They shall come with Songs unto Zion

'The ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come with songs unto Zion' (Isa. 35:10),

The truth of this is well illustrated by the experience of the Covenanting martyrs who had the songs of Zion in their mouth as they approached the heavenly Zion.

Donald Cargill, While in prison he wrote a letter to James Skene, ..." The God of mercies," he writes, " grant you a full gale and a fair entry into His kingdom, which may carry sweetly and swiftly over the bar, that you find not the rub of death." He was executed at the Cross of Edinburgh, July 27th, 1681. On the scaffold he sang his favourite psalm. Psalm cxviii., from the 16th verse to the end; and his last words were, " Welcome Father, Son, and Holy Ghost! Into Thy hands I commend my spirit."

Baillie of Jerviswood, condemned to death on December 34th, 1684, was hanged the same afternoon at the market cross of Edinburgh, with all the attendant barbarities of an execution for high treason. Yet even in his last hours, oppressed by mortal sickness, hourly expecting his sentence, he felt, as he told his son, that God's promises were sure, and that the "testimony of David" would, in his case also, be verified. " I have been young, and now am old, and yet saw I never the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging their bread" (Ps. xxxvii., verse 25).

Renwick. On February 17th, 1688, he was executed at the Grassmarket in Edinburgh. More than once his words were drowned by drums. But he sang a part of Psalm ciii., the psalm which was always chanted by " the Saints " at the celebration of the Sacrament; and, as he was turned over the ladder, his last words were "Lord, into Thy hands I commend my spirit; for Thou hast redeemed me, 0 Lord, Thou God of truth" (Ps. xxxi., verse 6). The same text, in whole or in part, was quoted by more than half of the great army of " witnesses " who suffered on the scaffold, between Hugh M'Kail in 1666 and James Renwick in 1688.

On January 1st, 1685, for example, Daniel McMichael was led out into the fields to be shot, and died singing part of Psalm xlii. In the following February, Alexander McRobin was hanged upon an oak tree near the Kirk of Irongray. At the tree-foot, a friend asked him if he had any word to send to his wife. "I leave her and the two babes upon the Lord," answered McRobin, " and to His promise; a father to the fatherless, and a husband to the widow, is the Lord in His holy habitation" (Ps. Ixviii., verse 5). And so he died, as Wodrow records, " in much composure and cheerfulness." In the parish of Ingliston was a cave, which had been a place of safety to not a few of the Covenanters. On April agth, 1685, guided by a traitor, the soldiers were brought to the mouth of the cave, where they seized five of the wanderers who had found refuge in its shelter. John Gibson, who alone was permitted to pray before he was shot, sang part of Psalm xvii., telling his mother and sister that it was the joyfullest day of his life. The rest were shot, "without being allowed to pray separately."

In January 1681, two "honest, worthy lasses," as Peden calls them, Isabel Alison and Marion Harvie, were hanged at Edinburgh. On the scaffold they sang together, to the tune of "Martyrs," Psalm Ixxxiv. " Marion," said Bishop Paterson, " you would never hear a curate; now you shall hear one," and he called upon one of his clergy to pray. " Come, Isabel," was the girl's answer- she was but twenty years of age—" let us sing the 23rd Psalm," and thus they drowned the voice of the curate.

The Two Margarets of Wigtown were also cruelly put to death. Of the younger it is said that as she was almost drowning she sang the 25th Psalm:

"My sins and faults of youth Do Thou, O Lord, forget;
After Thy mercies, think on me, And for Thy goodness great ";

and so continued singing till her voice was choked in the rising tide.

The One whom my soul loveth

This phrase is frequently in the mouth of the Church in the Song of Solomon. The best commentary on this book is Christian experience itself. Even if our own experience comes short of it, the experience of others help us to get a glimpse of the soul-experience that is described in the book.

This is true of the experience of Cotton Mather, the New England Puritan. Although his influence upon society is misrepresented and criticised it is clear that he was an eminently godly and spiritual man. His biographer writes: 'It might be said of Dr. Mather, with peculiar propriety, that "he was in the fear of the Lord all the day long," for he was almost continually conversing with God in his thoughts; and there was hardly a single occurrence that he met with in life, but he improved it to awaken in his mind some pious thoughts, and...prayers....His diligence in laying hold of all opportunities, and improving all proper means to maintain and cherish the life of faith in his soul, appears in the following extracts from his papers: —

The thoughts of Christ, are become exceeding frequent with me; I meditate on his glorious person, as the eternal Son of God incarnate; and I behold the infinite God as coming to me, and meeting with me in this blessed Mediator. I fly to Him on multitudes of occasions every day, and am impatient if many minutes have passed without some recourse to him. Every now and then, I rebuke myself for having been so long without any thoughts of my lovely Saviour. How can I bear to keep at such a distance from him! I then look up to him, and say, O my dear Saviour, draw near unto me! O come to dwell in my soul, and help me to form some thoughts wherein I shall enjoy thee. Upon this I set myself to think of his glories, his merits, his pattern, his maxims, what he has done, and what he will do for us. I find the subject infinitely inexhaustible. And after I have been thus employed in the day, I fall asleep at night in the midst of some meditation on the glory of my Saviour; so I fall asleep in Jesus, and when I awake in the night, I do on my bed seek him whom my soul loveth. The desires of my soul still carry me to him who was last in my thoughts when I fell asleep. I find that where Christ comes, a wondrous light, life, and peace comes with him, together with strength to go through services and sufferings.

The holiness and happiness to which I am introduced by this way of living, is better to me than all the enjoyments of this world. All the riches of this world appear contemptible things to me, while I have the unsearchable riches of Christ thus brought into my possession; and all the glory of the world would not tempt me to forego them. Now, O my dear Jesus, I know I have an inward witness, that, thou art the Son of God, and the Saviour of the world.

The blessedness of the heavenly world lies in our being with Christ; and by being with the Lord, in beholding his glory, by believing and affecting thoughts of him, I have enjoyed a sort of heaven upon earth. The light and peace, the joy, strength, and purity with which this fills my mind, is an earnest and foretaste of heaven.

As for the delights of this world, such of them as are most helpful to me in seeing and serving God, are those which I w"buld have the greatest value for. But I know of no delights comparable to those which I take in communion with my Saviour.

As for the riches of this world, I use no labour for them, I have no desire to obtain them, they appear to me as contemptible things; my nches are my opportunities to do good, and those illuminations of my mind which furnish me for it. In my Saviour I have unsearchable riches, and in my fruition of him I have a full supply of all my wants. As for the honours of this world, my abhorrence of having the great God robbed on my account, by people's honouring me without their being led through me to him, renders the praises of men distasteful to me; I do nothing to gain honours for myself, and whatever honours are conferred upon me by men, shall be improved for the interest of God. To be accepted of my Saviour, to have his image imprinted on me, and to be employed in his work, for the advancement of his kingdom, are all the honours that I wish for.

When I am exercised with any affliction, I repair to my Jesus. I realize to myself not only his hand, but also his love in sending the trouble. I see my Saviour as once encountering the same trouble, and I am heartily pleased at my conformity to him. I consider what is that good which this trouble deprives me of, and I see the same good, and what is infinitely better, laid up in my Saviour; and I am satisfied. I find the thoughts of my Saviour for ever sweetening the bitter waters of Marah to me; I find him the Comforter that always relieves my soul, when I have him near unto me. How many, O Lord, are my thoughts of theel the occasions on which, and the means by which I cherish such thoughts, cannot be reckoned up in order.

When I see any thing excellent in any man, it leads my thoughts to the superior excellences of Christ my Saviour; and when I behold the miseries of any of my fellow-creatures, I think on the miseries from which I am delivered by my Saviour; and on my obligations to my kind deliverer. I dare not let my mind be idle, as I walk in the streets; I rebuke myself, and I make my moan to heaven, if I have gone many steps without one thought of my Saviour; and when I have been at a loss for fresh thoughts of him, I have compelled the very signs and the shops in the street, to suggest new matter for meditation. I have done expecting any good things from this world; or if such expectations do at any time arise in my mind, I check them with this thought: — What is the good, O my soul, of that which thou expectest of all this good thou hast already in thy Saviour.

In conversing with my Saviour, I go through many portions of Scripture which testify of him, especially in the book of Psalms, taking a verse or more, or sometimes but a part of a verse at a time for the subject of my meditation, when every night I fall asleep in Jesus. The psalms are full of prayers, many of which are so suited to my own condition, that I cannot express it better before the Lord than in those very words which his Spirit teacheth. Several of those petitions were the prayers of Christ; and when I offer them up for myself, it is a vast encouragement and comfort to me to think, that therein I maintain a sweet fellowship with my Saviour, and that this very prayer was once presented by my Saviour unto his eternal Father: my Saviour once prayed at this rate, and found acceptance. I pray but as my Saviour taught me, and as he did before me: certainly such a prayer will be grateful unto God.

Finally, I am solicitous, that while I contemplate the glorious transactions of my Saviour in his work of redemption, I may feel the power of those things upon my own heart; which is a token for good that he has been concerned for me in all those several transactions. For instance, I see God uniting himself to man in the person of my Saviour; I feel the power of it in my returning to God, and in the union of my heart to him. I see my Saviour leading a hidden life, and passing through obscure circumstances while he sojourned amongst us; I feel the power of it, in my being willing to have my walk with God carried on with all possible privacy, and concealed as much as may be from the view of men. I see my Saviour dying on the cross for my sins; I feel the power of it in the death of my sinful dispositions, in my dying unto creatures, and in the world's being crucified to me, or my affections being weaned from it. "I see my Saviour in his resurrection triumphing over the powers of darkness, and entering upon a new life, which he lives for evermore; I feel the power of it, in my rising out of a state of spiritual death and darkness, and walking in newness of life, as being quickened with an everlasting principle of piety, to which I was once a stranger.

The Life of the Late Reverend and Learned Dr. Cotton Mather, Of Boston, (New England) by Samuel Mather (originally published 1729)

Another precious portion written by Mather is found at http://www.puritansermons.com/reformed/mather1.htm

Cotton Mather wrote and published more than 400 works. More information is available at http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil//mather.htm

Resurrection

Rev. Jonathan Edwards

The addition of happiness and glory made to the saints at the resurrection, it seems to me evident by the current of the Bible when it tells of those things, will be exceeding great. It is the marriage of the Lamb and the church; the state of things then is the state of perfection; all the state of the church before, both in earth and in heaven, is a growing state. Indeed, the spirits of just men made perfect will be perfectly free from sin and sorrow: will have inexpressible, inconceivable happiness and perfect contentment. But yet part of their happiness will consist in hope of what is to come. They will have as much happiness as they will desire in their existing state, because they will choose to have the addition at that time, and in that order, which God has designed; it will be every way most pleasing, and satisfying, and contenting to them that it should be so. Their having of perfect happiness does not exclude all increase, nor does it exclude all hope, for we do not know but they will increase in happiness for ever. The souls of the saints may now have as much happiness as they, while separate, desire; and such happiness as so answers their nature in its present state, as to exclude all sort of uneasiness and disquietude; and yet part of that happiness, part of that sweet rest and contenting joy, consists in the sight of what is future. They do not desire that that addition should be now, they know that it shall be most beautiful, most for God's glory, most for their own happiness, and most for the glory of the church, and every way most desirable, that it should be in God's order.

But the more properly perfect and consummate state of God's people of the church will be after the resurrection; and the whole is only now growing and preparing for that state: all things that are now in the world are but preparations for it.
The accession of happiness will consist partly in these things:
1.Then the saints will be in their natural state of union with bodies, glorious bodies, bodies perfectly fitted for the uses of a holy, glorified soul.
2.Then the body of Christ will be perfect, the church will be complete; all the parts of it in being; no part of it under sin or affliction; all the parts of it in a perfect state; all the parts of it together no longer mixed with ungodly men; then the church will be as a bride adorned for her husband, therefore the church will exceedingly rejoice.
3.Then the Mediator will fully have accomplished his work; will have destroyed, and will triumph over all his enemies. Then Christ will fully have obtained his reward; then shall he have perfected the full design that was upon his heart from all eternity, and then Jesus Christ will rejoice, and his members must needs with him.

1.Then God will have obtained the end of all his great works that he had been doing from the beginning; then all the deep designs of God will be unfolded in their events; then the wisdom of his marvellous contrivances in his hidden, intricate and inexplicable works will appear, the ends being obtained; then God's glory will more abundantly appear in his works, his works being perfect; this will cause a great accession of happiness to the saints who behold it; then God will fully have glorified himself, and glorified his Son, and his elect; then he will see that all is very good, and will rejoice in his own works, which will be the joy of all heaven. God will rest and be refreshed; and thenceforward will the inhabitants keep an eternal sabbath, such an one as all foregoing sabbaths were but shadows of.

2.Then God will make more abundant manifestations of his glory, and of the glory of his Son, and will pour forth more plentifully of his Spirit, and will make answerable additions to the glory of the saints, such as will be becoming the commencement of the ultimate and most perfect state of things, and as will become such a joyful occasion as the finishing of all things and the marriage of the Lamb. Then also the glory of the angels will receive proportional additions; for the evil angels are then to have the consummation of their reward. So that the good angels will have the consummation of their reward. This will be the day of Christ's triumph, and the day will last for ever. This will be the wedding day between Christ and the church, and this wedding day will last foe ever; the feast, and pomp, and entertainments, and holy mirth, and joys of the wedding will be continued to all eternity.

The Inclusive Bible: the logical conclusion of dynamic equivalence

The Inclusive Bible called the first egalitarian translation takes dynamic equivalence to its logical conclusion. It not only erases gender-specific language but everything else that anybody might find offensive. In other words it contextualises Scripture fully within the culture of modern western society. The author ("translator") describes it:
"It is a completely new translation of the Bible from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and koiné Greek into richly poetic, non-sexist, and non-classist modern English."

According to reports in the version, God is no longer "Father" but "Father-Mother." The "Son of Man" is rendered "the human one." God's "Right Hand" is recast as God's "mighty hand." The word "night" is used to describe evil rather than "darkness" lest folk with dark skin should be offended. Children are called upon to "heed" their parents but not "obey" them. The Inclusive Bible, uses feminine pronouns in reference to the Spirit. "When the Spirit of truth comes, she will guide you into all truth. She won't speak on her own initiative; rather she'll speak only what she hears, and she'lll announce to you things that are yet to come."


Colossians 3:18-19 reads "You who are in committed relationships, be submissive to each other. This is your duty in Christ Jesus. Partners joined by God, love each other. Avoid any bitterness between you."

It is homosexual-friendly but not marriage-friendly

"Kingdom" is apparently both sexist and authoritarian, so it is replaced by the newly coined word, "kindom." Adam is not a "man," he is an "earth creature."

It is published by a group called Priests for Equality which the author describes as "a Catholic organization working for the full inclusion of women at all levels of the church. They're a project of the Quixote Center, though PFE's leader has retired and his second-in-command has moved on, so they're not sure the project will continue much further."
The author describes the background to the Inclusive Bible:
"Back in the 1980s, PFE started the Inclusive Language Project, resetting the church lectionary readings in non-sexist language because they felt that God-language was one of the biggest barriers to women (and at the time, it was certainly a major step). And since I had already worked on an inclusive lectionary for the Episcopalians, they were glad to have me on board. This grew into wanting to do a full translation of the Bible."

The author describes himself as 'spiritually, an explorer of the edges of consciousness, from Taoism and Zen Buddhism to existential Christianity and Jewish mysticism to everything in between—including Native American medicine practices and various forms of aboriginal shamanism'. He says that the extensive footnotes are especially liberal. 'The commentary, in particular, honors many different religious traditions and perspectives, and owes a great debt to Jungian psychology as well'.

Sr. Nancy Sylvester of the Immaculate Heart of Mary lauds it enthusiastically in the National Catholic Reporter
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n39_v31/ai_17359837
'This translation frees the text so that you can listen to the Spirit within.'

As Gene Veith points out 'Good as New: A Radical Retelling of the Scriptures' goes further in taking dynamic equivalence to its logical conclusion. It describes itself as "women, gay and sinner friendly." Good as New leaves out the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation, including instead the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas.
http://www.worldmag.com/articles/11157

For a different post that reflects upon 'Good as New' as the culmination of Bible version projects in the 20th century go to http://the-holdfast.blogspot.com/2005/06/secular-bible-for-secular-church-bible.html.

It should be evident why these versions represent dynamic equivalence taken to its logical conclusion when we consider the statements of Eugene Nida father of this theory of translation.

"...God’s revelation involved limitations. ... Biblical revelation is not absolute and all divine revelation is essentially incarnational. ... Even if a truth is given only in words, it has no real validity until it has been translated into life. ... The words are in a sense nothing in and of themselves. ... the word is void unless related to experience" (Nida, Message and Mission, pp. 222-228).
"Because it is a medium of communication within a limited cultural context, human language is unsuited as a vehicle for supernatural, eternal truths that would, in fact, need a language that is unhuman or divine" (Nida, Message and Mission, pp. 224-228, cited by Van Bruggen, p. 76).

Nida writes, "Similarly, in the biblical account, the holy kiss, the wearing of veils, women speaking in the church, and wrestling with an angel all have different meanings than in our own culture" (E. Nida, Message and Missions, p. 41). According to Nida, Jacob’s struggle with the angel is being interpreted psychoanalytically or mythologically (E. Nida, Message and Mission, pp. 41-42). If wrestling with an angel is cultural then what could not come under this category? Nida makes this definition:
"The only absolute in Christianity is the triune God. Anything which involves man, who is finite and limited, must of necessity be limited, and hence relative. Biblical culture relativism is an obligatory feature of our incarnational religion, for without it we would either absolutize human institutions or relativize God" (Eugene Nida, Customs and Cultures, New York: Harper & Row, 1954, p. 282, footnote 22). Yet isn't God being relativised when translators use a name that a tribe or language already has for a heathen deity? This is just the same as what "The Inclusive Bible" does when it too renames God. It has simply reached a further stage on the dynamic equivalence/blasphemy continuum.

Hatred of Sin: a mark of grace

1. His wrongs done to Christ will prick him most. If the wrongs be done by others, they affect him; if by himself, they some way faint him. Wholeness of heart, under wronging of Christ, is too great an evidence that there is little or no ground for application of his satisfaction; but it is kindly like, when wrongs done to Christ affect most.
2. When not only challenges for sin against the law, but for sins against Christ and grace offered in the gospel, do become a burden, and the greatest burden.
3. When the man is made to mind secret enmity at Christ, and is disposed to muster up aggravations of his sinfulness on that account, and cannot get himself made vile enough; when he has a holy indignation at himself, and with Paul counts himself the chief of sinners; even though the evil was done in ignorance, much more if it has been against knowledge. It is no evil token when souls are made to heap up aggravations of their guilt for wrongs done to Christ, and when they cannot get suitable expressions sufficiently to hold it out, as it is an evil token to be soon satisfied in this. There are many that will take with [admit to] no challenge for their wronging Christ; but behold here how the prophet insists, both in the words before, in these, and in the following words; and he can no more win off the thoughts of it, than he can win off the thoughts of Christ’s sufferings.

Rev. James Durham

Extracted from Christ Crucified: The Marrow of the Gospel in Seventy-Two Sermons on the Fifty- Third Chapter of Isaiah

The conversion of John Stevenson of Carrick

Both doctrine and application had great weight with me, and made me go away longing to be reconciled to God, and resolved never to be easy till it were so. After this, in the same year, 1678, and 12th of August, I heard Mr John Welsh on Craigdowhill, who preached on the above- named text, 2 Cor. v. 20, and insisted chiefly on this, "We beseech you, be ye reconciled to God." In speaking to which words, the Lord helped his servant, not only to show what it was to be reconciled to God, but also earnestly to press reconciliation, and to make a free, full, and pressing offer of glorious Christ as Mediator and day's-man, and the great peace-maker, who would make up the breach, and bring about this much needed reconciliation. I, being fully convinced how greatly I needed this reconciliation and day's- man, who is the only way to the Father, I with all my heart and soul did cordially and cheerfully make the offer welcome, and with out known guile, did accept of and receive glorious Christ on his own terms in all his offices as Mediator, and did give myself away to the Lord in a personal and perpetual covenant never to be forgotten, accepting of God for my Lord, and my God, and my guide to the death, and great reward after it; resolving, though strange lords had dominion over me, yet henceforth I would be called by His name, whom I now avouched for my only God and Lord; upon which I took the heavens, earth, and sun in the firmament that was shining on us, as also the ambassador who made the offer, and clerk who raised the Psalms, I say, I took all these to witness in the great judgment-day, that I had uprightly and cheerfully entered into this everlasting marriage covenant, resolved through grace to be stedfast in his covenant till death.

After which, my soul was filled with joy and peace in believing; it was a joy unspeakable and glorious, having now got good hope through grace, that though he was angry, yet now his anger was turned away, and he was now become my salvation. I rejoiced in the thoughts of my new relation to God the Saviour, and felt the ravishing sweetness of a reconciled state, and went away firmly resolving that I would walk all my days in the bitterness of my soul, and never be vainly lifted up, but would fear the Lord and his goodness, who had so far condescended to stoop so low as to pardon a rebel, and be reconciled and pacified to me after all I had done, and all my bones at this very time shall and do cry out, "Who is a God like unto thee, a God keeping covenant, and whose faithfulness and mercy endure to all generations ?" Though after this sensible and sweet covenanting with God on the hill of Craigdow, I always studied to improve this covenant relation with God, according to my various cases, tentations, necessities, and distresses, yet the most memorable time of my renewing this covenant was at Craigdarroch in Nithsdale.

In the year 1686, where in secret prayer the Lord determined to renew that covenant I had entered into with him on Craigdowhill, and wonderfully condescended to bring me as it were nigh to his seat, and filled my mouth with arguments, and allowed me to plead with him as a man does with a reconciled friend; there was I helped with great enlargement to renew and adhere to the everlasting covenant, and there the kind God manifested himself to me otherwise than to the world, and I may say that truly my fellowship was with the Father, and with his dear Son Jesus, in as sensible a way and eminent degree as ever I met with before or since, though many times he has been even since kind to my soul."

From "Select Biographies" by Rev. W.K.Tweedie

the 12 most important things to learn

It would be a good practice to meditate on one of these 12 lessons during each month of the year.
THINGS TO BE PONDERED
A course of twelve lessons, which I have begun to learn, and should not cease to remember.
Rev. John Kennedy, Dingwall

1. That I was once "without God in the world." I did think sometimes then that I had a God; but "the living God" I neither sought nor knew. This I learned when Jehovah, as Lawgiver and Judge, presented and pressed His claims. The God who then addressed me was new to me. At first I thought Him to be a "hard Master," and I rose rebelliously against Him; and even when I was compelled to allow that He was righteous I could not venture to approach Him. When I knew Him as the God of salvation, I recognised Him as the same who spake to me from Sinai; but now I could not refrain from drawing near, assured that He was Jehovah, and in the same measure hoping that he would be gracious (Eph. ii. 10; Matt. xxv. 24; Ps. li. 4, cxxx. 3, 4).
2. That during the years of my ignorance I loved to sleep, because I disliked the care and the work to which the Lord was calling me. When He first awakened me I cried for "a little more sleep." I feared to ask to be allowed to sleep alway, and I thought it hard that He would not give me "a little more." I then asked for "a little more slumber;" but this too was sternly refused. I then requested at the least "a little more folding of the hands to sleep;" but though I twice abated my request, I sued in vain. At last I stretched out my hands, but it was to work and not to Christ I rose from the sluggard's bed to toil for self. But sin revived when I began to work. "The commandment" which aroused me stirred up sin and revived sin proved stronger than awakened me-so it slew me, and I died (Prov. xxiv. 33; Rom. vii. 9).
3. That I was as impotent before the calls of the Gospel as before the claims of the law, and that my faith, as surely as my Saviour, must be of God; that the operation of the Holy Ghost in applying was as necessary to me as the acting of the Father in providing, and the work of the Son in purchasing, redemption (John vi. 44; Eph. ii. 8).
4. That it was both vain and forbidden to search for Christ except in "the word of the truth of the Gospel;" and that there was to me no warrant of faith in Jesus but the testimony of God regarding Him to men as sinners. This I learned after vainly seeking a vision of Christ's glory, and traces of his Spirit's work in my soul, in evidence of His "goodwill" to me (John v. 39).
5. That the Person of Christ as "the Word made flesh" was the only foundation on which I might rest my soul; and that the merit of His precious blood was the only ground; even in Him the Daysman, on which I could present myself to God as a suppliant for mercy. Having strained to the utmost the power of "flesh and blood to acquire a satisfying view of His merit in the light of His personal glory," I was left in wearied weakness, utterly benighted, before the sovereign grace of the Father in heaven; and when at last I reached, and found rest in, Christ, it was because I was called, as was Lazarus, out of the grave. "Come forth," was the effectual call of the Son of God; and from among the dead I came, unconsciously quickened, but consciously lost, to Him who is "all in all" (Matt. xvi. 17, 18; Acts xx. 28; Eph. i. 7).
6. That given grace requires more grace. "More grace" is the cry of the new heart in the quickened soul, as surely as it is the promise of God in the Gospel. I thought I could keep the treasure I got when I found the Messiah; but I soon learned that He must rather keep me. I needed grace to make use of the grace which I had received. I leaned on my first experience, and my dead weight soon smothered all its joy and fervour. Fool as I was, I put Christ's gift instead of Christ Himself; He withheld His giving, and I fainted under a sense of poverty. I required to come back as a beggar again to the storehouse of grace, but I felt I could not come unless the Father drew me. I thought it hard to he compelled yet to beg, but harder still that I could not even do the begging without help from God (James iv. 6; John vi. 45; Isa. xl. 29).
7. That it is possible to sleep, but impossible to be happy, with an idol in the heart. The Lord may allow me to go to the sluggard's bed for a time; but when I am awake His anger against idolatry will cast a scaring shadow on my heart, and my flesh may be furrowed by the rod, till I resolutely cast the accursed thing away (Cant. v. 2; Josh. vii.; Hosea ii. 15).
8. That assurance not weakened by unwatchfulness is not worth the having; and that while true assurance is never enjoyed on the bed of sloth, it yet is never the mere reward of toil; that the wise course, in order to its recovery when it is lost, is to seek reviving grace in order to renewed believing, that fruits may be produced to certify my calling and election; but that, even if these are certified, I am still dependent on the Spirit's grace for my ascertaining them, and for so sealing the fruits which evidence them as to satisfy my conscience (2 Peter i. 5-11).
9. That the poverty which results from sloth hath always pride and unbelief as its companions, brings a most real dearth upon my soul, and is worse than weakness in the work of God; but that the healthiest tone of spirit and the best preparation for work or trial is willing, conscious, and trustful dependence on the grace that is m Christ (Prov. xxiv. 32, 33; 2 Cor. xii. 9, 10).
10. That the more I know the better I like Christ as a Master, and the less I think of myself as a servant; that if I had ceased to serve when I ceased to be satisfied with my performances I would have struck work long ago; and that the tasted bitterness of my iniquity in holy things makes the Master's grace all the sweeter when I come to Him for cleansing and for help.
11. That it is extremely difficult to combine the reverence and the boldness of the child in my state of feeling in drawing nigh to God. If I lose the one I become a presumptuous fool; and if I lose the other I become a cowering slave. The child's way is a narrow one between presumption on the one hand and unbelief on the other; and he can walk in it only as the everlasting arms sustain and draw him (Heb. x. 19-22; xii. 28, 29).
12. That the only death I can venture to die is death deprived of its sting on Calvary, and which is a gate of entrance to Zion-death made harmless by the cross of Christ, and made useful as a messenger to bring me to His presence. I can venture to die when I am assured that, as I part with my body for a season, I shall part with my sin for ever.

The Love of Christ

Rev John Maclaurin

Comparisons can give but a very imperfect view of this love which passeth knowledge. Though we should suppose all the love of all the men that ever were, or shall be on the earth, and all the love of the angels in heaven, united in one heart, it would be but a cold heart to that which was pierced with the soldier's spear. The Jews saw but blood and water, but faith can discern a bright ocean of eternal love flowing out of these wounds. We may have some impression of the glory of it, by considering its effects.

We should consider all the spiritual and eternal blessings, received by God's people for four thousand years before Christ was crucified, or that have been received since, or that shall be received till the consummation of all things; all the deliverances from eternal misery; all the oceans of joy in heaven; the rivers of waters of life, to be enjoyed to all eternity, by multitudes as the sands of the sea-shore - we should consider all these blessings as flowing from that love, that was displayed in the cross of Christ.


Maclaurin's writings have been held in very high regard. Dr John Brown called Maclaurin "the most profound and eloquent Scottish theologian of the last [18th]century". His sermon, "Glorying in the Cross of Christ," is reckoned to be one of the best sermons in print. Maclaurin was born iu 1693, and was the eldest son of the minister of the parish of Glendaruel, Argyleshire. Having studied divinity at Glasgow and at Leyden, he was in 1719 ordained minister at Luss on the shores of Loch Lomond. He translated the psalms into Gaelic. In 1723 he became minister of what was then known as the North-west Parish in Glasgow. Maclaurin supported the popular or Evangelical party in the Church of Scotland. He took a close interest in the revivals at Kilsyth and Cambuslang. He was the friend and correspondent of Jonathan Edwards, and on one occasion collected contributions among his friends in Scotland, to assist Edwards in a period of difficulty. He died in 1754.

Long Sermons or Short?

The Original Secession Magazine (Vol 5, 1860-61-62) took notice of a remark in the London Times, "We really wish that clergymen would remember that even a good sermon, more than three-quarters of an hour in length, is a bore from the moment that the third quarter is up." It would be hard to find many who would agree to even this criticism these days. Half-an-hour or 20 minutes is too long for many. The article by the Original Secession Magazine makes the point that 'such restrictions are directly opposed to the design of preaching—to the sanctification of the Sabbath—to the Directory for Public Worship—to the examples of the best ministers of the primitive and reformed churches'. 'The sanctification of the Sabbath requires that we "spend the whole time in the public and private exercises of God's worship, except so much as is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy." Unless it can be shown that the private exercises are more important than those which are public, the balance of due proportion must be kept up between them. But the testimony of the Spirit and the experience of God's saints give the preponderance to the exercises of the sanctuary."The Lord loveth the gates of Zion more than all the
dwellings of Jacob." If the worshippers know anything of the spirit of their Lord, they will do so also. If David could say that a day in the courts of the Lord was better than a thousand, we cannot understand how the shortest services should be most prized by any who profess to worship David's God'.

'Such restrictions have never been known to the Church except in an age of formal Christianity, or at a time when religious entertainment is fashionable, and multitudes enter the house of God, not to worship — not to have the head enlightened and the heart enlarged,—but merely to obtain a little intellectual excitement, in order to relieve the tedium of the Sabbath.' This is very true in our own day but I fear it is excitement of a kind other than intellectual that is sought within many so-called evangelical or otherwise churches.

The Magazine makes the points that in 'almost anything else but the service of God, hours are freely devoted without a grumble'. Worldly entertainments all demand much more than this. Reading the newspaper takes many longer than this. 'Until we see similar brevity in the time devoted to business, to recreation, to meetings for carnal pleasure, we will not believe either in the consistency or the sincerity of those who would reduce the public worship of God to the smallest possible limits. Is the message of God to men the only subject that can be crushed within the compass of a few minutes?'

Men debate for hours on politics and discuss various other topical matters. Is the message of heaven less important? 'Is the salvation of the soul, or the communion of the spirit with God in His Word, less interesting?'

The Magazine article puts its finger on the real reasons behind such objections. 'The secret of the matter lies in the fact, that the former is opposed to, while the latter is in harmony with, the depravity of human nature. Will any rational man say that one, two, or three hours may be requisite for the discussion of some philosophical principle, or the exposition of some natural law, while half-an-hour, or, at most, thirty-five minutes, is quite sufficient for expounding and applying the sublime and mysterious doctrines of grace? The idea is preposterous.
If eternity, with all the additional light of the upper sanctuary, will never exhaust the themes of the gospel, is the herald of the cross— the commissioned ambassador of Christ—to be bound down to a few fleeting moments in proclaiming the word and will of the living God?

Is it not a mockery of God and men to deal thus with the questions of life and death—with the present privileges and eternal interests of gospel hearers ? The men of the world and the votaries of pleasure will have time for the accomplishment of their special objects, so also must the Church and the gospel ministry have a due proportion of time for the service of the sanctuary. It is not becoming the house of God, nor in keeping with subjects of eternal moment, for either ministers or people to be pulling out watches, as if God were being served by the minute, and as if there was anxiety lest He should get more time than was due. All such habits have sprung from mere conventional ideas, and the want of a proper sense of that reverence which is due to the God of the sanctuary'.

The Magazine states: 'We are no advocates for protracted sermons, much less for long
prayers; but we protest against the modern restrictions which many, with self-constituted authority, would impose upon the worship of God. The want of spiritual appetite, and reluctance to make any sacrifice for the service of God, are the chief sources from which such restrictions emanate. Full of the world and its pleasures, there is little longing after the bread of life. Were gospel hearers earnest in their preparation for public worship, and found, like the Psalmist, waiting to hear what God the Lord will speak unto His people, there would be no desire to bring the sermon within the limits of half an hour, or to restrict the whole service of the Sabbath to ninety minutes, as is now done in some fashionable churches'.

These restrictions do not allow for the liberty and outpouring of the Holy Spirit. 'By such things the Spirit is grieved and quenched, while the hungering and thirsting children of God are deprived of that full provision which the Master of assemblies has made for His own house. It is alike dishonouring to God and to His commissioned servants to expect the prayerful preparation of a discourse that must be eut short, however momentous the theme, when the conventional minutes are exhausted'. 'The complaints of restless hearers in reference to the length of a sermon, are impertinencies which ought to have no place among sincere and spiritual worshippers. We cannot conceive of Christ or His Apostles being guided in their work by any such inventions or influences. With them, and with every genuine ambassador, the fleeting moments of time are forgotten while dealing with the realities of eternity'.

The sabbath services are vitally important: 'As each Sabbath comes with a special message, and may be the last to some gospel hearer, it becomes the herald of the cross to furnish that message, although he may exceed the tolerated limits of modern taste. In the time requisite, as well as in the message propounded, the minister can have no master but Christ—no dictation in the matter of duty but the guidance of the Spirit of God'.

We are speaking of the sabbath rather than midweek meetings where the nature of the day will mean that there must be some thought given to time. The general principle for all exercises of public worship, however, is well stated as follows. 'To preach or pray by the minute is little more than mechanical devotion'.

The magazine article concludes: 'In regard to long or short sermons, we must be guided by subjects and circumstances; but we repudiate all such conventional limits as are set by...fastidious hearers. The matters of the ministerial embassy are too weighty to be regulated, either in mode or measure, by the flippant dictum of popular opinion'.

The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland website puts the whole matter rather well in the following way:
'A ten-minute sermon once a week is unlikely to convey much biblical teaching. That is why the Free Presbyterian Church teaches its congregations through sermons of 30-60 minutes' duration, twice on the Lord's Day, and usually at midweek prayer meetings. A recent survey shows that most people in the U.K. gain their knowledge of Christianity through sermons and would like to have more information provided this way. If people are to attain to a saving knowledge of Christ they must find this knowledge in the Bible...It is hardly remarkable, however, when people are not sufficiently aware that the Bible is God's Word from which the Church must derive all her teaching.'

Books we never have read: Books we never should

Professor of French literature at the University of Paris VIII, Pierre Bayard's essay on "How to discuss books that one hasn't read" raises some intriguing thoughts. According to Bayard, it is possible to have a fruitful discussion about a book one hasn't read. Bayard is more interested in the 'constraining need to appear cultured' and discussing literary works. In other words – pride – this can come even into theological reading. 'Knowledge puffeth up'.

'And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.' (Ecclesiastes 12:12). Life is short, there are too many books to read and the pursuit of them can lead us away from the one book needful if we do not approach them in the right way: prayerfully, humbly, and scripturally. Martin Luther has an appropriate comment on this in 'An Open Letter to The Christian Nobility':

'The number of theological books must also be lessened, and a selection made of the best of them. For it is not many books or much reading that makes men learned; but it is good things, however little of them, often read, that make men learned in the Scriptures, and make them godly, too. Indeed the writings of all the holy fathers should be read only for a time, in order that through them we may be led to the Holy Scriptures. As it is, however, we read them only to be absorbed in them and never come to the Scriptures. We are like men who study the sign-posts and never travel the road. The dear fathers wished, by their writings, to lead us to the Scriptures, but we so use them as to be led away from the Scriptures, though the Scriptures alone are our vineyard in which we ought to work and toil.'

But it is true that one can discuss books one hasn't read. The false idea that one must have viewed, heard or read something that is obviously blasphemous or immoral before one can protest about its content is frequently made but absurd. It is the idea and the content not the 'artistic merit' one is discussing. 'whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things' (Phil 4:5).

This brings us on to books one should never read. These are what R.L. Dabney called 'dangerous books' by which he referred to 'particularly the usual kinds of fictitious narratives, novels, impure sentimental poetry, and biographies, whether accurate or not, of criminal and degraded characters. profess only to amuse while they destroy; which say, "Am I not in sport," [Prov. 26.19,] while they "scatter firebrands, arrows, and death." [Verse 18.]'

Dabney's objections to these can be summarised as follows, but the whole article is not long and repays careful reading. One point is interesting which is the one that anticipates the observation that television and film portrayal of violence, distress etc desensitises us to real, factual portrayal of these things. Another point is that fiction creates an alterior world which when indulged gives an altered sense of reality akin to what we complain of nowadays in relation to computer games, mind-altering drugs etc.

1. To do what they profess to do, to give a correct picture of human life and character in a fictitious narrative, is extremely difficult.I fearlessly assert that, even though their intentions and principles were pure, and their scenes undefiled by pictures of vice, the views of human life and of the human heart which they give would not be true to nature, but unnatural, exaggerated and absurd. They do not truly paint the springs of human conduct and feeling. The true history of the past, on the contrary, gives true, and useful views of life, because they are painted from nature. There men are drawn as they really lived and acted.
2. The habitual contemplation of fictitious scenes, however pure, produces a morbid cultivation of the feelings and sensibilities, to the neglect and injury of the active virtues.
3. Now, all works of fiction are full of scenes of imaginary distress, which are constructed to impress the sensibilities. The fatal objection to the habitual contemplation of these scenes is this, that while they deaden the sensibilities, they afford no occasion or call for the exercise of active sympathies. But the beholder of these fictitious sorrows has his sympathies impressed, and therefore deadened, while those sympathies must necessarily remain inert and passive, because the whole scene is imaginary. And thus, by equal steps, he becomes at once sentimental and inhuman.
4. All men who read novels will confess that usually they read them as an indulgence, and not as a means of improvement. Now, it is an indulgence which is not recreation, for it excites, wearies and emasculates the mind even more than excessive mental labor. But every man is responsible to God for the improvement of every hour which is not devoted to wholesome recreation. Novel-reading is the murder of time, and on this simple ground every mind which professes to be guided by religious principles is sternly challenged by God's authority to forego it. "Redeem the time." "The night cometh." [Eph. 5.16; John 9.4.]
5. The vast majority, besides being liable to the objections formerly stated, in their full force, lie under the still more damning charge of moral impurity. Many of them are, in truth, systems of error, covertly embodying and teaching ruinous falsehoods. Some are written for the secret purpose of teaching infidelity, and some to teach the epicurean philosophy. Many of them are the aimless effusions of a general hatred against every thing correct and pious. There may be no professed attack on right principles, probably no didactic discussion at all, in the whole book, and yet the whole may be false philosophy or heresy, teaching by fascinating incident and example.

John Rainolds and the AV Project

John Rainolds or Reynolds was the theologian who famously suggested a revision of the existing English translations to King James at the Hampton Court Conference in 1604.

Early life

Born in 1549 at Penhoe near Exeter, in Devon, he went up to Oxford University at the age of thirteen. He was made Fellow of Corpus Christi College in 1568, at the early age of seventeen. Of his five brothers, four others were fellows at Oxford University.

Conversion
Although he was later known as a prominent Puritan he actually began as an ardent Roman Catholic, and it is thought that he may have spent some time educated by Roman Catholics on the continent. It was at this period, in the late 1560s that Rainolds was converted together with his brother William. It was a time of controversy between Protestants and the Roman Catholics who were still prominent in the land. There was a famous debate at this time carried on between Thomas Harding and John Jewel. This may well have had some influence in turning both brothers away from the errors of Rome. It seems that both were brought to the truth and sought at the same time to bring each other to the same knowledge. Sadly, however, his brother William later returned to Romanism and in 1575 he made a public recantation at Rome. One of the professors at the English College in Rheims he was to be one of the translators of the Rheims New Testament of 1582 and a bitter opponent of Protestant theology in print.

Scholarship

In 1572, at age 23, Rainolds was appointed reader in Greek at Corpus Christi College. His public lectures on Aristotle's Rhetoric were held in particularly high regard and also remained very popular in their printed version. He resigned his lectureship however, and gave himself more to the study of theology. He was adept in theological debate and entered into the areas of dispute between Protestants and Romanism in significant depth. He studied the Scriptures in the original languages, and read all the Greek and Latin early fathers. It appears that he was gifted with a photographic memory since it was said that "his memory was little less than miraculous. He could readily turn to any material passage, in every leaf page, column and paragraph of the numerous and voluminous works he had read." He came to be known as "the very treasury of erudition" and was spoken of as "a living library and a third university".

He became the leader of the puritans at Oxford and proved to be a strong defender of Calvinism. In 1575 he led the case for disciplinary action against Francesco Pucci who publicly taught against various Calvinistic doctrines. The next year he protested against conferring a doctorate on Antonio del Corro because of heretical views in relation to predestination and justification by faith. It was at this time that Rainolds was ordained and quickly became a noted preacher

Rainolds entered into extended debate with John Hart who saw himself as a champion of Romish doctrine. The summary of the debate was published in 1584 as The summe of the conference betweene John Rainoldes and John Hart: touching the head and the faith of the church.


In 1586 Rainolds became a tutor at Queen's College. Rainolds lectured three times a week during term to large audiences: ‘never were any lectures in our memory so frequented as these in that university’, wrote Daniel Featley, ‘nor any in Cambridge, save those of Dr. [William] Whitaker’ (Abel redivivus, 2.226). The Jesuit Cardinal Bellarmine was another more widely-known individual who had set himself to refute Protestant teaching and published various books with this aim. While he publicly lectured against Protestantism in the Gregorian University there were those with connections to England who were recording what he delivered. It is said that the notes of his lectures against Protestantism were sent regularly to Rainolds from Rome who refuted them publicly. Rainolds refuted Bellarmine's attempt to make the Apocryphal books part of the Old Testament canon. The 250 lectures were not published during Rainolds's lifetime, but appeared in 1611 in two enormous quarto volumes under the title Censura librorurn apocryphorum veteris testamenti.

Dr. Bancroft, Archbishop Whitgift's chaplain, and his successor as Archbishop of Canterbury, maintained in a sermon, preached January 12th, 1588, that "bishops were a distinct order from priests and that they had a superiority over them by divine right, and directly from God." This was a startling doctrine to many at the time. Sir Francis Knollys, one of Queen Elizabeth's distinguished statesmen, remonstrated warmly with Whitgift against it. In a letter to Sir Francis, who had requested his opinion, Dr. Rainolds observes, "All who have labored in reforming the Church, for five hundred years, have taught that all pastors, whether they are entitled bishops or priests, have equal authority and power by God's word; as the Waldenses, next Marsilius Patavinus, then Wiclif and his scholars, afterwards Huss and the Hussites; and Luther, Calvin, Brentius, Bullinger, and Musculus. Among ourselves, we have bishops, the Queen's professors of divinity, and other learned men, as Bradford, Lambert, Jewell, Pilkington, Humphrey, Fulke, &c. But why do I speak of particular persons? It is the opinion of the Reformed Churches of Helvetia, Savoy, France, Scotland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, the Low Countries, and our own. I hope Dr. Bancroft will not say, that all these have approved that for sound doctrine, which was condemned by the general consent of the whole church as heresy, in the most flourishing time. I hope he will acknowledge that he was overseen, when he announced the superiority of bishops over the rest of the clergy to be God's own ordinance”.

Rainolds went on to say that "unto us Christians, no land is strange, no ground unholy; every coast is Jewry, every town Jerusalem, every house Sion; and every faithful company, yea, every faithful body, a temple to serve God in. The presence of Christ among two or three, gathered together in his name, maketh any place a church, even as the presence of a king with his attendants maketh any place a court."

(to be continued)

The Constitutional Aspect of the Declaratory Act

This article originally appeared in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland Magazine. It relates to Free Church Declaratory Act and the separation made from the Free Church of Scotland (sic) in 1893.


by Rev. D. Beaton

In our Deed of Separation the constitutional aspect of the Declaratory Act is very clearly set forth in the following words: "That by passing of the Declaratory Act of 1892, the said present subsisting Church, calling herself the Free Church of Scotland, through her General Assemblies, has, in so far as said Church is concerned, destroyed the integrity of the Confession of Faith as understood and accepted by the Disruption Fathers and their predecessors, and instead of the Westminster Confession of Faith as the recognised standard of orthodoxy in the Church, in all its heads and articles, has substituted what is called 'the substance of the Reformed Faith therein set forth,' the Church, through the majorities of the members of her Courts, being by the said Declaratory Act made the sole judge of the particular points that are to be included under this category of doctrines — a provision which overthrows the fixed doctrinal Constitution of the Free Church of Scotland, and lays its Creed at the feet of an irresponsible majority to determine the same as it will."

In making this charge of violating the Constitution of the Free Church, Free Presbyterians have appealed to the fact that this Act was passed under the Barrier Act of 1697. The title of this famous Act indicates its purpose: "Act anent the method of passing Acts of Assembly of general concern to the Church and for preventing of Innovations." The relevant part of the Act bearing on the subject under discussion may now be quoted: "Considering the frequent practice of former Assemblies of this Church, and that it will mightily conduce to the exact obedience of the Acts of Assemblies, that General Assemblies be very deliberate in making the same, and that the whole Church have a previous knowledge thereof, and their opinion be had therein, and for preventing any sudden alteration or innovation, or other prejudice to the Church, in either doctrine or worship, or discipline, or government thereof, now happily established; do, therefore, appoint, enact, and declare, that before any General Assembly of this Church shall pass any Acts, which are to be binding rules and constitutions to the Church, the same Acts be first proposed as overtures to the Assembly, and, being by them passed as such, be remitted to the consideration of the several Presbyteries of this Church, and their opinions and consent reported by their Commissioners to the next General Assembly following, who may pass the same in Acts, if the more general opinion of the Church thus had agreed thereunto."

There are two points in this Act which have a direct bearing on the violation of the Free Church's Constitution by the Declaratory Act. (1) The Barrier Act expressly states the kind of Acts with which it deals, viz., Acts "which are to be binding rules and constitutions to the Church." These words are plain enough, and lend themselves to only one interpretation, viz., that Acts which the Church sends down to Presbyteries under the Barrier Act are meant to be "Acts which are to be binding rules and constitutions to the Church," otherwise the collected wisdom of the Church, in General Assembly gathered, is betraying its utter incompetence to deal with legislation. (2) It is also clear from the wording of the Barrier Act that, while it was intended "for preventing any sudden alteration or innovation or other prejudice to the Church, in either doctrine or worship, or discipline, or government thereof," yet, though no doubt it was meant to hinder "sudden" alteration or innovation, it gave a significance to any alteration or innovation in doctrine or worship passed under it that it would not otherwise have but for the fact of having passed through the Barrier Act. It is this aspect of the Barrier Act which, it may safely be surmised, its framers never intended, that aided the wreckers of the Westminster Confessional doctrine in the Free Church of Scotland.

The founders of the Free Presbyterian Church, while holding that the majority in passing the Declaratory Act were acting ultra vires, inasmuch as a use was made of the Barrier Act for which it was never intended, at the same time asserted that the Declaratory Act, being inconsistent with the Confession, violated the Constitution of the Free Church. In taking up positions seemingly at variance, there was no inconsistency. Both positions were tenable and consistent with the real facts of the situation created by the ecclesiastical policy of one of the astutest ecclesiastical leaders Scotland ever had, though, alas! his gifts were prostituted to a bad cause. It is true, of course, that in 1894 an Act was passed in which it is enacted "that the Assembly hereby declare that the statements of doctrine contained in the said [Declaratory] Act are not thereby imposed upon any of the Church's office-bearers as part of the standards of the Church; but that those who are licensed or ordained to office in this Church, in answering the questions and subscribing the formula are entitled to do so in view of the said Declaratory Act." This was only a makeshift, and deceived only those who wished to keep their eyes shut. When Principal Rainy found the Free Church in the serious position in which she was placed by the passing of the Declaratory Act his subtle brain immediately set to work on formulating some method whereby the Declaratory Act would not appear to have the formidable position it really had under the Barrier Act, he fell on what must have appeared to himself and others a real inspiration in his ecclesiastical need. According to this presentation of the case, the Declaratory Act was not the serious piece of legislation that some men took it to be; it was only a "relieving Act." This phrase did ignoble service in many a speech, and captured the imagination of the facile followers of Dr Rainy to such a degree that those who thought differently were laughed to scorn. A relieving Act! What else was it but a relieving Act? It did not need Dr Rainy's subtle brain to coin this phrase, but there was one thing he ought to have laid a little more emphasis on to meet the real situation, and that was that this relieving Act relieved office-bearers from doctrines which were embedded in the constitution of the Free Church. The fact that it was a relieving Act did not nullify the damaging fact that it violated the Constitution of the Free Church.

A number who were opposed to the Declaratory Act still remained in the Church, and argued that they were not under it. This plausible argument ignored the working of ecclesiastical law. Take, for instance, a supposed case - The members of a whole Presbytery, with one or two exceptions, might refuse to licence a student because he wished to take advantage of the Declaratory Act, the case would be appealed to the Synod by the dissentients, and supposing the majority of the Synod supported the Presbytery, the matter would probably be appealed to the Assembly. The Assembly, in dealing with the case, had no option but to ask the Presbytery to licence the student and to give him the full benefit of any relief the Declaratory Act, its own Act, gave him. No amount of ecclesiastical argumentation could alter this fact, that the Assembly had passed this Act for such a purpose, and no amount of dissents could alter the fact that it was not an inoperative piece of legislation, but operative. Students, therefore, must be licensed and ministers ordained who were in the fullest sympathy with the Declaratory Act, and all the arguments of those who were opposed to it but yet remained in the Church betrayed their incapacity to realise the real logic of the ecclesiastical situation.

It has been argued by those who remained in the Church in 1893 and afterwards refused to enter the Union in 1900, that Free Presbyterians should be silent about being under the Declaratory Act, for (1) the Rev. D. Macfarlane remained in the Church a year after the Declaratory Act was passed, and during that year accepted a call to Raasay. In answer to this we have only to remind our readers that Mr Macfarlane explicitly stated in a letter to the press, reprinted in the Free Presbyterian Magazine, vol. XXVIII, p. 150, that it was at the request of the Constitutional party, who were opposed to the Act, that he remained in the Church, in the hope that the Declaratory Act would be repealed at the Assembly of 1893. But even though, it could be proved that Mr Macfarlane was under the Decalaratory Act for a year, which he denied, for the reasons stated in the forementioned letter, that does not prove that the Free Presbyterian Church was; for in the formation of the Free Presbyterian Church there was a complete break by Messrs Macfarlane and Macdonald with the Church which passed the Declaratory Act. (2) It has been argued that the Free Presbyterian Church never repealed this Act. One scarcely wishes to believe that those who use this argument are serious, as it shows an exceptionally low mental acumen, but, as it has been used time and again, and by those of whom better things might be expected, it is necessary to point out for the reason above stated that the Free Presbyterian Church, in making a complete break with the Church of the Declaratory Act, and in going back to the attainments of the Disruption Church, was under no necessity to repeal a law which never had a place on its statute book. The charge, therefore, that the Free Presbyterian Church is still under the Declaratory Act because it did not repeal the same is a piece of inconsequent reasoning that no man who wishes to be credited with even a minimum of logical acumen should ever dream of using. It was entirely different with the Free Church, which claimed to have a continuity with the Free Church up to 1892 and onwards. They were in duty bound to repeal the Declaratory Act in accordance with their profession at the earliest possible opportunity. That opportunity came in 1900, but it is a matter of history that it was not repealed until after the property case had been decided, and it is also a matter of history that the reason of this delay was owing to the question of the Church property then in dispute between the United Free and Free Churches. It has often been a question of interest to us: Supposing there had been no Union, would an effort ever have been made by those who afterwards formed the Free Church to have it repealed? We are aware we are dealing with hypothetical propositions, but propositions which nevertheless are very interesting. In the famous Church Case, Lord James of Hereford put a very interesting question to Mr Salvesen, one of the Free Church counsel: "Supposing," he said, "the majority of the United Free Church said: 'We take that view, and we will administer the Trusts according to their original form.' What would prevent their taking possession of and seeking to administer the property?" To which Mr Salvesen replied: "I think they would have to rescinded the Union, because our view is that the Union necessarily involves the abandonment of the principles of the Free Church; but if they rescind the Union and came back to the Church, of course they would be entitled to participate along with the Pursuers [i.e., the Free Church!]" In other words, had there been no Union the Free Church would not have been able to claim the property on the pleas she put forward in the case. Such, at anyrate, seems to be the inference that may be drawn from the opinions of the learned counsel of the Free Church.

It was because those who afterwards formed the Free Presbyterian Church believed that it was impossible to remain in the Free Church without being bound by the Declaratory Act, with its anti-Scriptural, anti-Confessional teaching, that they left the Free Church as then constituted. Events have proved that they were wisely guided in this matter. Even from a worldly standpoint any little sacrifice made for the cause of truth has been made up more than a hundred-fold. The Lord has owned the stand made in 1893 in the interests of His truth, and there are many now at rest who rejoiced to see the day of deliverance when they experienced a joy which must have been akin to that felt by Israel when they left the bondage of Egypt forever behind.

What is Communicating Unworthily?

An excerpt from a sermon by Thomas Boston

The way that many mar this duty: they do it unworthily, that is unsuitably, unmeetly; they mar it in the making, not going about it in the right way and manner. They are guests, but not meet guests, for the holy table. They come to the marriage-feast, but not with wedding-garments. 

What comes of it. The consequences are dreadful. They eat and drink damnation [Greek: judgment] to themselves. This judgment to some is temporal, to others eternal. This they are said to eat and drink to themselves; it becomes poison to them, and so they take their death with their own hands. While the meat is in their mouth, wrath goes down with it, as the devil did with Judas’ sop. 

A particular sin lying on them, which provokes God so to treat them: they do not discern the body of the Lord Christ; they do not duly consider the relation betwixt the elements and Christ, and so they rush in upon these creatures of bread and wine, that are of so deep a sanctification as to be the symbols of the body and blood of the Son of God; they sit down at that table, as to their ordinary meals, without that reverence and devotion that ought to be in those who sit down at such a holy table.  

1. People communicate unworthily when they have not an honourable respect for, and a due reverence to, this ordinance, when they partake of it, Mal. 1:6, 7. If it bear the stamp of divine authority, is it meet that persons should despise it, and not be touched with reverence of it? When the angel of the covenant appeared to Moses in the bush, he said to him, “Put off thy shoes from off thy feet; for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground,” Exod. 3:5. But, behold in this sacrament there are bread and wine of deeper sanctification than that holy ground, they being the symbols of Christ’s body and blood. 

2. When people do not go about it out of respect to the command of Christ, may he not justly astonish such at his table with that question, “If I be a master, where is my fear?” Mal. 1:6. Is it meet that people should communicate out of custom, vain-glory, &c.? If the sense of his command do not bring thee there, thou canst not expect the sense of his love, but rather to feel the weight of his hand, when there. As we must believe the truth because God has said it, otherwise our assent is not divine faith; so we must do our duty because God has commanded it, otherwise our obedience is not acceptable to him. 

3. When people look to any other quarter than to Christ for the good of the sacrament. Some look no farther than the elements. This is to put them in Christ’s stead: but be not deceived, bread and wine cannot nourish thy soul. Some are apt to look to ministers: and if such a one as they affect, serve the table they are at, they think they are sure of advantage. If they knew your hearts so led aside, they would, with a sad heart and angry countenance, say to you, as Jacob did to Rachel, “Am I in God’s stead?” Gen. 30:2. The spouse went a little further than the watchmen before she found her beloved, Cant. 3:4. Many smart by this respecting particular ministers, and overlooking the Master of this ordinance. Secondly, Consider the time of the institution: “The same night in which he was betrayed by Judas, when the hour and power of darkness was approaching.” If so, then it appears that this sacrament was left us as a token by our dying friend. He was now to go out of the world to the Father; but before he goes, he will leave his people a feast and token of love. Did he not know what was abiding him? Yea, verily he knew all. O! then, might not the prospect of the agony and bloody drops in the garden, the racking of his body, and the load of wrath under which his soul was to wrestle, have made him mind himself and forget us? Nay, in the night in which he was betrayed, he instituted this sacrament. Surely then it is most suitable, (1.) That we prize it highly as the love-token of a dying friend. (2.) That we be at pains to prepare to keep the tryst which he was so concerned to set. (3.) That at such a time we avenge the treachery upon our lusts.

So they partake unworthily, 

1. Who partake of this ordinance without a due valuing of it as the love-token of a dying Lord. A token from a friend, though it be small in itself, yet ought to be prized; a token from a dying friend more; but a token from a friend dying for us most of all; and he would be reckoned a monster of men, that would not highly value it. Not to value this ordinance highly, and so desire and delight in it, as many communicants do – who, if they could get their credit kept, could well live without it, and in their unconcernedness of heart for it and about it, say practically, The table of the Lord is contemptible – is to trample upon our dying Lord’s love-token, and to say in effect, He should have been otherwise taken up that night in which he was betrayed. 

2. Those communicants who are not at pains to prepare to keep the tryst our Lord set at that time. I may say, he forgot to eat his own bread, that he might provide for us. He did not so mind the cup of wrath which he was to get himself, as to forget the sacramental cup for our comfort. When he was on the cross, he trysts to meet the believing thief in heaven; and when the clouds of wrath were gathering, and ready to pour down upon him, he trysts to meet believers on earth. And shall we forget the tryst set in that remarkable night? But, ah! how many are there that will not be at pains to prepare for this ordinance, to examine themselves as to their state, frame, &c. They have built up mountains and walls of separation betwixt Christ and them, but are at no pains to remove them, nor to employ Christ to level them. Do not these communicate unworthily? 

3. Who do not avenge the treachery. How came Judas to betray him? Was it not the sins of his own people that were the spring of the unhappy action? Your sins were the chief traitors. Then surely Christ instituting this sacrament at this time, says in effect concerning our lusts, as Ps. 137:7, 8, 9, “Remember, 0 Lord, the children of Edom, in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Raze it, raze it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed: happy shall he be that rewardeth thee, as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” Can a worthy communicant partake of this ordinance, and mind the treachery his Lord met with, and not break his covenant with his lusts, and renounce his old master? No, surely. They communicate unworthily who come to this ordinance at peace with any lust; they react Judas’ sin-kiss of Christ, and betray him. Thirdly, Consider what is represented by the sacred symbols in this ordinance. The broken bread and wine represents Christ’s broken body, and his shed blood, Christ suffering for sinners. He is sacramentally crucified before our eyes in that ordinance. Now, if the bread and wine represents to us Christ’s body broken for us, and his blood shed for us, it is meet that, in communicating, (1.) We meditate believingly on these sufferings. (2.) That our hearts be inflamed with love to him. (3.) That they be filled with sorrow for and hatred of sin. Then, 1. They communicate unworthily, who do not in their partaking meditate believingly on the sufferings of Christ. Christ will ask that question at communicants, Matt. 16:15, “Whom say ye that I am?” And I would ask beforehand, Do ye believe that Jesus the Son of Mary, who was crucified betwixt two thieves without the gates of Jerusalem, was the Son of God, the only Saviour of the world, and that Christ? Do ye believe that Christ suffered? If ye do indeed believe it aright, I say, as Matt. 16:17, “Blessed art thou: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but Christ’s Father which is in heaven.” And sure I am, if ye do believe, ye cannot shun to meditate on it at the sacrament. This wonderful sight will dazzle your eyes; a sight of God suffering will blind your eyes as to other objects, and make you retire into yourself, to see and wonder, and with admiration to think on this terrible sight. Do they not act most unworthily here, who are not thus taken up? What would ye have said of Moses, had he not turned aside to see that great sight, the bush burning, yet not consumed? Exod. 3. Had ye been on Mount Calvary, within hearing of Christ’s dying groans, within sight of his pierced, mangled, and racked body, and had unconcernedly turned your back, and passed all without notice, would ye not say, he had been just had he turned you off that place quick into hell? Here ye have the same sight; and if ye behold it unconcernedly, ye act a most unworthy part, and oppose yourselves to the most direful effects of his vengeance. 2. Who communicate without love to Christ in exercise. He is represented a king’s son in love with a beggar, loving her, and dying for her. O miserable miscreant! does not this affect thy heart, who art this beggar? Can there be greater love? John 15:13. What hellish cold has frozen thy affections, that this fire cannot warm, nay, melt them! What a heart of a devil hast thou, that Christ, in his glorious apparel, his red garments, cannot captivate? Be astonished, O heavens, be horribly afraid; tremble, O earth; rend, O rocks; be struck blind, O glorious sun in the firmament, when ye see the communicants sitting without love to Christ, when he is sacramentally lying before them, broken, wounded, and pierced with the envenomed arrows of God’s curse, and all for them? 3. Who communicate impenitently. Have ye pierced him? How unworthy will ye be, if ye do not “look upon him whom ye have pierced, and mourn for him, as one mourneth for an only son, and be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first born,” Zech. 12:10. Will ye come to the table without the tear in your eye? O! unworthy communicants, what has petrified your hearts, turned you into stones harder than the adamant, which the blood of the goat will dissolve? Christ’s dying groans rent the rocks, and raised and alarmed the dead; and wilt thou sit stupid? Where sorrow for sin and hatred of it is wanting at a communion-table, there is eating and drinking judgment, which, when it begins to work within you, will make you mourn bitterly, either here or in hell. 

Fourthly, Consider the bread and the wine is offered and given to you at the table of the Lord, in token of Christ’s offering himself to you, with all his benefits, 1 Cor. 10:16; and your taking both, eating and drinking, declares your acceptance of the offer and application of Christ to your souls. Surely, then, it is meet, (1.) That ye believe that Christ is willing to be yours. (2.) That ye do sincerely and cordially accept of the offer. 

1. They are unworthy communicants who partake doubting of Christ’s willingness to be theirs, with all his saving benefits. Will ye not believe him when he gives you a sealed declaration of his mind? To doubt of this, is to say he is but mocking and solemnly cheating you; so that no wonder we say, “He that doubteth is damned if he eat.” What though ye be most unworthy? he stands not on that. Though your sins be many, the sea of his blood can drain them all, Isa. 1:18; Micah 7:18. If the devil get in thus far on you, it will be an error in the first concoction; and till ye get over it, it is impossible to communicate aright, or get good of the sacrament. 

2. Who taking the elements, yet do not take Christ by faith. Then it may be said, as John 1:11, “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” Is the bread or cup offered to you, then by that Christ says, “Lift up your heads, O ye gates, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in,” Ps. 24:7. Therefore, we ought to set our hearts wide open, clasp him in the arms of faith, embrace and welcome him into our souls. To take the bread in your mouths, and yet to hold Christ out of your hearts, is to put a solemn cheat upon the King of glory, which will bring upon you the curse of the deceiver, Mal. 1:14, “Which hath in his flock a male, and voweth and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing;” and the cheat will be discovered, if ye repent not, before the whole assembled world at the great day, to your everlasting confusion. This is to betray Christ, with a witness. Either, then, meddle not with these sacramental symbols, or take him by faith. And if ye take him, ye must let your lusts go. 

Fifthly, Consider this ordinance is a seal of the new covenant, 1 Cor. 11:25, “This cup is the new testament in my blood.” Christ has covenanted and left, in his testament to his people, all things necessary for them. His word in itself is sufficient security; but guilt is a fountain of fears; and we are guilty, and therefore fearful souls. And therefore, that it may be more sure to us, he has appended this seal. It is meet, then, (1.) That they be in the covenant who partake. (2.) That we take the sacrament as a seal of God’s covenant to us. (3.) That we believe more firmly. 1. They are unworthy communicants who are not in covenant with God, and yet come to his table. It is a profaning of God’s seal to set it to a blank. It is a feast for friends, not for enemies, Cant. 5:1; and if ye come in a state of enmity, ye can expect no kind entertainment; “For can two walk together except they be agreed?” Amos 3:3; yea, ye will get a sad welcome, such as the man got who wanted the wedding-garment, Matt. 22:11, 12. If there be not a mutual consent, it is no marriage: and if there be no marriage, ye have nothing ado with the marriage-feast. 2. They that use it as a seal of their covenant with God, and not of God’s covenant with them. Surely the sacrament is an obligatory ordinance to obedience; but this is not the principal end of it, but rather to be a seal of God’s covenant with us. The reason why so many afterwards appear to have been unworthy communicants, is, that they go to that ordinance rather to oblige themselves to obedience, than to get a full covenant sealed to them for obedience. All our strength lies in Christ; and worthy communicants go to Christ in the sacrament to get influences of grace secured to them under his own seal, that they may in time of need afterwards know what quarter to betake themselves to for supply. 3. They whose faith of the benefits of the covenant is not more confirmed. This is to sit down at the table, but not to taste of the meat that is set thereon. Why does the Lord give us such encouragement, and yet we grow never a whit stronger in faith; and though he give us new confirmations, yet we have never a whit more confidence in him? Would not a man think himself affronted to be thus treated? Sixthly, Consider this ordinance is appointed for strengthening our souls, for the nourishing of the Lord’s people, and their growth in grace. It is a supper, a feast where Christ is both maker and matter, whose flesh is meat indeed, and whose blood is drink indeed. The Lord’s people must needs have food to nourish the new man, and grace will decay unless it be recruited. If this be so, then it is meet, (1.) That communicants be spiritually alive. (2.) That they actually feed spiritually at this holy table. 1. Graceless souls must needs communicate unworthily. Where there is no grace there can be no strengthening of it. There can be no communion betwixt a holy God and an unholy sinner, Prov. 15:8. God will not make Nebuchadnezzar’s image of mystical Christ. We must be born from above ere we can be capable to feed on Heaven’s dainties. It was the custom of Egypt, not of Canaan, to bring dead men to feasts. They are rather to be buried out of God’s sight. An unregenerate soul at the Lord’s table is a monster that hath not a hand to take his meat, nor a mouth to eat it, 

II. The next general head is to show, what judgments unworthy communicating exposes people to. It exposes them, 1. To bodily strokes, as the Corinthians felt, 1 Cor. 11:30, “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. One falls into a decay of strength, another takes sickness after a communion, another slips off the stage. Some give one reason for it, and some another. But, O! unworthy communicating is often the procuring cause of all. What a dreadful distemper seized Belshazzar when he was abusing the vessels of the temple! Dan. 5; but the sin of unworthy communicating is more dreadful. 2. To spiritual strokes; strokes upon the soul, blindness of mind, hardness of heart, searedness of conscience, &c. The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain; he will let guilt lie on him. Hence some after communions are let fall into scandalous sins; some meet with greater darkness and deadness than ever before, and some with sharp desertions. 3. To eternal strokes. As to such as are out of Christ, unworthy communicating will damn them, as well as gross sins in the life and outward conversation, and no doubt will make a hotter hell than that of Pagans. Murder is a crying sin, but the murder of the Son of God is most dreadful, and the Mediator’s vengeance is most terrible. And they are said to eat and drink judgment to themselves; which I conceive, imports, 1. That the hurt which comes by unworthy communicating comes upon the person himself, not on Christ, whose body and blood he is guilty of; for themselves has a relation not to others, but to Christ. They may eat judgment to ministers and fellow communicants, if they have a sinful hand in bringing them to the table. Only, though the slight is given to Christ, yet it rebounds upon the man himself, and lies heavy on him with its consequences. They do interpretatively murder Christ, in so far as they abuse the symbols of his broken body and shed blood; but they can do him no harm; they kick against the pricks, which run into their bodies and souls. 2. That they themselves are the authors of their own ruin. They take their death with their own hand, like a man that wilfully drinks of a cup of poison, and so murder their own souls. And O, what a dreadful thing is this for a man to perish by his own hands! 3. That they shall be as sure of judgment upon them for their sin, if repentance prevent it not, and cut the thread, as they are of the sacramental bread they eat, and the wine they drink. Death is in the cup to them, and it will go down with the elements into their bowels.   

A good wish to the Lord's-day.

Hail thou that art highly favoured of God, thou map of heaven, thou golden spot of the week, thou market-day of souls, thou daybreak of eternal brightness, thou queen of days, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among days, Luke 1:28. I may say to thee what the angel said to Daniel, Oh day greatly beloved! Dan 9:23. Thou art fairer than all the children of time, grace is poured into thy lips; God, even thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows, Ps 45. Of the Jewish Sabbaths and other festivals, in comparison of thee it may be spoken, They perish, but thou remainest, and they all wax old as a garment; and as a vesture hast thou folded them up, and they are changed, but thou shalt (maugre the malice of men and devils) continue the same, and thy years shall not fail, Heb 1:11-12. As the temple succeeded and exceeded the tabernacle, this was fleeting, that was fixed, so dost thou all former Sabbaths, they were but morning stars to usher in thee, the sun, and then to disappear. Other festivals in all their royalty are not arrayed like unto thee. All the graces triumph in thee, all the ordinances conspire to enrich thee; the Father ruleth thee, the Son rose upon thee, the Spirit hath overshadowed thee. Thus is it done to the day which the king of heaven delighteth to honour.

Thou hast not only a common blessing with other days by the law of nature, but a special blessing above all other days, from the love of thy maker. Let thousands mark thee for their new birthday; be thou a day, as it was said of that night to the Jews, much to be remembered, much to be observed to the Lord, for bringing many out of worse than Egyptian bondage, Exod 12:42; be thou to them a day of light and gladness, of joy and honour, and a good day, Esther 8:16. On thee light was created, the Holy Ghost descended, life hath been restored, Satan subdued, sin mortified, souls sanctified, the grave, death, and hell conquered. Oh how do men and women flutter up and down on the weekdays, as the dove on the waters, and can find no rest for their souls, till they come to thee their ark, till thou put forth thy hand and take them in! Oh how do they sit under thy shadow with great delight, and find thy fruits sweet to their taste! Oh the mountings of mind, the ravishing happiness of heart, the solace of soul which on thee they enjoy in the blessed Saviour! They are sorry when the days shorten for thy sake, they wish for thee before thou comest, they welcome thee when thou art come, and they enjoy so much of heaven in thee, that thence they love and look, and long the more for their eternal Sabbath. "Go forth, O thou fairest among women, and be thou fruitful in bringing forth children to thy maker and husband. Be thou the mother of thousands and of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of them that hate them," Gen 24:60. Do thou, like Rachel and Leah, build up the house of Israel; do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be thou famous in Bethlehem. Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O thou mighty and gracious day, and in thy majesty ride prosperously; because of meekness, righteousness, and truth, let thy right hand teach thee terrible things; let thine arrows be sharp in the hearts of spiritual enemies, whereby the people may fall under thee. The Lord hath chosen thee, he hath desired thee for his habitation, Ps 132. Thou art his rest for ever; in thee he will dwell, for he hath desired it.

Let him abundantly bless thy provision, and satisfy thy poor with bread; let him clothe thy priests with salvation, and let thy saints shout aloud for joy; let thine enemies be clothed with shame, but upon thy head let the crown flourish. Let nations bow down to thee; let kingdoms fall down before thee. Let all the kingdoms of the earth become the kingdoms of thy Lord and of thy Christ; be thou honoured as long as the sun and moon shall endure, even throughout all generations. Thou art like Joseph, a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a wall, whose branches run over the wall. The archers have sorely grieved thee, and shot at thee, endeavouring to weaken thy morality, and hated thee, but thy bow abode in strength by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob, from thence is the shepherd, the stone of Israel; even by the Lord of Sabbaths who shall help thee, and by the Almighty who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts and of the womb; the blessings of this day have prevailed above the blessings of all other days; let them be continued and increased on the heads of this holy and honourable day, and on the head of that day which is separate from its brethren. Let them be ashamed and confounded that seek after thy hurt, let them be turned back and put to confusion that desire thy ruin; let all those that seek thee rejoice and be glad in thee; let them that love thy sanctification say continually, Let the Lord be magnified, who delighteth in the prosperity of his saints, and therefore hath set apart his Sabbath for their soul-good.

Thou, like Jacob, hast got away the blessing from the other days, yea, thy God hath blessed thee, and thou shalt be blessed: "Blessed are they that bless thee, and cursed are they that curse thee." In a word, the Lord be gracious to thee, and delight in thee, and cause the light of his countenance to shine upon thee; let all thine ordinances be clothed with power, and be effectual for the conversion and salvation of millions of souls; let thy name be great from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same. Finally, farewell sweet day, thou cream of time, thou epitome of eternity""thou heaven in a glass, thou firstfruits of a blessed and everlasting harvest: Did I say farewell? A welfare I wish to thee; but oh let me never lose thee, or take my leave of thee, till I come to enjoy thee in a higher form, to see the Sun of righteousness,""who early on thy morning rose and made a day indeed while the natural sun was behind,""face to face, and to know thy maker and master as I am known of him, when I shall be a pillar in the temple of my God, and shall go out no more, but serve him day and night, to whom, for the inestimable dignity and privilege of his own day, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen, amen.

From The Works of George Swinnock, "The Christian Man's Calling," Vol. 1, Chap. 22, pp. 258-260

 

This was posted elsewhere by Andrew Myers, Warrenton, VA USA

Removing the horse leach of covetousness

We concluded a previous post on the disease of consumerism, by acknowledging that we get nowhere until we realise that consumerism is a sin, the sin of covetousness.
"The horseleach hath two daughters, crying, Give, give." Proverbs 30:15. None of us think that we are covetous or the victims of consumerism but if we searched our life, hearts and habits honestly - our time and our thoughts we would know otherwise.

The puritan Richard Capel makes this point. 'We must be convinced that covetousness, I mean that our covetousness, is a vice; for it holds something of a virtue, of frugality, which is not to waste that which one hath; and this makes us entertain thoughts that it is no vice; and we often say that it is good to be a little worldly; a little covetousness we like well; which shows that we do not indeed and in heart, hold it to be a sin. For if sin be naught, a little of sin cannot be good. As good say, a little poison were good, so it be not too much.' This is how destructive covetousness and consumerism is.

We must describe it as it is, and as Scripture describes it, idolatry. ‘Little do they think that worldliness is a most guiltful sin in respect of God, and most hurtful in respect of men. Hark what the Word of God saith of it, Eph 5:5, - it is idolatry, and idolatry is the first sin of the first table.’ (Richard Capel)

'Covetousness is called idolatry, which is worse than infidelity, Colossians 3:5; for it is less rebellion not to honour the king than to set up another king against him.' (Henry Smith).

The only way to deal with the destructive influence of covetousness is not to contain it but to remove it altogether. It must be destroyed itself. We are to mortify covetousness. The horse-leach must be removed or it will drain our spiritual life and endanger our eternal life.

Capel points to Psalm 119:36 "Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, and not to covetousness": he saith not, this or that testimony, but (as including all the laws of God) he saith "testimonies"; to show us covetousness draws us away, not from some only, but from all God's commandments. So St. Paul: where covetousness is, there are "many lusts," 1 Timothy 6:9, and "many sorrows," 1 Timothy 6:10. "It drowns men in perdition and destruction," 1 Timothy 6:9. And the Greek word signifies such a drowning as is almost past all hope and recovery. It is the bane all society: men cry out of it, because they would have none covetous, rich but themselves...Such believe not the word, they trust neither nor man. For he that trusts not God, cannot trust man. It robs God that confidence we should have in him, and dependence we owe unto him it turns a man from all the commandments. Hence the prophet prays God to turn his heart to his commandments, "and not to covetousness." For not only we ought not, but as the phrase is, "we cannot serve God mammon," Luke 16:13.'

One of the puritans that wrote most extensively concerning covetousness was William Gouge http://www.puritansermons.com/gouge/covindx.htm. He has five remedies for preventing or redressing covetousness.

1. The judgment must rightly be informed in these two points-

(1.) In the nature of true happiness.
(2.) In the vanity and deceitfulness of riches.

Many learned men lack this point of understanding.

It is the blindness of a man's mind that maketh him place a kind of happiness in the things of this world, whereby he is brought even to coat upon them. If therefore we shall be rightly instructed that happiness consisteth in matters of another kind than this world affords, and that the things of this world are so vain as they can afford no solid comfort to a man, especially in spiritual distress, and so uncertain as they may suddenly be taken away from men, or men from them, surely their immoderate desire of riches could not be but much allayed. He that said, 'There be many that say, Who will shew us any good O Lord, lift thou up the light of thy countenance upon us,' Ps. 4:6, well discerned the difference betwixt earthly and heavenly blessings. So did he who said, 'Riches profit not in the day of wrath; but righteousness delivereth from death,' Prov. 11:4.

2. The will and heart of man must follow the judgment well informed, and raise themselves up to that sphere where true happiness resteth. 'Set 'our affection on things above, not on things on the earth,' Col. 3:2. This will keep the heart from coating on things below; for 'where your treasure is, there will your heart be also,' Mat. 6:21. A beast which is feeding in fair and fresh pasture will not stray into a bare and barren heath; much less will an understanding man, that finds the sweetness of spiritual and heavenly blessings, feed upon earthly trash. This made Paul account all outward things but dung, because his heart had tasted of the sweetness of Christ, Phil. 3:8ff.

3. A man's confidence must be placed on God and his providence. God's providence is an overflowing and ever-flowing fountain. The richest treasures of men may be exhausted; God's cannot be. Be therefore fully resolved of this, that 'God will provide,' Gen. 22:8. This casting of our care on God's providence is much pressed in Scripture, as Ps. 55:22, 1 Pet. 5:7, Mat. 6:25, 26, &c. By experience we see how children depend on their parents' providence. Should not we much more on our heavenly Father? This resting upon God's providence is the more to be pressed in this case, because nothing makes men more to misplace their confidence than riches. 'The rich man's wealth is his strong city,' Prov. 10:15.

4. Our appetite or desire of riches must be moderate. Herein be of his mind who thus prayed, 'Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me,' Prov. 30:8. This is the main scope of the fourth petition, Matt. 6:11. Be content, therefore, with that portion which God gives thee, and be persuaded it is best for thee. This lesson had Paul well learned, Phil. iv. 11. Contentedness and covetousness are directly opposite, as light and darkness. The apostle here in this text opposeth them.

5. We must pray against covetousness, as he who said, 'Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, and not to covetousness,' Ps. 119:36. We ought the rather to pray to God against it, because it is a hereditary disease, and in that respect the more hardly cured. It was one of Christ's greatest miracles to cure one that was born blind, John 9:32.