Every editor is solely responsible for the contents of his own articles. Contributions of general interest from our readers and questions for "The Reader Asks" department are welcome. Contributions will be limited to approximately 300 words and must be neatly written or typewritten, and must be signed. Copy deadlines are the first and fifteenth of the month. All communications relative to the contents should be sent to the editorial office.
REPRINT POLICY
Permission is hereby granted for the reprinting of articles in our magazine by other publications, provided: a) that such reprinted articles are reproduced in full; b) that proper acknowledgment is made; c) that a copy of the periodical in which such reprint appears is sent to our editorial office.
SUBSCRIPTION POLICY
Subscription price: $17.00 per year in the US., US $20.00 elsewhere. Unless a definite request for discontinuance is received, it is assumed that the subscriber wishes the subscription to continue, and he will be billed for renewal. If you have a change of address, please notify the Business Office as early as possible in order to avoid the inconvenience of interrupted delivery. Include your Zip or Postal Code.
BOUND VOLUMES
The Business Office will accept standing orders for bound copies of the current volume. Such orders are mailed as soon as possible after completion of a volume year.
l6mm microfilm, 35mm microfilm and 105mm microfiche, and article copies are available through University Microfilms international.
For new subscribers in the United States to the Standard Bearer, there is
a special offer: a ½ price subscription for one year--$8.50. Those in other countries can
write for special rates as well to: The Standard Bearer, P.O. Box 603, Grandville,
MI 49468-0603 or e-mail Mr. Don Doezema.
Each issue of the Standard Bearer is available on cassette tape for those who are blind, or who for some other reason would like to be able to listen to a reading of the SB. This is an excellent ministry of the Evangelism Society of the Southeast Protestant Reformed Church. The reader is Ken Rietema of Southeast Church. Anyone desiring this service regularly should write:
Southeast PRC
1535 Cambridge Ave. S.E.
Grand Rapids, MI 49506.
Table of Contents:
Meditation - Rev. Rodney G. Miersma
Editorial - Prof. David Engelsma
Ministering to the Saints - Rev. Douglas J. Kuiper
Taking Heed to the Doctrine - Steven R. Key
All Around Us - Rev. Kenneth Koole
When Thou Sittest in Thine House - Mrs. Connie Meyer
Feature Article - Rev. Charles Terpstra
Day of Shadows - George M. Ophoff
Search the Scriptures - Rev. Martin VanderWal
News from Our Churches - Mr. Benjamin Wigger
Rev.
Miersma is pastor of Immanuel Protestant Reformed Church in Lacombe, Alberta,
Canada.
Blessed
are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
The next three are positive spiritual virtues seen in the Christian. He is
merciful, pure in heart, and a peacemaker. In this way
the Christian is presented as one who in himself is empty, but who is filled with
spiritual blessings. These blessings are his for the sake of his Savior Jesus Christ. At
this time we look at the fifth beatitude, the beautiful virtue of mercy, a virtue seen
only in the child of God.
Mercy is, first of all, an attribute of God. Eternally God is merciful in Himself,
which means that to all eternity He desires His own blessedness. All that He is, all that
He does, is directed to this end: that His name be most blessed forever.
This mercy He was pleased to reveal outside of Himself to His own glory. We see it
manifested to Adam in Paradise in the state of perfection. In the very act of creating
Adam He revealed that He would make a creature blessed even as God Himself is. Thus Adam
was fashioned in the very image of God, in true knowledge, righteousness, and holiness.
Adam then sinned, and we see God showing His mercy to him also after the fall into sin.
God would deliver His people from sin and death and bring them to the glory of heaven.
From this point of view, mercy is Gods desire to make a people who were dead in sin
to be alive again in true righteousness. This mercy is not directed to all men head for
head, but is directed exclusively toward that people whom God elected in Christ.
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love
(Eph. 1:4).
Having spoken of mercy in general, we now see that God applies His mercy
specifically. Scripture presents Gods mercy as His desire to raise His people out of
their sin and misery. Sing, O heavens;
and be joyful, O earth; and break forth into singing, O mountains: for the Lord hath
comforted his people, and will have mercy upon his afflicted (Is. 49:13). We see
here that this mercy is directed toward the afflicted, a mercy which actually does
deliver. Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his
mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost
(Titus 3:5).
This mercy is that which God shows through His Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord,
through whose blood He saves us. He desires to make His people blessed in the way of
having their sins removed. There is no other way for the mercy of God to be shown. This
mercy is not universally directed to every man without exception, but is directed only to
some, to those whom He has eternally chosen. So then it is not of him that willeth,
nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth
(Rom. 9:16, 18).
We may not pretend
to be wiser than God, nor falsely claim that God is merciful to everyone without
exception.
Gods people also are merciful. As God is concerned with sin and misery and
its removal, so is the child of God. He is
not concerned simply with the external evidences of misery, but he is concerned with the
root cause of it all. The merciful Christian
insists that there must be repentance from sin, and he directs the sinner to the cross of
Christ. That is being merciful.
This mercy is not found in natural, unregenerated man. He may perform many acts
that are called merciful, but Scripture says that the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel
(Prov. 12:10).
This is true because they do not regard the law of God, or
perform their acts in the love of God or out of living faith. They certainly do remove
some external miseries, but they have no concern for the root cause: sin. Such
tender mercy is indeed cruel.
True mercy proceeds out of a regenerated heart and only out of a regenerated
heart. It is the fruit of Christs work in the heart of the born-again child of God.
Where that mercy is not evident, there is no evidence that such a one is a citizen of the
kingdom of heaven. On the other hand, where true mercy is seen, there is seen the
indication that such a one is a child of God.
Many false attempts are made to manifest mercy, most of which emphasize the social
aspect. Many individuals help others in distress and assist them in their trials. Many
volunteers donate their time and effort to help others. Some give of their wealth for the
assistance of those who are worse off than they. This social aspect is often emphasized as
the duty of the church. It is maintained that the duty of the church is to relieve the
needs of the poor and the oppressed, to provide hospitals and clinics especially
for the poor, to fight for those oppressed people of the minority races, etc. Thus the
church must be in the forefront of crusades for all sorts of things on earth. Mercy is
understood to be mostly outward actions which show our concern toward mankind generally.
This shows a misunderstanding of the scriptural view of mercy. It neglects entirely
or ignores the fact that the emphasis of the church is upon the preaching of the Word of
God. The church is not called to concentrate upon the surface difficulties, but to get to
the heart of the problem. One often proceeds from the idea that through outward deeds he
will be able to convince sinners concerning the value of Christianity. Thus he will gain converts through his own efforts
and by his own example. However, neither persuasive speeches nor outward acts can convert
sinners. What is essential is the work of the Holy Spirit, who causes sinners to be born
again and leads them to repentance and confession before God.
The citizens of the kingdom of heaven must show proper mercy both within and
without their church. Within the church it is their mutual desire to assure one another of
the wonderful salvation which is theirs in Jesus Christ the Lord. Where there is need of
warning against sin, that warning is given in mercy. Where there is need of instruction in
the Word of God, the faithful saint gives that in mercy. He does so because he desires
that he and all the elect saints of God enjoy the blessedness God has promised for the
sake of His Son. It is also the privilege of the child of God to assist his fellow saint
in material things. In the church we find both rich and poor, as graciously determined by
God. Those who have more can assist those who are in need. Therefore there is the
privilege both of giving and of receiving in mercy. This is the fruit of the mercy of
Christ shown to His people.
Today much of the privilege of showing mercy has been taken out of the hands of the
church and given to the state. There is Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and a host of
various welfare programs. This has not been to our spiritual profit. We must be encouraged to manifest true mercy by
giving materially. In the New Testament we
read of collections taken for the poor saints in Jerusalem during the time of famine. We
read also that even the world observed the concern that fellow saints had for each other.
However, mercy is shown also to those outside of the church. This must not be
equated exclusively with material assistance. Mercy is shown beyond the realm of the
church centrally in the preaching of the gospel. Christ did not tell His disciples to go
into all the world to found hospitals, to distribute food and clothing, and to abolish
slavery, but to preach the gospel. To preach the pure Word of God is the expression of
mercy by the church. It is the desire of the church that all those who are elect of God,
but yet in their sins, may be brought to that blessedness which the church enjoys. In conjunction with the preaching, the church has
the opportunity to assist those with whom she labors in their material needs. But
primarily, if we are to keep our priorities straight, mercy is centrally connected with
the good news of salvation.
The merciful shall receive mercy. Certainly
it will be shown to Gods children in the day of judgment. Christ shall return and
confront all peoples of all ages and express His judgment. The wicked who revealed their
cruel mercies shall be assigned to hell. They
showed no true mercy, so no mercy will be shown to them. But the merciful shall enjoy the
full manifestation of the mercy of God. He who eternally desired to make them blessed in
Jesus Christ shall now do so to all eternity. For that final revelation of Gods
mercy the church throughout the ages has longed.
We do not have to wait until judgment day to receive the mercy of God. No, He shows
that already to us on earth, though not in its full and final form. From eternity God
determined to show mercy in His Son Jesus Christ. In the fullness of time that Son entered
our flesh to suffer and die under the wrath of God for the sins of His people. Now God
assures regenerated, confessing children of God that He is merciful to them. He brings
them to the consciousness of their sins and miseries. Yet, children of God are not
discouraged, for God also brings them to the conscious belief that the blood of the Lamb
has removed the guilt of these sins and that they are saved from sin and death. Now we
enjoy the mercy of Gods presence through the Holy Spirit. Mercifully He guides us by
His Word every day. Already now we are blessed in obtaining mercy.
This mercy is sure. Not because we show mercy does God then show
us mercy. This is not in harmony with the scriptural doctrine of grace. Christ is
emphasizing that the mercy of God is surely given. Those who have experienced the wonder
of Gods work in them, so that they show mercy, know assuredly that they shall obtain mercy of God. What God does is reward
His own work in us. Those who show no mercy, into whose heart is not evident Gods
work, must not think that God will nevertheless show them mercy. But those who have shown
the fruit of Gods work in them, let them be assured without doubt that they shall
enjoy the fullness of Gods mercy finally
in heaven
.
Their Value
Hoeksemas sermons on Romans are valuable in several respects. First, they add to our knowledge of the
theological thinking of a great Reformed theologian.
The series contributes significantly to our knowledge of Herman Hoeksemas
theology, inasmuch as in the series Hoeksema explains the book of Romans. From the time of the Reformation, the Protestant
churches have recognized Romans as the one book of the Bible that, more than any other,
sets forth the entire gospel of salvation by the sovereign grace of God in a thorough,
systematic way. Martin Luther called the
epistle to the Romans the masterpiece of the New Testament, the purest Gospel of
all. John Calvin declared that
this epistle [Romans], besides many other and singular graces found in it, has one
proper and peculiar to it, which can never be sufficiently prized and esteemed; this is
that anyone who has achieved a true understanding of it has as it were an open door
through which to enter into the most secret treasures of Scripture.
All of the fundamental teachings that make up the gospel of grace appear in the
book: the depravity and guilt of man;
justification; the atonement by the death of Christ; sanctification; predestination; good
works as fruits of faith; and more.
At the end of the series on Romans, in sermon ninety-seven, Hoeksema referred to
the book whose exposition he was now completing as one of the richest and most
beautiful parts of the Word of God.
Many Reformed people, including the scholars, will be interested in this work simply to discover what Herman Hoeksema believed concerning various doctrines. For example, sermon forty on
Romans 7:4
(Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law ... that ye should be
married to another) shows that already by the late 1930s Hoeksema believed, and
publicly taught, that marriage is an unbreakable bond for life.
Just as the marriage relation between man and wife is exclusive, so the
relation between Christ and His people is exclusive. Christ
belongs to the church, and the church belongs to Christ and to no one else. If she flirts, she becomes an adulteress. Finally, it is a union for life. The
union cannot be broken, even as the marriage relation cannot be broken. The marriage relation is a union for life.
Second, the value of the sermons is that they are models for
Reformed ministers. The example of the Romans
sermons should encourage ministers to preach series.
It should also encourage the people to desire the preaching of series of sermons on
an entire book of the Bible. Series preaching edifies the church as the
preaching from texts haphazardly chosenor
purposefully chosenfrom here and there and everywhere does not. By the preaching of series, the minister himself
grows.
The series on Romans should encourage ministers to preach through doctrinal books.
The sermons will also give guidance, how to do this.
These sermons will be of help to ministers, how to choose the theme of a sermon and
then develop that theme by arranging the material of the passage in two or three main
thoughts. The sermons are models of
homiletics. No more than it is right simply
to go to the pulpit with any other mans work would it be right for a minister to
preach these sermons as his own, but they can certainly instruct in the craft of sermon
making. I can see them becoming a text for
the homiletics course, and not only at the Protestant Reformed Seminary.
Above all else, the worth of the sermons is that they are a sound, penetrating
exposition of the Word of God in the book of Romansa commentary on Romans. They are a rather complete commentary. In the nature of the case, they are not a
commentary on every verse and every word. Nevertheless,
the exposition covers the entire book; treats all the main thoughts; includes word study
of important, or difficult, words; concerns itself with significant connections and
relations; and, even though concentrating on the main verse in a passage, usually brings
in and briefly explains the other verses in the passage.
For example, when he came to
Romans 7:1ff.,
Hoeksema preached verse four, about our
marriage to Christ. In the course of the
exposition of verse four, he commented also on verses two and three, which teach the truth
that earthly marriage is for life and thus serves as the basis for the spiritual reality
of our marriage to Christ.
If Hoeksemas exposition of Romans lacks the helpfulness of
a commentary that proceeds verse by verse and virtually word by word, it has the great
advantage that it gives the meaning of each of the chapters and, indeed, of all the
particular passages or individual texts that make up the chapters. The exposition makes the meaning perfectly plain
to the people of God. In addition, it applies
the doctrine of the text or passage to the life and experience of the saints. Righteous
by Faith Alone is a devotional commentary: a
genuine exposition that carries out the purpose of the Holy Spirit with the book of
Romans, namely, to edify the body of Christ.
Hoeksema was uniquely qualified to explain the book of Romans. He was naturally gifted, widely read, and a
theologian who by the time he preached the series had worked long and hard at disciplined
theological study, both as a pastor and as a seminary professor.
In addition, like the apostle Paul himself, who wrote the book of
Romans, Hoeksema was zealous for the glory of God in His sovereignty. Only such a man can rightly explain and preach the
book of Romans. It was this zeal for the
glory of the sovereign God that made Hoeksema fearless in acknowledging Gods
sovereignty where it is found in Romans, as it made him diligent in exploring Gods
sovereignty within the limits, but then to the full
extent of these limits, of the revelation in Romans.
Lack of this zeal for the glory of God is the reason why so many commentators
falter and fail in their exposition of Romans, especially when they come to chapters eight
through eleven, on divine predestination.
There is in the Romans sermons explanation of certain passages
that even corrects the erroneous interpretation given by Calvin in his commentary on
Romans. One of the weakest and most dangerous
sections of Calvins Romans commentary is his explanation of all men in
Romans 5:12ff.
Commenting on the phrase in
verse 18, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto
justification of life, Calvin wrote: Paul
makes grace common to all men, not because it in fact extends to all, but because it is
offered to all. Although Christ suffered for
the sins of the world, and is offered by the goodness of God without distinction to all
men, yet not all receive Him (John Calvin, The
Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians, tr. Ross
Mackenzie, Eerdmans, 1961, pp. 117, 118).
Regardless whether one agrees or disagrees with the doctrine that amazingly escaped
from Calvin in these two sentences (were I of higher-critical bent, I would suggest that
some later editor inserted these lines, and that this editor was James Arminius), this
doctrine is not the teaching of the apostle in the text.
Romans 5:18
does not teach that the grace of righteousness is ineffectually offered
to all, but that it effectually comes upon all, so that all are righteous and live. As effectually as Adams offense rendered all
condemned, so effectually did Christs righteous deed justify all men.
Hoeksema corrected Calvin, though not explicitly, explaining the all
who are justified by Christ as all who are represented by Him according to eternal
election. In sermon thirty-three, Hoeksema said this about the all men in
Romans 5:18
to whom the righteousness of Christ
came:
Upon
all men, the text says. There are some
who, regardless of anything Scripture teaches elsewhere, insist that all men
means every individual of the human race. According
to them, the verse teaches that as every individual is under condemnation because of the
one offense, so justification of life comes upon every individual of the human race
because of one righteousness. There are two
distinct theories about this. One theory
teaches that every individual is saved. This
is consistent. The other theory recognizes
that not all are saved. It teaches that all
men are justified in Christ as far as Gods
intention is concerned, there being a condition upon which the fulfillment of
Gods intention depends. The question to
every man then becomes, Do you want it? Do
you want to be justified? In other
words, this theory explains it in such a way that the justification of Christ was not a
justification after all.
The truth is that those who according to Gods verdict are justified are
also saved, even as those who are condemned according to Gods verdict must die. Scripture says, Whom he justified, them he also glorified [
Rom. 8:30
]. The simple
meaning is this: all men in the one man, and
all men in the other man. Just as, on the
one hand, the rule is, through one man condemnation upon all who are in him (and this is
all men), so through one man justification of life upon all who are in Him (and this is
the elect church). Christ did not make of
justification a chance. The judgment took place 1900 years ago. Even as all in Adam die, so all in Christ are
justified.
(to be continued )
Their Proving
In
telling His church what kind of men her deacons must be, God sets a high standard.
We have examined this standard in the past several articles. The deacon must be full of the Holy Ghost,
of wisdom, and of faith; he must hold the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience; he
must manifest Gods inworked grace by living a
blameless life, being grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of
filthy lucre; he must be faithful to one wife, ruling his children and house well; and his
wife must be grave, not a slanderer, sober, faithful in all things.
One requirement must be noted yet one which will also underscore how high
the standard for deacons is. We read in
I Timothy 3:10:
And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a
deacon, being found blameless.
We have already examined the idea of the deacon being blameless (cf. SB October 1, 2001).
But how do we know if a man is blameless or not?
The answer is: prove him! Only after he is proved, and found to be
blameless, may he be installed into office as a deacon.
We should be clear on what is meant by this proving, and how it is done.
To
prove something is to test it, examine it, try it, to see if it is genuine.
We often use the word prove with reference to metal ore. Gold ore, for instance, contains many impurities.
To remove them, so that one can have pure gold, one puts the ore through a fire. The fire removes the impurities by burning some up
and by melting the gold so that other impurities can be removed from it. That which is left behind is genuine gold
it has been proved to be such.
Scripture also uses the word prove with reference to God trying our faith
(James 1:3,
for example). Persecution,
for instance, is a means by which God proves the members of His church on earth, to make
known whether or not their faith is genuine. The
fact is that to have ones membership in a Christian church does not mean one is a
child of God; in the church are also unconverted unbelievers. From time to time God sends persecution or
other afflictions upon His church. Persecution
causes those who are not truly Gods children to leave the church, and it strengthens
the faith of those who are.
We see that proving something, in the sense in which the word is used in our text,
results in a separation between that which is genuine and that which is not.
Now the Holy Spirit in our text requires that the church prove men for the office
of deacon. There are many men in the church;
but do not think that all of them are qualified to be deacon! A process of proving must take place, to know
whether one is fit to be a deacon or not. Some
men, when proved, are found not to be blameless. They
may not be put in office. Others are found to
be blameless; they are qualified.
How ought this proving
The point of the passage is not to require a formal, oral examination of
prospective deacons, in the way in which candidates for the ministry are examined. According to Peter Y. DeJong a certain Jacobus
Koelman did argue that the text required such an examination:
Thus before anyone might be publicly installed he would have to submit to an examination on doctrine, conduct, and general knowledge of the nature and functions of this office. This was to take place before the elders and deacons who already held office in the congregation.1
Reformed churches have not adopted this idea, however. John Calvin says rightly, This trial is not for a single hour, but consists in long experience. 2
Some have argued that this proving is accomplished by allowing
the prospective deacon to begin doing the work of the office on a trial basis for a period
of probation, after which a final determination is made regarding his ability to do the
work.3 The problem with this idea is twofold: first, a man must not be
put into office until after being examined,
according to this text (then let them use
the office of a deacon, emphasis mine, DJK); and second, in such an examination the
emphasis shifts from the qualifications of the
man, to whether he does the work well. But the text requires the church to examine
whether he be qualified for office. If he is
qualified, and if God calls him to the office, he will
do the work well, by Gods grace.
The best way to fulfill the requirement that a deacon first be proved is simple:
councils must evaluate each man whose name comes up for the office, whether he is truly
fit for it or not. The men of the council
must discuss the person amongst themselves, in confidentiality but also in true love for
that person and the church. The question must
be openly and honestly faced: Are there
reasons that can be brought forward why such a man is not qualified for the office? So DeJong writes:
Undoubtedly this passage refers to one of the responsibilities which rests upon the consistory at the time of making nominations. The church must be assured that those who are appointed to this work possess the gifts of wisdom and gravity so highly essential in the diaconal ministry.4
What standard should be used
Of course, the standard of Gods Word, in
I Timothy 3:8ff.
The council must ask itself whether the
prospective deacon measures up to these qualifications.
DeJong says:
A warning ought to be sounded against the rather prevalent attitude that any young man who is a member in good and regular standing and possesses a measure of business acumen has the necessary qualifications for the ministry of mercy. Often the hope is expressed in such cases that because the deacons work is not too difficult such a candidate if elected will soon be able to perform the work suitably. This, of course, is contrary to the spirit of the text of Scripture. 5
Nothing other than the qualifications
of Scripture are the standard!
In this connection, note one qualification which we have not yet examined: the deacon must not be a novice.
It might seem at first that Scripture nowhere makes this
requirement of deacons. Of the elders, not the deacons, we read:
Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil
(I Tim. 3:6).
However, the
Spirit refers to this verse just quoted when in verse 10 He says of deacons: and let these also first be proved. Notice: also! That is, just as men who are relatively new to the
faith should not be put into the office of elder, so also men who are relatively new to
the faith should not be put into the office of deacon prove them first! A
person who recently joined a congregation might appear to have the natural and spiritual
gifts necessary to hold the office of deacon, but not actually have them. After some time,
as the council and congregation observe the individual and get to know him better, they
will be able better to determine whether or not he has the necessary qualifications.
Does the requirement that a deacon first be proved, and that he not be a novice,
mean we should impose a minimum age requirement on deacons?
Some have imposed such restrictions on deacons.
The Council of Carthage in 397 decided that deacons must be at least 25. 6 James Barnett
defends this:
This age allows time for individuals to gain sufficient maturity and Christian formation to make responsible decisions in so weighty a matter and yet at the same time be young enough for their patterns of living to be shaped more readily in this ministry.7
In 1967, Pope Paul VI fixed the minimum
age at 25 for single men, and at 35 for those men who were married. The Catholic Bishops in the United States
went a step further by requiring all deacons, whether married or not, to be at least 35. The American Episcopal Church in 1952 set the
minimum age at 21. 8
When a Reformed person hears that this is the rule of the Roman Catholic Church, he
might be tempted to see this as one more way in which precept has been added upon precept,
and in which churches have gone beyond that which is required by God. Perhaps it is another instance of such, in the
particular case of the Romish church. However,
the church of Jesus Christ is free to set guidelines in this regard, if her purpose in
doing so is to guide her in being faithful to the requirement of Scripture. Some of our churches have done essentially the
same thing, in requiring that a man be a member of that congregation for a certain period
of time before being considered for office in the church.
The ground for this requirement is found in the Word of God, And let these
also first be proved.
Even if we do not set a minimum age limit in stone (and I think we ought not), the
fact is that councils do well to consider the age of a man when determining whether or not
he is qualified.
A danger that must be avoided in considering a mans age is that we say of a
prospective deacon, he is too old, let us consider him for elder, and find younger men to
fill the office of deacon. No support can be
found in Scripture for a notion that the deacons should be the younger men of the church. Let the deacons also be proved to be mature men.
Maturity is the real issue, then. We
must ask about a mans age, because it is one indicator of his maturity. Admittedly, it is not the only indicator
that is why putting a minimum age limit in stone would not be helpful or wise. One man might be mature enough at the age of 24 to
hold the office of deacon; another might not
be mature enough even though he is 42.
And not just physical or intellectual maturity, but spiritual maturity, is the real standard. He must be found to be blameless. Is
he found to be that in all his life? Is his
walk godly in every respect? Is his theology
sound? The real point of the qualification
let him first be proved is that, not just any man, but only the best, be
selected for the office of deacon. So Calvin
succinctly states the point of the passage when he says:
In a word, when deacons are to be ordained, the choice must not fall at random, and without selection, on any that come to hand; but those men are to be chosen who are approved by their past life in such a manner that, after what may be called full inquiry, they are ascertained to be well qualified.9
In light of this requirement that the deacon be proved, some words of advice are in
order for any man who desires the good work of the office of deacon in his particular
congregation. First, get to know the people
of the congregation, and show them that you love them.
Attend the Bible Studies regularly, prepare well for them, and contribute wisely. Talk with the people of God after church; mingle
in different groups; and let your talk be on spiritual subjects. Show a concern already for those who are ill or in
need.
Second, be a godly man in all of your life, even at work, or on
vacation, and at other times when the churchs leaders and members will not notice
you. Let the world see that if your congregation selects you
for office, you are a man fit to serve!
Third, make it your business to read and study on your own. A deacon must be a theologically sound man!
Finally, do none of the above, if you will not do it from a sincere heart. This advice is not
intended for one who looks only at the earthly honor and power he could have in the
church if he holds the office of deacon, and who is therefore looking for the best way to
campaign for that office. Such a man is
singularly unqualified for the office! The
advice is for the man who desires to serve God and His church in this office. Then do the things mentioned above, and you will
prove yourself fit to serve.
2.
Cf. Calvins commentary on
I Timothy 3:10.
3.
Charles W. DeWeese, The Emerging Role of Deacons (Nashville,
TN: Broadman Press, 1979), page 74. DeWeese
does not say that he personally takes this view, but he says that some Baptist churches
do.
4.
DeJong, op. cit., page
101.
5.
DeJong, op. cit., page
102.
6.
Cf. James Monroe Barnett,
The Diaconate: A Full and Equal Order (Valley
Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1995), page 182.
8.
Cf. Jeaninne E. Olson, One
Ministry, Many Roles: Deacons and Deaconesses
Through the Centuries (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House), pages 358-359, and
page 367, as well as Barnett, page 182, for
this information.
9.
Cf. his commentary on this passage.
Rev. Key is
pastor of the Protestant Reformed Church of Hull, Iowa.
We have seen that a proper understanding of faith begins, not with the activity of
believing, but with the truth that faith is first and essentially a living connection with
Christ, the bond which God by His Holy Spirit establishes when He grafts us into His own
dear Son.
When we consider the establishment of that graft, we get to the very heart of the
truth of the Christian faith.
It is in wisdom that the Heidelberg Catechism approaches the question of salvation
with this question (Q. 20): Are all
men then, as they perished in Adam, saved by Christ?
The answer is: No, only those
who are engrafted into Him.
That same question could conceivably have been asked in different ways. If salvation were in any way the work of man, then
the question might be asked this way: Are all
men going to accept Christ? But when we consider the truth of the Scriptures that we read in
Ephesians 2,
that salvation is the
work of God, then the question has to be put this way:
Whom does God save? Are all men
then, as they perished in Adam, saved by Christ?
You understand immediately that the question is an extremely
serious question from the viewpoint of the sinner! We must have the correct answer to that question!
We must not be motivated in our answer by our emotional ties to our flesh and blood
and our loved ones. That happens very
quickly. When Scripture tells us that not all
men are saved, it also reminds us very pointedly that those who perish may be our own
flesh and blood! Those who perish may include
our own children or family members! They may
include our neighbor with whom we are well acquainted and who is such a nice man or woman.
Oh, when it comes to foreigners or heathen it is very easy to be dogmatic. It is very simple to talk about election and
reprobation when you talk about people in the abstract, those whom you do not know and
whom you have never seen.
But when those who perish may involve your own flesh and blood, your own children,
your own brothers and sisters, that changes the picture, doesnt it?
If you then must answer this question, and you are influenced by your emotions, you
may give a wrong answer. You may be inclined
to soft-pedal the truth, to change it just slightly.
You may be afraid to point your loved ones to the everlasting consequences of their
sins, to the necessity of that living graft with Christ.
You may be afraid you will lose them if you talk about such things.
The preacher might do this within his congregation.
It is much easier to seek a superficial and outward peace than to preach with
conviction the truth that not all men shall be saved.
It is much easier to pacify than to declare that all unbelievers, and such as do
not sincerely repent, stand exposed to the wrath of God and eternal condemnation so long
as they are unconverted, so long as they are not partakers of that living graft of
salvation.
But if that happens, we have departed from the truth of Scripture and the way of
salvation.
Therefore, we must not face the question, who shall be saved,
from the viewpoint of our own emotions and feelings; but we must seek from God the answer to this question. And He has given us the answer in His Word.
God saves those who are grafted into Christ. This
graft is established by God alone.
That is the truth set forth in the Scriptures.
It is a truth corrupted by many today.
Some claim that ultimately all men that ever lived shall be
saved. Because the modern church generally
teaches that God loves all men, there has been an increase in the number of those who hold
to the idea of universal salvation. The
moment men begin to twist the truth and teach that God loves everyone, what will certainly
follow is the conclusion that God saves everyone. Whom God loves He will save. That must certainly follow. It may take several years after the initial
departure from the truth, but it will certainly follow.
We have had ample opportunity in other connections to refute that heresy. We are all acquainted with the scene in
Matthew 25,
which speaks of the judgment day. Of them who were not His own and who did not His works, Jesus says in
Matthew 25:46:
And these shall go away into everlasting
punishment: but the righteous into life
eternal.
Most of those who fall into the error of the Arminians agree wholeheartedly with
the fact that not all men are saved. Followers
of Arminian thought will even agree with you when you say that faith is a gift of God. If they know their Bibles at all, they will remember
Ephesians 2:8.
They will acknowledge
that by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.
But if you want to have clearly before you the scriptural truth of the
establishment of faith, you have to ask this question:
To whom does God give faith?
The Arminian says, God gives faith to those who will it. That grace of God which alone saves can enter your
heart only if you will it. You must open the
door of your heart a crack, or at least unlock the door, in order that God may give you
faith. That is the position of the
Arminian.
Over against
that, you and I must stand on the basis of Scripture and say, Here we part
ways. For Scripture teaches that God
gives faith to them to whom He wills to give it.
Are all men then, as they perished in Adam, saved by Christ? No, only those who are engrafted into Him.
This engrafting is a work of God under which you and I are completely passive. The establishment of a living graft is a divine
mystery.
How foolishly applied to the scriptural figure of the living graft is the idea that
you must graft yourself into Christ. Shall we
place as a ground for salvation the condition that you must graft yourself into Christ? Does such a thing ever take place in nature? Does a twig pick itself up off the ground and
graft itself into the living vine?! How could Jesus then even use such a figure as in
John 15
and
Romans 11?
Our salvation is a wonder work of God.
That is also the truth expressed throughout Ephesians, chapter 2. Let us do a brief overview of that passage.
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins. Notice how strongly the apostle puts that. You were dead.
A dead man has no hand with which to accept Christ.
A spiritually dead man has not the power to believe, let alone to graft himself
into the source of life. And the apostle
repeats that devastating view of man in verse 5, we were dead in sins. That death is described in the verses 2 and 3.
And you hath he quickened. Or
again, But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even
when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are
saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in
Christ Jesus.
There you have the truth as we are considering it.
God Himself and God alone has made us sit together in Christ Jesus and to receive
all His benefits. That is the gospel of our
salvation.
And how does God make us sit together in Christ Jesus? Through faith!
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Faith is that bond, that living graft, established by God alone. And by that living graft we are united with
Christ, in order that we might receive all His benefits and bear fruits unto the glory of
God into all eternity.
The establishment of that graft bears a fruitful consequence. Christ, in whom we now live, not only merited life
and salvation for us, but He bestows them upon us. He
bestows the blessings of salvation upon us by His Holy Spirit.
Do you understand what that means as a matter of your own salvation and experience?
There are millions upon millions of elect from the beginning to the end of the
world, as innumerable as the stars of the sky in multitude and the sand upon the seashore. Think of what must happen in all of those elect
throughout their lives. Think only of your
own life. Yes, Christ bestows upon us what He
has received from the hand of His heavenly Father an inexhaustible supply of
fruits, the Spirit beyond measure!
And the wonderful way in which we receive those benefits is the way of our own
personal experience.
That salvation does not come to us through a funnel.
The connection is spiritual. We are
grafted into Christ Himself, to be fruitful partakers of His life and attributes. We receive all His benefits. The living branch draws its life from the vine,
and itself bears fruit.
Except you abide in Christ, you cannot bear fruit. That is
John 15:5.
But it is
impossible for one who is grafted into Christ with that living graft of faith not to bear
the fruits of Christ. Jesus says, He
that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit.
You and I ought to be conscious of our own emptiness. But we ought also to be conscious of Christs
fullness and our own experience of that fullness. The
more we study the concept of this living graft, and the more conscious we are of the fact
that we dwell in Christ only as a wonder work of Gods sovereign, irresistible grace,
the more we shall not only be fruitful, but abound in
fruitfulness.
Do not overlook that truth expressed by our Lord, He that abideth in me, and
I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit. That
much fruit is borne by the activity of saving faith.
The bond begets the activity. So faith
is seen as Gods work in and through us.
The activity of faith we shall proceed to consider in our next articles, God
willing.
From heaven echoes the eternal decree of election.
God confirmed it in the fullness of time with the sending of His Son, who died and
rose again that we might have life, and that more abundantly. He grafts us into Christ by the work of the Holy
Spirit. He sends forth His Word throughout
the history of this world, by the preaching of the gospel.
And He crowns His work. For when the
sinner cries out, God, be merciful unto me! How
great thou art! then Gods name is glorified in the fruit of His grace. And shall be forever and ever.
Rev. Ken
Koole
Yes, human cloning is back in
the headlines again, and in blockbuster fashion. Advanced
Cell Technology, a small biotech start-up company in Worcester, MA, announced in
mid-October that they have successfully engineered the worlds first cloned human
embryo. Due to the complex, fragile structure
of human DNA, this breakthrough occurred sooner than most had thought possible, taking
most by surprise. But, as expected, it was
news stirring up reactions of greatest contrast. Many
applauded it as the breakthrough of the young century; others responded with consternation
and horror. U.S. News & World Report magazine, which was
granted exclusive rights by the ACT company to follow its progress for publicity reasons,
wrote a most glowing report. U.S. News slant on things was apparent
already from the cover of their December 3 issue describing the American scientists responsible as those who
made history by creating lifesaving embryo cells. (Note the word lifesaving. This, mind you, before there is one iota of
evidence that the promised benefits will ever be anything but theory.) The cover article opens by trumpeting that
The breakthrough promises cures for terrible diseases. No question which side of the issue this magazine,
known for its conservative perspective, stands on.
On the other hand, World magazine
(December 8, 2001) entitled its cover story on the breakthrough, Monstrous,
Inc. (in reference to ACT, the company responsible).
There seems to be little middle ground between the two reactions. You either applaud and shout down all criticism
and warnings, or you are filled with alarm. Put
me in the latter group.
What is especially alarming is the approach that the U.S. News magazine chose to introduce the cloning
breakthrough to the world and nation. The
article opens by introducing you to a certain Judson Somerville, paralyzed from the chest
down due to a cycling accident, who donated some skin from his useless legs so it could be
used for the experiment and lab work.
Somerville did not make the decision [to donate his skin cells] lightly. As a conservative Republican, a longtime contributor to President Bush, Somerville knows how controversial cloning is for many of his political compatriots. But he is also a devout Episcopalian. After consulting with his church leaders, Somerville concluded that being one of the first humans to be cloned not to produce a baby, which he would never do, but to create healthy new cells for ailing patients would be one of the best things he could do for his fellow man. His decision wasnt completely selfless, however. Neurons derived from his own cloned embryo could end Somervilles paralysis.
Now, Somerville may be a step closer to that walk [walking his daughter down the wedding aisle KK], and humanity is moving into uncharted medical and ethical territory.
So the cloned cells come from one who is paralyzed, conservative, Republican,
church-going, evidently anti-abortion, and wanting to walk his daughter down the aisle
(with his bishops blessing besides). So
much for objective reporting. About the only
thing lacking is the blessing of Mother Theresa. And
someone dares to raise objections to what science is trying to accomplish on behalf of
this man and his dreams? What is it with you
Christian fundamentalists? You,
unfeeling in your health, would rather have others suffer, than to experience (or at least
have a chance at) being healed and able to walk again and be pain free, and to use all
parts of their bodies and brains. Old
Ebenezer Scrooge had more of a soul than your sort. Christianity,
indeed!
This is not a debate that will be carried on in a calm,
scientifically detached fashion. Major
geological plates of the ethical sort collide along these lines. The after-shocks still rumble, with more to come. As U.S. News
goes on to admit:
The accomplishment presents huge challenges to every premise of scientific, religious, and legal thought. Given the intensity of last summers national debate over human embryonic stem cell research, ACTs work is sure to become a lightning rod for conservative critics when the issue is taken up again in the months ahead. It will be condemned as an ethical abomination akin to playing God and described as the creation of embryos for spare parts. It will also be hailed as the hugest medical breakthrough of the past half century an accomplishment that could cure many diseases of aging and provides hope for people like Somerville.
About this, U.S. News is
correct. The question is, how does this
reputedly conservative magazine justify its unqualified support? Well, you have to choose the right label. They speak not of reproductive cloning
(which would be used to create a human being), but of therapeutic cloning
(creating embryos to produce the all-important stem cells which, once stripped from the
embryo, can be used in what is called a therapeutic way). This, then, is supposed to put everything into a
different light. There are those who beg to
differ. In an informative article entitled
Australian Pro-Lifers Challenge Stem-Cell Terminology, Patrick Goodenough
(Bureau Chief of the Pacific Rim News Agency) writes:
The signatories (of a letter by religious leaders to various branches of the Australian government) attacked the use of the labels reproductive and therapeutic in the cloning debate.
The terms have generally been used to distinguish between cases in which an embryo cloned in a lab will then be implanted into a womb and carried to birth, and those in which an embryo is cloned in order to be stripped of stem cells, and is destroyed in the process.
The latter case is known as therapeutic cloning because of the therapeutic benefits embryonic stem cells are believed to possess in the treatment of diseases. On the basis of this distinction, Britain earlier this year legalized therapeutic cloning, while insisting a ban on reproductive cloning would be enforced.
But pro-lifers argue that the term therapeutic cloning is a misnomer, intended to fudge the issue .
Theyve called it therapeutic cloning to try to cause society to think, This sounds good, were cloning for therapy, to help people with Parkinsons Disease or whatever. But in fact its the dismembering of the embryo by removing the stem cells. The embryo itself gets no therapy at all, rather total destruction.
In their letter, the Australian religious leaders and others tackle this issue.
To produce an embryo is always reproductive; to destroy an embryo is never therapeutic, they write .
In fact, the signatories argued that cloning with the intention of destroying the embryo once it is harvested of its stem cells is even worse than cloning a human being which is allowed to be born and develop as a child.
Much worse than cloning human beings to reproduce children would be the creation or use of human embryos for the purpose of destructive experimentation, they say while making it clear this does not mean they support the former.
And so the battle is joined. Great
issues at stake. But how can one say
No! to what promises to be the miracle of healing and the end of
suffering (and not be reviled as merciless and cruel!)?
World magazine puts the breakthrough into perspective.
The experiment was not an unqualified success. Although ACT was able to parthenogenically activate 22 human eggs and perform nuclear transfer on 17 eggs, none of the embryos survived beyond just a few cell divisions all short of producing the stem cells for which the researchers had hoped. Some scientists quickly declared the experiment a failure.
But the ACT announcement is a major milestone in medical ethics. A moral threshold has been crossed, and proponents of cloning are certain that time is on their side.
The reality is, there is no going back. The
only question is, what emergency legislation can be put in place to patch the dykes
together for a time, and how long before the dykes and restrictions are swept away
completely. Variations of Frank N. Stein
organ-part by organ-part are only a petri dish away.
In case you
havent heard enough bad news to begin the new year, consider the following article
by Martha Kleder of Cross Walk News Channel: Censure
of Christianity in every form continues to rear its ugly, dragon head.
Londons only Christian radio station, Premier Christian Radio, has been cited by Britains Radio Authority (RA) for seven breaches of programming rules resulting from a broadcast found offensive by listeners.
The RA also issued a Yellow Card a serious warning that threatens a stations license renewal to Premier. The Yellow Card was issued for an Insight For Living broadcast by Dr. Chuck Swindoll that warned Christians about dabbling in the occult, a practice Swindoll said was ensnaring and addicting people. He then urged listeners to burn books and all items of such religions.
The Mysticism and Occult Federation, which filed the complaint against this broadcast, labeled such action a hate crime. That group filed 12 of 13 complaints against Premier in the July-September 2001 quarter. Of those, seven were either fully or partially upheld.
Another complaint upheld by the RA was against Leading the Way, where Michael Yusef stated that the liberal church teaches the crazy idea that you can be a good Christian and a practicing homosexual, and that there can be no healing outside Christ.
The RA found both statements to violate Rule 7.7 of the Radio Authoritys Program Code on religious abuse. The code states, Theological debates and disagreements may occur within religious programs. However, programs and/or follow-up material must not be used to denigrate or attack the beliefs of other people.
... U.S.-based broadcasts were not the only ones running afoul of Rule 7.7. An advertisement for a local church, Liberty Church International, also generated a complaint because the church helps deliver you from sickness, poverty, abuse, racism, debt, occultism and fear.
Infomercials for an upcoming seminar on occult practices and end-time events by New Zealander Barry Smith also generated a complaint. That complaint was upheld, as was another complaint against a show on the roots of Freemasonry.
However, the RA seems to be one-sided when dealing with Rule 7.7. A listener complaint was also filed against 96.4FM BRMB for offensive and ridiculing remarks made about the book of Leviticus. The RA decided in favor of the radio station.
Another complaint was filed against 96.9 Vikings FM for a call-in program asking listeners where they would like to have sex and requesting volunteers to have sex on the air. The RA ruled in favor of the radio station in that instance as well.
Neither did the RA act on complaints filed for derogatory comments about the Virgin Mary, sexist and sexually suggestive jokes, insults to the poor, Welsh speakers, and the mentally handicapped.
The only complaint the RA upheld against a secular radio station program involved crass and insensitive comments applauding the murder of a child.
The double standard of censure going on in Western society is frighteningly
obvious. Anything that sounds like it might
trace its lineage back to the Good News and dares expose ungodly idolatry in
any form is to be silenced. But every other
abomination and desecration is considered freedom of speech. If the media powers that be continue to have their
way, Silent Night with a whole new meaning will be the Christless carol of the
future.
But wait, this late breaking bulletin just in:
Good News after all, He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: The Lord
shall have them in derision
. Yet have I
set my king upon my holy hill of Zion
. Kiss
the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a
little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him
(Ps. 2:4, 6, 12).
Mrs. Meyer is
a wife and mother in Hope Protestant Reformed Church of Walker, Michigan
Come, children, lets take a walk together.
There is something we want to show you. It
is because of our great love for you that we want to show you this. Not that you are our first love, though. No, there is an object of our love that we love
even more than you. Does that scare you? It ought not.
In fact, if we did not have this first love, our love for you would be
worthless. It would do you no good at all. So what is this first love? That is what we want to show you. Come. Come
with us and see this wonderful thing.
There it is, over there on the mountain. Do
you see it? It is beautiful for situation,
is it not? See how it reflects the light of
the sun. It almost looks like a castle, but
it is more glorious than that. It is a mighty
fortress with towers that cannot be moved. As
we come closer to it, you can see how very large it is.
Its much bigger and stronger than any castle you have ever seen before. Come. We
are very near to it now.
Look up. Look way up high and see how
the towers reach up into the clouds. They
are higher than you can imagine! They are
strong, too. They are of such strength and
magnitude that no weapon known to man can put one scratch upon them, much less knock them
down. The walls surrounding the towers are
just as strong. They are impenetrable. No enemy can touch you when you are inside these
walls. When foes come and see this mighty
fortress on the mount, they haste away in fear! This
is a place of refuge where you are absolutely safe. Not
a hair can fall from you head.
But there is more. This fortress is
not only mighty, it is as beautiful as it is strong.
Come, let us enter the gates. What
glory is inside! The bulwarks are embedded
with diamonds and rubies and all sorts of precious stones, stones not measured in carats
but in pounds. Gold is the mortar that
cements the ramparts in place, reinforced with platinum and pearls. In the courtyard, palm trees flourish near a
sparkling fountain that bubbles up with purest, life-giving water. There is nothing but peace and joy and prosperity
within the walls of this magnificent citadel!
Now this is the wonderful thing: to love
the truth is to be inside this glorious haven and refuge. But where are the gold and rubies, you ask? Where are the palms and pearls? Well, this isnt a castle of the earth. Its heavenly gold and pearls that you must
see. It is under the shadow of these heavenly
towers that you must abide. It is only from
behind these magnificent walls that God will keep you safe and use you to guard and
defend, and to gather the rest of the holy nation inside.
Let us walk around the palace yard now and see these wonderful things.
Look at the center tower of the fortress first.
It is firm, foundational, and constructed of purest gold. It is one, lone tower with several glistening
spires soaring up into the sky. It is
the sure and glorious truth that is the foundation of all we believe: salvation by grace alone. But this tower includes other pinnacles of the
Reformation as well: Christ alone, Scripture
alone, and faith alone.
Do you know these truths? Do
you know what they stand for? Do you love
them? Do you understand by them that we have
perfect peace, perfect rest, and perfect safety in Jesus Christ our Savior? Its true!
Its true for you.
Also built onto this central tower are formidable ramparts and walls, with bulwarks
ascending just as gloriously high. There is
the perseverance of the saints we cannot lose our salvation! There is irresistible grace Gods work
of grace is sovereign and particular, and we surely will receive it! There is limited atonement Christ paid for
the sins of only His people, and that payment is certain and complete! There is unconditional election from all
eternity God chose us to be His people and appointed others to be reprobate, and His
choosing had nothing to do with what our actions would be!
And, yes, there is total depravity.
Total depravity? That we by nature are
dead in trespasses and sins, unable to do, or even want to do, the very least act of
goodness or faith, and only evil continually in all our thoughts, words, and deeds
this is a glorious truth? Oh, dear child, it
is not only one of the precious towers of which we speak, it is also the very floor on
which these towers stand! Look at it! Look down at the floor. In the polished stone and crystal of the pavement,
do you see a reflection of yourself? You must
see the true reflection! Do not hide from it. Do not run away.
There you are, and you are ugly. You
are ugly as sin. But now look up. Look up and see the perfect, righteous, holy
towers that could not possibly exist without this distinct and solid ground of truth. Look up and see that you are not responsible for
your salvation in any way or in any part. You
cant be! If you ever doubt that tower
of truth, just take a glance down at the ground and you will remember and know that this
would be impossible. It all depends on
Christ. It all gives the glory to Him and no
other.
But look up once more. See those tall
spires, how they ascend up even into the clouds? Take
note of those clouds. It is on the clouds of
glory that our Savior will return. Keep
looking up and watching those clouds. There
are clouds of wars and earthquakes, disease and pestilence, persecution and death. But there is one cloud that overshadows them all
the gospel will go forth conquering and to conquer.
Do not fear. The gospel is that same
glorious truth in which we hide. It is that
mighty fortress in which God gathers His own and keeps them to the end. Do not fear.
You are safe, even in these last evil days, even unto death.
It is by this same grace of God that we walk together and dwell together in these
wonderful, glorious truths.
Look up, for your redemption draweth nigh.
Let them with thankfulness proclaim the
judgments of their King.
Mount Zions walls behold, about her
ramparts go,
And number ye the lofty towrs that guard
her from the foe.
That to the sons that follow you her glories you may tell;
For God as our own God forever will abide,
And till lifes journey close in death will be our faithful guide.
Rev. Charles
Terpstra
A
Conscious Involvement
Gods people, we said, have a vital role in the worship of God. They are not passive spectators but active
participants.
That brings us to our second main point, in which we want to examine specifically
our conscious involvement in worship. By
looking at the worship service and its various elements, we want to show how we are active
and how we must be active.
We return to the idea that the Reformed worship service is to be seen as covenant
fellowship or dialogue between God and His people in Christ. Keeping this in mind, we can divide the service
into those parts in which God speaks to us and those parts in which we respond and speak
to God. Let us look at some of the specific
elements of our service to see how this works out in terms of our activity.
God speaks to us, for example, in the salutation (Grace, mercy, and
peace
) and benediction (The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ
). We might be tempted to say that, because we are
silent when these things are being spoken to us, we are also passive. But such is not the case. This is the Word of greeting to us and the Word of
parting to us from our covenant Father and Friend. And
we must be active in hearing and receiving this Word! In this there is fellowship with the
living God!
Are we passive when a friend is conversing with us? Do we act as if nothing is
happening and let the words pass over us? Of course not! How much more then in the worship
of God! Also in listening to Gods speech we must be bowing down before Him, serving
Him, reverencing Him, and praising Him.
The same is true of Gods speech to us in the reading of the law and in the
reading of Scripture. We would even say it is
true of Gods Word to us in the singing! In each case, God is addressing His people
covenantally. And we are to be active in
receiving that Word of our covenant God! Passive we must not be! Hearing and receiving
Gods Word belongs to the work of worship! And it is hard work; it requires our
conscious participation and strenuous effort.
Is it perhaps the case that because we have lost sight of this work and activity we
can act bored and be sleepy and let our minds wander when God is speaking to us? Have we
let our culture of entertainment so influence us that we, too, come to the service not to
work and think but to be entertained?! Then let us remember to be conscious of what we
must be doing when God is speaking to us as our covenant Friend!
Furthermore, we are also to be consciously involved in the parts
of worship where we are speaking to God. In the
service we respond to Gods speech by speaking to Him.
There is, for example, the doxology, the opening song of praise. By means of that song we are ascribing worth to
God, telling Him what we think of Him, why we would bow down before Him. We must be conscious of that and think about that
and weigh our words concerning that! In other words, this may not be done passively, but
actively!
The same is true of the rest of the songs we sing in the service, the psalms and
the hymns. Singing is a highly spiritual
activity. It may not be done in a thoughtless
and careless manner. Yet we often do. But then let us remember that when we sing, our
covenant God is speaking to us, as we said. And
we must think on His speech.
But we are also responding to Him and speaking to Him as His friends. We are praising and extolling and adoring Him,
telling Him of His greatness and His glory. Clearly,
that means conscious involvement!
In the psalms we also speak out of the wide variety of our experiences in life and
express our deepest feelings. We not only
ascribe worth to God, but we confess sin and mourn; we cry out because of suffering and
pain and sorrow; we complain on account of the persecution of enemies; we pray and ask God
to do things for us. All of this implies
conscious involvement. Do we not think about
what we are saying to God in these things?! Do we not feel with the psalmists?!
Still more, in the worship service we pray. The
congregational prayer is also part of our covenantal speech to God, and it too requires
conscious involvement. Yes, the pastor or
elder leads in this prayer. But it is the
congregations prayer! And we must be making it with and through the pastor/elder!
That means that when the pastor is praying, we are following along carefully, saying and
pondering the words with him. This is not nap
time, or time to go over our weekly calendar of activities! This is prayer time! We are
conversing with our heavenly Father, and it is the work of worship!
So it is also in the giving of our offerings.
When we present our gifts in the offertory, we are responding to God and speaking
to Him. We are expressing our thanks for His
unspeakable gift of grace in Jesus Christ. We
are thanking Him for His love that makes us love the poor and needy and contribute to
their support. We are praising Him for the
means He gives us to support His kingdom and cause in the world.
And again, all of this presupposes our conscious involvement. This activity must also be done with great thought
and care and desire. The offertory is not a
time to relieve ourselves, whether at the drinking fountain or in the bathroom. It is not a time to take a break from the work of
worship, so that we can think about what we want and do what we want. Also our giving is to be an act of worship! It is
a time for meditating on the grace of God to us, for giving thanks and praise as our hand
places money into the plate! Let us do this, too, consciously!
There are a couple of other points we need to bring out yet to close out this part
of our subject.
For one thing, we must not forget that these conscious acts of worship are to be
performed in the godly attitudes that mark true worship.
We must sing and pray and give and listen in the fear of God, with genuine
thanksgiving, in true love for God and our fellow saints, and in real joy in the Lord. This is conscious involvement too. Worship without these is worthless and vain; it is
blasphemous.
For another thing, we must remember that our active involvement in worship involves
the whole person heart, soul, and body. Our
worship must come from the heart, our spiritual center.
Our worship must involve our souls, i.e., our minds and our wills. There is thinking and willing to do, and they
must be done. And our worship involves our
bodies: our brains, our mouths, our hands, our legs really the whole of us. Let us see to it that the whole of us, from heart
to head to feet, is engaged and working spiritually.
And, finally, we have to realize that this kind of conscious involvement is the
answer to the danger of formalism in our worship on the one hand and innovation on the
other hand.
We use the same liturgy week after week. The
form of our worship we believe is biblical and proper.
But that does not mean we cannot fall into the sin of formalism, of using the right
means of worship in the wrong way, just going through the motions, as if the elements were
empty, insignificant rituals. What keeps us
from this sin is conscious, spiritual involvement, engaging ourselves in the real work of
worship. We must know our place and know what
we are doing and know whom we are serving.
So, too, is this conscious involvement the answer to the danger of introducing
innovations into the worship of God. Why is
it that many in the modern church want liturgical change and new forms? Not because there
was something wrong with the old forms of worship, with the traditional elements of the
service. But because they themselves have
lost the wonder of worship, have forgotten to be involved in the conscious activity of
bowing before and fellowshipping with the God of heaven.
The services of many churches are dead because the worshipers are spiritually dead! Maybe for us too.
The answer, then, is not a changing of the service and the elements; not the
introduction of the latest fads for worship. But
the answer is change in peoples hearts and minds, change in the way they handle the
traditional elements, such that they involve themselves consciously in worship through the
biblical means established. That is what we
need: change in our hearts, in my heart. Change
in the way we act in the worship of the great God of heaven and earth.
George Ophoff
was Professor of Old Testament Studies in the Protestant Reformed Seminary in its early
days. Reprinted here, in edited form, are articles which Ophoff wrote at that time
for the Standard Bearer.
We concluded our last article by stating three purposes which were served by the
shadows of the old dispensation. The first of
these purposes was that they demonstrated to the believers of the Old Testament the great
truths of sin and grace. The sum total of the
shadows was unto the believers their pedagogue to bring them to Christ.
Let us examine this matter a little more closely.
Why and how were the sum total of the shadows a pedagogue bringing believers to
Christ? The shadows did this, we repeat,
because they exhibited to believers the great truth of redemption. In elucidating this matter we shall set out by
enumerating at least some of the fundamental truths exhibited by the shadows. We shall confine ourselves to the rite of
expiatory sacrifice. What truths were
impressed upon the soul of the offerer by means of this rite?
It is according to the testimony of Scripture that the carnal Jew failed to sense
the message and the real meaning of this rite. His
conception of the sacrifice was altogether pagan. The
sacrificial victim was regarded by him as a gift to God instead of Gods gift to him,
and he offered for the purpose of bringing God under obligation to himself. Having sacrificed, he expected God to abdicate
long enough to pay him homage.
It is also certain, from the words of the prophets, that the carnal Jew regarded
the dedication of the victim to God as a symbol of the devotion of self upon the altar of
service to God. But, someone may interject,
can it be maintained that the wicked serve God? He
does, but in doing so he is being actuated by a motive as carnal as he himself is. He insists that God, on His part, will agree to
place Himself at mans service. A man
may agree to serve God for the same reason that the sinners of whom Jesus spoke do good
unto those who do good unto them. When
carnal man discovers that God refuses to dance according to his music, he takes God off
his list and begins to shake his fist in the face of the Almighty. The service of the wicked, when analyzed, turns
out to be service of self. The essence of his
service is pride and, hence, rebellion against God, and therefore an abomination in
Gods sight.
Furthermore, the carnal Jew refused to admit that he was covered from head to foot
with spots and blemishes and that his devotion was, for that reason, a loathsome spectacle
in Gods sight. He failed to realize
that his moral depravity rendered him totally unfit as a sacrifice. He imagined that he was permitted to sacrifice
with hands covered with blood and that, irrespective of his bloody hands, his sacrifice
had meritorious value. This accounts for the
rebuke of the prophet Isaiah. Hear the
word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of
Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude of
your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am
full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the
blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. When
ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an
abomination unto me
. And when ye spread
forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea,
when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your
hands are full of blood (Is. 1:10-15).
It is plain that God detested the sacrifice the service of the carnal
Jew. And why?
Because his hands were full of blood; because, in other words, he was a depraved
and polluted sinner. It is a sad thing that
the exponents of the theory of common grace insist, contrary to Gods own statements,
that the service of the wicked one is pleasing unto God, even though it be that he is
sacrificing with hands full of blood.
The prophet thereupon faces the carnal Jew and announces to him that the only kind
of sacrifice pleasing to Jehovah is the sacrifice of him whose hands are clean. In other words, the sacrifice in which Jehovah
takes delight is the sacrifice of a perfect, holy life.
It must be a lamb without spot or blemish. Therefore
these words from the lips of the prophet: Wash
you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do
evil; learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead
for the widow (Is. 1:16, 17).
The people of God realized that they could not render unto God the kind of service
He requested. Further, brought under the
conviction of sin, the devout sensed that they were unable to cleanse themselves from
sins guilt and pollution. Consequently,
they would have become the victims of despair had not Jehovah informed them of His
willingness to purge them from their sins. Therefore
these words out of the mouth of the prophet: Come
now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though
your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson,
they shall be as wool (Is. 1:18). God
assures His people that, since they are powerless to remove those dark stains, He will do
so. And when He does so, they will sacrifice
to Him, not the sacrifice of pride, but the sacrifice of praise and of a broken heart. They will do this in the Lamb, who was slain and
who redeemed them to their God by His blood.
I repeat, the carnal Jew did not sense the reason for and the message of the rite
of expiatory sacrifice. But the believer did. Unto him this rite, as well as the shadows in
general, was the pedagogue which brought him to Christ.
Again we ask: how and why? In explaining the matter at hand we should have
regard to the subjective element entering in. The
author of the epistle to the Hebrews informs his readers that the gifts and sacrifices
could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience. We quote the passage: Which was a figure for the time then
present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience
(Heb. 9:9).
It is the guilty conscience which must be taken
into account in explaining how it was that the shadows of the old dispensation led
believers to Christ. The first manifestation
of the presence of the Spirit of regeneration in the sinners heart is that he begins
to complain about his sin. His eyes have
opened to the enormity of his guilt, under the weight of which he is being crushed to the
earth.
Such also was the experience of the believer of the old covenant. He would turn to the sacrifice for relief. The animal to be slain in his room was led to the
altar. Upon its head the troubled one would
lay his hands a sign of the transference of guilt.
The victim was slain. Its blood was
sprinkled upon the altar. But the offerer,
not yet having learned to look beyond the sacrifice, found no relief for his troubled
conscience. He learns his first great lesson,
namely, that the sacrifices could not make him perfect as pertaining to the conscience. Yet, according to the testimony of Scripture, the
devout of the old covenant knew the peace of God which surpasses all understanding
that peace of mind and heart arising from the consciousness that sin had been pardoned.
Let us quote from the Psalms. Blessed
is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not
iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile. When
I kept silence, my bones waxed old through my roaring all the day long. For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: my moisture is turned into the drought of summer. I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity
have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgression unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin
(Ps. 32:1-5).
The sacrifices, then, could not make perfect as pertaining to the conscience. Nevertheless, the believer rejoiced in the divine
pardon.
We wish to know, now, what it was that secured for him the peace for which his
heart had been craving. The answer is ready: it was his faith in Jehovahs mercy. Fact is, that the anxious one, deriving no peace
and comfort from the sacrifice, now casts himself upon the mercy of Jehovah.
This, too, is according to the testimony of Scripture. For we are consumed by thine anger, and by
thy wrath are we troubled. Thou hast set our
iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance. For all our days are passed away in thy wrath: we spend our years as a tale that is told
. Who knoweth the power of thine anger? even
according to thy fear, so is thy wrath. So
teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom. Return, O Lord, how long? And let it repent thee concerning thy servants. O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days
(Ps. 90:7-14).
The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy. He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger forever. He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor
rewarded us according to our iniquities. For
as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him. As far as the east is from the west, so far hath
he removed our transgressions from us. Like
as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him
. But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to
everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto childrens children
(Ps. 103:8-17).
Because God, to put it
in the words of the psalmist, fed His people with mercy, therefore had they peace. The offerer, it is plain, was taught to look
beyond the sacrifice to Jehovah. Doing so,
he received remission of sin and life eternal.
What, now, was the great object lesson of the sacrifice? It was this:
Sin must be atoned for; there can be no remission of sin without the shedding of
blood. The offerer understood, then, that
Jehovah was his Savior, but in connection with blood.
The sacrifice taught him that the mercy of God is permeated with justice. He knew that Jehovah and blood were responsible
for the pardon and life which was his. In a
word, the believer of the old covenant was taught, and empowered to lay hold on, that
which constitutes the very heart and core of the economy of redemption, viz., Jehovah and
blood. But whose blood? He had been taught to expect nothing from the
blood of the sacrificial animal. He knew,
too, that human sacrifice was an abomination in Gods sight. Hence, he was compelled to conclude that Jehovah
Himself would provide.
Jehovah and blood these two constituted the mystery of redemption upon which
the believer of the old covenant pondered and which he attempted to penetrate. That he did so is according to the testimony of
the apostle Peter. Of which salvation
the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that
should come unto you: Searching what, or what
manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow
(I Pet. 1:10,
11).
The individual believer and the church at large were being taught to expect all
from Jehovah, not only salvation, but the means of salvation as well.
At last the expectation of the church reached those heights determined upon by God. That was the fullness of time. God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh
(Rom. 8:3).
And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem,
whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation
of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost,
that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lords Christ. And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus,
to do for him after the custom of the law, then took he him up in his arms, and blessed
God, and said, Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou
hast prepared before the face of all people; a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel
(Luke 2:25-32).
The salvation of the elect of God of the old covenant is perplexing to the mind of
many. Were the devout, so it is asked,
capable of looking beyond the lamb to Christ? This,
we reply, is a matter of conjecture. Nevertheless,
the salvation of the just of the old covenant was altogether permissible. It was a contrite, brokenhearted sinner who cast
himself upon the mercy of Jehovah, realizing that the mercy with which he desired to be
satisfied was a just, though unmerited, mercy. What
was there preventing God from granting such a one the desires of his heart? God could show such a one mercy, and pardon his
sins. He could do so without lowering Himself
in the eyes of His moral creatures. For He
had taken care to demonstrate unto them that the sin pardoned must somehow be atoned for
and His mercy merited. It was not for nothing
that blood played so prominent a part in the typical transactions of the old dispensation.
The Spirit of God empowered the people of
God to sense the meaning and message of the blood.
It is plain that the shadows led men to Christ.
Jehovah, by means of them, trained His people to expect all from Him
salvation and the means. The church (the true
church) was awaiting and expecting the consolation of Israel. When He came, there was rejoicing among the
devout.
It is plain that the shadows did indeed lead believers to Christ. Having passed through the course of training
insisted upon by Jehovah, the believers of the old covenant perceived that Jehovah alone
can save. He saves, however, in conjunction
with blood, not the blood of the animal, but the blood which Jehovah would provide. Now, Christ is God and blood, the latter
signifying the human nature in which God suffered and died for His own. In fine, the Old Testament believer was empowered
to lay hold on that which constitutes the very heart and soul of redemption, Jehovah and
blood.
The passage we now consider is the solid ground for one of our distinctive
doctrines, the unbreakable character of marriage. It
is also the solid ground for one of our distinctive practices, the forbidding of divorce,
except in cases of adultery, and the forbidding of remarriage in every case.
This is a hard doctrine and a hard practice to maintain. The world at present knows almost nothing about a
lifetime commitment of husband and wife to one another.
More to its shame, the same is also true of the church world at present. The divorce rate is the same in the church as in
the world. It is even the same among those
who put themselves in the category of born-again evangelical.
A hard doctrine and practice we readily admit.
One of the main reasons the church ignores the biblical doctrine and practice is
because it is, in their words, too hard. There
is a lack of ethical and doctrinal discipline that leads to such a failure in marriages. This lack is both on a corporate, institutional
level, and on an individual level. In the
passage before us Jesus Christ affirms that it is so.
He brings us to the root of adultery, in the heart.
It is only there that we can properly and fully deal with it, under His guidance
and by His grace.
Similarly, the teaching of Christ in this passage must not only teach us about
marriage, adultery, and divorce, it must also teach us about sin in general. We learn here of the source of sin as it comes to
manifestation in every area of our lives. We
say this because this passage has a very distinct place in the section consisting of
verses 21 through 48. This section is the
practical exercise of Jesus words in verses 17-20.
He proves that He has not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. He is showing how the law is to be fulfilled and
done, even it its least matters. He is
showing the sort of righteousness that exceeds the righteousness so-called of the scribes
and Pharisees. The particular force of the
verses we consider in this installment apply not only to the root of sin, but to the
necessary work of eradication.
In this way, we see that the text divides up readily into three parts. Verses 27 and 28 treat the beginning principle of
adultery. Verses 29 and 30 address the
difficult work of dealing with sin. And
verses 31 and 32 address the manifestation of that sin, and its proper treatment, even
from an external viewpoint.
As we have seen before, the teaching of old time belongs not to the law
of God itself. That is, while the form of the
words is the same as the seventh commandment, the substance is different. Those of old time represent the traditions of men. For many ages men had taught that adultery was
only a matter of what one did with his body. As
long as one did not commit adultery with his body, he was in perfect conformance with that
commandment.
This had two important effects upon the popular conception of
righteousness. First, if ones external
life measured up to this seventh commandment, he was declared to be righteous because he was righteous.
There was no need of the pardoning grace of God, nor any need of divine
righteousness to cover that sin. In the
hearing of the commandment many might puff out their chests, boasting of their own,
self-produced righteousness. This conception
excluded any need for an external, divine righteousness.
Second, as the traditions of men strictly regulated the application of the commandment to ones
external conduct, one was left absolutely without obligation in other areas. The thoughts of the heart, the look of the eyes,
even the actions of ones hand, did not fall under the purview of this commandment. With the external conformance, there might be an
internal lawlessness.
With one pronouncement, Jesus overturned this entire tradition. But I say unto you. He presents not a contradiction of the formal
statement, Thou shalt not commit adultery.
He has not come to destroy the law. He
presents the true application. That
application was wholly contrary to the tradition of old time. The righteousness of this law, explained by the
King, goes all the way to the heart. The
commission of adultery happens in his heart.
Understand very carefully what is on the foreground here. This adultery of the heart is not merely the
imagining of the activity of adultery. Nor is it merely conceiving in the heart the
ways and means to such an activity, without executing such a plan. A man cannot say that he is free of this sin if he
so restrains his thought-life that he does not go that far.
He is not righteous even should he keep his eyes to himself. Rather,
the purpose is identified, the reason why he
looks at a woman. He has lust in his heart:
to lust after her.
This is the point: sin does not enter in through the eyes, to snare a man in the
sin of adultery. It begins in his heart. It directs his eyes to a woman, picks her out, and
makes her the object of his lust. Sin is in
the heart, even as it governs the motion of the eyes.
This teaching of Christ is pertinent to the present day. We refer to the deep doctrinal separation of the
Protestant Reformation from the Roman Catholic Church.
The same separation we can easily use to distinguish biblical, Reformed thought
from modern, evangelical thought. This has to
do with the motive of the heart, whether there is sin.
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that one need not confess or repent over lust in
the heart. If one should, upon noticing that
lust, harbor and treasure it in his bosom, then it becomes sin. Much of modern evangelicalism, following in this
same way, says the same thing. This is the
natural consequence of a Semi-Pelagian view of the sinner.
The teaching of Christ is that this lust, apart from any other consideration, is
itself sin. Sin is not only in the deed; it
is in the nature that gives rise to the deed.
It becomes an all-important question, then, what to do about that sin. In the two verses which follow, Christ gives the
answer. This answer is radical. He requires the cutting off of that which offends. Two examples are given. One is the right eye; the other is the right hand. If these members cause a person to stumble into
sin, the Lord gives the remedy: Cut them off,
and cast them from thee. Do not think such a
thing difficult. It ought to be an easy
thing, when we remember the consequences. It
is better that such a member should perish, than that the whole body should be cast into
hell. There is no comparison, after all. The worst pain that could be felt in losing a
limb, even in the most horrific way, cannot compare with a moment of that awful suffering
of the wrath of God. How many of the wicked,
suffering eternally in hell, would wail and gnash their teeth that they had not obeyed
such a word. What is the loss of an eye, a
hand, when compared with enduring unending millennia in such depths of fire unquenchable?
Let that truth sink in for a bit. Think
upon it. We ought to give all heed to the
righteousness that exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, in order to
possess it. We ought to work as hard as we
can to avoid the things that cause offense, even to the point of removing eyes and hands
from our bodies. The stakes are high: the
kingdom of heaven, or hell.
We acknowledge that these two verses have been greatly abused in the past. In their deep desire to escape every influence of
sin, monks and ascetics have been known to mutilate themselves. They attempted to obey these words of Christ. So afraid were they of their bodies being cast
into hell that they tore out their eyes, or cut off their hands. Others were unwilling to go that far. Instead they applied much pain to their bodies. They voluntarily submitted to various kinds of
torture. In so doing, they attempted to
purify themselves of sin. There is also the
thinking that this same thing applies to the soul as well.
Immediately after death, the souls of believers enter purgatory. In their souls they suffer pain in order to be
prepared for heaven. After thousands of
years, then they will be ready to enter heaven.
How terrible a thing to misunderstand and misapply this passage in such a dreadful
way! Freedom from hell is not so easily had! It ought to be obvious, though, that the sin that
brings condemnation is not removed so easily. Something
harder, something more painful is required than amputation.
Understand the distinct direction that these words must take us. If we must speak of things that truly cause
offense, we must not speak of the right eye or the right hand. The problem with adultery is not the eye that sees
or the hand that grasps. If the right is
removed, there is still the left. We must
instead speak of the true source of offense: the heart that directs the eye and the hand. The problem is in the heart. The will is naturally inclined toward sin, and
away from righteousness. Again, sin is in the
nature, the deepest part of that nature.
The work of cutting off and casting this cause of offense from self is a most
difficult thing. Out of love for the kingdom
of heaven, out of fear of hell, one must work within, in the spiritual center: the heart. Whenever he uncovers sinful, impure motives that
move his eyes or limbs toward sin, he must undertake a spiritual self-amputation. He must hate and abhor the sin and corruption of
His heart. He must confess it before God, and
he must seek its forgiveness at the cross. He
must seek all grace from God in order to fight against and overcome that sin in his heart.
At the same time, this work is the reflection and result of the work of Gods
sovereign grace. That grace is already at
work in the heart, long before anyone does this spiritual amputation. This is the work of Christ that Ezekiel
prophesied. 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.
And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them
(Ezek. 36:26, 27).
Again, in verse 31, we are presented with the traditions of men. When we compare verse 31 with the teaching in
Deuteronomy 24:1
we see an immediate difference.
Deuteronomy 24:1
gives the reason, or occasions, for divorce. Without going into the exact nature of that reason, that reason is wholly lacking in
Matthew 5:31.
That verse only states the procedure. In such cases of putting away, a document is
necessary.
The point that Jesus makes in the correction of this tradition goes again to the
guilt of adultery, in relationship to the act itself.
What the tradition established was only a transaction. The truth is far deeper, going to guilt and
righteousness.
With this instruction of Christ, freedom from the guilt of adultery becomes very
narrow. It is not merely the woman who is
divorced for whatever reason, and who marries another, that is guilty of adultery. He also is guilty of adultery that puts her away. The only man that is clear of such guilt is he who
has put her away for the sake of fornication.
This whosoever is very broad. It
matters not whether the woman who is unlawfully put away actually does marry another. Where she does marry, he does indeed share the
blame for this adulterous marriage. But even
if she does not marry, he is guilty. He has
presented the occasion for her to sin.
The guilt of this sin is still present, and is brought upon still others. There is another whosoever. He marries a woman who has been put away, lawfully
or unlawfully. That marriage is a marriage. However, it bears the stamp of adultery. He that marries in that way commits adultery with
her that is put away. How sin multiplies and
grows, even out of the heart of one, to involve so many others!
This Scripture stands clearly as the basis for the teaching and practice of our
churches concerning divorce and remarriage. Where
Christ has declared guilt, so must the church. The
church must do this without fear of being out of step with popular culture. This is the popular culture in the world. This is the popular culture in the church world. Many correctly observe that such a teaching as
held by the PRC makes for small churches and a small denomination. Many churches and many teachers and leaders within
those churches understand the word of Christ in this text, and its hard character. Yet, out of a fear of losing members, they refuse
to speak and exercise this truth. May we
prefer faithfulness to the King of the church, rather than conformity to the world.
In our promotion and defense of this doctrine and practice, we must again go to the
root of the matter: the heart. Those
churches that would remain faithful to this word of Christ must continually penetrate
there. The lust of the heart must be exposed
through the preaching. The sin of the heart
must be named, and repentance over it must be urged.
The penitent must be taught that the righteousness of Christ covers that sin. He is the fulfillment of this law. The church must also teach that the strength to
fight against this lust is only by Jesus death on the cross.
But the lust of the heart must be replaced with a love and fidelity toward God. The church must be taught to consecrate herself to
God, to be a bride adorned for her husband. This
is the glory of self-denial, devotion, even costly, to the faithful, loving God.
In that context, the heart is ready to hear the positive calling of
Matthew 5:27-32.
That positive calling we bring out in the words of the apostle Paul,
Ephesians 5:25.
Husbands,
love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.
1.
What other Scriptures teach the same as our text?
How do they work together to substantiate the one teaching about marriage, divorce,
and remarriage?
Mr. Wigger is
a member of the Protestant Reformed Church of Hudsonville, Michigan.
Evangelism
committees from two of our churches, the Hope PRC in Redlands, CA and the Kalamazoo, MI
PRC, have recently completed work on their own home pages on the internet. If you
are interested in giving them a look, we encourage you to check them out at www.kalamazooprotestant
reformedchurch.org or www.hope prc.org.
Kalamazoos Evangelism Committee also continues to be busy each week hosting a
radio program on WKPR in Kalamazoo. This program airs on Friday afternoons at 12:10 p.m. and is entitled, The Word of
Truth. Rev. W. Bruinsma, pastor at
Kalamazoo, is the host, and he speaks for ten minutes on some subject of doctrine.
This past fall Kalamazoo aired their seventy-fifth broadcast.
The Hope Pregnancy Center, a pro-life crisis pregnancy center in Fort Lauderdale,
FL, recently requested 100 copies of Knowing the True God from the Evangelism
Committee of the Peace PRC in Lansing, IL. The
Evangelism Committee filled this request, and sent along some other pamphlets for
information and consideration.
School
Activities
Instead
of exchanging gifts among themselves, the teachers and students at the Free Christian
School in Edgerton, MN decided to donate money towards buying books for the mission field
in Ghana. This idea was expanded even further when the students contacted everyone
in their congregation to ask them for donations as well.
The Student Council of Covenant Christian High School in Walker, MI sponsored a
food drive during the weeks before Christmas to assist families in the PR churches in the
west Michigan area.
The students of the Hull, IA PR Christian School presented their all-school program
on November 20. The theme for this years program was Trust.
Congregation
Activities
The
congregation of the Georgetown PRC in Hudsonville, MI was busy this past fall with what
was called the Valaszut Christmas Project. This consisted of
sending Christmas packages to individual students of a small Christian School in
Valaszut, Romania. A short presentation in conjunction with the final
packaging of the gift boxes for this school was given on December 2 at Georgetown. A
group of those from Cornerstone PRC in Dyer, Indiana who visited this area last summer
were also present to answer any questions, and everyone interested in this work was
invited to attend.
Georgetowns congregation also met together for a Fall Harvest Outing on
October 31 at the greenhouses of one of their members. In addition to a potluck
supper in the greenhouse, there were hayrides, a bonfire, and flashlight tag following
supper.
At a recent congregational meeting the members of the South Holland, IL PRC
approved the recommendations of their council to install a Stannah stairway chair lift to
the basement and to replace the eight glass entry doors of the church.
Members from the Hudsonville and Trinity PRCs in Hudsonville, MI joined their
voices together on December 2 to present their annual choral program of thanksgiving
and celebration of our Saviors birth.
December 16 the choir of the Loveland, CO PRC also presented their Christmas
program. That same evening the choral society
of the Faith PRC in Jenison, MI presented their Christmas program of praise and thanks
through the gift of music. A collection was taken to help the saints of the Covenant
PRC in Northern Ireland with their building fund.
Sister-Church
Activities
The collection for Northern Ireland
at the Faith choir program reminds us that in recent news from Ballymena, Northern Ireland
we learned that the loan which was taken out to purchase the property on which they
hope, the Lord willing, to build a church home on someday, has been paid for. We are
thankful for this evidence of Gods continuing care for the church there.
Young
Peoples Activities
Some of the
young people from Bethel PRC in Roselle, IL were able to accompany their pastor, Rev. C.
Haak, on December 1 and 2 when he traveled to Randolph, WI to install Rev. Doug
Kuiper as their pastor. A Saturday evening activity was planned, and housing was
provided by the families of Randolph.
The Young People of the Edgerton, MN PRC invited members of their congregation, as
well as those from the Doon and Hull, IA PRCs, to attend a Christmas Singspiration
Sunday evening, December 16.
Minister
Activities
Rev.
A. Spriensma accepted the call he had been considering to serve our churches as
missionary to the Philippines. Plans now call for him to preach his farewell sermon
on January 6 and be installed as missionary on January 18 in Doon, IA and possibly
preach his inaugural sermon on January 20.
The Grandville, MI PRC has a new trio consisting of Rev. C. Haak, Rev. C. Terpstra,
and Rev. R. VanOverloop. Covenant PRC in
Wyckoff, NJ has formed a trio consisting of Revs. W. Bruinsma, D. Kleyn, and R. Smit. From a trio of the Revs. B. Gritters, K. Koole,
and R. VanOverloop, the Byron Center, MI PRC extended a call to Rev. VanOverloop to serve
as their next pastor.
It
is no good reason for a mans religion that he was born and brought up in it; for
then a Turk would have as much reason to be a Turk as a Christian a Christian.