WHY JOHNNY CAN'T PREACH: On Sermonic Unity

I picked up Dr. T. David Gordon's new book Why Johnny Can't Preach: The Media Have Shaped the Messengers a few weeks ago. I just started it tonight.

I was immediately struck by Dr. Gordon's first critique: "I will argue that few sermons have unity and that the lack of unity is a serious, if not fatal, defect in a sermon" (13-14). I agree!

I don't mean to pretend to be a great preacher. I am still very young and inexperienced. I need time to season, by God's grace. Nonetheless, in my own experience, both in preaching the Word and hearing the Word preached, Dr. Gordon's first critique rings true. The ONE thing that frustrates me more than anything else about poorly constructed sermons (many of which I've preached!) is their lack of unity. The unity of a sermon is like the foundation of a building, without it nothing of significance can be constructed. Looking back I believe this is the most important insight in my development as a preacher over the last year.

While interning at PCPC I had the wonderful opportunity to preach many Wednesday evening worship services. The service is only 30 minutes long and includes the Supper, so the sermon has to be short (10-15 minutes max). Preparing these shorter sermons forced me to focus, focus, focus on one key point. I learned to begin my sermon preparation by deriving a SPECIFIC thesis from the biblical text.

Before outlining, before writing, before anything (besides understanding the context), I derive a thesis statement that I believe is the central teaching of the text. Then, and only then, do I begin to construct the sermon, being very disciplined along the way to ONLY SAY what serves the thesis, nothing more nothing less. This requires a willingness to delete a lot of text in the process. Just as good writing is rewriting, good sermon construction is reconstruction. Sometimes you have to tear down in order to build up.

Along the way I will often realize that the thesis needs to be tweaked a bit. There is a sort of dialogue that develops as the sermon is born, between it and the thesis. Both may change, but the thesis remains the fundamental unifying element.

I continue this practice today. Regardless of sermon length, I begin by deriving a thesis from the text. This has totally revolutionized my sermon preparation.

12 QUESTIONS THAT HAVE SHAPED CHURCH HISTORY (11): What is true freedom? (Part 4)

Continuing from Part 3 . . .

Edwards continues by answering the Arminian objection that Calvinian necessity renders means and endeavors vain, making men mere machines. He begins by demonstrating the fact that the concept of "means" and "ends" presupposes a cause and effect relationship or "connection" between antecedent and consequent events. In other words, without Calvinian necessity there is no basis for endeavoring to use means in order to any end. It is the Arminian scheme of self-determination which renders means and endeavors vain.

So that the objection we are upon, don't lie against the doctrine of the necessity of events by a certainty of connection and consequence: on the contrary, it is truly forcible against the Arminian doctrine of contingence and self-determination; which is inconsistent with such a connection. If there be no connection between those events wherein virtue and vice consist, and anything antecedent; then there is no connection between these events and any means or endeavors used in order to them: and if so, then those means must be in vain. The less there is of connection between foregoing things and following ones, so much the less there is between means and end, endeavors and success; and in the same proportion are means and endeavors ineffectual and in vain (367).

Furthermore, as Edwards cleverly demonstrates, the Arminian inference (i.e. that means are useless given Calvinian necessity) is self-referentially incoherent. One cannot infer anything from inconsistency.

No person can draw such an inference from this doctrine, and come to such a conclusion, without contradicting himself, and going counter to the very principles he pretends to act upon: for he comes to a conclusion, and takes a course, in order to an end, even his ease, or the saving himself from trouble; he seeks something future, and uses means in order to a future thing, even in his drawing up that conclusion, that he will seek nothing, and use no means in order to anything future; he seeks his future ease, and the benefit and comfort of indolence. If prior necessity that determines all things, makes vain all actions or conclusions of ours, in order to anything future; then it makes vain all conclusions and conduct of ours, in order to our future ease (369).

Therefore, far from making men into machines, Calvinian necessity provides the framework from which men can be men. It is the basis of all reasonable understanding and choice. The Arminian doctrine of self-determination is what strips men of their dignity, leaving them in an even worse position than machines. As Edwards says:

If their scheme makes any other difference than this, between men and machines, it is for the worse: it is so far from supposing men to have a dignity and privilege above machines, that it makes the manner of their being determined still more unhappy. Whereas machines are guided by an understanding cause, by the skillful hand of the workman or owner; the will of man is left to the guidance of nothing, but absolute blind contingence (371).

N.B. The Arminian objection that Calvinian necessity makes means and endeavors useless is itself useless, because the concept of means requires a cause-effect relationship between antecedent and consequent events. Moreover, it is the Arminian doctrine of self-determination (i.e. autonomy) which renders all means and endeavors useless, because it undermines the cause-effect relationship between antecedent and consequent events.

Edwards moves on to answer the ad hominem argument that his doctrine is wrong because it was held by the ancient Sotics and Thomas Hobbes. First, he defends himself by distinguishing his doctrine (i.e. Christian determinism) from theirs (i.e. fatalism). Christian determinism is not Stoical/Hobbesian fatalism because it includes a meaningful doctrine of free will and has "an intelligent wise agent, that presides, not as the soul of the world, but as the sovereign Lord of the universe, governing all things by proper will, choice and design" (374). Second, he questions the legitimacy of ad hominem arguments in general writing:

If truth is so defiled because it is spoken by the mouth, or written by the pen of some ill-minded mischievous man, that it must never be received, we shall never know when we hold any of the most precious and evident truths by a sure tenure. And if Mr. Hobbes has made a bad use of this truth, that is to be lamented: but the truth is not to be thought worthy of rejection on that account. 'Tis common for the corruptions of the hearts of evil men, to abuse the best things to vile purposes (374).

N.B. Christian determinism is not Stoical fatalism because it includes a meaningful doctrine of free will and a doctrine of a personal God. Also, ad hominem arguments are not always good arguments given total depravity.

Next Edwards addresses the objection that if self-determination is fundamentally inconsistent and, therefore, all intelligent beings must will of necessity, then God must will of necessity, which vitiates his freedom. Edwards begins his answer by reminding himself and his readers that understanding the inner workings of our own souls, much less God's, is difficult. Nonetheless, that God only chooses according to the perfections of his character is itself a perfection of his character that in no way vitiates his freedom. Moral freedom is not based on the multiplicity of one's options. It is based on the persistence of inclination to choose the right option. Indeed with respect to God, "'Tis no disadvantage or honor to a being, necessarily to act in the most excellent and happy manner, from the necessary perfection of his own nature" (377). Edwards also notes, "It no more argues any dependence of God's will, that his supremely wise volition is necessary, than it argues a dependence of his being, that his existence is necessary" (381).

N.B. Because God is persistently inclined to choose according to his perfections (i.e. righteousness), he is therefore morally free.

MICHAEL HORTON ON CTC

Dr. Michael Horton recently sat down with the guys at Christ the Center to discuss his new book Christless Christianity.

ATTEMPTED AXIOM: On Autonomy

People who are impressed with themselves will not be impressed with Christ except insofar as he serves their own personal agendas.

God save me from the siren song of autonomy!

DR. MICHAEL HORTON'S CHRISTLESS CHRISTIANITY

After my ordination service back in March I sat down with my former supervising pastor from Park Cities Presbyterian Church. As we talked he said he thought the Rev. Dr. Michael Horton was THE premier Reformed systematic theologian in America today. I'd read Horton's 2006 God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology my last semester at Dallas Seminary (not because it was assigned), and it was excellent. But THE premier Reformed theologian? I was skeptical of such an accolade. Nonetheless, my former pastor is very thoughtful and even-keeled. He doesn't often sail the rough seas of hyperbole. In fact, I can't recall him ever overstating a case of any sort to me. So when he said this, I took notice.

After finishing Dr. Horton's 2008 book Christless Christianity: The Alternative Gospel of the American Church, I am tending to agree with my pastor. Horton is certainly a top-shelf Reformed theologian. I don't think it is an overstatement to say his book is the Babylonian Captivity of our day, only, rather than being captive to a corrupt magisterium, the church is captive to a pervasive cult of individualism and enthusiasm that could be defined theologically as a mixture of Pelagianism and Gnosticism.

Horton calls the prevalent American religion moralistic, therapeutic deism. It is moralistic in its belief that people are basically good and simply need good advice on how to save themselves. It is therapeutic in its diagnosis of humanity's problem as feelings of guilt and the unnecessary burden of living according to rules. God exists primarily for our happiness. It is deistic in its restriction of God's involvement in the world. God has set certain natural patterns in place for our self-realization, but he is not personally offended by our sin. In this religion the distinction between law and gospel is blurred so that no one is confronted with the gravity of their sin and therefore no one is amazed with the wonder of the gospel. People who are impressed with themselves will not be impressed with Christ except insofar as he serves their own personal agendas.

Horton calls the church to return to the ministry of Christ through the ordinary means of grace, Word and sacrament. The church needs to be the church, only then will people be transformed by the gospel of her Head. Here are a few choice morsels:

The Good News concerning Christ is not a stepping-stone to something greater and more relevant. Whether we realize it or not, there is nothing in the universe more relevant to us as guilty image-bearers of God than the news that he has found a way to be "just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Rom. 3:26) (22).

It is not heresy as much as silliness that is killing us softly. God is not denied but trivialized--used for our life programs rather than received, worshiped, and enjoyed (24).

Today's self is restlessly bent on reinvention mainly in order to get rid of the nagging sense of guilt that creates tremendous anxiety despite its unknown origins (35).

People need to see--for their own good--that self-realization, self-fulfillment, and self-help are all contemporary twists on an old heresy, which Paul identified as works-righteousness (40).

Gospel doesn't come naturally. It comes as Jesus (48).

If Christianity is about public truth delivered through an external word, then ministry and evangelism require educated leaders who can expound and apply that truth for the benefit of those under their care. By contrast, if Christianity is reduced to personal experience, then its leadership will consist of the most successful entrepreneurs and managers of extraordinary staged events (51-52).

Liberals and revivalists both de-emphasize God's transcendence and tend to see God's Word as something that wells up within a person rather than as something that comes to a person from outside (58).

Start with Christ (that is, the gospel) and you get sanctification in the bargain; begin with Christ and move on to something else, and you lose both (62).

[Joel] Osteen's message is also a good example of the inability of Boomers to mourn in the face of God's judgment or dance under the liberating news of God's saving mercy. In other words, all gravity is lost--both the gravity of our problem and of God's amazing grace. According to this message, we are not helpless sinners--the ungodly--who need a one-sided divine rescue. (Americans, but especially we Boomers, don't take bad news well.) Rather, we are good people who just need a little instruction and motivation (71).

This gospel of submission, commitment, decision, and victorious living is not good news about what God has achieved but a demand to save ourselves with God's help. Besides the fact that Scripture never refers to the gospel as having a personal relationship with Jesus nor defines faith as a decision to ask Jesus to come into our heart, this concept of salvation fails to realize that everyone has a personal relationship with God already: either as a condemned criminal standing before a righteous judge or as a justified coheir with Christ and adopted child of the Father (74).

The central message of Christianity is not a worldview, a way of life, or a program for personal and societal change; it is a gospel. From the Greek word for "good news," typically used in the context of announcing a military victory, the gospel is the report of an appointed messenger who arrives from the battlefield. That is why the New Testament refers to the offices of apostle (official representative), preacher, and evangelist, describing ministers as heralds, ambassadors, and witnesses. Their job is to get the story right and then report it, ensuring that the message is delivered by word (preaching) and deed (sacrament). And the result is a church, an embassy of the Triune God in the midst of this passing evil age, with the whole people of God giving witness to God's mighty acts of redemption (105).

That my life is not the gospel is good news both for me and for my neighbors. Because Christ is the Good News, Christians as well as non-Christians can be saved after all (118).

The more we talk about Christ as the Bible's unfolding mystery and less about our own transformation, the more likely we are actually to be transformed rather than either self-righteous or despairing (118).

We need to be evangelized every week (125).

There are really only two religions in the world: a religion of human striving to ascend to God through pious works, feelings, attitudes, and experiences and the Good News of God's merciful descent to us in his Son. The religions, philosophies, ideologies, and spiritualities of the world only differ on the details. Whether we are talking about the Dalai Lama or Dr. Phil, Islam or Oprah, liberals or conservatives, the most intuitive conviction is that we are good people who need good advice, not helpless sinners who need the Good News (128).

Jesus's example is not good news but a terrifying burden unless he is first of all one who saves me from my inability to follow it (136).

The church exists in order to change the subject from us and our deeds to God and his deeds of salvation, from our various missions to save the world to Christ's mission that has already accomplished redemption. He sends us into the world, to be sure, but not to save it. Rather, he sends us into the world to witness to Christ as the only Savior and to love and serve our neighbor in our secular vocations. Evil lies not outside us but inside; it is salvation that comes from outside ourselves (141).

What a relief it is when we are liberated from thinking that we are called to be the gospel! Now we can simply receive it and draw upon it daily for the confidence to look up to God in faith and out to our neighbor in love (156).

People are looking for authenticity, but this includes acknowledgment of our sin and self-righteousness and our need for Christ. What could be less authentic and honest than assuming that our lives can preach better than the gospel (157)?

This characteristically American approach to religion, in which the direct relationship of the soul to God generates an almost romantic encounter with the sacred, makes inner experience the measure of spiritual genuineness. Instead of being concerned that our spiritual leaders faithfully interpret Scripture and are sent by Christ through the official ordination of his church, we are more concerned that they exude vulnerability, authenticity, and the familiar spontaneity that tells us that they have a personal relationship with Jesus. Everything perceived as external to the self--the church, the gospel, the Word and sacraments, the world, and even God--must either be marginalized or, in more radical versions, rejected as that which would alienate the soul from its immediacy to the divine (169).

The one unassailable authority in the American religion is the self's inner experience. . . . No longer constrained by creeds and confessions, sermons and catechism, baptism and Eucharist in the covenant assembly, the romantic self aspires to a unique and spontaneous experience (170).

While Luther, Calvin, and their heirs sought to reform the church, the more radical Protestant movements have sought an immediate, inner gnosis. Where the reformers pointed to the external ministry of the church, centering on Word and sacrament, as the place where God promised to meet his people, enthusiasm (the Reformers' term for radical Protestant groups) was suspicious of everything external (174).

The evangel defines evangelism; the content determines the methods of delivery; the marks of the church (preaching and sacrament) define its mission (evangelizing, baptizing, teaching, and communing) (196).

Neglecting a covenant ecclesiology, evangelicalism exhibits a zeal for mission unhinged from the marks of the church. After all, if the gospel is about our experience and activity in personal and social transformation rather than how we can be regular recipients of God's gifts, the means of grace are beside the point. What we really need are means of commitment and action. However, this "missional" activism unhinged from the methods God has prescribed has not only failed to lead to an upswing in professions of faith among "all who were far off," but has led to burnout, instability, and dropout among believers and their children (197).

The primary theater for the service of the people is the world rather than service ministries in the church. Luther nicely captures the point I'm making here by saying, "God does not need your good works; your neighbor does" (198).

Where Christ is not King, he is neither Prophet nor Priest. Christ rules his church--instituting its structure and methods--precisely so that he can effectively deliver his good gifts to the world (205).

Without the marks, the mission is blind; without the mission, the marks are dead (205).

Calling us to accomplish great things for God is part of the hype that constantly burns out millions of professing Christians. . . . If we think the main mission of the church is to improve life in Adam and add a little moral strength to this fading evil age, we have not yet understood the radical condition for which Christ is such a radical solution (211).

Ministers are simply God's waiters at the feast (219).

There is a direct correlation . . . between a theology of self-salvation and the church chiefly as a center of human rather than divine activism. No longer do we need formally trained ministers of the Word but charismatic and entrepreneurial leaders who can inspire activistic movements (220).

Once your faith is focused on what happens inside you instead of what happened outside you in history, it is easy to say that what you really need are good resources for private experience and moral improvement rather than any external Word (223).

[Charles] Finney's approach itself represents a "practical atheism" according to which the success of Christian mission depends on human technique, style, planning, and charisma "without having to surrender ourselves and our words to the presnece and work of the Word and Spirit." It is no wonder that the expectation of the Spirit's activity shifted from the church to the parachurch, from the ordinary means of grace to the extraordinary methods of inducing conversions, as Finney understood it (225).

An authorized gospel comes with an authorized ministry. It is ministers of God's Word--not people who like to carve out their own niches, share their own experiences, and determine their own emphases--whom God qualifies by training, testing, and approving and who bring us God's gifts in his name. Our goal is not to leave our own legacy but to dole out Christ's inheritance (235).

We need to recover that sense so pervasive in other periods: namely, that even Christians do not know what they really need or even want and that attending to their immediate felt needs may muffle the only proclamation that can actually satisfy real needs (240).

A church that is deeply aware of its misery and nakedness before a holy God will cling tenaciously to an all-sufficient Savior, while one that is self-confident and relatively unaware of its inherent sinfulness will reach for religion and morality whenever it seems convenient (243).

All that is necessary for us to become unwitting Pelagians is less preaching and teaching of the law and the gospel--downplaying the means of grace (Word and sacrament) in favor of our means of transforming ourselves and our world (244).

Americans, as we have already seen, have a fairly pronounced anti-intellectual streak. We are doers, not believers; pragmatists, not thinkers. Impatient with tedious study and reflection, we would rather be overcoming obstacles, conquering nature, and putting it to use more than understanding and enjoying it (245).

When we examine the ecumenical creeds and the confessions and catechisms of the Reformation traditions, one thing is clear: Christ is central, the Alpha and Omega of faith and practice. Teaching the faith to each generation through such standards, however, has become increasingly suspect of formalism and intellectualism in a culture that prizes autonomy and self-referential expression. . . . Accross our entire cultural landscape, the only law left seems to be "keep it light." (245-46).

Where did we ever get the idea that the best way to ensure the relevance of Christian faith and practice is to accommodate in this present age the discourse and practices of the age to come? How could we ever have imagined that the best way to win the world to Christ is to surrender the only legitimate tools that God has given for the breakthrough of Christ's kingdom in the very heart of this world's history of vanity (248)?

Outsiders become insiders through the Word and Spirit. Not by eliminating the strangeness that makes them outsiders, but by prayerfully anticipating God's powerful work through the strange message and methods he has appointed, we see the mission succeed through the marks of preaching and sacrament (252).

What is called for in these days, as in any other time, is a church that is a genuine covenant community defined by the gospel rather than a service provider defined by laws of the market, political ideologies, ethnic distnictives, or other alternatives to the catholic community the father is creating by his Spirit in his Son. For this, we need nothing less than a new creation, where the only demographic that matters is in Christ. When our churches are once again located there, both the converted and those whom we have yet to reach will become recipients of grace who can, in turn, love and serve their neighbors in the world. When that happens, we too should expect to hear fresh reports, even in America, that "the word of God spread, and the number of disciples multiplied greatly" (Acts 6:7 NKJV) (256-57).

The church in America will have to learn what it means to mourn before it can dance. Sticking to the story, fixing our eyes on Christ--even if it means distracting us from what we have diagnosed as our real issues--is the kindest thing a pastor can do for a congregation, the most precious gift we can receive and pass along to our neighbors, and the most relevant mission on earth. In the words of Dorothy Sayers, "It is the dogma that is the drama--not beautiful phrases, not comforting sentiments, nor vague aspirations of loving-kindness and moral uplift, nor the promise of something nice after death--but the terrifying assertion that the same God who made the world lived in the world and passed through the grave and gate of death. Show that to the heathen, and they may not believe it; but at least they may realize that here is something that one might be glad to believe" (259).

CONTRIBUTING AT THE CONVENTICLE

I've subscribe to The Conventicle for a while now. Just last week I was invited to contribute. The Conventicle is a historical theology blog focused on the study of the Puritans. From the About page:

con⋅ven⋅ti⋅cle (kənˈvɛntɪkəl), n.

1. a secret or unauthorized meeting, esp. for religious worship, as those held by Protestant dissenters in England in the 16th and 17th centuries
2. a place of meeting or assembly, esp. a Nonconformist meeting house
3. (obsolete) a meeting or assembly

Back in 2005, the original Conventicle was formed as a multi-user blog by a group of post-graduate students researching various aspects of puritanism at the University of Edinburgh’s College of Divinity, in Scotland.

For about two years now, we’ve been talking about expanding our site to make room for a more accessible and more comprehensive repository of information on puritanism. That aspiration has finally become a reality.

In addition to a standard web-blog, The Conventicle now also features a database or wiki — what we call the PurWiki — which will hold an ever-expanding store of information on puritanism: biographical data on puritan and non-puritan figures, historical time-lines, book reviews, links to other puritan sites, descriptions of important places and events, and much more.

If you aren't already subscribed to The Conventicle I encourage you to check it out. I plan to post over there fairly regularly.

ATTEMPTED AXIOM: On Love and Knowledge

I am feeling hyper-axiomatic today. Must've gotten plenty of quality sleep last night. :-) Here's a humble attempt:

While love surpasses knowledge, the unknown is by definition unloved.

Or,

While love surpasses knowledge, you cannot love what you do not know.

ATTEMPTED AXIOM: On the Simplicity of God

All theories are consistent if we allow inconsistency in God.

In other words,

The simplicity of God is the basis of reason.

Or,

God's simplicity is reason's basis.

ATTEMPTED AXIOM: On the Preacher's Work

The preacher's work is not to change his hearers, that is something only God can do; the preacher's work is to proclaim the revelation of God's glory in his Word.

Or,

God's work is to change people; the preachers work is to proclaim God.

Or,

God changes people through the proclamation of his unchangeableness.

ATTEMPTED AXIOM: On the Consequence of Teaching

Teaching that doctrine is inconsequential is self-referentially incoherent.

In other words,

The moment a teacher teaches that doctrine doesn't matter he must either stop teaching or contradict himself.

In other words,

A basis of teaching is the belief that it matters.

MONDAY EDWARDS EXCERPT: What is the glory of God?

Last night I had the wonderful privilege of discussing the doctrine of election with my junior high guys discipleship group. During our discussion the issue of why God created the world came up. I explained that, given choice as inclination, there could be only two reasons for God to create: either (1) God lacked something or (2) It is God's nature to overflow in the super-abundance of who he is, displaying and communicating himself.

Of course, the first reason is out because it undermines the doctrine of divine aseity (self-sufficiency). A self-sufficient God cannot lack. The second reason, however, is plausible, and, a strong case can be made, biblical. This was the teaching of Jonathan Edwards. As Craig Biehl explains in his wonderful new book The Infinite Merit of Christ: The Glory of Christ's Obedience in the Theology of Jonathan Edwards, Edwards taught that "God's glory is defined as the flowing forth of His excellence and happiness, while His ultimate purpose in all things concerns His glory in the display and communication of His excellence and happiness to His creatures" (26).

As Edwards writes:

God communicates himself to the understanding of the creature, in giving him the knowledge of his glory; and to the will of the creature, in giving him holiness, consisting primarily in the love of God: and in giving the creature happiness, chiefly consisting in joy in God. These are the sum of that emanation of divine fulness called in Scripture, "the glory of God" (quoted by Biehl on p. 33 from "The End for Which God Created the World" published in the Yale Edition of his Works 8:529)

And THIS is the foundation of His creatures' happiness.

God in seeking his glory, therein seeks the good of his creature: because the emanation of his glory (which he seeks and delights in, as he delights in himself and his own eternal glory) implies the communicated excellency and happiness of his creature. And that in communicating his fullness for them, he does it for himself: because their good, which he seeks, is so much in union and communion with himself. God is their good. Their excellency and happiness is nothing but the emanation and expression of God's glory: God in seeking their glory and happiness, seeks himself: and in seeking himself, i.e. himself diffused and expressed (which he delights in, as he delights in his own beauty and fullness), he seeks their glory and happiness (quoted by Biehl on p. 35 from "The End for Which God Created the World" published in the Yale Edition of his Works 8:459).

In other words as Biehl writes, "God delights in His creatures insofar as they display His own holiness and happiness communicated to them" (36). The happiness of His creatures is God's happiness communicated to them. Therefore, God's happiness in himself and the happiness of the creature are one purpose, goal, or end. God accomplishes this end through the person and work of Jesus Christ. What a mighty God we serve!

NEW SERMON AUDIO AND VIDEO: "The Chief Exercise of Faith"

This Sunday evening I had the privilege of preaching during our worship service at Twin Oaks Presbyterian Church. Here's the sermon info:

Title: "The Chief Exercise of Faith"
Text: 1 John 5:13-15
Thesis: Confidence in God is chiefly expressed as confidence toward God, which is prayer.
Themes: Prayer, Faith, Worship, Regulative Principle

You can access the audio and video files online by clicking the link above or in the sidebar under My Sermon Audios.

LIG DUNCAN: On Systematic Theology

From Nick Batzig.

THE PURITANS ON THE LORD'S SUPPER

Yesterday I read The Puritans on the Lord's Supper (185 pg.), published in 1997 by Ligonier Ministry's Soli Deo Gloria Publications, which was recently acquired by Reformation Heritage Books. It is very good. Here's the table of contents:

1. The Passover: Its Significance, and the Analogy between It and Christ our Passover, Richard Vines
2. The Lord's Supper Is a Federal Ordinance: Impying a Covenant Transaction between God and Us, and Supposing a Renewal of Solemn Vows to be the Lord's, Edmund Calamy
3. The Express Renewal of Our Christian Vows: Every Time We Come to the Holy Communion, and Directions about the Right Management of It, Edmund Calamy
4. It Is Every Christian's Indispensable Duty to Partake of the Lord's Supper, William Wadsworth
5. Self-Examination, Joseph Alleine
6. The Fruit and Benefit of Worthy Receiving, Richard Vines
7. The Mystery of the Lord's Supper, Thomas Watson

I have one criticism of the book. Other than brief bio-sketches on the front flap, it has no introduction(s) to aid in understanding the context in which these writings were produced. Nonetheless, the writings exemplify the rich biblical-theological analysis and synthesis of the Puritans. This is a wonderful introduction to some of the best Puritan pastor-theologians on the doctrine of the Supper.

Particularly striking was Thomas Watson's work "The Mystery of the Lord's Supper." This was my first exposure to Watson. He was clearly a brilliant theologian and a wordsmith of the highest calibre. Next on my list will be his work on the Shorter Catechism entitled A Body of Divinity (The first book published by The Banner of Truth Trust). Here are a few quotes from Watson's "The Mystery of the Lord's Supper" (Don't miss the bold ones):

"The celebration of the Lord's Supper," said Chrysostom, "is the commemoration of the greatest blessing that ever the world enjoyed." A sacrament is a visible sermon. And herein the sacrament excels the Word preached. The Word is a trumpet to proclaim Christ. The sacrament is a glass to represent Him (127).

The Word is for the engrafting; the sacraments are for the confirming of faith. The Word brings us to Christ; the sacrament builds us up in Him. The Word is the font where we are baptized with the Holy Ghost; the sacrament is the table where we are fed and cherished (127-28).

The sacrament is both an antidote against fear and a restorative to faith (129).

Christ's setting the elements apart from common bread and wine showed that He is not for common persons to feed upon. They are to be divinely purified who touch these holy things of God. They must be outwardly separated from the world and inwardly sanctified by the Spirit (130).

QUESTION. But how could Christ suffer, being God? The Godhead is impassible.
ANSWER. Christ suffered only in the human nature, not the divine. . . . When Christ was in the human nature, He was in the divine nature triumphing. . . .
QUESTION. If Christ suffered in His human nature only, how could His suffering satisfy for sin?
ANSWER. By reason of the hypostatic union, the human nature being unied to the divine. The human nature suffered; the divine nature satisfied. Christ's Godhead gave both majesty and efficacy to His sufferings. Christ was Sacrifice, Priest, and Altar. He was Sacrifice, as He was man; Priest, as He was God and man; Altar, as He was God. It is the property of the altar to sanctify the thing offered on it (Matthew 23:19). So the altar of Christ's divine nature sanctified the sacrifice of His death and made it meritorious (132-33).

It was more for Christ to suffer one hour than for us to have suffered forever (133).

Sin is a peace-breaker (145).

Sin is the birthplace of our sorrows and the grave of our comforts (145).

Do we count that sin light which made Christ's soul heavy unto death (Mark 14:34)? Can that be our joy which made the Lord Jesus a Man of sorrows (Isaiah 53:3)? Did he cry out, "My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" And shall not those sins be forsaken by us which made Christ Himself forsaken (145)?

The body of Christ broken is enough to break the most flinty heart (146).

Let us pray that, as Christ was crucifixus, so He may be cordi-fixus. That is, as He was fastened to the cross, so He may be fastened to our hearts (146).

A conscience sprinkled with Christ's blood can, like the nightingale, sing with a thorn at its breast (150).

It is hard for a man to look inward and see the face of his own soul. The eye can see everything but itself (153).

Some say they have good hearts, yet lack knowledge. We may as well call that a good eye which lacks sight (154).

A broken Christ is to be received with a broken heart (156).

The more bitterness we taste in sin, the more sweetness we shall taste in Christ (156-57).

The sacrament is called "communion" (1 Corinthians 10:16). What communion can earthly man have with Christ? First, there must be conformity before communion. He that is earthly is no more conformed in likeness to Christ than a clod of dust is like a star. An earthly man makes the world his god. Then let him not think to receive another God in the sacrament (158).

The hypocrite would rather have his faith commended than examined (161).

When we send the dove of prayer to heaven, it brings an olive leaf in its mouth (164).

Our sins should humble us, but they must not discourage us from coming to Christ. The more diseased we are, the rather we should step into this pool of Siloam. Who does Christ invite to the supper but the poor, hlted, maimed? (Luke 14:21)--that is, such as see themselves unworthy and fly to Christ for sanctuary (166-67).

Presumptuous sins open the mouth of conscience to accuse and shut the mouth of God's Spirit, which should speak peace (167).

Faith knows the most tedious voyages have the richest returns, and, the longer mercy is in expectation, the sweeter it will be in fruiton (176).

Let us pray for furnace grace. Be like those three children. "Be it known to thee, O king, that we will not serve the gods" (Daniel 3:18). They would rather burn than bow (178).

Zeal turns a saint into a seraphim (179).

Oh, that such a luster and majesty of holiness sparkled in the lives of communicants, so that others would say, "These have been with Jesus!" (181-82)

Christ, who is a lodestone to draw the elect to heaven, will be a millstone to sink the wicked deeper in hell (184).

HOW PEOPLE CHANGE

This Friday I finished Timothy S. Lane's and Paul David Tripp's 2006 book How People Change. THIS IS THE BEST BOOK ON SOUL CHANGE I'VE EVER READ. It is excellent! It is like the authors took the rich feast of Calvin's Institutes and the writings of the best Puritan divines and condensed them into a powerful pill-sized theory of soul transformation.

Lane and Tripp sustain focus on the person and work of Jesus Christ throughout their work. Their theory of change, which is the Puritan-Reformed theory, is truly Gospel-driven. Unlike many popular works on the subject it isn't merely ornamented here and there with various biblical texts. It is saturated by the deeper redemptive-historical themes of the Bible. The authors understand that humanity's problem is ultimately sin and that sin is fundamentally idolatry (i.e. worshiping something other than God). Therefore our greatest need is to recognize our idolatry for what it is and, in faith and repentance, worship the one true God for who he is. They write:

The Bible cannot be reduced to a set of directions for successful living. This does violence to the very nature of the Word of God and robs it of its power. The Bible is the world's most significant story, the story of God's power. The Bible is a "big picture" book. It introduces us to God, defines our identity, lays out the meaning and purpose of life, and shows us where to find help for the one disease that infects us all--sin. If you try to reduce the Bible to a set of directions, not only will you miss its overall wisdom, you will not make any sense of the directions. They only make sense in the context of the whole story. . . . only when you have an overall sense of what God is doing can you make sense of the details of your life (92, 93).

The authors describe four elements of the big picture of what God is doing in the world and in the lives of all those who believe in Jesus Christ. They write:

1. Heat. This is the person's situation in daily life, with difficulties, blessings, and temptations.
2. Thorns. This is the person's ungodly response to the situation. It includes behavior, the heart driving the behavior, and the consequences that result.
3. Cross. This focuses on the presence of God in his redemptive glory and love. Through Christ, he brings comfort, cleansing, and the power to change.
4. Fruit. This is the person's new godly response to the situation resulting from God's power at work in the heart. It includes behavior, the heart renewed by grace, and the harvest of consequences that follow (96).

For a better understanding of how God changes people, GET THIS BOOK.

ATTEMPTED AXIOM: On Religious Dysfunction

Religious dysfunction is confusing means with ends.

WHAT ARE WE TO BELIEVE CONCERNING THE RESURRECTION?

Answer: We are to believe, that at the last day there shall be a general resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust: when they that are then found alive shall in a moment be changed; and the selfsame bodies of the dead which were laid in the grave, being then again united to their souls forever, shall be raised up by the power of Christ. The bodies of the just, by the Spirit of Christ, and by virtue of his resurrection as their head, shall be raised in power, spiritual, incorruptible, and made like to his glorious body; and the bodies of the wicked shall be raised up in dishonor by him, as an offended judge (Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. 87).

JOEL BEEKE PURITAN LECTURES

Nick Batzig has linked to free audio files of lectures on the Puritans over at Feeding on Christ. The lectures were given at the 2008 National Founders Conference (associated with the SBC). Enjoy!

THE WESTMINSTER DIRECTORY OF PUBLIC WORSHIP

I finished a couple more books today. First, the 2007 book The Expository Genius of John Calvin by Steven J. Lawson. I commented briefly on this book yesterday after completing half of it. In the end it did not disappoint. Dr. Lawson's account of Calvin the Bible expositor is magnificent. It was truly a joy to read! Very edifying!

Also, today I read the newly published book The Westminster Directory of Public Worship: Discussed by Mark Dever & Sinclair Ferguson. It is an excellent historical-theological introduction to the Puritans in general and Reformed worship in particular by two men who are not only scholars of the subject but lovers of its best aspects. Dr. Ferguson examines the Puritans' view of Christian ministry in general. Dr. Dever takes a look at the Puritans' view of preaching. The book concludes with a modern republication of the The Westminster Directory of Public Worship. Here are a few tidbits:

Ferguson offers this excellent one-paragraph summary of the historical origins of the Westminster Assembly:

The historical origins of the Westminster Assembly lie, in very simple terms, in the difference between the English and Scottish Reformations. The Reformation in England was not only the fruit of a widespread movement of spiritual awakening and revival in the early sixteenth century; it was also intertwined with the personal life of the monarch Henry VIII, and particularly his marital status. At one time created Defensor Fidei by the Pope (a title the British monarch still carries), Henry would eventually resist the authority of Rome rather than bow to its judgments on his marital infidelity. The Reformation in England, subsequently, took the form of a balancing act between the new wine of the reformation gospel, and the old wine bottles of the unreformed church (19-20).

Ferguson also writes:

The Puritans treated this as a pastoral as well as a theological formula: grace makes sense to us only in the light of the sin to which it provides the remedy. Consequently, the more sensitive we are to sin, misery and danger, the more clearly we will grasp the wonder of God's salvation. Grace is only 'amazing' when we see that it is 'a wretch like me' it saves. Only sinners seek Jesus as a Savior (30)!

Dever quotes the Puritan pastor Richard Sibbes on the doctrine of assurance commenting along the way:

Though "the evidence indeed to prove our faith to be a true faith, is from works, . . . the title we have is only by Christ, only by grace." This was to be the ultimate basis of assurance for the Christian, as Sibbes taught: "We are more safe in his comprehending us, than in our clasping and holding of him. As we say of the mother and the child, both hold, but the safety of the child is that the mother holds him" (52-53).

Dever also spikes this one-liner:

There is no life driven by any true purpose which is not honest about sin (55).

Along the way Dever warns:

Preachers must not be scared off into being mundane, practical secularists, neither by yesterday's materialists nor by today's realized eschatology communitarians. Both groups are in serious error and departure from the Reformed tradition when they steal away the hope of heaven from those who hold it dear. When "kingdom-centered" is used to effectively oppose "heavenly-minded," then you know that the kingdom such critics are representing is not the kingdom of God (59)!

CALVIN ON LIGHT AND HEAT

I'm half way through Steven J. Lawson's 2007 book The Expository Genius of John Calvin. It is excellent! I've been well instructed and motivated thus far. Thanks for the suggestion Danny!

On page 44 I ran across this insight from Calvin. Dr. Lawson writes:

For Calvin, "Doctrine without zeal is either like a sword in the hand of a madman, or . . . else it serves for vain and wicked boasting." In other words, the light of truth must yield the warmth of devotion to God. Grasping this aspect of Calvin is crucial to any right understanding of his preaching (emphasis added).

SCRIPTURE AND WORSHIP

Today I finished the 2007 book Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation & The Directory for Public Worship by Richard A. Muller and Rowland S. Ward. It is part of The Westminster Assembly and the Reformed Faith Series edited by Carl R. Trueman, and published by P&R out of Phillipsburg, NJ in association with the Craig Center.

It is excellent! Doctors Muller and Ward demonstrate their great skill in doing sound historical-theological research and writing. Dr. Trueman writes in the preface: "It is the hope of the Craig Committee not only that this small volume will offer the careful reader a model of how the study of historical theological documents should be done, but also that it will rekindle interest in the Westminster Standards as part of the church's great creedal and confessional tradition." This book achieved that goal.

The book is divided into two parts. Part One "Scripture and the Westminster Confession" by Dr. Muller, and Part Two "The Directory for Public Worship" by Dr. Ward.

In Part One Muller clearly demonstrates the essential unity between the Westminster Confession of Faith, the theology of the Reformers, and the Reformed orthodoxy of the Continental theologians contra the claim that the Confession represents a break from those. Muller begins by examining the work of Scriptural annotation during the days of the Assembly. He then moves to examine the first chapter of the Confession, "Of the Holy Scripture." He concludes with an examination of the Assembly's understanding of Scriptural exegesis and theological formulation by examining their teaching on the divine decrees and the covenant of works compared to an earlier work called the Annotations.

Four interesting tidbits from Part One are (1) Muller's account of the Assembly's debate on the doctrine of illumination, (2) his distinguishing between the literary genres of doctrinal system and doctrinal confession, (3) his account of the protestant answer to the Roman claim that Augustine asserted the authority of the church over Scripture, which demonstrates the Reformed divines' concern to maintain catholicity, and (4) his account of the Assembly's understanding of the meaning of a text.

1. The Assembly's debate on the doctrine of illumination. A sentence from WCF 1.6 was originally proposed to read, "We acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word." After some debate the word "saving" was inserted so that it finally read: "We acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word."

2. Distinguishing between the literary genres of doctrinal system and doctrinal confession. The Westminster Confession is not a system of doctrine per se. It is a confession. This explains why there is no prolegomena. It also explains the brevity of the confession on points that could have been expanded. Muller writes: "The confession intentionally offers no more detail than its authors thought necessary for a basic definition of Reformed doctrine--and many topics found in the theological systems of the day are entirely omitted from consideration" (39).

3. The protestant answer to the Roman claim that Augustine asserted the authority of the church over Scripture, which demonstrates the Reformed divines' concern to maintain catholicity (referring to WCF 1.4). Augustine once wrote "I would not believe in the Gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not influence me to do so" (Against the Letter of Mani). Muller writes, "To the Roman claim that Augustine, so often favorably cited by the Reformers, had acknowledged the authority of the church as prior to and necessary to the establishment of the authority of Scripture, Protestant theologians had replied that Augustine had certainly been moved to study Scripture by the church--and that this alone was the sense of his comment. The church had directed Augustine toward Scripture, but the Scripture itself had demonstrated its authority to him. The point is important to the catholicity of the Reformation and, by extension, of the Westminster Confession. By affirming the authority of Scripture as resting on its identification as the Word of the divine Author, while at the same time recognizing ecclesial location and recommendation of the text, the Westminster divines had in fact asserted the connection between their confession and the church of all ages" (49).

4. The Assembly's understanding of the meaning of a text. Muller reflects on the Assembly's understanding of meaning writing, "The ultimate meaning of the text, as given by the divine Author, was never to be exhausted by the original historical context of a biblical book or, indeed, of a pericope in the text. Meaning was, of course, to be located in the literal sense of the words of the text, but the literal sense itself, given the ultimate Author of Scripture, receives its significance from the scope and reference of the text in relation to the whole of the canon" (56).

In Part Two Dr. Ward situates the Directory historically and principally (i.e. the Regulative Principle). Then he moves to examine the elements and practice of worship. This is an excellent historical introduction to Reformed worship. One thing stood out: the absolute commitment of the Reformed to the Word as the primary means of grace.

The book also includes The Directory of Public Worship with modern spellings and punctuations as an appendix.