Praying earnestly for the conversion of the Jews

When we pray according to the principle 'thy kingdom come' we will be praying for specific events. The Larger Catechism helpfully expounds this. 'we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fulness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption,countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate: that the ordinances of Christ may be purely dispensed, and made effectual to the converting of those that are yet in their sins, and the confirming, comforting, and building up of those that are already converted'. In the midst of this is the conversion of the Jews, a standard feature of the Puritan outlook on the future.

The Anglican minister and poet George Herbert has a poem which breathes the prayer for the restoration and conversion of the Jews. It partakes of the spirit of Romans 11, that the Gentiles would not be high-minded but fear and be humbled by the temporary rejection of the Jews in God's sovereign purpose. The poem shows that it was not simply a puritan view but widely held and not questioned by the time of the Westminster Assembly. Expositors of the same Jacobean period as Herbert have a similar view. Andrew Wilier writes "The Gentiles should shew themselves unthankfull to insult against the foote, which did beare the branches", Hexapla in Danielera: That is, a Six-fold Commentarie upon the most Divine Epistle of the holy Apostle S. Paul to the Romanes (London, 1620), p. 187. Elnathan Parr preached that ,"God is infinitely good who out of the generall evill, the sinne of the Jewes, can bring so great good, as the salvation of the Gentiles and Jewes." The Workes of that faith full and painefull Preacher Mr. Elnathan Parr (London, 1632, 3rd edn.), p. 173. The famous interpreter of unfulfilled prophecy, Joseph Mede was at Christ's College during Herbert's residence at Trinity and during the latter's function as University Orator. Both men evidently met since Mede describes in a letter the evening of 12 March 1623 when Herbert delivered a speech before King James I. Lancelot Andrewes in his Devotions prayed for the conversion of "Gentiles, Turks and Jews". John Donne likewise praised St. Paul's concern for the Jews. Nicholas Ferrar, wrote in his Acta Apostolorum Elegantis of his hope for the conversion of the Jews.

The trump to which Herbert refers is not the last trump of the second coming but one of the seven trumpets sounded in Revelation. He appears to say that their conversion will come at a time of revival when the Church is agonising in prayer for their conversion.

Poore nation, whose sweet sap and juice
Our cyens have purloin'd, and left you drie:
Whose streams we got by the Apostles sluce,
And use in baptisme, while ye pine and die:
Who by not keeping once, became a debter;
And now by keeping lose the letter.

Oh that my prayers! mine, alas!
Oh that some Angel might a trumpet sound;
At which the Church falling upon her face
Should crie so loud, untill the trump were drown'd,
And by that crie of her deare Lord obtain,
That your sweet sap might come again!

In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Publick Worship of God (1644) ministers were directed to pray for 'the conversion of the Jews, the fullness of the Gentiles, the fall of Antichrist, and the hastening of the second coming of our Lord; for the deliverance of the distressed churches abroad from the tyranny of the antichristian faction, and from the cruel oppressions and blasphemies of the Turk; for the blessing of God upon the reformed churches, especially upon the churches and kingdoms of Scotland, England, and Ireland, now more strictly and religiously united in the Solemn National League and Covenant'.

William Greenhill wrote: 'The conversion of the Jews we may warrantably expect and pray for. God hath promised to gather the children of Israel, and to bring them to David their king, that is, Christ: I will gather them out of every side ; I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen whither they be gone; and one king shall rule over them. Seeing God hath promised to do it, we may believe and pray for the same. This conversion of the Jews will be not of some few particulars, but national, though not of every one belonging to the nation. Hos. 3:5, "The children of Israel shall return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter days:" there will be a very general, glorious, and visible return of them; they will prove eminent Christians, fearing the Lord and his goodness. Paul hints unto you, that there is a time when the vail shall be taken off the heart of the Jews, and they turn unto the
Lord, 2 Cor. 3:15,16.'

Thomas Boston also write: 'A day is coming in which there shall be a national salvation of the Jews. The Jews, now blinded and rejected, shall at length come into the faith of Christ and join themselves to the Christian Church. There are many promises of this in the Old Testament, but I shall confirm it from Romans 11 where the Apostle purposely insists upon it...Believe it and help it on by your prayers. Ply the throne of grace earnestly for it. Join cordially in the public prayers for it and remember it in your family and secret prayers.'

As Boston points out there are a multitude of promises connected with the conversion of the Jews. Here is the collection gathered by Samuel Clarke in his treasury of Bible promises

"And men shall dwell in it [that is, all the land], and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited" (Zechariah 14:11). See the whole chapter.

"Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, when thou shalt receive thy sisters, thine elder and thy younger [Sodom and Samaria, verse 55]: and I will give them unto thee for daughters, but not by thy covenant" (Ezekiel 16:60, 61). See also verses 62, 63.

"Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel" (Hosea 1:10, 11).

"And I will cause the captivity of Judah and the captivity of Israel to return, and will build them, as at the first. And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity, whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have transgressed against me. And it shall be to me a name of joy, a praise and an honour before all the nations of the earth, which shall hear all the good that I do unto them: and they shall fear and tremble for all the goodness and for all the prosperity that I procure unto it. In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness. Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, The two families which the LORD hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? thus they have despised my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. Thus saith the LORD; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them" (Jeremiah 33:7-9, 15, 16, 24-26). To the same purpose see the whole chapter. See also chapter 50:4, 5, 19, 20.

"I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will put them together as the sheep of Bozrah, as the flock in the midst of their fold: they shall make great noise by reason of the multitude of men. The breaker is come up before them: they have broken up, and have passed through the gate, and are gone out by it: and their king shall pass before them, and the LORD on the head of them" (Micah 2:12, 13).

"I will multiply upon you [the mountains of Israel] man and beast; and they shall increase and bring fruit: and I will settle you after your old estates, and will do better unto you than at your beginnings: and ye shall know that I am the LORD. I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. In the day that I shall have cleansed you from all your iniquities I will also cause you to dwell in the cities, and the wastes shall be builded" (Ezekiel 36:11, 24-26, 33). See the whole chapter; also chapter 37.

"Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Luke 21:24).

"And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever" (Ezekiel 37:25).

"I will bring you out from the people, and will gather you out of the countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out. And I will bring you into the wilderness of the people, and there will I plead with you face to face. And I will cause you to pass under the rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant: And I will purge out from among you the rebels, and them that transgress against me: In mine holy mountain, in the mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord GOD, there shall all the house of Israel, all of them in the land, serve me: there will I accept them, and there will I require your offerings, and the firstfruits of your oblations, with all your holy things" (Ezekiel 20:34, 35, 37, 38, 40). See also verses 41, 44.

"Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land assuredly with my whole heart and with my whole soul" (Jeremiah 32:41). See from verse 37 to the end.

"And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it. And they shall no more be a prey to the heathen, neither shall the beast of the land devour them; but they shall dwell safely, and none shall make them afraid. And I will raise up for them a plant of renown" (Ezekiel 34:23, 24, 28, 29). See also verses 11, 16, and from verse 22 to the end of the chapter.

"Behold, I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her. And I will give her her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt. And I will betroth thee unto me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in lovingkindness, and in mercies" (Hosea 2:14, 15, 19). See from verse 16 to the end.

"Even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away" (2Corinthians 3:15, 16).

"Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the LORD. And the LORD shall inherit Judah his portion in the holy land, and shall choose Jerusalem again" (Zechariah 2:10, 12).

"Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel. And he shall stand and feed in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth. And the remnant of Jacob shall be in the midst of many people as a dew from the LORD, as the showers upon the grass, that tarrieth not for man, nor waiteth for the sons of men. Thy graven images also will I cut off, and thy standing images out of the midst of thee; and thou shalt no more worship the work of thine hands" (Micah 5:3, 4, 7, 13). See the whole chapter, chapter 4, and chapter 7:14, 17. See also Zeph. 3:9, to the end.

"Upon mount Zion shall be deliverance, and there shall be holiness; and the house of Jacob shall possess their possessions. And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD'S" (Obadiah 1:17, 21).

"The children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim: Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days" (Hosea 3:4, 5).

"Behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem, I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land. So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more. Judah shall dwell for ever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation" (Joel 3:1, 2, 17, 20). See also verses 7, 14, 16, 18, 21.

"And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph, and I will bring them again to place them; for I have mercy upon them: and they shall be as though I had not cast them off: for I am the LORD their God, and will hear them. I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased. And I will sow them among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again" (Zechariah 10:6, 8, 9). See the whole chapter.

"God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. If the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. How much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the Father's sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. [See also verses 30-31.] God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" (Romans 11:2, 12, 15, 23, 24, 25-29, 32-33).

"At the same time, saith the LORD, will I be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people. Again I will build thee, and thou shalt be built, O virgin of Israel: thou shalt again be adorned with thy tabrets, and shalt go forth in the dances of them that make merry. Hear the word of the LORD, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles afar off, and say, He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd doth his flock. There is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children shall come again to their own border. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner" (Jeremiah 31:1, 4, 10, 17, 31-33, 38). See the whole chapter.

"In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn" (Zechariah 12:6, 10). See the whole chapter.

"And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God" (Amos 9:14, 15).

"They shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them. Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid" (Jeremiah 30:9, 10). See to the end of the chapter.

Bible versions and over-marketing

An article in the Los Angeles Times notes how bible 'publishers have found a niche -- a big one -- for stylized Bibles inspired by pop culture. Almost anything goes'. It appears that 2008 'marks the 30th anniversary of the best-selling New International Version of the Bible, a highly readable translation that has vaulted Zondervan (a division of HarperCollins) to the top of the Bible publishing world, with a 40% market share. To celebrate, the company is producing an update of the NIV Study Bible, with thousands of revised footnotes. Formatted with extra-wide margins for note-taking, bound in premium leather, the new edition has been tentatively priced at $119.99.'

The trouble is that bible publishers have so over-marketed their product that it is creating confusion. 'Half of all customers who walk into a store intending to buy a Bible leave empty-handed, according to Brenda Lugannani, a vice president of Family Christian Stores' (the USA's largest Christian chain). "When they look at what's available," she says, "it begins to confuse them." There is an even more serious issue, which is that the multiplicity of versions as well as editions are seriously undermining the authority of what is the Word of God. Which one is the right one? Which one contains all of the original? Another post on this blog looks at this issue:

http://the-holdfast.blogspot.com/2006/02/cult-of-modern-in-contemporary-bible.html

For the full text of the article in the LA Times go to
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-bible25dec25,1,502680.story?page=1&ctrack=1&cset=true

The best of Highland experimental preaching

One of the best books for giving a true flavour of the character and attainments of spirituality in the Highlands of Scotland in the past is John Kennedy's 'The Days of the Fathers in Ross-shire'. This is now available online here http://www.john-kennedy-dingwall.co.nr/.

A classic section of the book deals with the character of the preaching of the Fathers in Ross-shire and in the process outlines the character of true experimental preaching that is accompanied by the unction of the Spirit.

'As preachers they were all remarkable. There are some who preach before their people, like actors on the stage, to display themselves and to please their audience. Not such were the self-denied preachers of Ross-shire. There are others who preach over their people. Studying for the highest, instead of doing so for the lowest, in intelligence, they elaborate learned treatises, which float like mist, when delivered over the heads of their hearers. Not such were the earnest preachers of Ross-shire. There are some who preach past their people. Directing their praise or their censure to intangible abstractions, they never take aim at the views and the conduct of the individuals before them. They step carefully aside, lest their hearers should be struck by their shafts, and aim them at phantoms beyond them. Not such were the faithful preachers of Ross-shire. There are others who preach at their people, serving out in a sermon the gossip of the week, and seemingly possessed with the idea, that the transgressor can be scolded out of the ways of iniquity. Not such were the wise preachers of Ross-shire. There are some who preach towards their people. They aim well, but they are weak. Their eye is along the arrow towards the hearts of their hearers, but their arm is too feeble for sending it on to the mark. Superficial in their experience and in their knowledge, they reach not the cases of God s people by their doctrine, and they strike with no vigour at the consciences of the ungodly. Not such were the powerful preachers of Ross-shire. There are others still, who preach along their congregation. Instead of standing with their bow in front of the rank, these archers take it in line, and reducing their mark to an individual, never change the direction of their aim. Not such were the discriminating preachers of Ross-shire. But there are a few who preach to the people directly and seasonably the mind of God in His word, with authority, unction, wisdom, fervour, and love. Such as these last were the eminent preachers of Ross-shire.

While all of them were excellent, each of them was peculiar; and their variety was as necessary as their skill. In apt and striking illustration Porteous and Mackenzie excelled, and have left more memorable sayings behind them than any of the others; Calder and Macphail preached in clear, unctuous words filled full of Christ crucified, while from their manner and language all was carefully excluded that might withdraw the minds of their hearers from the spiritual import of the message which they carried; for exactness of exposition, and precision of statement, Macadam and Forbes were second to none; Dr Mackintosh was eminent in solemnity and power; and for clearness and skill in unfolding the doctrines of grace, and in fervent appeals to the Christless, Fraser and Macdonald excelled them all.

Their preaching was remarkable for its completeness. It combined careful exposition, fulness and exactness of doctrinal statement, a searching description of experimental godliness, and close application of truth to the conscience. The admixture of these elements, in wisely-adjusted proportions, constitutes the true excellence of preaching. Careful to ascertain the mind of Cod in His Word, they were not content merely to prefix a passage of Scripture as a motto to their sermon. They chose to preach from a text, rather than to discourse on a subject. They did not try what they themselves could say about it, but to tell what the Lord said through it, to their hearers. But, while careful expounders, they were systematic theologians as well. They clearly saw, and they clearly taught, "the form of sound doctrine." No loose statement of doctrine would satisfy them, and yet no men were further than they from being frozen into the stiffness of a cold, lifeless orthodoxy. Their zeal for a sound creed was at least equalled by their desire for a godly experience and a holy life. They loved "the form of sound doctrine," but they also loved "the power of godliness." They insisted on a clear understanding of the former, but they also insisted on a deep experience of the latter. It is in fashion to speak of objective and subjective preaching, and to commend each by itself as excellent in its way; but surely that preaching is defective, that presents a statement of doctrine without any description of the experience which the application of that doctrine produces, or of the fruits in which that experience results; and preaching without distinct doctrinal statement is like attempting to build without a plummet or a plan.

Their preaching was distinguished by the minuteness with which the Lord guided them, to speak to the varied cases of their hearers. In this respect they were quite singular; and many marvellous instances of this might be given. Some of these might be easily accounted for. In dealing with the cases of God's people, a minister, acquainted with the power of godliness, will be sure to have a counterpart, in his own experience, of many of the fears, hopes, and enjoyments of those whom he addresses. Speaking from the heart, he will be sure to speak to the heart; declaring what he himself has felt, he will be sure to express the feelings of others. When the honour the Lord has been wont to put on the ordinance of preaching, and His tender care of His children are taken into account, who will limit the degree of minuteness to which the Lord's guidance may be given, in adapting the message sent by His servant to the varied feelings of the hearers? Words marvellously seasonable have been often thus spoken, to account for which no prophetic gift should be ascribed to the preacher. The pressing need of a beloved child had to be seasonably met, and the Lord revived, in the memory of His servant, a corresponding experience, and guided him to tell it, and this is often the whole secret of the matter. There have been, however, instances of "words in season" that cannot thus be explained. Some more direct guidance of the speaker's mind was required, and some more abrupt impression must have been produced of the case, to which the Lord was sending a leaf from the tree of life, or an arrow from the quiver of the law. Care will be taken that any such instances as may be given, shall be accurately stated rather than satisfactorily explained.'

The Future of the Church

The church shall in the end prove victorious against all its adversaries, or providence must miss of its aim. The church is compared to an olive tree, Hosea 14:6, in respect of beauty, 'his beauty shall be as the olive tree!' It is so also in respect of victory. Olive branches were used in triumph. God is on the church's side, and he is stronger than the strongest, and wiser than the wisest, and higher than the highest. Jesus Christ is the church's head and general ; Christ the head watcheth for the good of the church, the body. He must be destroyed before the church can.

There is a mighty arm, which, though it may for a time seem withered, will in the end be stretched out, and get itself the victory. Whilst Christ is in the ship, it may be tossed, but it shall not be sunk. It may be beaten down, but like a ball to rebound the higher. The young tree that is shaken by the wind may lose some leaves, and some fruit too, but the root gets greater strength and strikes itself deeper into the earth, and makes the branches more capable of a rich return of fruit the following year. The church's stature is compared to a palm tree, Song 7:7, which cannot be depressed by the weights which hang upon it, but riseth the higher. God uses the same method in the church's, as in Christ's advancement. Our Saviour's death was necessary to his glory, Luke 24:26, and the church's affliction sometimes to its exaltation. A nation may lose some battles, and yet be victorious ; the church may have many a cross, but in the end will surmount all difficulties. Though judgments and apostasies may be great in a nation, yet God will have a care of his own plants, Isa. 6:12,13; 'There shall be a tenth; it shall return, the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.' As a tree in winter, which seems dead, but its juice shall revive into rich and generous blossoms. The ark 'shall float above the waters. Babylon shall fall, the Lamb shall stand upon mount Zion. Men may as well stop the rising of the sun in its mounting to the meridian, bridle in the tide of the ocean, as hinder the current of an almighty providence.

The interest of nations is to bear a respect to the church, and countenance the worship of God in it. This is to concur with God's main end, and imitate him in his providential administrations. God's people, whatever their enemies suggest to the contrary, are a blessing in the midst of a land, Isa. 19:24 ; their interest is greater than the interest of all the world besides ; though they be but a handful, their fruit shall shake like Lebanon, Ps. 72:16. The neglect of religion is the ruin of nations. It is observed that Cyrus was slain in the war in Scythia, a little after he neglected the building of the temple of Jerusalem which he had begun. (sse Broughton on Dan. 10:10.)

Those Persian kings reigned the longest that favoured the Jews in that and their other just requests. God honoured or disgraced them as they were kind or cruel to his people. And when they act for the good of his people, they shall not be without their reward. When Cyrus should let the Jewish captives go free without ransom, he should be no loser by it. God would give him the labour of Egypt, the merchandise of Ethiopia, and the strength of the Sabeans into his hand for the price of his people's delivery, Isa. 45: 13,14. Those nations which should favour them in the times of their persecutions and flights, and give them shelter in their countries, should thrive and prosper by the blessing of God upon them. If Moab give entertainment to the flying Israelites in the time of the invasion of Shalmanezer, God will preserve their land that the spoiler shall not enter into the confines of it, and they shall have kings and judges under the protection of the house of David, i.e. under the kings of Israel, as some understand it, Isa. 16:4, 5. Saints are the guardians of the places where they live, their prayers have a greater influence than the wisest counsels, or the mightiest force, 2 Kings 2:12: 'And Elisha cried, My father, my father! the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof.' The Chaldee paraphraseth thus: 'Thou art better to Israel by thy prayers than chariots and horsemen.' This is the elegy of one single prophet ; what influence then hath the whole church of God in a place? The whole world is the better for the church of God.

by Stephen Charnock

1893, 1900 and Church Authority

An article in the Free Presbyterian Magazine in 1901, written in Gaelic by John Macleod (later Principal), reflects upon the different stands taken in 1893 and 1900. The first was that of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the latter those of the Free Church of Scotland who had not joined with the Free Presbyterians and were refusing to join the union with the United Presbyterian Church which would form the United Free Church of Scotland. The article was entitled which may be translated as 'The Standing/Principle of the Churches'. The article has been translated from Gaelic by Mr Alan Boyd, Grimsay, North Uist. While it is true that John Macleod himself later joined the Free Church of Scotland it is clear that the views expressed in this article at the time reflect the Free Presbyterian position.

The focus is clearly on constitutional matters. The article was not written in order to heighten controversy or out of partisan bitterness. It concludes by observing 'it would benefit us to remember Dr Owen's wise words that the closer two bodies are to one another in confession and in principle, often the more contentious they are against one another – a thing that does not arise from love or envy for the truth but from the corruption that remaineth in them'.

The article makes some important points, however. It begins by describing the situation immediately before 1900 when the Free Church united with the United Presbyterian Church. 'Before the Union took place last year, we noticed if our memory serves us right, a section within the Free Church that at one time claimed to be of the same opinion as ourselves concerning the standing/principle of the Church. When we refused to depart a hair's breadth from that standing/principle, they accused us and said that that was not the time for bearing a distinct witness but that we ought to have kept the peace until the matter came to making a union with another body, and until a change would be made to the questions put to office bearers. At the time we noticed that of that body, very little was to be heard among them concerning the taking of a stand when the Union would come about. We are now pleased that when the Union did take place that many stood against it and refused to go in with it. They therefore proved what they meant before then that that was the time to stand separate from the majority who were determined on permanently backsliding. But there were some of them who went in with the union and who therefore ate their own words'.

Macleod then draws a comparison with the Ten Years Conflict before the time of the Disruption in 1843. 'Before the time of the Disruption when Patronage was in the Church of Scotland, the Church made a law in the year 1834 which gave great freedom to those whom the landlord was trying to impose a minister over them against their will. This law was called the Veto Act. The civil courts came to the conclusion that the church went outside its remit when it took this step and there was therefore no substance in the Act. The Moderates were against this act but when they got their own way after the Disruption, they did not repeal it. What did they mean by this step? They esteemed it as a dead letter because that was the mind of the law courts after it had been found, according to their opinion, as not being in harmony with the founding principles of the Church. They never as much as gave it a reverend burial. With that, they were in effect admitting that the Church was not an independent/voluntary/self-ruling organisation that had the ability to make laws that its members must obey'. The Veto Act was a measure which was introduced enacting that if a majority of the male heads of families, being communicants, in a congregation entered a positive dissent against a call that it should have the effect of nullifying a presentation by a patron. When presbyteries acted according to this it was overturned in the civil courts. The Moderates were accepting that any civil law has precedence over Church law and that the Church has no power to enact anything contrary to civil law. Anything that the Church legislates in conflict with civil law is beyond its powers and therefore a dead letter. This is how the Moderates regarded the Veto Act of 1834, there was no need to repeal it, it could just be ignored as inoperative because the Assembly had exceeded its powers in passing it.

It goes without saying that this view is Erastian and not at all correct in its understanding of Church authority. Macleod goes on to comment. 'Such was not the opinion of the Free Church of Scotland. That was not in the mind of the worthies who opposed the Union thirty years ago and that is not the principle on which we stood as a church when we refused to submit to the Declaratory Act in 1893. As far as we can see, the Free Church of Scotland, since the time of the Reformation, has always had such authority over its members that they are expected to be submissive to every law and statute she has made. Since we cannot be submissive to the courts of a Church that has in a perverse manner released her office bearers from the oaths to which they are bound, we had no alternative but to stand aside'. To speak of an act as a dead letter is to dismiss the true authority of the Church and its courts. This is a significant question when compared with the Disruption of 1843 because the issue at stake there, as Macleod indicates, was the relation of judicial and constitutional law. As James Bannerman put it 'The Church, as the visible society of professing Christians in the world, with its outward provision of authority and order and government, owes its origin to Christ as Mediator' not to the State, 'the Church must be free to judge and act for herself according to the law of Scripture, without responsibility to or interference from the State'.

Macleod points out that those who were professed constitutionalists but did not take the Free Presbyterian position in 1893 did so largely on the advice of lawyers who they consulted as to whether they would retain the property if they separated at that time. The Constitutionalists consulted eminent legal opinion about property in winter 1892-3 in Scotland and England but it was not favourable to their retaining property unless Union came about. Hence the tone changed decided to fight from within. According to Free Church Counsel Mr Johnson in the 1904 case, it was a case of waiting till the best legal grounds for contesting the property came up - 'we have certainly resisted, and when it comes to touch property, then is our opportunity'. Therefore they hung on even though they were unable to protest and certainly seemed to change very easily from their dissent in 1892 where they stated that 'the Church is left without any definite, fixed or authoritative standard of doctrine'. Macleod comments on this: 'We can give the benefit of the doubt to those who always confessed to be opposed to the change that was made at that time that they stayed in (as the terminology goes) on the advice of lawyers. This was the issue, and, if our memory serves us right, some of them were denying it at the time, that they didn't as a body admit to it at all that they had consulted lawyers. But if it is that it was on the advice of lawyers that they took the step that they did take, we think that they were of the same opinion concerning the power of the Church as were the Church of Scotland people after the Disruption when they would take nothing to do with the Veto Act [when they didn't touch the Veto Act]. After they thought that the Church had gone past her right [taken liberty of her position] in the presence of the Most High, they came to the conclusion that she exceeded her power among [the] people and that the Declaratory Act was not worth the paper it was written on'.

Macleod then brings in the fact that the Declaratory Act had been made the law of the Church under the Barrier Act. This is an act that required the consent of the majority of presbyteries before legislation could be made a binding law and constitution. The Barrier Act was necessary because only a third of the presbyteries was represented at any General Assembly. In order for the whole Church to express their mind on something – the Barrier Act allowed for all members of presbyteries to be consulted. 'If it was not that office-bearers had been asked to be obedient to the Church courts, they'd have had some foundation to support this opinion but we cannot see as things are at present that they had a foundation to stand on. The Barrier Act was made law in the Church of Scotland over two hundred years ago so that the whole Church could not be put under a law by one General Assembly alone. Each year there was only a third of the presbytery members at the Assembly and if every conclusion that the Assembly came to was binding on the whole Church, a third of the presbytery members – and indeed a fifth – could bind the whole Church'.

'When a new statute like this is being drawn up, often the office-bearers are not of the same mind. Those who are against it may either submit a dissent or a protest – that is, though they are against it, if they can cooperate with the body which made the new statute, they may [so do], in order to display such dissent or to publicize that it was against their wish that the thing was made. But if they are unable to cooperate with the new thing then it is a protest they will lodge or a "protection clause" stating that they are unable to be submissive in the courts regarding the matter. If they do get the opportunity to make a "protection clause" like this and to get it in writing in the Church books, then they are protected and a restriction is placed on the new statute. But if they fail to obtain this, they can be no longer obedient to the courts of the Church. We have no recollection of there having been such a "protection clause" allowed after the Church introduced a statute under the Barrier Act'.

This is because any legislation passed under the Barrier Act is 'a binding law and constitution' and if it is binding then disobedience to it is not possible. This was clearly the understanding of the Free Church General Assembly of 1893 when it instructed all inferior courts to disallow and delete (physically expunge) all protests against the Declaratory Act. (e.g. Synod of Glenelg, Synod of Caithness and Sutherland cf. Also case in Synod of Ross - Minutes of FC General Assembly Sat 20 May 1893 and Thurs 25 May 1893). At Dores and Dornoch where men had sought to subscribe the Formula expressly repudiating the Declaratory Act, this was disallowed. This showed that individuals were bound by the Act even in their consciences since it was impossible to protest against it in order to clear the conscience. Dr Rainy confirmed this in 1893 at the General Assembly where he states: 'A protest [against legislation under the Barrier Act] really meant a denial in the meantime, a denial of the validity of the action that was protested against, that it is null and void in an inferior court. They protested and appealed, they protested and complained, and their protest suspended the operation of the Act that had been passed until it was renewed. That was why there was no such thing as a protest against the decision of the General Assembly'. Elsewhere John MacLeod points out that, 'Defiant protests against the law of the Church are plain breaches of ordination vows. At ordination, every office-bearer vows submission to the lawful courts of the Church. Refusing to acknowledge a law of the Church is not obedience, it is contumacy'.

Macleod shows that Dr John Kennedy of Dingwall was clear on the principle that if anything is passed under the Barrier Act one would have to separate – because it would become constitutional. Sometimes questions have been raised as to what John Kennedy would have done if he had been alive in 1893, but it is quite clear from his own words that follow and elsewhere. 'Twenty years ago, when Dr Kennedy was protesting against the Disestablishment of the Established Church, he published a book to explain the matter to the people of the Highlands; in that Booklet, he clearly demonstrated the mind of which he himself was concerning the effect of this Barrier Act. He set his case as follows: "If the Assembly of 1880 had put to the presbyteries through the Barrier Act what the majority had agreed on, there would be no Free Church today. And what right do the Leaders have to be entangling the Church in things that they themselves wouldn't dare to commit themselves to? If they had given such support to that matter in 1880, I, as one, could no longer be connected with a Church that, by such, was forsaking its distinctive stance….and the connection would only have been broken by myself remaining faithful to the Free Church." Now, this was the mind of the minority in the Free Church until 1892 and it was on the basis of this principle that we took the stance that we took'.

Macleod makes it clear that the constitutionalists shared this understanding of the effect of the Barrier Act. We know that the leader of the Constitutionalists, Rev. Murdo Macaskill, Dingwall took the following view of protest :"To protest, for instance against the decision of the General Assembly as the final Court of Review, in a case at the bar is useless, and on the face of it, absurd. Again, to table an absolute protest against the validity of a General Assembly in any of its public Acts is plainly inadmissable, because it would be calling in question the supreme and rightful authority of the Court, itself, calling in question, in short, its right to exist, and disowning its authority. The immediate consequence of such action would necessarily be the disowning of an separation from the jurisdiction of such a Court by the protesters. Such was the nature of the action which resulted in the Disruption". (Ross-shire Journal Sept. 30, 1892).

Macleod applies these considerations to the situation in 1901. 'It's on the other principle [i.e. the Moderate principle as to Church authority] that the Free Church is today claiming its right for the name and place of the Free Church – that is that they were claiming that the Declaratory Act was a dead letter after it had been made law by the authority of the Church. But at the same time they clearly make public their mind as soon as they are vindicated by the courts of law that they would wish to repeal the Acts of Declension...We are of the opinion that they took the wrong step nine years ago and their feet are now "bogged down" in more ways than one. If they had taken a brave stand at that time, they'd have had an excellent opportunity and out of all probability, the Highlands at any rate would have been kept pretty well sound to the present day...Now when they attempt to repeal the "acts of Declension", it won't be easy to reconcile that with their opinion that the Act of 1892 was a dead letter. It was in 1892 that they changed their minds and it was the bad step that they took at that time that mostly stands against them today'.

The subsequent effects of that position are that, while the Declaratory Act was repealed when the property was secured through the law courts, the spirit of the Declaratory Act lived on in those individuals who made it public that they did not believe parts of the Westminster Confession (and therefore not the whole doctrine) but no discipline was applied. This was the case in the 1930s with Professors Mackay and Alexander who denied that God had so preserved his Word that it was 'by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages'. This was what was being taught to students for the ministry. Later people could express public disagreement with the Confessional position on six day creation, the papal Antichrist and other matters with impunity. No Declaratory Act had been passed but the spirit had lived on and so had the spirit of inaction in the face of it.
Kenneth MacRae wrote "The Resurgence of Arminianism" in the 1950s to protest against the laxity of views within the Free Church at the time as to Free Church principles and as to doctrine. Free Church men were looking favourably upon the Arminianism of Billy Graham, Keswick and the Faith Mission. They now viewed the issues of 1900 and before as related solely to Higher Criticism when, as MacRae well pointed out, the real issue was Arminianism. What was said to be a 'dead letter' proved to have a rather long life and influence.

Backsliding portrayed in the book of Hosea

'For Israel slideth back as a backsliding heifer' (4:16)

The Nature of Backsliding

It is spiritual whoredom, 'the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the LORD.' (1:2). 'For they shall eat, and not have enough: they shall commit whoredom, and shall not increase: because they have left off to take heed to the LORD. Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart.' (4:10-11). There is a drawing out of the heart after its own iniquity: 'they set their heart on their iniquity' (4:9)

It is a neglect of God and failure to call upon him through pride and sinful, wilful ignorance: 'They are all hot as an oven, and have devoured their judges; all their kings are fallen: there is none among them that calleth unto me. Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned. Strangers have devoured his strength, and he knoweth it not: yea, gray hairs are here and there upon him, yet he knoweth not. And the pride of Israel testifieth to his face: and they do not return to the LORD their God, nor seek him for all this. Ephraim also is like a silly dove without heart: they call to Egypt, they go to Assyria.' (7:7-11)

'They will not frame their doings to turn unto their God: for the spirit of whoredoms is in the midst of them, and they have not known the LORD. And the pride of Israel doth testify to his face' (5:4). Pride and idolatry are closely connected: 'When Ephraim spake trembling, he exalted himself in Israel; but when he offended in Baal, he died. And now they sin more and more, and have made them molten images of their silver, and idols according to their own understanding' (13:1-2)

This idolatry and pride is partly the sin of using the outward prosperity that God bestows not to glorify him but for our sinful ends 'As they were increased, so they sinned against me' (4:7). The backslider refuses to reverence God as he must be reverenced 'my people are bent to backsliding from me: though they called them to the most High, none at all would exalt him.' (11:7)

God's word is neglected 'I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing.' (8:12). There is therefore a lack of knowledge: 'My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge' (4:6)

The Effects of Backsliding

Backsliding brings upon it the Lord's chastisement which is designed to provoke conviction on account of such sinful departures:
'behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall, that she shall not find her paths.And she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now. For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and multiplied her silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal. Therefore will I return, and take away my corn in the time thereof, and my wine in the season thereof, and will recover my wool and my flax given to cover her nakedness. And now will I discover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and none shall deliver her out of mine hand. I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts. And I will destroy her vines and her fig trees, whereof she hath said, These are my rewards that my lovers have given me: and I will make them a forest, and the beasts of the field shall eat them. And I will visit upon her the days of Baalim, wherein she burned incense to them, and she decked herself with her earrings and her jewels, and she went after her lovers, and forgat me, saith the LORD' (2:6-13).

God's chastisements are just and in proportion to the backlider's departures: 'because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. As they were increased, so they sinned against me: therefore will I change their glory into shame.' (4:6-7) 'Their heart is divided; now shall they be found faulty' (10:2)

God withdraws and leaves the backslider to himself - to be filled with his own ways - as a chastisement 'Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone.' (4:17) 'they shall go with their flocks and with their herds to seek the LORD; but they shall not find him; he hath withdrawn himself from them.' (5:6)

'Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment, because he willingly walked after the commandment. Therefore will I be unto Ephraim as a moth, and to the house of Judah as rottenness. I will be unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah: I, even I, will tear and go away; I will take away, and none shall rescue him. I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they will seek me early'. (5:11-15)

The backslider is given up to barrenness and reproach: 'Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit' (9:16) 'Ephraim feedeth on wind, and followeth after the east wind: he daily increaseth lies and desolation' (12:1) 'Ephraim provoked him to anger most bitterly: therefore shall he leave his blood upon him, and his reproach shall his Lord return unto him' (12:14)

The Cure of Backsliding

Grace alone can cure backsliding.
'O Israel, return unto the LORD thy God; for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity. Take with you words, and turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips. Asshur shall not save us; we will not ride upon horses: neither will we say any more to the work of our hands, Ye are our gods: for in thee the fatherless findeth mercy. I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him' (14:1-4)

Therefore, behold, I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her. And I will give her her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt. And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali. For I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall no more be remembered by their name'. (2:14-17)

'Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight. Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the LORD: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth. (6:1-3)

Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep mercy and judgment, and wait on thy God
continually'.(12:6)

Richard Sibbes has fourteen sermons on Hosea entitled "The Returning Backslider", preached in the 1620s were printed in 1639. Sibbes writes firstly of personal backsliding, an aggravation of sin, a sin against knowledge and with a high hand. It is spiritual adultery, a loathsome thing in the world. It brings shame into his life so that sinners are justly called fools. Sin robs a man of all that is good and great; it is the bane of all our comforts.

The only course of action for the backslider is to repent." Take your words to God and confess your sin to him." We are to attack the Goliath sin to which we are most addicted, whose death causes other lesser sins to flee. To encourage us in this enterprise let us look especially at the mercy of God which mitigates all God's other mighty awesome attributes. Labour for further assurance that you are his. The bedrock of assurance is found as you rest upon God in Christ. This God loves to show mercy to returning sinners. So Sibbes too seeks to encourage the penitent backslider. Preventing backsliding is crucial because it starts imperceptibly. Grow in your knowledge of God and his Son so that grace will grow. Confess your sin daily.

"Many think they have repented, and are deceived upon this false ground. They are and have been grieved for their sins and offences; are determined to leave and forsake them, and that is all they do. They never lay hold of Christ, and come home to God."

"They are cruel to their own souls that walk in evil ways; for undoubtedly God will turn their own ways upon their own heads."

Days of Humiliation

Tommorrow (12th December) has been appointed by the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland as a Day of Humiliation and Prayer throughout the congregations of the Church on account of the increasing manifestations of divine displeasure against the nation for our national sins. The following report shows much of this. http://www.fpchurch.org.uk/ReligionMorals/2007Report.pdf

During the time of Westminster Assembly there were monthly Fast-Day Sermons before the Long Parliament for prayer and humiliation. John Wilson wrote a book that examined these, JF Wilson. Pulpit in Parliament. Puritanism During the English Civil Wars 1640-1648 (Princeton, 1969. Hugh Trevor-Roper, commonly unsympathetic, has a useful summary http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/719/77055 on 2007-12-11.

The fast day sermons reveal the interdependence of collective and individual piety in puritanism (cf. Wilson:166-196). Issues that concern collective identity on a local and national level are addressed, responding as they do to major critical events in the life of a community they participate in fostering the emotions of collective cohesion and belonging that such moments instinctively call forth. The note that John Preston strikes in his national fast sermons of the Caroline years is unambiguously that of the Old Testament prophets, as he urges repentance and immediate responsive action in the face of certain imminent judgement upon the nation and church as he sees it spreading from Europe. Preston emphasises the notion of ripe time, a dramatic sense of the moment when certain actions must be engaged. 'For all private actions, as well as for those that are publicke, there is a time…The times for the severall changes to which every man, every Common-wealth, and every Citty is subject, these times God hath assigned…and they are as bounds that cannot be passed'.

Puritan sermons generally urge an activistic rather than contemplative conclusion. Hence John Preston would apologize if he stayed too long in 'the doctrinal part' of the sermon since he held that the end of theology is in action. It seems clear that John Preston and Richard Sibbes gave most attention to the application part of the sermon. The direct application is the portion in which exhortation emerges most strongly, in contrast to the belaboured establishing of the text's content.

The purpose of the puritan sermon is that the application be enacted. When the sermon is said, the sermon has only begun to be done. As Watkins indicates, the puritan principle as reflected in their spiritual autobiographies was that, 'the only masterpiece worthy of the name was to be achieved in the most complex and difficult of all forms of creative endeavour: a human life'. The contrary mode of preaching at the time, High Anglican or Laudian, differs markedly in its insistent stress upon passive rather than active obedience.

When Revolution came in the 1640s, ministers were summoned to Parliament to preach upon monthly national fast days. Action continued to be the insistent note of such sermons. The role of the parliamentarians was given unambiguous statement by Edmund Calamy in particular:
'It is certain that God hath begun to build and plant this nation, and he hath made you his instruments'. The role of the ministry (as persecuted prophets) was given great emphasis, Marshall wondered whether 'the negligence and corruption of our governors' had accounted for the poor state of the clergy, and whether neglect of preaching had been 'one main cause of the ill success of so many former Parliaments?'. In one fast sermon, George Gillespie issued the blunt dictum, 'Reformation ends not in contemplation, but in action'.

Samuel Bolton's sermon to the House of Commons (March 2 1646), on the text Genesis 18:19 gives particular emphasis to direct application. On the 25th of the same month he would preach to the Commons Hamartolos Hamartia: Or The Sinfulness of Sin upon Matthew 1:21b: as John Wilson makes plain concerning this sermon, 'Bolton in effect applied it for his audience without the intermediate structure of doctrines and reasons'. In the prior sermon, however, Bolton immediately draws attention to the 'forme and matter of the text' in order to demonstrate that he derives his doctrine exegetically. After dwelling upon the form of the text, the doctrine is eventually stated that 'God doth communicate rare secrets to certaine knowne and chosen men'. Bolton first speaks of 'humbling, convincing, converting secrets'. This suggests a typical fast sermon which would involve great initial stress upon humbling followed by proportionate stress upon duty. Having spent only a brief space upon such secrets, Bolton breaks out in earnest exhortation:

Tell me, how doe these Secrets worke upon thee? art thou willing to take a pardon upon faire and honourable termes? wouldest thou doe any thing, suffer any thing, forgoe any thing, that thou mightest be at peace with this mighty God? Dost thou desire Direction from God, Reconciliation and communion with him? Why then I have some encouraging secrets to impart unto thee.

Bolton returns to the 'Gospell secret' and lists more secrets. When the last secret is arrived at it is clear that it corresponds most closely with the text since it concerns God's secret revelation of his future action. Bolton extends the possibility of being in the secret confidences of God, which in the midst of a military struggle was supremely inviting.

At this point Bolton inserts an anticipated objection along the lines "this is a secular not a religious secret". Bolton negotiates this objection with the answer that it is 'for religious purposes': such are edifying secrets. The 'secular' secret soon becomes a sermon in itself:

Abraham was not to repeate it as a story, but as a sermon to his Posterity, that they might behold the Majesty of Jehovah…and be perswaded to walke in the way of Jehovah.

The secular and religious can be rival motivations and allegiances rather than merely different spheres of public life: 'this Secret is not secular which takes within the heart from all secular accommodations, and teaches men to choose their seate or dwelling not for secular advantages, but for Spirituall accommodations'. Thus far the secrets have been only partially delivered, in truth Bolton is more concerned with the secrets of interiority and personal piety, much like Thomas Watson's Gods Anatomy Upon Mans Heart (1649) that sought to make examination of the hypocrisy of the Rump. Watson's doctrine was, 'The most secret Cabinet-designes of mans heart are all unlocked and clearly anatomized before the Lord'. Bolton soon proceeds to say that 'God knows our secrets'.

Presently Bolton drops the theme and takes up: 'Doct. It is our duty to endeavor to bring all that are under our command, to be at Gods command'. Bolton had only been demonstrating the 'forme' of the text and applying it; because this 'opening' of the text, has been mainly application the sermon seems almost back to front in structure. Bolton introduced the incentives to obedience before the teaching is developed.

The responsibilities of fathers to their families are then developed at great length as though this will be the central issue of the sermon. Eventually, however, the application comes, 'You that are Parliament men are Members of an Honourable House' 'the only way to preserve your Honour is to walke in the way of Jehovah' The appeal is to family identity, to a paternalist affection and duty: Bolton's purpose in developing the paternal role is the encouragement of those emotions and considerations. The climax of this mode of persuasion is not to bring a word from the Lord but to bring a word from the people, not to warn and rebuke the Parliamentarians in the name of God as had become the custom of fast day preachers but to appeal to their sense of community and collective identity, a mixture of patriotism and duty. The approach is surprising and striking in its expression:

But I am not worthy to advise a Parliament, the motion is humbly presented; and though it be rejected with smiles, I intend not tot appeal from you to the people: but give me leave in My Master's Name to present the Peoples Appeal to You. Consider the cries, and out-cries of the godly part of this kingdom for a Reformation, they speak plain, and tell you, that,
1.They have fasted, prayed, wept, for a Reformation
2.They have exhausted their Treasures, many of them
3.Adventured their lives, lost their limbs, their blood, their friends for Reformation
4.You have promised us a Reformation
5.And we have prayd for a Reformation
6.You are therefore in debt to us for a Reformation

The list continues to climax in emotional intensity in stating its grievances. Bolton moves between the things that are outwith the remit of Parliament such as house to house teaching and the purity of families as churches and the things that may be accomplished by legislation namely: educational reform and 'justice and judgement'. The principle undergirding this combination is the necessity of personal piety to collective piety as well as perhaps another principle, to which it seems to give new meaning: that politics is the art of the impossible.

More than a gap in your thinking?

Thinking without God - Man's Natural Condition

Man's condition by nature is Godless. He acts as though there were no God, he thinks and plans as if there were no God. In both his heart and his life he says, by implication: "there is no God" (Psalm 14:1). God is not in all his thoughts. This is the heart of man by nature, "there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God" (Romans 3:11). Because God is not in all his thoughts "every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [is] only evil continually" (Genesis 6:5).
Man sins and yet does not fear the retribution of God, he despises the forbearance of God's mercy and shrugs his shoulders, so to speak: "he hath said in his heart, Thou wilt not require it" (Psalm 10:13).

It is not just that men forget God "days without number" (Jeremiah 2:32), fundamentally they do "not like to retain God in their knowledge" (Romans 1:28).We all know God but at the same time we do not know Him. He is the God who is "not far from every one of us" but He is also "the Unknown God" (Acts 17:27 & 23). Can it surprise us to read that the "thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the LORD" (Proverbs 15:26)? The Bible also states in Psalm 10:4 that: "The wicked, through the pride of his countenance will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts."

Perhaps you thought that only the very worst of the worst could be called "wicked": murderers, adulterers, extortioners and the like. The Bible, however, makes it clear that the wicked are God-rejecters and God-neglecters, they will not seek after God, He is not in all their thoughts. It is not a question of degree, that they are the worst, it is a question of nature. Do you have a heart that excludes God?

Godless Thinking in Daily Life

Intellectually speaking, those thoughts may be lofty, logical and admirable yet morally speaking because there is a proud, self-sufficiency underlying them they are tainted by the wickedness of a Godless heart. The Scriptures teach man that his highest reason for being on this earth and the deepest meaning of life itself is to glorify God in whatever we do, even in eating and drinking (1 Corinthians 10:31). Yet man refuses to serve God. Thus, we read that even "the plowing of the wicked is sin" (Proverbs 21:4), because it is done without reference to the God on whom he is dependent for the skill and success of such work. The plans and thoughts of man's heart are unceasing, and yet they have no provision for the sovereign will of God. Men ought to say, if they understood aright, "if the Lord will, we shall live, and do this or that" (James 4:15). They ought to commit their plans to the Lord, who alone can establish them, but God is not in all their thoughts.

Godless Thinking in Religion

It seems absurd that man can pursue his Godless thinking into religion but only a little reflection confirms that this is so. Man takes his own way, according to his own thoughts, indeed false religion is always focussed on the works of man as the ground of salvation rather than the work of Christ. "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Proverbs 14:12). Man will seek out his own inventions for his own glory, whether it be the blaspheming rationalistic theologian tearing at the Bible or the diligent churchgoer going about to establish his own righteousness. There are some on the other hand who will claim to be religious but they still believe that they can live their own life of disobedience (Deuteronomy 8:11, 29:19). Man will tailor things to himself; adding to what God has revealed and taking away from it at his own pleasure.

What man can pervert he will pervert. Even when he attends orthodox worship, man thinks he is doing God a favour and that there is merit in attendance. But he will not give the heart, his lips may express praise but his thoughts and heart are far from God (Proverbs 15:8, Mark 7:6). Men will also reason to themselves "I'm not as bad as others, God will accept me as I am", forgetting the holiness and justice of God. The reply that comes from God himself, however, is: "thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself: but I will reprove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes" (Psalm 50:21). God is not in all the thoughts of the wicked.

The Remedy for Godless thinking

The gospel call comes to the sinner in terms of a command to repent (literally, a change of mind), and a command to abandon his Godless thoughts. "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon" (Isaiah 55:7). Like the prodigal son, the sinner in conversion to God, comes "to himself" (Luke 15:17). There is a radical change, the thoughts are now taken up with God (Isaiah 26:8, Psalm 73:25). The believer "hates vain thoughts" but loves the Word of God (Psalm 119:113) which teaches him how to think aright. His mind becomes renewed and sanctified according to the truth. He will ask God to single out his offensive thoughts that they may be repented of (Psalm 139:23). Instead of an arrogant self-sufficiency and self-absorption he has the mind of Christ, an attitude of humility towards others (Philippians 2:5). Instead of God not being in all his thoughts, he seeks to glorify God in his body and in his spirit, which are God's by redemption through the perfect, finished work of the life-giving sacrifice of Christ.
Is this you?
If not, then "how long shall thy vain thoughts lodge within thee?" (Jeremiah 4:14).

The history of the Communion season

From Leigh Eric Schmidt's book 'Holy Fairs: Scottish Communions and American Revivals in the Early Modern Period' (1989) it appears that the history of the communion season begins very early in Scotland. Preparatory services, sitting at the table, tokens, self examination and fencing of the table were all always present from the beginning of the Reformation. Schmidt says that at least as early as the 1590s, Presbyerian resistance found partial expression in popular religious gatherings that were heralds of the later revivals and sacramental occasions. Thoughout the years 1587 to 1631 Robert bruce's preaching was popular. Bruce first officiated at the communion in Edinburgh in 1588, this resulted in 'elevated affections among the people, as had not been seen in that place before' and as Robert Wordrow described it an 'extraordinary effusion of the spirit'. Attendances were large from 1613 where Bruce was preaching at communions. Multitudes came from all corners to hear him. John Livingstone records: 'I had the advantage of the Acquaintance and Example of many gracious Christians, who used to resort to my Father's House, especially at Communion-occasions: such as Mr. Robert Bruce, and several other godly ministers'. From 1618 people withdrew from ministers who had accepted the articles of Perth and 'travelled abroade to seeke the Communion where it was minstred in puritie'. The thronged communions of 1620s were therefore testimony to the popular resistance to episcopacy. These involved outdoor preaching by a number of ministers to gatherings of many people where long vigils of prayer were held.

It was John Calvin, apparently, who first saw the usefulness of tokens for dealing with admission to the Lord's Table in decency and order. He wrote, "Each person should receive tokens of lead for those of his household who were instructed; and the strangers who might come, on giving testimony of their faith, should also receive tokens, and those who had none should not be admitted to the tables".

Calvin's proposal to use tokens was then adopted by the French reformed church. John Knox and other leaders of the reformed church in Scotland were in close contact with Calvin and the practice of using Communion Tokens came to Scotland.

Liberty of Conscience and Church Courts

Acts 24. 16. "And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God and toward men." Liberty of conscience is a vital subject but it has become a vexed point in modern times. Many people appear to have adopted what is basically the Baptist view of liberty of conscience. See for instance how the London Baptist Confession amends the Wesminster Confession.

http://www.proginosko.com/docs/wcf_lbcf.html#WCF20

WCF Chap 20 Section 2 says "God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it in matters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commandments out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience; and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also." This is often appealed to. Yet the Confession distinguishes between true liberty of conscience and pretended liberty of conscience. The latter seeks a liberty of conscience beyond the bounds of Scripture and which cannot be restrained by any lawful authority. Section 4 of chapter 20 deals with these biblical limits. This is the section removed by the London Baptist Confession. The appeal to liberty of conscience is not an uncomplicated one and does not automatically mean that Church courts do not have the right to restrain conscience in some ways.

How conscience may be compelled

George Gillespie stated: "If the thing be indifferent, I confess no man is to be compelled to it against his conscience, for this hath been the tyranny of Papists and Prelates, to compel men against their consciences to certain rites which themselves acknowledge to be merely indifferent, setting aside obedience to authority in such things, which (they say) is not indifferent. But if the word of God either directly or by necessary consequence, make the thing necessary, and such as we cannot leave undone without sin and breach of duty; if there be such an obligation from the word, then may a man be compelled to it, though against his conscience." (Wholesome Severity reconciled with Christian Liberty). This is the balance of the Confession - that there is liberty of conscience and yet a man may be compelled against his conscience by the powers which God has ordained. In Section 4 of chapter 20 the Confession goes on to qualify and limit what it says on liberty of conscience: "And because the powers which God hath ordained, and the liberty which Christ hath purchased, are not intended by God to destroy, but mutually to uphold and preserve one another, they who, upon pretense of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God. And, for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity (whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation), or to the power of godliness; or, such erroneous opinions or practices, as either in their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order which Christ hath established in the church, they may lawfully be called to account, and proceeded against, by the censures of the church."

Dr M'Crie notes that: "The design of section fourth is to guard against the abuse of the doctrine of liberty of conscience in reference to public authority. 'And because the powers which God hath ordained, and the liberty which Christ hath purchased, are not intended by God to destroy, but mutually to uphold and preserve one another, they who, upon pretence of Christian liberty, shall oppose any lawful power, or the lawful exercise of it, whether it be civil or ecclesiastical, resist the ordinance of God.' He who is the Lord of the conscience has also instituted the authorities in Church and State; and it would be in the highest degree absurd to suppose that he has planted in the breast of every individual a power to resist, counteract, and nullify his own ordinances. When public and private claims interfere and clash, the latter must give way to the former; and when any lawful authority is proceeding lawfully within its line of duty, it must be understood as possessing a rightful power to remove out of the way everything which necessarily obstructs its progress. The Confession proceeds, accordingly, to state: 'And for their publishing of such opinions, or maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature; or to the known principles of Christianity whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation, or to the power of godliness; or such erroneous opinions or practices as, either in their own nature or in the manner of publishing and maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order which Christ hath established in the Church; they may lawfully be called to account, and proceeded against by the censures of the Church, and by the power of the civil magistrate.' Individual liberty is regulated by the principles found in Scripture and is limited by the mutual duties believers owe to one another, and by concern for the welfare of all men.

Conscience - internal and external aspects

We must draw a distinction between conscience in its internal and external aspects. Alternatively we may speak of conscience in its invisible aspect (a man's mind, his thoughts and beliefs) and in its visible aspect (when these beliefs opinions are expressed publicly either verbally or through action). This is in relation to the authority of both Church and State. "We say the magistrate or his sword hath nothing to do with the elect and internal acts of the mind, of understanding, knowing, judging or believing, but only with the external acts of speaking, teaching, publishing dangerous and pernicious doctrines to the hurt and destruction of the souls of others" (Rutherford, A Free Disputation, p.62). No magistrate can coerce or force someone to believe something; they can only prevent them from promoting such opinions as are contrary to the truth by preaching, printing, spreading of dangerous opinions, schismatic, pernicious, and scandalous practices, or drawing factions among the people.

The same principle obtains for Church courts."...it is certain that human laws, as they come from men, and in respect of any force or authority which men can give them, have no power to bind the conscience. For the business of our consciences is not with men, but with the one God, says Calvin. [Instit. lib. 4, cap. 10, sect. 5.] Over our souls and consciences, no one except God has any right, says Tilen. [Synt., part. 2, disp. 32, thes. 4.] From Jerome's distinction, that a king is in charge of the unwilling, but a bishop the willing, Marcus Antonius de Dominis well concludes: to be in charge of the willing as a flock removes all legal authority and power to command and force, and signifies only power to guide where, viz., the subject is at liberty to comply and not to comply, such that the one who is in charge has nothing by which to compel to compliance one who does not want to comply. [De Rep. Eccl., lib. 5, cap. 2, n. 12.] This point he proves in that chapter at length, where he disputes both against temporal and spiritual coactive jurisdiction in the church." Gillespie, A Dispute Against the English Popish Ceremonies (Naphtali Press, 1993) I-4-3. pp. 12-13. Again Gillespie asserts the distinction between private opinions in the mind and public practices based on them. "I distinguish betwixt bare opinions or speculations, and scandalous or pernicious practices, as Mr. Burton doth in his Vindication of the Independent Churches, page 70. You must distinguish, saith he, betwixt mens consciences and their practices. The conscience simply considered in itself is for God the Lord of the conscience alone to judge, as before. But for a man's practices (of which alone man can take cognizance) if they be against any of God's commandments of the first or second Table; that appertains to the civil Magistrate to punish, who is for this cause called Custos utriusque Tabulæ, the keeper of both Tables: for this he citeth Rom. 13.3,4, and addeth: So as we see here what is the object of civil power, to wit, actions good or bad, not bare opinions, not thoughts, not conscience, but actions." (Wholesome Severity reconciled with Christian Liberty).

The Reformers also made this distinction, Heinrich Bullinger said "...while false faith doth lurk and lie hid within the heart, and infecteth none but the unbeliever, so long the unbelieving infidel cannot be punished: but if this false and forged faith, that so lay hid, do once break forth to blaspheme, to the open tearing of God and the infecting of his neighbours, then must that blasphemer and seducer be by and by plucked under, and kept from creeping to further annoyance."(Decade 2, Sermon 8, p. 363 in Parker Society edition).

What we are establishing is that the distinction between internal and external acts of conscience enunciated by those who framed the Westminster Confession (viz. Rutherford and Gillespie) is encapsulated in the Confession itself in 20:4. The powers ordained by God have authority to restrain the public acts of conscience in this way. So Rutherford says "Christ hath left the consciences of false teachers and heretics under ecclesiastical censures of admonitions, rebukes, excommunication" (A Free Disputation, p.235). Thus the appeal to liberty of conscience is not an uncomplicated one and does not automatically mean that Church courts do not have the right to restrain conscience in some ways. While Church courts cannot impose aspects of faith and worship by their sole authority they can apply that which is in God's Word. "The dogmatic power of a synod is not a power to make new articles of faith, nor new duties and parts of divine worship, but a power to apply and interpret those articles of faith and duties of worship which God hath set before us in his written word, and to declare the same to be inconsistent with emergent heresies and errors." Notice that Gillespie highlights what the WCF highlights in 20:2, that our consciences are left free from "the doctrines and commandments of men which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it in matters of faith or worship" (my italics). To compel a man to believe something by force is persecution but to compel a man to desist from creating division, disorder, damage stemming from erroneous views and opinions and through expressing or acting upon them publicly is within the lawful powers of the Church and State. The Westminster divines were well aware of what persecution was from the Laudian inquisition of the 1630's which sought to punish men for their beliefs whether expressed or not.

An objection to this which Gillespie acknowledges is someone who may say when compelled to obey "I am brought into a necessity of sinning, for if I obey not, I refuse a duty; if I obey, I do it against my conscience. Answer. This necessity is not absolute, but hypothetical, is not per se, but per accidens, so long as a man retaineth the error of his conscience, which he ought to cast away. You will say again, supposing that my conscience cannot be satisfied, nor made of another opinion than now I am of, whether in this case, and so long as it standeth thus with me, may authority compel me to obey against my conscience, and so to sin? or whether ought they not rather permit me not to obey, because my conscience forbiddeth me. Answer. The thing being necessary, as hath been said, it is pars tutior, yea, tutissima, that a man be compelled to it, though it be against his erring and ill informed conscience. I know so long as he hath such an erring conscience he cannot but sin in obeying. But the sin of not obeying is greater and heavier: for this is a sin in the fact itself; that a sin in the manner of doing only, being not done in faith: this is a sin of itself; that is a sin only by accident: this is a sin materially; that is a sin only interpretatively to him, because he thinks so: this is a sin for the substance; that a sin for the circumstance: this cannot be made to be no sin, for the nature of the duty cannot be altered; that may cease to be a sin, for the man's conscience may through God's mercy and blessing upon the means, be better informed. So that there can be no doubt but this is every way a greater sin than that, and consequently more to be avoided." (Wholesome Severity)

Liberty of conscience is not the same thing as the right of free speech, the Confession does not uphold the unlimited right of free speech. Its position preserves the right of private judgement and rejects persecution, but it is against the very God-given role of the Church and State to permit heresy and division to burn uncontrollably. This is the sense of Act II 1846 which declared the interpretation of the Confession at this point. The Church did not regard her Confession "as favouring intolerance or persecuting principles", nor did she consider "that her office-bearers, by subscribing it, profess any principles inconsistent with liberty of conscience and the right of private judgement". Hence also The Practice of the Free Church of Scotland (and the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland Manual of Practice), says: "That the Free Church maintains more emphatically that no authority in the hands of fallible men, such as the authority of the General Assembly, has any absolute rule over the consciences of believers, and that every one of her members may appeal to the Great Head of the Church against any such merely ministerial authority" (i.e. dissent with reasons) Chapter 4 Part 2.

Within the context of a Church court therefore, liberty of conscience is fully preserved when dissent is registered. The conscience is not compelled internally but able to be cleared. By dissenting with reasons a man keeps his conscience clear from the responsibility of what he does not approve of. He has no responsibility for the steps leading up to and the passing of a decision but not of obedience to it. Dissent is merely an expression of disagreement not of non-compliance. Non-compliance means resistance and disobedience. As the American Schism of 1741 highlighted, the issue is that of whether church courts have the authority and right to bind the consciences of dissenting members.

The nature of ordination vows

In the September 2007 Monthly Record of the Free Church of Scotland Rev. John Ross Inverness Greyfriars-Stratherrick reports on an induction and comments as follows on the vows put to the prospective minister.

'I wonder if it really is necessary to make an ordination a public display of the mysteries of the Claim, Declaration and Protest of 1842 or the Protest by Commissioners to the General Assembly of 1843, or a disavowal of all "Popish, Arian, Socinian, Arminian, Erastian and other doctrines doctrines, tenets and opinions whatsoever..." to say nothing of placing the candidate under reminder of the strictures of Act V, 1932. This all bemused most of the congregation and produced not a few a few stifled sniggers and embarrassed looks by those conscious of the presence of the local Catholic priest, whose kindly presence helped welcome Ricky and Melissa to the community. Might not these arcane memories of 'old unhappy, far off things and battles long ago' be better dealt with by the Presbytery in private prior to ordination? Surely induction questions, like those put to a bride and groom at a marriage, ought to be short, serious, and above all, obviously relevant, not detracting from the essentially joyous nature of the occasion by turning it into a public justification of the continued separate existence of the Free Church of Scotland'.

These comments fail to understand the true nature of the vows themselves as well as the their content. Ordination vows must be public, before the congregation who are receiving this minister or other office-bearer. It matters what the minister believes and is prepared to assert, maintain and defend. It matters what constitutes purity of worship. The climate of indifference to these solemn vows within the Free Church at present is truly alarming when we consider the true nature of such vows.

The solemn promises and declarations made at ordination - commonly called ordination vows- are in nature both an oath made in relation to man and vows taken with respect to God. (the Establishment in the Act for Settling the Quiet and Peace of the Church 1693 speak of the ordination vow as "the oath of allegiance"). Thus the whole of chapter 22 of the WCF is applicable. In relation to oaths the Confession says:
"WHOSOEVER takes an oath, ought duly to consider the weightiness of so solemn an act, and therein to avouch nothing but what he is fully persuaded is the truth. Neither may any man bind himself by oath to anything but what is good and just, and what he believes so to be, and what he is able and resolved to perform. Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching anything that is good and just, being imposed by lawful authority.

An oath is to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words, without equivocation or mental reservation. It cannot oblige to sin; but in anything not sinful, being taken, it binds to performance, although to a man's own hurt; nor is it to be violated, although made to heretics or infidels."

This makes it clear that an oath is to be taken clearly without mental reservation or interpretation different from those who impose it because that involves the individual in the sin of perjury. An oath also binds to performance although it is to one's hurt and even though it is made to those who are heretics or infidels - we cannot violate it (Ezek. 17:16, 18, 19; Josh. 9:18, 19; II Sam. 21:1), provided the object of the oath is not sinful. An oath is also to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words, without equivocation or mental reservation. Thus there is to be no reinterpretation - the oath is to be understood in its prima facie sense.

"A vow is of the like nature with a promissory oath, and ought to be made with the like religious care, and to be performed with the like faithfulness." As Robert Shaw puts it, "the oath retains its high place among the solemnities of religion".
The fulfilment of vows is repeatedly enjoined in Scripture. "If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth." Numbers 30:2 "When thou shalt vow a vow unto the LORD thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the LORD thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee." (Deuteronomy 23:2) "He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not." (Psalm 15:4) "...yea, they shall vow a vow unto the LORD, and perform it." (Isaiah 19:21) "When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay" (Eccl 5:4-5). "Vow, and pay unto the LORD your God:" (Psalm 76:11). "It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy, and after vows to make enquiry." (Proverbs 20:25).

It is a solemn thing therefore to break ordination vows - it is to violate the third commandment. As James Begg put it: "To allege that they may afterwards set these avowals at defiance, and still retain their offices, is to outrage morality and overflow the liberty of the Church and her congregations".

James Ussher and the Incarnation

I understand that the complete Works of Ussher are now online at Google http://www.google.co.uk/books?id=l8YOAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=ussher

A striking prediction made by Ussher was posted here recently with some details of his life. http://the-holdfast.blogspot.com/2007/11/church-of-god-deserted-and-reduced.html

More books written by Ussher have been republished lately http://www.solid-ground-books.com/books_UssherTitles.asp.

Crawford Gribben has also written an excellent popular biography.

http://www.evangelicalpress.org/books/The%20Irish%20Puritans.htm

Ussher wrote a study of the person and work of Christ especially his incarnation. This is a remarkable piece of spiritual and theological insight written in a meditative spirit and one of my favourite pieces of writing. Read it here:

http://www.the-highway.com/Christ_Ussher.html

Here are a few extracts from Ussher's work on the incarnation:
"The Nature assumed, is the seed of Abraham, Heb. 2:16, the seed of David, Rom. 1:3. the seed of the Woman, Gen. 3:15, the WORD, the second person of the Trinity, being made FLESH, that is to say, Gods owne Son being made of a Woman, and so becomming truely and really the fruit of her wombe. Neither did hee take the substance of our nature onely, but all the properties also and the qualities thereof: so as it might be said of him, as it was of Elias and the Apostles; that hee was a man subject to like passions as wee are. Yea he subjected himself in the dayes of his flesh to the same weaknesse which we find in our owne fraile nature, and was compassed with like infirmities; and in a word, in all things was made like unto his brethren, sin onely excepted. Wherein yet we must consider, that as he took upon him, not an humane Person, but an humane Nature: so it was not requisite he should take upon him any Personall infirmities, such as are, madnesse, blindnesse, lamenesse, and particular kindes of diseases, which are incident to some onely and not to all men in generall; but those alone which doe accompany the whole nature of mankinde, such as are hungring, thirsting, weannesse, griefe, paine, and mortality."

When Moses beheld the bush burning with fire, and yet no whit consumed, he wondred at the sight, and said; I will now turne aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. But when God thereupon called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Draw not nigh hither, and told him who he was; Moses trembled, hid his face, and durst not behold God. Yet although, being thus warned, we dare not draw so nigh; what doth hinder but we may stand aloofe off, and wonder at this great sight? Our God is a consuming fire; saith the Apostle: and a question we finde propounded in the Prophet. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who amongst us shall dwell with the everlasting burnings? Moses was not like other Prophets, but God spake unto him face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend: and yet for all that, when he besought the Lord that hee would shew him his glory; he received this answer, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. Abraham before him, though a speciall friend of God, and the father of the faithfull, the children of God; yet held it a great matter that hee should take upon him so much as to speak unto God, being but dust and ashes. Yea, the very Angels themselves (which are greater in power and might) are fame to cover their faces, when they stand before him; as not being able to behold the brightnesse of his glory.

"With what astonishment then may we behold our dust and ashes assumed into the undivided unity of Gods owne Person; and admitted to dwell here, as an inmate, under the same roofe? and yet in the midst of those everlasting burnings, the bush to remaine unconsumed, and to continue fresh and green for evermore. Yea, how should not wee with Abraham rejoyce to see this day, wherein not onely our nature in the person of our Lord Jesus is found to dwell for ever in those everlasting burnings; but, in and by him, our owne persons also are brought so nigh thereunto, that God doth set his Sanctuary and Tabernacle among us, and dwell with us; and (which is much more) maketh us our selves to be the house and the habitation wherein hee is pleased to dwell by his Spirit, according to that of the Apostle: Ye are the temple of the living God, as God hath said; I will dwell in them and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. and that most admirable prayer, which our Saviour himselfe made unto his Father in our behalfe. I pray not for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word: that they all may be one, as thou. Father art in me, & I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may beleeve that thou hast sent me. I in them, and thou in me, that they may bee made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou host sent me, and host loved them as thou host loved me."