2004 Issue 2 - RPCUS Distinctives and the Westminster Standards - Counsel of Chalcedon
2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of...
-
Upload
chalcedon-presbyterian-church -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of...
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
1/13
THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY
During the reign of Henry VIII, the reformation of the
church in England was largely a contest between theking and the pope. The purpose, which Henry VIII
set before himself, was to free the state from foreign
influences exerted by the pope through the church; and
his efforts were directed, with great singleness of aim, to
the establishment of his own authority in ecclesiastical
matters to the exclusion of that of the pope. In these
efforts he had the support of Parliament, always jealous
of foreign interference; and was not merely sustained
but urged on by the whole force of the religious and
doctrinal reform gradually spreading among the people,
which, however, he made it his business rather to curb
than to encourage. The removal of this curb during the
reign of Edward VI concealed for a time the evils inherent
in the new powers assumed by the throne. But with the
accession of Elizabeth I, who had no sympathy whatever
with religious enthusiasm, they began to appear; and they
grew ever more flagrant under her successors, (Bloody
Mary, the pervert James I, and the devotee to the
tenet that the king is law, Charles I). The authority in
ecclesiastical matters, which had been vindicated to the
throne over against the pope, was increasingly employed
to establish the general authority of the throne over against
the Parliament. The church thus became the instrument ofthe crown in compacting its absolutism; and the interests
of civil liberty soon rendered it as imperative to break the
absolutism of the king in ecclesiastical affairs as it had
ever been to eliminate the papacy from the control of the
English Church.
The controversy was thus shifted from a contest
between Pope and King to a contest between King
and Parliament. And as the cause of the king had
ever more intimately allied itself with that of the
prelatical party (Anglo-Catholics) in the Church,
which had grown more and more reactionary until
under the leading of Laud (1573-1645) it had
become aggressively and revolutionary so, the
cause of Puritanism, that is of pure Protestantism,became ever more identical with that of the
Parliament. When the parties were ultimately lined
up for the final struggle, therefore, it was king and
prelate (Anglo-Catholic bishop) on the one side,
against Parliament and Puritan on the other. The
MAIN ISSUE, which was raised, was a secular
one, the issue of representative government over
against royal absolutism. This issue was fought
to a finish, with the ultimate result that there were
established in England a constitutional monarchy
and a responsible government. There was
complicated with this issue, however, also the
issue, no doubt, at bottom, of religious freedom
over against ecclesiastical tyranny, for it was
impatience with ecclesiastical tyranny which gave
its vigor to the movement. But the form, which
was openly taken by the ecclesiastical issue, was
rather that of A CONTEST BETWEEN A PURE
PROTESTANTISM AND CATHOLIZING
REACTION.
This struggle had reached its acutest stage
when the Long Parliament1 met, on the third of
November, 1640. Profoundly distrustful of thekings sincerity, and determined on its own behalf
to be trifled with no longer, Parliament was in no
mood for compromises with respect whether to
civil or to ecclesiastical affairs. (At this point
in time)...the Reformed character of the Church
of England as well as in its official Articles of
Religion as in its general conviction was not
in dispute.- Warfield, THE WESTMINSTER
ASSEMBLY AND ITS WORK, pgs. 4-6.
AUTHENTIC CHRISTIANITY II
Studies in the Westminster Standards
By Joe Morecraft III
the COUNSELof CHALCEDON4
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
2/13
THE ACTIONS LEADING TO THE
CALLING OF THE WESTMINSTER
ASSEMBLY
THE CENTURY BEFORE THEWESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY
THE REIGN OF HENRY VIII (1509-1547)Henry VIII, dissatisfied with his latest wife, sought
approval for a divorce from the Pope in Rome, so he could
remarry. The Pope refused and so Henry broke with the
Roman Catholic Church, and set himself up as supreme
head of the Church of England, requiring submission
from all ministers and members to his headship. He
also divorced and remarried! However, although the
Protestant Reformation was making its way through the
English and Scottish countryside and universities, the
king imposed many Roman Catholic rituals and doctrines
upon the Church of England. Pillars of the Reformation,
such as Thomas Cromwell, were burned at the stake for
heresy, (1540), i.e., the believing and preaching of purely
Protestant doctrine. Roman Catholics were beheaded for
refusing to accept his headship over the church in the
place of the popes.
This ecclesiastical and civil tyranny of Henry VIII was
the cause that led to the long and bitter controversies by
which the church was agitated, to the cruel persecutions
which the established church waged for more than one
hundred years against dissenters, and to that religious
revolution of which the Westminster Assembly was the
culmination and its creed the symbol.- Robert Price in
MEMORIAL VOLUME, pg. 36.
THE MINISTRY OF WILLIAM TYNDALE(1492-1536)
The Reformation in England spread through the work of
William Tyndale, who translated the Bible into English.
Because of the influence of Thomas Cranmer on Henry
VIII, this Bible was allowed on sale in 1537 and in 1538
Thomas Cromwell ordered that it be accessible to the
public in every church.2
With this increased Bible reading3, and with the increasing
influence of the writings of the English pre-Reformer1 So by the mid-seventeenth century, English men and women had experienced a quarter of
millenium of emphasis on the sovereignty of the Scriptures as the unique source of Divine wisdom on
subjects, including politics; and a source which must be opened to everybody.- Christopher Hill, TH
ENGLISH BIBLE AND THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY REVOLUTION, 1993.
2 The number of Bibles and New Testaments printed in England (and in English) between t
Protestant Reformation of the Sixteenth Century and the Westminster Assembly, (about 150 years),
estimated at ONE MILLION!
3 The most popular version was the Geneva Bible published in 1560 in England. It not only was
popular and readable text, it had commentary on each page that was reflective of the theology of Joh
Calvin, John Knox and the Protestant Reformation, with significant political and social implications an
applications. Between 1560 and 1603 it went through 90 editions. But after 1616 when James I came
the throne it had to be smuggled in from the Netherlands. One translator of King James Is Bible boast
that, whereas the word tyrant was used repeatedly in the Geneva Bible, it was not used once in the Ki
James version!
Charlie Marks likes a challenge. Having served his church for 30 years as
worship leader, choral director, songwriter, guitarist, voice/guitar/music theory
teacher, and keyboardist, he decided to create an album of synthesized holiday
instrumentals, with each artificial "instrument" matching its true "voice" as
realistically as possible. This labor of love became Classic Christmas, an
excellent instrumental album that is jubilant, generous (almost a full hour of
music!), and genuinely delightful. The 18 tracks lean exclusively towards the
sacred, embracing an air of joy and excitement.
This album would provide a beautiful backdrop for any seasonal event. The music
is well-crafted. The arrangements are creative, but remain true to the heart
and soul of these familiar holiday favorites. Favorite moments include the
precious bell choir on "O Little Town of Bethlehem," the exotic flutes on "We
Three Kings of Orient Are," the alien intro on "While Shepherds Watched their Flocks," the sweetly simple "GentleMary Laid Her Child" (the same tune as "Good King Wenceslas"), and the glorious trumpet fanfare on "Joy To The
World."
Classic Christmasis exactly that--holiday music that is absolutely classic for the season. Charlie Marks likes a
challenge, and this fine album is the winning result. Congratulations, Charlie!
--Carol Swanson
To hear samples of this album and to place an order see: http://cdbaby.com/cd/charliemarks
Charlie is currently a member of the Westminster Presbyterian Mission in Corpus Christi, TX.
the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Joe Morecraft III
5
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
3/13
John Wyclif (1328-1384), of Martin Luther, and other
continental Reformers, more and more Englishmen were
becoming genuinely Protestant and Reformed. But Henry
VIII persisted in his Roman Catholic theology. In 1539 he
had Parliament pass the Six Articles Act, which committed
the Church of England to strict Roman doctrines, including
transubstantiation, the denial of which was punishable by
death.
THE REIGNS OF EDWARD VI (1547-1553) ANDBLOODY MARY (1553-1558)
Under Edward VI, who succeeded Henry VIII, the tension
eased a bit, and for a while genuine Protestantism,
released from Henrys bigotry and intolerance, made rapid
progress, yet the people had no voice in ecclesiastical
affairs; in fact, the great majority of the people and of
the parochial clergy were in sympathy with the Catholic
Church.... The outward progress and open avowal of
the reformed doctrines was checked by the accession
of Mary, (the bloody Mary). The ease with which shereversed the ecclesiastical policy of the government and
took the church back to Rome, shows how little hold
Protestant doctrines had taken on the people. A great
many Protestants were burned at the stake; but the effect
of this was to spread and intensify the popular aversion
to a church so cruel Protestantism was strengthened and
purified by the efforts to exterminate it. Many fled to the
continent, and there came in contact with the Presbyterian
form of church government, and on the death of Mary
returned to England filled with the spirit of freedom and
scriptural truth which they had there imbibed, (from
Geneva, Frankfurt and Zurich).
THE HEROIC MARTYRS UNDER BLOODYMARY
Devout Roman Catholic that she was, Blood Mary restored
papal authority in England and severely persecuted the
Reformers. John Rogers, Thomas Cranmer, Nicholas
Ridley, Hugh Latimer and John Hooper, all great and
godly Reformers, were burned to death in 1555-1556,
along with some 300 other martyrs. These martyrdoms
did more for the spread of anti-Rome sentiment than all
previous efforts by the state.
THE REIGN OF ELIZABETH I (1558-1603)
Elizabeths policy, (she succeeded Mary), was similar to
that of her father, Henry VIII. There was some reason to
believe that she was a Catholic at heart, and would have
been willing to return to the Roman allegiance if the thing
had been practicable. But, as the Pope excommunicated
her and denied her legitimacy, her occupancy of the
throne depended upon the support of her Protestant
subjects. She was, therefore, compelled to be a Protestant
in self-defence. As it was, she devoted herself to the
maintenance of the national church as then constituted
and to the repression of anything like dissent, or any
form of religious liberty. Puritanism as a party, and active
power, made its appearance during her reign, and was
greatly strengthened by the return from the continent of
the Marian exiles.- Price in MEMORIAL VOLUME
pgs. 35-38.
THE FIRST PRESBYTERY IN ENGLAND (1572)
In 1572 many of the Puritan ministers and laymen formed
a presbytery at Wandsworth, not far from London. This
was the first presbytery every organized in England
Thus nearly a hundred years before the meeting of the
Westminster Assembly Presbyterianism was planted
in England in organized form.- Price, MEMORIAL
VOLUME, pg. 40.
THE HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION INSCOTLAND
The history of the Reformation in Scotland was in
striking contrast with the history of the Reformation in
England. In the latter it originated in the caprice of an
unprincipled despot; in the former the movement began
with the people as the result of personal conviction. The
doctrines of the Protestant reformers probably found
their way into Scotland through the secret circulation of
the writings of Luther and others. The first, so far as is
known, who openly and systematically preached them
was Patrick Hamilton, a young man of royal lineage, great
talents and burning zeal. In 1526 he went to the continen
and studied under Luther and Melanchthon. On his return
he devoted himself to the preaching of the truth. He was
arrested and burned at the stake. The martyrdom of one
so young, so high-born, and so accomplished, helped to
attract attention to the doctrines for which he suffered
They spread with considerable rapidity in the next ten
years, notwithstanding the bitter persecution, which was
waged, in which many perished at the stake. In 1546 the
party had become so strong that the Protestant nobles rose
in armed resistance to their persecutors. In 1560, by the
aid of Queen Elizabeth of England, the government forceswere defeated, and the right to hold a free parliament was
extorted. This body met the first day of August, 1560
One of its first acts was to abolish the Roman Catholic
Church as the Church of Scotland, to prohibit the mass
under severe penalties, and to require the Protestant
ministers, of whom John Knox was chief, to draw up a
confession of faith, which was there and then adopted as
the standard of the national church. On the twentieth of
December of the same year, the ministers and many of the
the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Authentic Christianity II
6
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
4/13
THE REIGN OF JAMES I (1603-1625)
In 1580 the Scottish General Assembly, under the
leadership of Andrew Melville, by a unanimous vote
abolished episcopal church government and ordered the
bishops to demit their offices. James VI of Scotland, soon
to be James I of England, greatly disapproved of this
decision. He defied the Assemblys decision by appointed
an archbishop of Glasgow. The church resisted his actionand stood firm, thus bringing the church into dangerous
collision with the king. From that time on James pursued
the policy of subjecting church courts to his despotic
authority and of forcing prelacy upon the Scottish church
He felt that the freedom of the Presbyterian system was
incompatible with despotism in the state, while the bishops
could be used as the instruments of his tyranny. His motto
was, No bishop, no king. To secure the subjugation
of the church he did not hesitate to resort to deceit and
persecution. Some of the most eminent ministers in the
kingdom were banished. In 1603 he succeeded to the
English throne, under the title of James I. But no change
was made by this in his ecclesiastical policy, except to
render it, if possible, more uncompromising and severe.
Ministers who refused to conform to what they regarded
as superstitious ceremonies were silenced, and sometimes
shut up in prison, or forced to leave the country. Many
distinguished for their learning and piety, together with
leading Protestant laymen met together for the purpose
of organizing the new church.... This is called the first
meeting of the Scottish General Assembly.
The system thus established has prevailed in the Church
of Scotland from that day to this, and has come down
to us through the Westminster Assembly. Through all
the intervening years the Scotch church has battled and
suffered for those principles, and the blood of its martyrs,poured out like water, has rendered the soil of Scotland
sacred ground in the eyes of all Presbyterians the world
over.- Price, MEMORIAL VOLUME, pgs. 43-44.
Why was the biblical doctrine of the church rediscovered
in Scotland, a land which for so long had been accustomed
to the rule of a powerful hierarchy of clan chiefs, and to
the rule of monarchy and aristocracy in the state? How
could such a land in such a condition with such a history
conceive of the idea of a republican form of government
for the church? This may be accounted for in part by their
acquaintance with the Genevan church and the writings ofCalvin, though theirs was a more thorough development of
Presbyterianism than prevailed in Geneva. The real cause,
however, lies in the fact that they took the Scriptures as
their sole and infallible guide of faith and practice, and
modeled their church organization after that which was
established by the apostles.- Price, pg. 44.
No b l e S a v a g e s
Ex p o s in g t h e W o r l d v i e w o f P o r n o g r a p h e r s a n d Th e i r W a r A g a i n s t Ch r i s t i an
C i v i l i z a t i o n
B y R . J. R u s h d o o n y
Pornography has burgeoned into a near 60 billion dollar industry exceeding the combined revenuesof professional football, baseball, and basketball. Millions of erotic web sites litter cyberspace withportals of entrapment that entice every race, nationality, and gender. Even Christians are notimmune to this social virus as recent surveys reveal that 47% of Christians declared pornographyto be a problem in their home.
What was once sold under the counter as filth was now celebrated as the literary symbol ofliberation from God and His law-word. In 1974, recognized that the roots of pornography in modernculture are essentially religious and must be combated religiously. In this powerful book NobleSavages (formerly The Politics of Pornography) Rushdoony demonstrates that in order for modernman to justify his perversion he must reject the Biblical doctrine of the fall of man. If there is no fall,the Marquis de Sade argued, then all that man does is normative. Rushdoony concluded, [T]he
world will soon catch up with Sade, unless it abandons its humanistic foundations. Symptomsare important and sometimes very serious, but it is very wrong and dangerous to treat symptomsrather than the underlying disease. Pornography is a symptom; it is not the problem. What is theproblem? Its the philosophy behind pornography the rejection of the fall of man that makesnormative all that man does. Learn it all in this timeless classic.
Price: $18
Order from: www.chalcedonstore.com
Chalcedon FoundationP.O. Box 158
Vallecito, CA 95251Tel: (209) 736-4365Fax: 209 736-0536
the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Joe Morecraft III
7
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
5/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Authentic Christianity II
8
their devoted followers preferred exile, with religious
liberty, to their beloved country groaning under civil and
religious despotism, and sought refuge in Holland where
English churches were erected after the Presbyterian
model. Some, driven by Episcopal oppression to the
opposite extreme of church government, adopted the
independent polity, and after a temporary residence among
the liberty-loving and hospitable Dutch, emigrated to
New England.... The foolish, bigoted and tyrannical rule
of James I was one of the chief causes, which led to such
fatal results to his family and kingdom, and to that great
religious revolution which culminated in the Westminster
Assembly.4
THE REIGN OF CHARLES I (1625-1649)
Charles I fell heir to the principles, as well as the
throne, of his father (James I). Charles I undertook...
to establish a despotism in the state, and with the aid of
Archbishop Laud, a despotism in the church. No liberty
of belief or practice was to be allowed. All were requiredto be members of the Established Church, and all were
required to conform, in the minutest particulars, to its rites
and ceremonies. Laud was an Arminian in his theology
and semi-papal in his ecclesiastical polity. His purpose
was to bring the Church of England into an agreement
with the Church of Rome as nearly as could be done
without abandoning its separate existence. The High
Commission Court and the Star Chamber Court were the
instruments of his oppressions.- Price, MEMORIAL
VOLUME, pgs. 45-48.
4 Puritan hostility was greatly aroused against James I when he issued his infamous BOOK OF
SPORTS in 1618, in which he recommended sports, games and dances on Sunday, instead of careful
Sabbath observance. To the Puritans this was a direct royal demand to disobey the revealed will of God.
What was even more offensive and intolerable was the requirement that all ministers read the BOOK OF
SPORTS to their congregations every Sunday. Many refused and suffered for it. Others would read it and
then read from the Fourth Commandment, saying that thefirst is the injunction of man, the second is the
law of God.
When Charles I ascended the throne, he found England
in a state of discontent swelling towards insurrection
in consequence of a long course of tyranny, civil and
religious, which it had uneasily endured. Unfortunately
for him and for the kingdom, he had imbibed all his
fathers despotic notions of the absolute and irresponsible
nature of the royal prerogative. ...he not only refused
to mitigate the sufferings of the English Puritans, but
resolved to complete what his father had begun, and to
bring the Scottish Church into an entire conformity with
that of England.- Hetherington, pgs. 103-104.
THE NATIONAL COVENANT INSCOTLAND (1638)
THE ATTEMPT OF CHARLES I TO OPPRESS THESCOTTISH CHURCH
After Charles I, under the influence of Archbishop Laud
had forced conformity to Roman Catholic ceremonies
on the church, which led to the severe persecution ofthose who refused to comply,5 the king recklessly tried
to impose those ceremonies upon the Scottish people and
the church of Scotland, which was Presbyterian, because
of the influence of such men as John Knox. This measure
provoked immediate and determined resistance. The
nation of Scotland united itself against the kings measure
in the National Covenant
THE CONTENT OF THE NATIONALCOVENANT
Whereas the entire document is worth reading, the main
point is to be found in these words:
We Noblemen, Barons, Gentlemen, Burgesses,
Ministers, and Commons, under-subscribing,
considering divers times before, and especially at
this time, the danger of the true reformed religion,
of the Kings honor, and of the public peace of
the kingdom, by the manifold innovations
and evils, generally contained, and particularly
mentioned in our late supplications, complaints
and protestations; do hereby profess, and
before God, his angels, and the world, solemnly
declare, That with our whole heart we agree,
and resolve all the days of our life constantly
to adhere unto and to defend the aforesaid true
religion, and (forbearing the practice of all
innovations already introduced in the matters
of the worship of God, or approbation of the
corruptions of the public government of the
5 Many fled England for Holland and America. Large numbers of non-conformists who wrot
against these oppressive measures were left totally destitute, and some were punished by having their ea
cut off, their nose slit, and by perpetual imprisonment.
A Cart oon il lus trat ed Exp osi tio n of Daniel 9:24-27 that out-charts Dispensationalism!
By Vic Lockman
The gap theory is exposed and the Gospel isclearly proclaimed in the text.
Biblical
Historic Reformed
Gospel-loaded
24 pages - $3
Vic has other excellent material on the Westminster Catechism, Gods Law,Reading th e Bible, and the Last Days!
Order from www.viclockman.com
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
6/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Joe Morecraft III
9
Kirk (Scottish church), or civil places and
power of kirkmen, till they be tried and allowed
in free Assemblies and in Parliament) to labor,
by all means lawful, to recover the purity and
liberty of the Gospel, as it was established and
professed before the foresaid innovations.
And because, after due examination, we
plainly perceive, and undoubtedly believe, thatthe innovations and evils contained in our
supplications, complaints and protestations,
have no warrant in the word of God, are contrary
to the articles of the foresaid Confession, to
the intention and meaning of the blessed
reformers of religion in this land, to the above-
written acts of Parliament; and do sensibly tend
to the re-establishing of the Popish religion
and tyranny, and to the subversion and ruin of
the true reformed religion, and of our liberties,
laws, and estates; we also declare, That theforesaid Confessions are to be interpreted,
and ought to be understood of the foresaid
(in)novations and evils, no less than if every
one of them had been expressed in the foresaid
Confessions; and that we are obliged to detest
and abhor them, amongst other par ticular heads
of Papistry abjured therein. And therefore,
from the knowledge and conscience of
our duty to God, to our King and country,
without any worldly respect or inducement,
so far as human infirmity will suffer, wishing
a further measure of the grace of God for
this effect; we promise and swear, by the
GREAT NAME OF THE LORD OUR GOD,
to continue in the profession and obedience of
the foresaid religion; and that we shall defend
the same, and resist all these contrary errors
and corruptions, according to our vocation,
and to the uttermost of that power that God
hath put in our hands, all the days of our life.
THE RESPONSE OF THE KING
The king raised an army to break this Scottish resistance,
but, true to his cowardly nature, he shrunk back from
what would be a perilous encounter and entered into an
evasive truce.
THE ETCETERA OATH (1640)
The abortive attempt of Charles I to bring Scotland to her
knees, exhausted the treasury, and compelled him to call
a Parliament so as to obtain more finances. The House
of Commons refused to do so until certain grievances
had been redressed. Disappointed and enraged, the king
dissolved the Parliament, and threw its leading members
into prison. Hungry for finances he taxed his people more
oppressively than ever. Although Parliament refused the
money, the Convocation (of bishops), contrary to the law
of the land, granted him a large sum to continue his efforts
to reduce his people to total conformity to his ceremonies
This money enabled him to continue what was called the
Episcopal war6. The Convocation, in support of the king
also issued what was called the et cetera oath upon all
ministers, which required them to swear that they wil
never give their consent to alter the government of this
Church, by archbishops, bishops, deans, archdeacons
ET CETERA, as it now stands established, upon pain
of severe penalty. From this clause it obtained the
name of the et cetera oath,1 and became an additiona
element of strife between the Prelatists and the Puritans
driving many ministers into the latter body, because they
could not consent to swear adherence to they knew notwhat.- William M. Hetherington, HISTORY OF THE
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY OF DIVINES, pg. 80.
THE ROOT AND BRANCH PETITION(1640)
By this time England was in an uproar. Men were elected
to the House of Commons in Parliament who were staunch
defenders of liberty, and who were prepared for the
struggle with the king. Because it stayed in existence for
so long a time, it was called The Long Parliament, and it
has been said that no age or nation has ever produced men
of greater eminence, in abilities and character, than were
the leaders of that celebrated assembly.- Hetherington
pg. 81.
The Long Parliament immediately took bold action
The nation was swirling with murderous plots and
conspiracies, which usually included the king, and which
would advance his tyranny. Realizing that Archbishop
Laud was the real instigator behind the abortive invasion
of Scotland, he was imprisoned in the Tower of London
and later executed (1645). The Earl of Strafford, Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, was also impeached for conspiracy
and committed to the Tower. The people had taken all they
could take. Along with the literary assaults of the Puritans
the people poured petitions into the House of Commons
from all over the nation. The most important petition
was the root and branch petition signed by 15,000
people. Fifteen-hundred men of high rank presented it to
Parliament in 1640.
This petition was to the effect that the government of
6 It is interesting to note that Charles Is war to extend tyranny was called the Episcopal war, a
the American War of Independence to extend liberty was called the Presbyterian rebellion.
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
7/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Authentic Christianity II
10
archbishops and lord bishops, deans, and archdeacons,
etc. (the same enumeration, observe, as in the et cetera
oath1) with all its dependencies, roots and branches,
may be abolished, and all laws in their behalf made void,
and the government according to Gods word may be
rightly placed amongst us.- Warfield, pg. 7. The petition
was passed into law by the Long Parliament on February
5, 1642, since the great majority of its leading men had
become Presbyterians in their tendencies. On January
26, 1643, a bill was passed which abolished prelacy
altogether.
Among the formal complaints against the prelates given
as reasons for the root and branch petition and included
in that petition were:
(1). There was a faint-heartedness of ministers to preach
the truth of God, lest they should displease the prelates;
as namely, the doctrine of predestination, of free grace, of
perseverance, of original sin remaining after baptism, of
the sabbath, the doctrine against universal grace, election
for faith foreseen, free-will, against antichrist, non-
residents, human inventions in Gods worship all which
are generally withheld from the peoples knowledge,
because not relishing to the bishops.- printed in TO
GLORIFY AND ENJOY GOD, pg. 269.
(2). The great increase of idle, lewd and dissolute,
ignorant and erroneous men in the ministry, which swarm
like the locusts of Egypt over the whole kingdom; and
will they but wear a canonical coat, a surplice, a hood,
bow at the name of Jesus, and be zealous of superstitious
ceremonies, they may live as they list (want), confront
whom they please, preach and vent what errors they will,and neglect preaching at their pleasures without control.-
pg. 270.
(3). The discouragement of many from bringing up their
children in learning; the many schisms, errors, and strange
opinions which are in the Church; great corruptions which
are in the Universities; the gross and lamentable ignorance
almost everywhere among the people; the want (lack) of
preaching ministers in very many places both of England
and Wales; the loathing of the ministry, and the general
defection to all manner of profaneness.- pg. 270.
(4). The hindering of godly books to be printed, the
blotting out or perverting those which they suffer,
all of most of that which strikes either at Popery or
Arminianism....- pg. 270.
(5). The publishing and venting of Popish, Arminian and
other dangerous books.... 11- pg. 270.
(6). The growth of Popery and increase of Papists, Priests
and Jesuits in sundry place, but especially in London since
the Reformation....- pg. 270.
(7). The multitude of monopolies and patents, drawing
with them innumerable perjuries; the large increase of
customs (taxes!) ..., under which all groan.-pg. 270.
(8). Profanation of the Lords Day....- pg. 272.
THE PROTESTATION OF THE HOUSE OFCOMMONS (1641)
I, A.B., do, in the presence of God, promise, vow
and protest to maintain and defend, as far as lawfully I
may with my life, power and estate, the true reformedProtestant religion expressed in the doctrine of the Church
of England, against all Popery and popish innovation
within this realm....- TO GLORIFY AND ENJOY GOD
pg. 273. This vow was taken by the members of the House
of Commons.
THE ORDER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS(1641)
September 1, 1641, the House of Lords passed its own
resolution outlawing all diverse innovations in or about
the worship of God, calling for the dutiful observation o
the Lords day, the removal of crucifixes, images of Mary
and the cessation of superstitious practices in the church
This resolution revealed the strongly anti-Romanist and
pro-Reformed spirit of the entire Parliament.
THE GRAND REMONSTRANCE (1641)
THE GROWING AWARENESS FOR GODLYADVICE TO PARLIAMENT
Along with these resolutions dismantling the prelatic
government of the Church of England, attempts and calls
were made to pass positive legislation, which wouldreconstruct the church along Biblical lines. Therefore
also, it was becoming more and more obvious that the
advice and wise counsel of godly and scholarly Reformed
ministers and teachers was needed to assist and guide the
Parliament in its reconstruction of church government.77 Although the great majority of leading men in Parliament were Presbyterian in their tendencie
(with reference to church government), they had very littl e knowledge as to what Presbyterianism real
was. In fact, it never entered into the minds of the men in Parliament to construct a government in th
Church of England, which would not be under the control of Parliament. The king and prelates wanted th
church under the king; and Parliament wanted the church under Parliament. This trenchant secularity
Parliament was its ingrained Erastianism, named after Thomas Erastus, 1524-83. Erastianism holds th
there is no institutional separation of church and state, that the church is not a commonwealth with
own officers and jurisdiction separate from the civil government, but that, in some sense, it is under t
institutional jurisdiction of the state.
The Westminster Assembly was confined to a purely advisory function with reference to Parliamen
Parliament was determined to hold the entire power of both church and state in its own hands. Althou
Parliament was intent upon vindicating the civil liberty of the English citizens, it never caught the visi
of a free Church in a free State. It must also be pointed out, however, that although the Parliament deni
to the Assembly initiation and authority, it left it perfectly free in its deliberations and conclusions.
Since Parliament was, in reality, to some degree or another, Erastian, in the debates of the Assemb
and in the whole conduct of its negotiations with Parliament during this dispute, the Assembly manifest
the highest dignity,firmness and courage. If Parliament utterly refused to set up a series of ecclesiastic
courts with independent jurisdiction even in purely spiritual matters, and insisted on reserving to itse
or to secular committees established by and directly responsible to it, the review of even such spiritu
functions as the determination offitness to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, the Assembl
on its part respectfully but firmly protested against such an intrusion of the secular arm into spiritu
things, and refused to be a party to any ecclesiastical arrangement which denied to the Church what
deemed its divinely prescribed rights and responsibilities. It took for its motto the ringing phrase, TH
CROWN RIGHTS OF JESUS CHRIST1.... It showed itself tender, zealous and careful to assert Chri
and His Church their privilege and right...that Christ lives and reigns alone over and in His Church, a
will have all done therein according to His Word and will, and that He has given no supreme headshi
over His Church to any Pope, King or Parliament whatsoever. (Warriston) On the matter of the spiritu
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
8/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Joe Morecraft III
11
THE INCREASING CALL FOR AN ASSEMBLY OFDIVINES TO ASSIST PARLIAMENT
From all sides, within Parliament and without it alike,
the suggestion was pressed that a formal Synod of
Divines should be convened to which Parliament should
statedly appeal for counsel in all questions which should
occasionally arise in the process of the settlement of the
Church. And from the beginning it was at least hinted that,in framing its advice, such a Synod might well bear in
mind wider interests than merely the internal peace of the
Church of England; that it might, for example, consider
the advantage of securing along with that a greater
harmony with the other Reformed churches, particularly
the neighboring Church of Scotland. It was accordingly
with this wider outlook in mind that the proposition was
given explicit shape in the Grand Remonstrance, which
was drawn up in the House of Commons on November
8, 1641, and having been passed on November 22, was
presented to the King on December I.
THE CONTENT OF THE GRANDREMONSTRANCE
This document began by avowing the intention of
Parliament to reduce within bounds that exorbitant power
which the prelates had assumed unto themselves, and to
set up a juster discipline and government in the Church.
It proceeded thus: And the better to effect the intended
reformation, we desire there may be a general synod of the
most grave, pious, learned and judicious divines of this
island; assisted with some from foreign parts, professing
the same religion with us, who may consider of all thingsnecessary for the peace and good government of the
Church, and represents the results of their consultations
unto the Parliament, lo be there allowed of and confirmed,
and receive the stamp of authority, thereby to find passage
and obedience throughout the kingdom.- Warfield, THE
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY AND ITS WORK, pgs.
10-11.
THE CALLING FOR THE WESTMINSTERASSEMBLY
Having been passed by Parliament in 1643 and put ineffect, without the kings assent, the ordinance called
for around 150 attendees and participants to meet and
assemble themselves at Westminster, in the Chapel called
King Henry the VIIs Chapel, on the first day of July, in
the year of our Lord One thousand six hundred and forty-
three,1 and thereafter, from time to time to sit, and be
removed from place to place1 and to confer and treat
among themselves of such matters and things, touching
jurisdiction of the Church, the Assembly remained unmoved and insisted that Christ has instituted in the
Church a government and governors ecclesiastical disti nct from the civil magistrate.- B.B. Warfield, THE
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY AND ITS WORK, pgs. 41-43.
and concerning the Liturgy, Discipline and Government
of the Church of England, or the vindicating and clearing
of the doctrine of the same from all false aspersions and
misconstructions....-Warfield, pg. 12.
THE INCREASING DANGER OF THECONFLICT (1641-42)
THE MURDEROUS CONSPIRACIES OFCHARLES I
In May, 1641, a plot was uncovered to bring the roya
army into London, rescue Strafford from the Tower, and
take possession of London. When the plot was discovered
the conspirators fled to France. The effect of this discovery
was like a lightning flashsudden and fatal. It revealed
to the community their own peril, and the nature of the
measures which the king was capable of pursuing; and
thus it drove them to the conclusion that his word or treaty
could not be trusted, and that the only method of securing
their own safety consisted in depriving him of all powerto injure them.- Hetherington, pg. 85.
THE TYRANNICAL NEED FOR INCREASEDTAXATION
Charles I was anxious that the Scottish army return to
Scotland, since its presence in England, (since Charles
abortive war with Scotland), was an encouragement to the
Reformed element of the population, squelching his own
military preparations. He urged Parliament to raise money
to support his own army, and not the Scottish army. But
when the plot against London was detected, the people of
London would not contribute taxes.8
THE ATTEMPT TO RALLY SCOTLAND TO THEKING AGAINST ENGLAND
The Parliament abolished the pro-crown Court of High
Commission and the Star-Chamber, thus destroying the
main engines of oppression. The king, perceiving that he
was not winning this war with Parliament, changed his
tactics, and suddenly let it be known to Parliament that he
intended to visit Scotland, ostensibly to pacify the Scots. A
treaty was concluded between the king and the Scots, and
the king returned home. Leading members of Parliamentdiscovered his true intentions in going to Scotlandhe
was trying to convince the Scots to detach their army from
support of Parliament to himself, so that he could easily
reduce his resistant subjects to submission to his absolute
rule. He tried to buy off the Scottish Covenanters, and, o8 The burden of maintaining the Scottish army in England was oppressive. The House of Common
had already borrowed large sums for the payment of current expenses; and a still larger sum would b
required for the completion of the transaction. But when the plot against the Parliament was detecte
the citizens of London, who had hitherto advanced the necessary supplies on Parliamentary securit
refused to contribute any more on a security which appeared to be so precarious. Public credit being th
overthrown, the only expedient for its recovery which presented itself was, to secure the continuation
the Parliament ti ll these troubles should terminate. -Hetherington, HISTORY OF THE WESTMINSTE
ASSEMBLY, pg. 85.
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
9/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Authentic Christianity II
12
course, he failed.
THE INCIDENT
Before the kings arrival in Scotland, the Earl of
Montrose had been detected forming a conspiracy to
betray the Covenanters, even while acting as one of their
commissioners at Ripon (meeting with Charles I). For
this, and other similar matters, he had been imprisoned
in Edinburgh Castle. Even in his confinement he found
means of corresponding with his associates, and, through
them, with the king; and a plot was formed, of which there
is strong reason to believe the king to have been aware,
to seize Argyle and Hamilton, (two Scottish nobles) and
either put them to death, or hurry them on board a frigate
which lay in Leith roads, and having thus struck terror
into the Covenanters, to put the army into the hands of the
king, at the head of which his majesty might return and
overpower his refractory Parliament in England. This
event, known by the name of The Incident, sunk deep
into mens minds, and led them to entertain the belief,that the king was capable of conniving at any measure,
however dark and bloody, provided that it could promote
his progress towards absolute despotism. The fearful
outburst of Popish fury, termed the Irish Massacre, taking
place at the same time, gave to all these suspicions the
most dark and dreadful aspect, and filled the heart of both
England and Scotland with intense horror and alarm.-
Hetherington, pgs. 88-89.
THE KINGS CALL TO ARMS AGAINSTPARLIAMENT (1642)
In exasperation with Parliament, the king would retaliate
against their assaults on prelacy. In 1642, he impeached
five leading members of the House for Commons of
high treason. On April 23, 1642, he led a large calvary
with the intention of seizing the important town of Hull,
and taking possession of their ammunition supplies. He
was refused by a Parliament-appointed city official. So,
in his rage, the king declared him a traitor. The breach
continued to widen until there was a complete disruption
between king and Parliament. Considerable numbers of
both Houses forsook the Parliament and joined the king;
an army was formed, and Hull was invested in regularform. To meet this hostile movement, the two Houses, on
the 12th of July, resolved that an army should be raised
for the defense of the king and Parliament, and gave the
command to the Earl of Essex. On the 9th of August, the
king proclaimed
Essex and his adherents traitors; and also declared both
Houses guilty of high treason, forbidding all his subjects
to yield obedience to them. The Parliament, on the
other hand, proclaimed all who should join the kings
army traitors against the Parliament and the kingdom.
Hetherington, pg. 92.
On August 22, 1642, the king rallied all his faithfu
supporters to himself at Nottingham. Few complied with
this warlike summons; but the standard was erected amid
the gathering gloom and the rising gusts of a commencing
tempest, which, ere evening, increased to a perfect
hurricane, and dashed to the earth the royal banner, as ifominous of the fierce storm of civil war then bursting on
the land, and the disgrace and ruin that awaited the roya
cause. It had for some time been clearly perceived by the
Parliament that war was inevitable, especially after the
kings attempt upon Hull; and they accordingly began to
make all necessary preparations.- Hetherington, pg. 92.
THE SEEKING OF AID FROM SCOTLAND(1643)
THE SYMPATHY & RECOMMENDATION
OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND WITHPARLIAMENT
Scotland tried to mediate between the English king
and Parliament; but, although the Parliament accepted
her mediation, the king refused, ordering them not to
intermeddle with the affairs of another nation. The English
Parliament, knowing that the General Assembly of the
Church of Scotland was about to meet, communicated with
that body the serious state of affairs in England, expressed
the desire of Parliament to avoid civil war and to promote
reformation in church and state. The Assemblys response
expressed sympathy for those facing danger in Englandand recommended that the only solution to the situation
and the only way to avoid war was to have national unity
in the Christian Faith, that in all his majestys dominion
there might be one Confession of Faith, one Directory of
Worship, one public Catechism, and one form of Church
government.- Hetherington, pg. 93.
THE DESIRE IN ENGLAND FOR APRESBYTERIAN CHURCH GOVERNMENT AND
A REFORMED CONFESSION
A number of Reformed leaders from England also sent a
communication to the Scottish Assembly stating that thedesire of the most godly and considerable part amongst us
is, that the Presbyterian government, which hath just and
evident foundation, both in the Word of God and religious
reason, may be established amongst us, and that...we
may agree in one Confession of Faith, one Directory of
Worship, one public Catechism and form of government.1
From these expressions it is evident that both the English
Parliament and the Puritan divines were perfectly aware
of the views entertained by the Scottish Parliament and
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
10/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Joe Morecraft III
13
Assembly; and yet did not hesitate to seek assistance, and
to assent to the idea of a uniformity in religious worship,
which Scotland regarded as an indispensable condition.
Nor does it appear that the English Parliament entertained
any reluctance to procure Scottish aid on such terms.-
Hetherington, pgs. 93-94.
THE MILITARY CONFLICT
The military conflict had begun in earnest. Several battles
were fought, mostly to the disadvantage of the Parliament.
As winter approached, hostilities ceased and a peace treaty
was attempted at Oxford, in hopes that the king would
agree to terms which might restore the peace without
the surrender of liberty. But it was soon discovered that
the king was involved in another traitorous plot, which
revealed his continuing duplicity. Military conflict was
resumed, and the kings troops were repeatedly successful.
Therefore, Parliament recognized the urgency of a close
alliance with Scotland.
THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT(1643)
THE APPEAL TO SCOTLAND
The English Parliament made its appeal for Scottish
assistance against the king in the summer of 1643.
Scotland, for decades, had been a Presbyterian and
Reformed nation, and a covenanted nation. The English
nation wanted an alliance with Scotland to secure her
CIVIL LIBERTY; and Scotland wanted an alliance with
England to preserve her RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. Any
compact between them had to be both a political, militaryalliance and a religious covenant, if both parties were to
be satisfied.
THE COURAGE AND COMPASSION OFSCOTLAND
The Scots, indeed, had nothing to gain from the alliance
which was offered them, unless they gained security for
their Church from future English interference; while on
the other hand by entering into it they risked everything
which they had at such great cost recovered for themselves.
Their own liberties were already regained; the cause ofParliament in England on the contrary, hung in the gravest
doubt. It really was an act of high chivalry, to call it by
no more sacred name, for them to cast their lot at this
crisis with the Parliament; and more than one Scot must
have cried to himself during the ensuring years, Surelie
it was a great act of faith in God, and hudge courage and
unheard of compassion, that moved our nation to hazard
their own peace, and venture their lives and all, for to save
a people so irrecoverablie ruined both in their owne and
all the worlds eyes.(Baillie) On the other hand, the Scots
demanded nothing more than that the Parliament should
explicitly bind itself to the course it was on its own accoun
loudly professing to be following...the reconstruction of
the English Church. All that was asked of the Parliament..was...that it should give greater precision, and binding
force under the sanction of a solemn covenant, to its
repeatedly declared purpose.-Warfield, pg. 23.
THE HEART OF THE SOLEMN LEAGUE ANDCOVENANT
The result was THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND
COVENANT9, by which the two nations, England and
Scotland, bound themselves to each other. It was sworn
to by the English Parliament, the Westminster Assembly
the Scottish parliament, and the General Assembly ofthe Scottish Church. It was then sent out throughout the
two countries to be subscribed by the entire population
The date for this historic event was SEPTEMBER 25
1643.10
The two covenanting nations bound themselves to the
preservation of the reformed religion in the Church o
Scotland, in doctrine, worship, discipline and government
against our common enemies, on the one hand; and on
the other to the reformation of religion in the kingdoms
of England and Ireland, in doctrine, worship, discipline
and government, according to the word of God and theexample of the best reformed Churches; to the end that
thereby the Churches of God in the three kingdoms migh
be brought to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in
religion, confession of faith, form of Church government
directory for worship and catechizing.- Warfield, pg
24.
9 The full text of The Solemn League and Covenant can be found in the Free Presbyterian Church
Scotland publication of the Westminster Standards and, as an appendix, in TO GLORIFY AND ENJOY
GOD, published by The Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh.
10 Portions of The Solemn League and Covenant can be found at the conclusion of this paper in a
appendix entitled: The Solemn League and Covenant, pg. 80.
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
11/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Authentic Christianity II
14
THE IMPACT OF THE SOLEMN LEAGUE ANDCOVENANT UPON THE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE WESTMINSTERASSEMBLY
The signing of this covenant11 had a great impact on
the Westminster Assembly. From July-September, 1643,
the Assembly was simply vindicating and clarifying the
doctrinal statement of the Church of England, i.e., TheThirty-Nine Articles. The divines had worked through the
sixteen articles, when the covenant was put into force.
This changed everything. Now the Assembly would not
simply be a body of counselors to the Parliament on
church affairs, it would have vastly increased significance
and heightened dignity. It would have a wholly new
definiteness to the work which should be required of it,
with respect both to its compass and its aim. Whatever else
Parliament might call on the Assembly to advise it in, it
would now necessarily call on it to propose to it a new Form
of Church Government, a new Directory for Worship, a
new Confession of Faith, and a new Catechetical Manual.
And in framing these formularies the aim of the Assembly
would now necessarily be to prepare forms, which might
be acceptable not merely to the Church of England..., but
also to the Church of Scotland as preserving the doctrines,
worship, discipline, government already established in
that Church. The significance of the Solemn League and
Covenant was, therefore, that it pledged the two nations to
uniformity in their religious establishments and pledged
them to a uniformity on the model of the establishment
already existing in the Church of Scotland.- Warfield,
pg. 26.
THE PRODUCTIONS OF THE
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY
THE FORM OF PRESBYTERIAL CHURCHGOVERNMENT (1644)
THE BIBLICAL PRINCIPLES OF CHURCHGOVERNMENT
The Biblical principles upon which this book of church
order produced by the Westminster Assembly are: (1).
The all-sufficient authority of the Bible as the Word of
God. There is a form of government prescribed for the
church in the Word of God, and that form is Presbyterian or
ecclesiastical republicanism. (2). The exclusive kingship
of Jesus Christ over His church. The Lord Jesus Christ,
as King and Head of his Church, hath therein appointed a
government, in the hand of Church officers, distinct from
the civil magistrate. (XXX:I)12 ...To these officers the11 It must be remembered that The Solemn League and Covenant was not some loose agreement
between two churches. It was a solemnly ratified treaty between two nationsScotland and England.
12 Although the overwhelming consensus in the Westminster Assembly among the vast majority of its
members on this issue, (XXX: 1), the entire chapter XXX was omitted from the version of the Westminster
keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed; by virtue
whereof, they have power, respectively, to retain and remi
sins; to shut that kingdom against the impenitent, both by
the Word and censures (discipline).... (XXX:2) The civi
magistrate may not assume to himself the administration
of the word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of
the kingdom of heaven.... (XXIII: 3).
The Preface to The Form of Presbyterial Church-Government sets forth the exclusive and total kingship
of Christ over His Church with unmistakable clarity
Jesus Christ, upon whose shoulders the government is
whose name is called Wonderful, Couselor, The Mighty
God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace; of the
increase of whose government and peace there shall be
no end; who sits upon the throne of David, and upon his
kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and
justice, from henceforth, even forever; having all power
given unto Him in heaven and in earth by the Father, who
raised Him from the dead, and set Him at His own right
hand, far above all principalities and power, and might
and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in
this world, but also in that which is to come, and put all
things under His feet, and gave Him to be the head over
all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness o
Him that filleth all in all: He being ascended up far above
all heavens, that He might fill all things, received gifts for
His church, and gave officers necessary for the edification
of His church, and perfecting of His saints.13
THE UNFINISHED BOOK OF CHURCHGOVERNMENT AND ORDER
The Assemblys final production on church government
has an unpolished and unfinished appearance, due to the
restraints and disagreements of Parliament on this issue and
the political turmoil of its day. Therefore the permanent
influence of the labors of the Westminster Assembly
in the great matter of church organization...has been
largely unofficial and somewhat indirect. Indeed, it is
questionable whether the really great works of individua
members of the Assembly on these topics...must not be
conceived the chief vehicles of this influence.17 The mos
that can be said for the formal work of the Assembly in
this field is that it gave ungrudgingly an immense amoun
of self-denying labor to preparing devices for the use of
Parliament in settling the government of the Church of
England on a Presbyterian model, but was prevented by
the circumstances in which it did its work from doing
full justice in these documents either to its own clear
convictions or to the system with which it was dealing.
Confession approved by the English Parliament!
13 See George Gillespies Aarons Rod Blossoming, (1646); Samuel Rutherfords Due Right
Presbytery, (1644); and Alexander Hendersons The Government and Order of the Church of Scotland
(1641, 1690).
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
12/13the COUNSELof CHALCEDON
Joe Morecraft III
15
Warfield, pg. 44.14
THE PARTIES WITHIN THE WESTMINSTERASSEMBLY
Although there was solid, theological and doctrine unity
among the members of the assembly, all of whom were
devout and thorough-going Calvinists, there was strong
disagreement among them regarding church government,church discipline and the relation of church and state.
(1). The Episcopalians, opposed prelacy, i.e., bishops
acting as civil magistrates, but favored a moderate
episcopal form of church government. Some of them
did become convinced of presbyterianism during the
debates in the Assembly. (2). The Independents favored
non-connectional, autonomous local congregational
government, with no organization beyond that. Although
they were only five in number, hence referred to as the
five dissenting brethren, they were brilliant men, strong
debaters, and to one degree or another were supported by
Cromwell and his army. They were obstructive in their
tactics in the assembly, desiring to delay or defeat the
adoption of a Presbyterian government of the church,
although the majority favored it. (3). The Presbyterians,
who were the overwhelming majority, favored
representative church government by a plurality of elders
with parity, in congregations connected organizationally
by a common confession of faith and church government,
distinct from the civil government, with Christ as its
organic and organizational head, who governed by His
Word and Spirit.
At the outset of the Assembly, most English divines
believed that Presbyterianism was the system of church
government most consistent with the principles of church
polity taught in the New Testament. But, the Scottish
divinesBaillie, Henderson, Gillespie and Rutherford
all of whom believed in Presbyterianism by divine right,
i.e., that it is the only system of church government
prescribed in the Bible, soon convinced the majority of
their viewpoint.
Then there were (4). the Erastians, who comprised a small
but learned group (of two or three), who were supported
by many in Parliament, but who got nowhere in the
Assembly, which was decidedly anti-erastian. And last,
but in no way least, was (5). the Scottish delegation of
commissioners, who were not voting members but who
had the privilege to speak and to enter into debate. Their
small number of about five included preaching elders and
14 It fell...to the lot of the Scots to hold back the English Presbyterians from precipitate and aggressive
action. It was their policy to obtain if possible a settlement not so much imposed by a majority as at least
acceptable to all. They therefore gave themselves not merely to conciliate the minor differences which
emerged in the debate...but even to satisfy1 the small but able band of Independents in the Assembly....
The Independents, on their part, adopted an obstructive policy, and set themselves not only to obtain every
concession it was possible t o wring from the majority....- Warfield, pg. 37.
ruling elders, however, they exerted a dominant influence
on the entire Assembly. They were official commissioners
of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland
which had a century of presbyterian and reformed history
behind them. The ministers among them were Alexande
Henderson, Samuel Rutherford, Robert Baillie and George
Gillespie.
THE WILD GROWTH OF RELIGIOUS SECTS
THE SPRINGING UP OF NUMEROUS SECTS
During the 1640s England experienced the wild and
unbridled growth of numerous and pernicious, religious
sects which were hostile to everything that had a previous
and authorized existence. These sects sprung up even
before the Long Parliament, holding all various shades
of opinion in religious matters, from such as were simply
absurd, down to those that were licentiously wild and
daringly blasphemous.- Hetherington, pg. 148.
THE REASON FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THESESECTS
How is it that these sects appeared in a nation with a
national church under the head of state? How could so
many people follow such absurd and pernicious errors?
The answer is to be found in the way the Church of
England, (prelacy), had GOVERNED, and in the way it
had TAUGHT the people of England.
THE GOVERNMENT OF PRELACYFirst, regarding the way prelacy GOVERNED the people
Since the days of Henry VIII, with the blending of churchand state, and the declaration of the king as the head of
the church, had come civil and ecclesiastical tyranny
It imposed ceremonies on the church not found in the
Word of God. It intruded into the form and language of
worship, ordering a person how to worship and what to
say and do in worship, without regard to the Creators
commands. It presumed to exercise absolute control over
the doctrines which the ministers were to teach, thus
rashly interfering not merely with mans approach to God
but also with Gods message to man. The extreme poin
of spiritual despotism was reached, when the king and his
prelates authoritatively commanded the Lords Day to be
violated, and forbade any other but the Arminian system
of doctrine to be preached. Hence it appears that Prelatic
Church government had proved itself to be a complete
and oppressive despotism, increasing in severity as it
increased in power.- Hetherington, pg. 150. During this
period it silenced or rejected large numbers of the ables
preachers in the nation without mercy. Such tyranny could
only create a strong reaction from people like the English
causing them, in the violence of the revulsion and recoil
-
8/12/2019 2006 Issue 4 - Authentic Christianity: Studies in the Westminster Standards Part 2 - Counsel of Chalcedon
13/13
Authentic Christianity II
to regard every form of ecclesiastical government as
inevitably tyrannical.... In this manner Prelatic tyranny was
the very cause why so many sects sprung up, repudiating
every kind of ecclesiastical government.- Hetherington,
pg. 150.
THE TEACHING OF PRELACY
Second, regarding the way prelacy TAUGHT the people.
Teaching the people was not considered by the Church
of England as a necessary part of its duty. There is an
obvious reason for this. In a church where a tyrannical
king is supreme, it is a dangerous thing to have preaching
and teaching by the church, for that creates an intelligent
and truly religious people, who cannot be enslaved. And
perhaps...the reason why parochial schools were never
instituted in England, is to be found in the same despotic
principle which led the English kings and Church to wish
the people to remain ignorant, that they might be the easier
kept in a state of blind subjection. It will be remembered
also, that whenever the Puritan ministers became whatwas thought troublesome, in their endeavors to teach their
poor and ignorant countrymen, they were immediately
silenced.- Hetherington, pg. 151. Therefore, it is almost
mockery to say that the Prelacy ever attempted to teach
the people of England at all.
Such had been the GOVERNING and such the
TEACHING of Prelacy in England; and it was not strange
that men, groaning under oppression, and kept in utter
darkness, should wrench asunder their fetters furiously,
and should be dazzled when they rushed at once into
unwonted light. Thus is was easy for any man whopossessed sufficient fluency of speech to impose upon an
excited and ignorant people, to gain a number of adherents
to his opinions, and to become the founder and leader of a
sect.- Hetherington, pgs. 151-52.
THE CONTRAST OF SCOTLAND ANDENGLAND
But consider Scotland during this growth of sects in
England. After the restoration of Charles II (1660s),
the Presbyterian Church of Scotland was violently
overthrown, and its adherents subjected to twenty-eight
years of terrific and relentless persecution. Did the people
of Scotland split into innumerable and extravagant
sects, when thus deprived of their religious teachers,
and oppressed with the most remorseless cruelty? They
did not. What caused this remarkable difference?
One answer only can be giventhe superiority of the
Presbyterian system, which had so thoroughly instructed
the people, that they could and did retain their calm and
regulated consistency of doctrine and character in the
midst of every maddening and delusive element; while, on
the other hand, when the Prelatic government of England
was broken up, its oppressed and ignorant people rushed
headlong into the most wild, extravagant, and pernicious
errors.- Hetherington, pgs. 151-152.
THE EFFECTS OF THESE SECTS UPON THEWESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY
The effects of these many sects upon the proceedings ofthe Westminster Assembly were pernicious. Although the
Independents in the Assembly did not openly avow any
connection with these swarming sects, nevertheless, they
communicated with them and often defended them to
secure their support, so as to increase their numbers. In so
doing, they retarded the progress of the Assembly.
TO BE CONTINUED.
A Doxology for the DoxologyDid you know that the Doxology originally had three
stanzas? Thomas Ken, the author, was a minister and
held various positions in England. He originally penned
three verses to the Doxology. They were first written to
to encourage the devotional habits of boys under his
care as chaplain of a school in 1674.
His intention was that one verse was to be sung upon
waking, another at bedtime, and the third at midnight
if sleep did not easily come. Of course today, we can
modify that plan to morning, noon, and night, and change
the order to 1, 3, and 2.
1. Awake, my soul, and with the sun
thy daily stage of duty run;
Shake off dull sloth and joyful rise, to pay thy
morning sacrifice.
2. All praise to Thee, my God, this night,
for all the blessings of the light!
Keep me, O keep me, King of kings, beneath Thine
own almighty wings.
3. Praise God, from Whom all blessings flow;
Praise Him, all creatures here below;
Praise Him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost.
From Then Sings My Soul, a collection of 150 of the
Worlds Greatest Hymn Stories, by Robert J.
Morgan.