, (Matt. vii. 11,) If we being evil cannot however refuse good things to our children, nor bear to send them empty away, nor give them poison for bread, how much greater kindness is to be expected from our heavenly Father, who is not only supremely good, but goodness itself?
Master. - May we not from this name also draw the inference which we mentioned at the outset, viz., that to be approved, all our prayers should be founded on the intercession of Christ? (John xv. 7; Rom. viii. 15.)
Scholar. - And indeed a most valid inference. For God regards us as sons, only in so far as we are members of Christ.
Master. - Why do you call God "our Father" in common, rather than "my Father" in particular?
Scholar. - Each believer may indeed call him his own Father, but the Lord used the common epithet that he might accustom us to exercise charity in our prayers, and that we might not neglect others, by each caring only for himself.
Master. - What is meant by the additional clause, that God is in heaven?
Scholar. - It is just the same as if I were to call him exalted, mighty, incomprehensible.
Master. - To what end this, and for what reason?
Scholar. - In this way we are taught when we pray to him to raise our minds aloft, and not have any carnal or earthly thoughts of him, nor measure him by our own little standard, lest thinking too meanly of him, we should wish to bring him into subjection to our will, instead of learning to look up with fear and reverence to his glorious Majesty. It tends to excite and confirm our confidence in him, when he is proclaimed to be the Lord and Governor of heaven, ruling all things at his pleasure.
Master. - Repeat to me the substance of the first petition.
Scholar. - By the name of God, Scripture denotes the knowledge and fame with which he is celebrated among men. We pray then that his glory may be promoted everywhere, and in all.
Master. - But can any thing be added to his glory, or taken from it?
Scholar. - In itself it neither increases nor is diminished. But we pray as is meet, that it may be illustrious among men- that in whatever God does, all his works may appear, as they are, glorious, that he himself may by all means be glorified.
Master. - What understand you by the kingdom of God in the second petition?
Scholar. - It consists chiefly of two branches-that he would govern the elect by his Spirit-that he would prostrate and destroy the reprobate who refuse to give themselves up to his service, thus making it manifest that nothing is able to resist his might.
Master. - In what sense do you pray that this kingdom may come?
Scholar. - That the Lord would daily increase the numbers of the faithful-that he would ever and anon load them with new gifts of his Spirit, until he fill them completely: moreover, that he would render his truth more clear and conspicuous by dispelling the darkness of Satan, that he would abolish all iniquity, by advancing his own righteousness.
Master. - Are not all these things done every day?
Scholar. - They are done so far, that the kingdom of God may be said to be commenced. We pray, therefore, that it may constantly increase and be carried forward, until it attain its greatest height, which we only hope to take place on the last day on which God alone, after reducing all creatures to order, will be exalted and preeminent, and so be all in all. (1 Cor. xv. 28.)
Master. - What mean you by asking that the will of God may be done?
Scholar. - That all creatures may be subdued into obedience to him, and so depend on his nod, that nothing may be done except at his pleasure.
Master. - Do you think then that any thing can be done against his will?
Scholar. - We not only pray that what he has decreed with himself may come to pass, but also that all contumacy being tamed and subjugated, he would subject all wills to his own, and frame them in obedience to it.
Master. - Do we not by thus praying surrender our own wills?
Scholar. - Entirely: nor do we only pray that he would make void whatever desires of ours are at variance with his own will, but also that he would form in us new minds and new hearts, so that we may wish nothing of ourselves, but rather that his Spirit may preside over our wishes, and bring them into perfect unison with God.
Master. - Why do you pray that this may be done on earth as it is in heaven?
Scholar. - As the holy angels, who are his celestial creatures, have it as their only object to obey him in all things, to be always obedient to his word, and prepared voluntarily to do him service, we pray for such prompt obedience in men, that each may give himself up entirely to him in voluntary subjection.
Master. - Let us now come to the second part. What mean you by the "daily" bread you ask for?
Scholar. - In general every thing that tends to the preservation of the present life, not only food or clothing, but also all other helps by which the wants of outward life are sustained; that we may eat our bread in quiet, so far as the Lord knows it to be expedient.
Master. - But why do you ask God to give what he orders us to provide by our own labour?
Scholar. - Though we are to labour, and even sweat in providing food, we are not nourished either by our own labour, or our own industry, or our own diligence, but by the blessing of God by which the labour of our hands, that would otherwise be in vain, prospers. Moreover we should understand, that even when abundance of food is supplied to our hand, and we eat it, we are not nourished by its substance, but by the virtue of God alone. It has not any inherent efficacy in its own nature, but God supplies it from heaven as the instrument of his own beneficence. (Deut. viii. 3; Matt. iv. 4.)
Master. - But by what right do you call it your bread when you ask God to give it?
Scholar. - Because by the kindness of God it becomes ours, though it is by no means due to us. We are also reminded by this term to refrain from coveting the bread of others, and to be contented with that which has come to us in a legitimate manner as from the hand of God.
Master. - Why do you add both "daily" and "this day ?"
Scholar. - By these two terms we are taught moderation and temperance, that our wishes may not exceed the measure of necessity.
Master. - As this prayer ought to be common to all, how can the rich, who have abundance at home, and have provision laid up for a long period, ask it to be given them for a day?
Scholar. - The rich, equally with the poor, should remember that none of the things which they have will do them good, unless God grant them the use of them, and by his grace make the use fruitful and efficacious. Wherefore while possessing all things, we have nothing except in so far as we every hour receive from the hand of God what is necessary and sufficient for us.
Master. - What does the fifth petition contain?
Scholar. - That the Lord would pardon our sins.
Master. - Can no mortal be found so righteous as not to require this pardon?
Scholar. - Not one. When Christ gave this form of prayer, he designed it for the whole Church. Wherefore he who would exempt himself from this necessity, must leave the society of the faithful. And we have the testimony of Scripture, namely, that he who would contend before God to clear himself in one thing, will be found guilty in a thousand. (Job ix. 3.) The only refuge left for all is in his mercy.
Master. - How do you think that sins are forgiven us?
Scholar. - As the words of Christ express, namely, that they are debts which make us liable to eternal death, until God of his mere liberality deliver us.
Master. - You say then that it is by the free mercy of God that we obtain the pardon of sins?
Scholar. - Entirely so. For were the punishment of only one sin, and that the least, to be ransomed, we could not satisfy it. All then must be freely overlooked and forgiven.
Master. - What advantage accrues to us from this forgiveness?
Scholar. - We are accepted, just as if we were righteous and innocent, and at the same time our consciences are confirmed in a full reliance on his paternal favour, assuring us of salvation.
Master. - Does the appended condition, viz., that he would for. give us as we forgive our debtors, mean that we merit pardon from God by pardoning men who have in any way offended us?
Scholar. - By no means. For in this way forgiveness would not be free nor founded alone on the satisfaction which Christ made for us on the cross. But as by forgetting the injuries done to ourselves, we, while imitating his goodness and clemency, demonstrate that we are in fact his children, God wishes us to confirm it by this pledge; and at the same time shows us, on the other hand, that if we do not show ourselves easy and ready to pardon, nothing else is to be expected of him than the highest inexorable rigour of severity.
Master. - Do you say then that all who cannot from the heart forgive offences are discarded by God and expunged from his list of children, so that they cannot hope for any place of pardon in heaven?
Scholar. - So I think, in accordance with the words, "With what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again."
Master. - What comes next?
Scholar. - "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil."
Master. - Do you include all this in one petition?
Scholar. - It is only one petition ; for the latter clause is an explanation of the former.
Master. - What does it contain in substance?
Scholar. - That the Lord would not permit us to rush or fall into sin-that he would not leave us to be overcome by the devil and the desires of our flesh, which wage constant war with us-that he would rather furnish us with his strength to resist, sustain us by his hand, cover and fortify us by his protection, so that under his guardianship and tutelage we may dwell safely.
Master. - How is this done?
Scholar. - When governed by his Spirit we are imbued with such a love and desire of righteousness, as to overcome the flesh, sin, and Satan; and, on the other hand, with such a hatred of sin as may keep us separated from the world in pure holiness. For our victory consists in the power of the Spirit.
Master. - Have we need of this assistance?
Scholar. - Who can dispense with it? The devil is perpetually hovering over us, and going about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. (1 Pet.. v. 8.) And let us consider what our weakness is. Nay, all would be over with us every single moment did not God equip us for battle with his own weapons, and strengthen us with his own hand.
Master. - What do you mean by the term Temptation?
Scholar. - The tricks and fallacies of Satan, by which he is constantly attacking us, and would forthwith easily circumvent us, were we not aided by the help of God. For both our mind, from its native vanity, is liable to his wiles, and our will, which is always prone to evil, would immediately yield to him.
Master. - But why do you pray God not to lead you into temptation, which seems to be the proper act of Satan, not of God?
Scholar. - As God defends believers by his protection; that they may neither be oppressed by the wiles of Satan, nor overcome by sin, so those whom he means to punish he not only leaves destitute of his grace, but also delivers to the tyranny of Satan, strikes with blindness, and gives over to a reprobate mind, so that they are completely enslaved to sin and exposed to all the assaults of temptation.
Master. - What is meant by the clause which is added, " For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever ?"
Scholar. - We are here again reminded that our prayers must lean more on the power and goodness of God than on any confidence in ourselves. Besides, we are taught to close all our prayers with praise.
Master. - Is it not lawful to ask any thing of God that is not comprehended in this form?
Scholar. - Although we are free to pray in other words, and in another manner, we ought, however, to hold that no prayer can please God which is not referable to this as the only rule of right Prayer.

OF THE WORD OF GOD.
Master. - The order already adopted by us requires that we now consider the fourth part of divine worship.
Scholar. - We said that this consists in acknowledging God as the author of all good, and in extolling his goodness, justice, wisdom, and power with praise and thanksgiving, that thus the glory of all good may remain entirely with him.
Master. - Has he prescribed no rule as to this part?
Scholar. - All the praises extant in Scripture ought to be our rule.
Master. - Has the Lord's Prayer nothing which applies here?
Scholar. - Yes. When we pray that his name may be hallowed, we pray that he may be duly glorified in his works-that he may be regarded, whether in pardoning sinners, as merciful; or in exercising vengeance, as just; or in performing his promises, as true: in short, that whatever of his works we see may excite us to glorify him. This is indeed to ascribe to him the praise of all that is good.
Master. - What shall we infer from these heads which have hitherto been considered by us?
Scholar. - What truth itself teaches, and was stated at the outset, viz., that this is eternal life to know one true God the Father, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent, (John xvii. 3,)-to know him, I say, in order that we may pay due honour and worship to him, that he may be not only our Lord but also our Father and Saviour, and we be in turn his children and servants, and accordingly devote our lives to the illustration of his glory.
Master. - How can we attain to such blessedness?
Scholar. - For this end God has left us his holy word; for spiritual doctrine is a kind of door by which we enter his heavenly kingdom.
Master. - Where are we to seek for this word?
Scholar. - In the Holy Scriptures, in which it is contained.
Master. - How are you to use it in order to profit by it?
Scholar. - By embracing it with entire heartfelt persuasion, as certain truth come down from heaven-by being docile, and subjecting our minds and wills in obedience to it- by loving it sincerely-by having it once for all engraven on our hearts, and there rooted so as to produce fruit in our life-finally, by being formed after its rule. Then shall it turn to our salvation, as it was intended.
Master. - Are all these things put in our own power?
Scholar. - None of them at all; but every thing which I have mentioned it belongs to God only to effect in us by the gift of his Spirit.
Master. - But are we not to use diligence, and zealously strive to profit in it by reading, hearing, and meditating?
Scholar. - Yea, verily: seeing that every one ought to exercise himself in the daily reading of it, and all should be especially careful to attend the sermons when the doctrine of salvation is expounded in the assembly of the faithful.
Master. - You affirm then that it is not enough for each to read privately at home, and that all ought to meet in common to hear the same doctrine?
Scholar. - They must meet when they can-that is, when an opportunity is given.
Master. - Are you able to prove this to me?
Scholar. - The will of God alone ought to be amply sufficient for proof; and the order which he hath recommended to his church is not what two or three only might observe, but all should obey in common. Moreover, he declares this to be the only method of edifying as well as preserving. This, then, should be a sacred and inviolable rule to us, and no one should think himself entitled to be wise above his Master.
Master. - Is it necessary, then, that pastors should preside over churches?
Scholar. - Nay; it is necessary to hear them, and listen with fear and reverence to the doctrine of Christ as propounded from their lips.
Master. - But is it enough for a Christian man to have been instructed by his pastor once, or ought he to observe this course during life?
Scholar. - It is little to have begun, unless you persevere. We must be the disciples of Christ to the end, or rather without end. But he has committed to the ministers of the Church the office of teaching in his name and stead.

OF THE SACRAMENTS.
Master. - Is there no other medium, as it is called, than the Word by which God may communicate himself to us?
Scholar. - To the preaching of the Word he has added the Sacraments.
Master. - What is a Sacrament?
Scholar. - An outward attestation of the divine benevolence towards us, which, by a visible sign, figures spiritual grace, to seal the promises of God on our hearts, and thereby better confirm their truth to us.
Master. - Is there such virtue in a visible sign that it can establish our consciences in a full assurance of salvation?
Scholar. - This virtue it has not of itself, but by the will of God, because it was instituted for this end.
Master. - Seeing it is the proper office of the Holy Spirit to seal the promises of God on our minds, how do you attribute this to the sacraments?
Scholar. - There is a wide difference between him and them. To move and affect the heart, to enlighten the mind, to render the conscience sure and tranquil, truly belongs to the Spirit alone; so that it ought to be regarded as wholly his work, and be ascribed to him alone, that no other may have the praise; but this does not at all prevent God from employing the sacraments as secondary instruments, and applying them to what use he deems proper, without derogating in any respect from the agency of the Spirit.
Master. - You think, then, that the power and efficacy of a sacrament is not contained in the outward element, but flows entirely from the Spirit of God?
Scholar. - I think so; viz., that the Lord hath been pleased to exert his energy by his instruments, this being the purpose to which he destined them: this he does without detracting in any respect from the virtue of his Spirit.
Master. - Can you give me a reason why he so acts?
Scholar. - In this way he consults our weakness. If we were wholly spiritual, we might, like the angels, spiritually behold both him and his grace; but as we are surrounded with this body of clay, we need figures or mirrors to exhibit a view of spiritual and heavenly things in a kind of earthly manner; for we could not otherwise attain to them. At the same time, it is our interest to have all our senses exercised in the promises of God, that they may be the better confirmed to us.
Master. - If it is true that the sacraments were instituted by God to be helps to our necessity, is it not arrogance for any one to hold that he can dispense with them as unnecessary?
Scholar. - It certainly is; and hence, if any one of his own accord abstains from the use of them, as if he had no need of them, he contemns Christ, spurns his grace, and quenches the Spirit.
Master. - But what confidence can there be in the sacraments as a means of establishing the conscience, and what certain security can be conceived from things which the good and bad use indiscriminately?
Scholar. - Although the wicked, so to speak, annihilate the gifts of God offered in the sacraments in so far as regards themselves, they do not thereby deprive the sacraments of their nature and virtue.
Master. - How, then, and when does the effect follow the use of the sacraments?
Scholar. - When we receive them in faith, seeking Christ alone and his grace in them.
Master. - Why do you say that Christ is to be sought in them?
Scholar. - I mean that we are not to cleave to the visible signs so as to seek salvation from them, or imagine that the power of conferring grace is either fixed or included in them, but rather that the sign is to be used as a help, by which, when seeking salvation and complete felicity, we are pointed directly to Christ.
Master. - Seeing that faith is requisite for the use of them, how do you say that they are given us to confirm our faith, to make us more certain of the promises of God?
Scholar. - It is by no means sufficient that faith is once begun in us. It must be nourished continually, and increase more and more every day. To nourish, strengthen, and advance it, the Lord instituted the sacraments. This indeed Paul intimates, when he says that they have the effect of sealing the promises of God. (Rom. iv. 11.)
Master. - But is it not an indication of unbelief not to have entire faith in the promises of God until they are confirmed to us from another source?
Scholar. - It certainly argues a weakness of faith under which the children of God labour. They do not, however, cease to be believers, though the faith with which they are endued is still small and imperfect; for as long as we continue in this world remains of distrust cleave to our flesh, and these there is no other way of shaking off than by making continual progress even unto the end. It is therefore always necessary to be going forward.
Master. - How many are the sacraments of the Christian Church?
Scholar. - There are only two, whose use is common among all believers.
Master. - What are they?
Scholar. - Baptism and the Holy Supper.
Master. - What likeness or difference is there between them?
Scholar. - Baptism is a kind of entrance into the Church; for we have in it a testimony that we who are otherwise strangers and aliens, are received into the family of God, so as to be counted of his household; on the other hand, the Supper attests that God exhibits himself to us by nourishing our souls.
Master. - That the meaning of both may be more clear to us, let us treat of them separately. First, what is the meaning of Baptism?
Scholar. - It consists of two parts. For, first, Forgiveness of sins; and, secondly, Spiritual regeneration, is figured by it. (Eph. v. 26 ; Rom. vi. 4.)
Master. - What resemblance has water 'with these things, so as to represent them?
Scholar. - Forgiveness of sins is a kind of washing, by which our souls are cleansed from their defilements, just as bodily stains are washed away by water.
Master. - What do you say of Regeneration?
Scholar. - Since the mortification of our nature is its beginning, and our becoming new creatures its end, a figure of death is set before us when the water is poured upon the head, and the figure of a new life when instead of remaining immersed under water, we only enter it for a moment as a kind of grave, out of which we instantly emerge.
Master. - Do you think that the water is a washing of the soul?
Scholar. - By no means; for it were impious to snatch away this honour from the blood of Christ, which was shed in order to wipe away all our stains, and render us pure and unpolluted in the sight of God. (1 Pet. i. 19; 1 John i. 7.) And we receive the fruit of this cleansing when the Holy Spirit sprinkles our consciences with that sacred blood. Of this we have a seal in the Sacrament.
Master. - But do you attribute nothing more to the water than that it is a figure of ablution?
Scholar. - I understand it to be a figure, but still so that the reality is annexed to it; for God does not disappoint us when he promises us his gifts. Accordingly, it is certain that both pardon of sins and newness of life are offered to us in baptism, and received by us.
Master. - Is this grace bestowed on all indiscriminately?
Scholar. - Many precluding its entrance by their depravity, make it void to themselves. Hence the benefit extends to believers only, and yet the Sacrament loses nothing of its nature.
Master. - Whence is Regeneration derived?
Scholar. - From the Death and Resurrection of Christ taken together. His death hath this efficacy, that by means of it our old man is crucified, and the vitiosity of our nature in a manner buried, so as no more to be in vigour in us. Our reformation to a new life, so as to obey the righteousness of God, is the result of the resurrection.
Master. - How are these blessings bestowed upon us by Baptism?
Scholar. - If we do not render the promises there offered unfruitful by rejecting them, we are clothed with Christ, and presented with his Spirit.
Master. - What must we do in order to use Baptism duly?
Scholar. - The right use of Baptism consists in faith and repentance; that is, we must first hold with a firm heartfelt reliance that, being purified from all stains by the blood of Christ, we are pleasing to God: secondly, we must feel his Spirit dwelling in us, and declare this to others by our actions, and we must constantly exercise ourselves in aiming at the mortification of our flesh, and obedience to the righteousness of God.
Master. - If these things are requisite to the legitimate use of Baptism, how comes it that we baptize Infants?
Scholar. - It is not necessary that faith and repentance should always precede baptism. They are only required from those whose age makes them capable of both. It will be sufficient, then, if, after infants have grown up, they exhibit the power of their baptism.
Master. - Can you demonstrate by reason that there is nothing absurd in this?
Scholar. - Yes; if it be conceded to me that our Lord instituted nothing at variance with reason. For while Moses and all the Prophets teach that circumcision was a sign of repentance, and was even as Paul declares the sacrament of faith, we see that infants were not excluded from it. (Deut. xxx. 6; Jer. iv. 4; Rom. iv. 11.)
Master. - But are they now admitted to Baptism for the same reason that was valid in circumcision?
Scholar. - The very same, seeing that the promises which God anciently gave to the people of Israel are now published through the whole world.
Master. - But do you infer from thence that the sign also is to be used?
Scholar. - He who will duly ponder all things in both ordinances, will perceive this to follow. Christ in making us partakers of his grace, which had been formerly bestowed on Israel, did not condition, that it should either be more obscure or in some respect less abundant. Nay, rather he shed it upon us both more clearly and more abundantly.
Master. - Do you think that if infants are denied baptism, some thing is thereby deducted from the grace of God, and it must be said to have been diminished by the coming of Christ?
Scholar. - That indeed is evident; for the sign being taken away, which tends very much to testify the mercy of God and confirm the promises, we should want an admirable consolation which those of ancient times enjoyed.
Master. - Your view then is, that since God, under the Old Testament, in order to show himself the Father of infants, was pleased that the promise of salvation should be engraven on their bodies by a visible sign, it were unbecoming to suppose that, since the advent of Christ, believers have less to confirm them, God having intended to give us in the present day the same promise which was anciently given to the Fathers, and exhibited in Christ a clearer specimen of his goodness?
Scholar. - That is my view. Besides, while it is sufficiently clear that the force, and so to speak, the substance of Baptism are common to children, to deny them the sign, which is inferior to the substance, were manifest injustice.
Master. - On what terms then are children to be baptized?
Scholar. - To attest that they are heirs of the blessing promised to the seed of believers, and enable them to receive and produce the fruit of their Baptism, on acknowledging its reality after they have grown up.
Master. - Let us now pass to the Supper. And, first, I should like to know from you what its meaning is.
Scholar. - It was instituted by Christ in order that by the communication of his body and blood, he might teach and assure us that our souls are being trained in the hope of eternal life.
Master. - But why is the body of our Lord figured by bread, and his blood by wine?
Scholar. - We are hence taught that such virtue as bread has in nourishing our bodies to sustain the present life, the same has the body of our Lord spiritually to nourish our souls. As by wine the hearts of men are gladdened, their strength recruited, and the whole man strengthened, so by the blood of our Lord the same benefits are received by our souls.
Master. - Do we therefore eat the body and blood of the Lord?
Scholar. - I understand so. For as our whole reliance for salvation depends on him, in order that the obedience which he yielded to the Father may be imputed to us just as if it were ours, it is necessary that he be possessed by us; for the only way in which he communicates his blessings to us is by making himself ours.
Master. - But did he not give himself when he exposed himself to death, that he might redeem us from the sentence of death, and reconcile us to God?
Scholar. - That is indeed true; but it is not enough for us unless we now receive him, that thus the efficacy and fruit of his death may reach us.
Master. - Does not the manner of receiving consist in faith?
Scholar. - I admit it does. But I at the same time add, that this is done when we not only believe that he died in order to free us from death, and was raised up that he might purchase life for us, but recognise that he dwells in us, and that we are united to him by a union the same in kind as that which unites the members to the head, that by virtue of this union we may become partakers of all his blessings.
Master. - Do we obtain this communion by the Supper alone?
Scholar. - No, indeed. For by the gospel also, as Paul declares, Christ is communicated to us. And Paul justly declares this, seeing we are there told that we are flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones-that he is the living bread which came down from heaven to nourish our souls-that we are one with him as he is one with the Father, &c. (1 Cor. i. 6; Eph. v. 30; John vi. 51; John xvii. 21.)
Master. - What more do we obtain from the sacrament, or what other benefit does it confer upon us?
Scholar. - The communion of which I spoke is thereby confirmed and increased; for although Christ is exhibited to us both in baptism and in the gospel, we do not however receive him entire, but in part only.
Master. - What then have we in the symbol of bread?
Scholar. - As the body of Christ was once sacrificed for us to reconcile us to God, so now also is it given to us, that we may certainly know that reconciliation belongs to us.
Master. - What in the symbol of wine?
Scholar. - That as Christ once shed his blood for the satisfaction of our sins, and as the price of our redemption, so he now also gives it to us to drink, that we may feel the benefit which should thence accrue to us.
Master. - According to these two answers, the holy Supper of the Lord refers us to his death, that we may communicate in its virtue?
Scholar. - Wholly so; for then the one perpetual sacrifice, sufficient for our salvation, was performed. Hence nothing more remains for us but to enjoy it.
Master. - The Supper then was not instituted in order to offer up to God the body of his Son?
Scholar. - By no means. He himself alone, as priest for ever, has this privilege; and so his words express when he says, "Take, eat." He there commands us not to offer his body, but only to eat it. (Heb. v. 10; Matt. xxvi. 26.)
Master. - Why do we use two signs?
Scholar. - Therein the Lord consulted our weakness, teaching us in a more familiar manner that he is not only food to our souls, but drink also, so that we are not to seek any part of spiritual life anywhere else than in him alone.
Master. - Ought all without exception to use both alike?
Scholar. - So the commandment of Christ bears: and to derogate from it in any way, by attempting anything contrary to it, is wicked.
Master. - Have we in the Supper only a figure of the benefits which you have mentioned, or are they there exhibited to us reality?
Scholar. - Seeing that our Lord Jesus Christ is truth itself; there cannot be a doubt that he at the same time fulfils the promises which he there gives us, and adds the reality to the figures. Wherefore I doubt not that as he testifies by words and signs, so he also makes us partakers of his substance, that thus we may have one life with him.
Master. - But how can this be, when the body of Christ is in heaven, and we are still pilgrims on the earth?
Scholar. - This he accomplishes by the secret and miraculous agency of his Spirit, to whom it is not difficult to unite things otherwise disjoined by a distant space.
Master. - You do not imagine then, either that the body is in-closed in the bread or the blood in the wine?
Scholar. - Neither is inclosed. My understanding rather is, that in order to obtain the reality of the signs, our minds must be raised to heaven, where Christ is, and from whence we expect him as Judge and Redeemer, and that it is improper and vain to seek him in these earthly elements.
Master. - To collect the substance of what you have said-You maintain that there are two things in the Supper, viz., bread and wine, which are seen by the eyes, handled by the hands, and perceived by the taste, and Christ by whom our souls are inwardly fed as with their own proper aliment?
Scholar. - True; and so much so that the resurrection of the body also is there confirmed to us by a kind of pledge, since the body also shares in the symbol of life.
Master. - What is the right and legitimate use of this Sacrament?
Scholar. - That which Paul points out, "Let a man examine himself;" before he approach to it. (1 Cor. xi. 28.)
Master. - Into what is he to inquire in this examination?
Scholar. - Whether he be a true member of Christ.
Master. - By what evidence may he come to know this?
Scholar. - If he is endued with faith and repentance, if he entertains sincere love for his neighbour, if he has his mind pure from all hatred and malice.
Master. - Do you require that a man's faith and charity should both be perfect?
Scholar. - Both should be entire and free from all hypocrisy, but it were vain to demand an absolute perfection to which nothing should be wanting, seeing that none such will ever be found in man.
Master. - Then the imperfection under which we still labour does not forbid our approach?
Scholar. - On the contrary, were we perfect, the Supper would no longer be of any use to us. It should be a help to aid our weakness, and a support to our imperfection.
Master. - Is no other end besides proposed by these two Sacraments?
Scholar. - They are also marks and as it were badges of our profession. For by the use of them we profess our faith before men, and testify our consent in the religion of Christ.
Master. - Were any one to despise the use of them, in what light should it be regarded?
Scholar. - As an indirect denial of Christ. Assuredly such a person, inasmuch as he deigns not to confess himself a Christian, deserves not to be classed among Christians.
Master. - Is it enough to receive both once in a lifetime?
Scholar. - It is enough so to receive baptism, which may not be repeated. It is different with the Supper.
Master. - What is the difference?
Scholar. - By baptism the Lord adopts us and brings us into his Church, so as thereafter to regard us as part of his house-hold. After he has admitted us among the number of his people, he testifies by the Supper that he takes a continual interest in nourishing us.
Master. - Does the administration both of baptism and of the Supper belong indiscriminately to all?
Scholar. - By no means. It is confined to those to whom the office of teaching has been committed. For the two things, viz., to feed the Church with the doctrine of piety and administer the sacrament, are united together by an indissoluble tie.
Master. - Can you prove this to me by the testimony of Scripture?
Scholar. - Christ gave special commandment to the Apostles to baptize. In the celebration of the Supper he ordered us to follow his example. And the Evangelists relate that he himself in dispensing it, performed the office of a public minister. (Matt. xxviii. 19; Luke xxii. 19.)
Master. - But ought pastors, to whom the dispensing of it has been committed, to admit all indiscriminately without selection?
Scholar. - In regard to baptism, as it is now bestowed only on infants, there is no room for discrimination; but in the Supper the minister ought to take heed not to give it to any one who is clearly unworthy of receiving it.
Master. - Why so?
Scholar. - Because it cannot be done without insulting and profaning the Sacrament.
Master. - But did not Christ admit Judas, impious though he was, to the Communion?
Scholar. - I admit it; as his impiety was still secret. For though it was not unknown to Christ, it had not come to light or the knowledge of men. (Matt. xxvi. 25.)
Master. - What then can be done with hypocrites?
Scholar. - The pastor cannot keep them back as unworthy, but must wait till such time as God shall reveal their iniquity, and make it manifest to all.
Master. - But if he knows or has been warned that an individual is unworthy?
Scholar. - Even that would not be sufficient to keep him back from communicating, unless in addition to it there was a legitimate investigation and decision of the Church.
Master. - It is of importance, then, that there should be a certain order of government established in churches?
Scholar. - It is: they cannot otherwise be well managed or duly constituted. The method is for elders to be chosen to preside as censors of manners, to guard watchfully against offences, and exclude from communion all whom they recognise to be unfit for it, and who could not be admitted without profaning the Sacrament.

END OF DOCUMENT