spiritual-re-formation-july-august-2013 by Modern Reformation

vol.22 | no.4 | July-August 2013 | $6.50

New from Kim Riddlebarger. NOW AVAILABLE “First Corinthians is a book that has long been neglected by Reformed commentators. That’s why I’m so glad that Kim Riddlebarger has provided the church with this exegetically-sensitive and doctrinally-sound exposition.” — Guy Prentiss Waters, Professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary

FO R A LIMITED TIME, ALL CO PIES ORD E RE D FROM W H I T E HO R SE INN W ILL BE SIGNED BY D R. RI D D L E BARGE R. OR D E R N OW AT W H ITEH O R SEINN.O R G/ FI RSTCORI N T HI ANS.

features VOL.22 | NO.4 | JULY-AUGUST 2013

Spiritual Disciplines and Means of Grace: Contrast or Continuum?

The Reformation and Spiritual Formation

Vital Religion

Christian Prayer

The Book of Common Prayer

Q &A WI T H DA LLAS WIL L ARD

BY MI CHAE L S. H ORTON

BY W. ROB E RT GOD FREY

BY H YWE L R . JO NES

BY LE E G AT I SS

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

One Subscription, 21 Years of Archives. AS A SUBSCRIBER YOU’LL RECEIVE ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE MODERN REFORMATION DIGITAL ARCHIVE — FOR FREE.

VI S I T M OD E R N R E FO R MATIO N.O R G TO SUBS CR IBE TODAY, AND RE AD M OD ER N R EF O R MATI O N O N YO UR TABLET O R CO MPUT E R TOM ORROW.

departments 04 05 10 14

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR BY RYA N G LO MSRUD

CHRIST & CULTURE ›› Listening to The Scream DANI E L A . SI E DE LL

FROM THE HALLWAY ›› Hipster or Herald?

Five Exhortations for Young Preachers BY JO N D. PAYNE

THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD ›› Part IV: The

Once and Future King: From Saul to Solomon BY ZACH KEELE

49 54

BOOK REVIEWS

BACK PAGE ››

ENGELBRECHT, BILLINGS AND HESSELINK, AND EVERHARD

GEEK SQUAD ››

Book of Common Prayer Timeline LE E G AT I SS

Spiritual Classics Editor-in-Chief Michael S. Horton Executive Editor Ryan Glomsrud Managing Editor Patricia Anders Marketing Director Michele Tedrick Design Director José Reyes for Metaleap Creative, metaleapcreative.com Department Editors Ryan Glomsrud (Letter from the Editor & Reviews), Michael S. Horton Designers Tiffany Forrester, Ashley Stephens Copy Editor Elizabeth Isaac Proofreader Ann Smith Modern Reformation © 2013 All rights reserved. ISSN-1076-7169 1725 Bear Valley Parkway Escondido, CA 92027 (800) 890-7556 info@modernreformation.org www.modernreformation.org Subscription Information US 1 YR $32 2 YR $58 Digital Only 1 YR $25 US Student 1 YR $26 Canada 1 YR $39 2 YR $70 Europe 1 YR $58 2 YR $104 Other 1 YR $65 2 YR $118

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

LETTER from the EDITOR

RYAN GLOMSRUD executive editor

One of the comments that started me thinking seriously about Reformation piety was penned by our editor-in-chief in his book Putting Amazing Back into Grace: “Suppose we were to make a list of aids to spiritual growth. What might top the list? Prayer, Bible study, fasting, devotions, evangelism….But how many of us would put the sacraments at the top? Would they even make the list?” This issue tackles head-on the topic of spirituality, aiming to bring reformation to evangelical thinking about spiritual formation. The theme throughout is how to bring together the work of Christ outside of us and for us, and made visible in the sacraments, with the work of God in us by the Holy Spirit. The opening interview with spiritual formation guru Dallas Willard demonstrates the way in which evangelicalism never tires of trying “new” ways to draw close to God, such as fasting, silence, solitude, and contemplation. But in the end, the disciplines advocated by Willard and others amount to the same medieval monastic practices that were rightly criticized by the Protestant Reformers. Put succinctly by Michael Horton, these practices have a way of turning us inward rather than outward to Christ. Evangelicalism stumbles with its commitment to human disciplines that bring God’s grace, whereas Reformation spirituality thinks in terms of God’s means of grace that produce commitment.

There is real spiritual formation in Reformation theology, only it is of a different sort entirely. W. Robert Godfrey, president of Westminster Seminary California, reminds us that the Reformers promoted vital religion. There is always room for the work of God within us. In fact, Rev. Hywel Jones explains that prayer is a place where the ministries of two advocates meet, one external and the other internal—namely, the ministry of Christ before the throne of God, and the ministry of the Holy Spirit in our hearts to bring assurance that we are the children of God. The consequence is the Christian life of prayer, which can be spontaneous but may also be guided by the common wisdom of all the saints. This latter approach in particular is the burden of Anglican author and theologian Lee Gatiss, as he discusses the Book of Common Prayer. The rub in spiritual formation, of course, is the problem of indwelling sin—a theme evident in the lives of the Old Testament kings as explored by Rev. Zach Keele, and evident in modern art as explored by Dan Siedell, an important critic and art historian. The reality of indwelling sin and the life of putting off the old man and putting on the new man grounds Christian thinking about spirituality—and helps our spiritual lives to flourish—in the biblical truth that “the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:23).

THE REFORMERS PROMOTED VITAL RELIGION.

E D I T O R’ S N O T E : As this issue was going to

press, Dallas Willard died of cancer at the age of 77. Before retiring in 2012, Willard granted MR an interview, which we are rerunning in this issue. His provocative contribution to the study of Christian spirituality deserves to be a topic of conversation for a modern reformation of our churches.

C H R I S T & C U LT U R E

LISTENING TO THE SCREAM by DANIEL A. SIEDELL

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

C H R I S T & C U LT U R E

N MY LAST VISIT to New York, I went to the Museum of Modern Art to see The Scream, a little drawing in pastel by Edvard Munch on loan from a private collector. It is one of four versions that the artist made of the famous subject: a genderless figure, standing on a bridge, holding its hairless head and screaming. The image of the silent scream has entered our popular visual culture, from coffee mugs to Macaulay Culkin’s trademark expression in the movie Home Alone. It hangs on a custom-built display wall in the center of a room, amid other drawings, prints, and paintings by the Norwegian artist where tourists crowd in front of the little pastel to pose with their version of the famous gesture. THE $1 2 0 M I L LIO N Q U E ST IO N

This little pastel drawing fetched nearly $120 million, which at that time was the highest price ever paid for a work of art at public auction. The visitors came to gawk at that—to see what $120 million looks like. But The Scream raises a $120 million question: What is up with modern art? What are we to make of it, especially those of us in Reformation traditions? Modern art is strange, intimidating; it puts you on the spot. It doesn’t seem to behave how we believe “Art” should. It hangs in art museums throughout the world, but— to be frank—we’re not quite sure how it got there. Even the most creative and progressive culture makers among us are not quite sure what to do with it. As a museum curator and professor of modern art for nearly twenty years, I understand that frustration and confusion. So let’s spend some time thinking about The Scream. L I STE N I NG A N D SE E ING Some years ago, an artist friend of mine surprised me by claiming that “a painting often distracts us by what it looks like.” Is it possible that a painting, of all things, can be more than meets the eye?

Although he is an atheist, my friend, who has devoted his life to painting, echoed an important biblical truth that Luther recovered: our eyes deceive us. We are easily impressed with visual displays of power, wealth, and beauty. This has given the visual arts one of its primary roles in political and religious regimes since the dawn of recorded history. If our eyes deceive us, then what are we to do in front of a painting? Let me suggest that we follow Martin Luther’s advice and listen. Luther claimed that the ears are the only organs of a Christian. It is through the ears that we hear God’s promises, his promise to love us, to be with us, to never forsake us, to be for us in spite of what we see before our eyes and even in spite of the hiddenness of God—our inability to see him and his presence in the world amid suffering, pain, and injustice. But we like our art as we like our Christianity—visually pleasing. We like it practical, useful, maybe a little therapeutic. We want a Jesus to instruct and encourage us; we want paintings to form virtue in us, elevate us, empower us, even entertain us. We want our Jesus, like our art, to help us succeed. We want tangible, visible results. You and I, if we’re honest with ourselves, gravitate toward a theology that resembles Joel Osteen and art that resembles a Thomas Kinkade painting much more closely than we care to admit. This is not because we’re ignorant about Reformation theology or a creational worldview. It is because we’re human. We’re drawn to what looks like piety, improvement, progress, and talent. We are drawn, like moths to the light, to what Luther called “theologies of glory.” And because it is so powerful visually, a painting is one of those cultural artifacts most susceptible to its seductions. Modern art contradicts most of our assumptions about art. It isn’t about heroes to emulate and challenge us, relaxing scenes with happy trees and quaint cottages to comfort us, outrageous images that entertain or scandalize us, or even expressions of an artist’s “worldview.” And because it pushes against our expectations and assumptions, modern art can offer a fresh way by reflecting on how God is at work in the world

“MODERN ART CONTRADICTS MOST OF OUR ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT ART. IT ISN’T ABOUT HEROES TO EMULATE AND CHALLENGE US, RELAXING SCENES WITH HAPPY TREES AND QUAINT COTTAGES TO COMFORT US, OUTRAGEOUS IMAGES THAT ENTERTAIN OR SCANDALIZE US, OR EVEN EXPRESSIONS OF AN ARTIST’S ‘WORLDVIEW.’” through his two words, law and gospel, in surprising and often scandalous ways, even in the Museum of Modern Art. WEA K A N D VU L N E RAB L E The artist Mark Rothko once said that it is a risky business to send a painting out into the world. And let’s face it: smearing smelly pigment across a scrap of canvas with a brush is a rather strange endeavor. In spite of the fact that they hang in the Louvre and the Metropolitan Museum of Art or cost collectors millions of dollars, paintings—even the so-called masterpieces—are weak and vulnerable things, always seemingly subject to destruction, theft, ridicule, misunderstanding, or—perhaps worse—neglect. To devote one’s life to painting pictures is an absurd practice, one that seems to fly in the face of what the world finds important, relevant, or useful. It contradicts both non-Christian and Christian theologies of culture, which are often obsessed with consumption, education, redemption, or transformation—theologies that work hard to make painting fit into the justifying, transactional power schemes

that shape the world in which both Christians and non-Christians live and breathe and have their being. Paintings exist as contradictions to the conditional engine that drives the world. NATU RE AND T HE MOD E RN A RT I ST Edvard Munch, like so many modern artists, understood an important theological point: nature is much more than meets the eye. In 1907, Munch wrote in his journal: “Nature is not only that which is visible to the eye. It is also the inner image of the mind. The images upon the reverse of the eye.”1 Perhaps it might come as a surprise, but modern artists rediscovered the awesome wonder of nature. One of the reasons that Munch despised academic painting—the pictures of nymphs, nudes, angels, and heroes that populated the salons and academies of his day—was because it presented an overly interpreted, explained, and allegorized nature. For Munch, nature was mysterious, brilliantly opaque, dangerously violent, and put insurmountable pressure on body and soul. He perceived in nature something terrible and unrelenting: it demands our life. The modern artist doesn’t “interpret” nature. He wrestles with it. Paul Cézanne, one of the most influential artists in the history of modernism, even admitted, “Nature appears to me so complicated.”2 ART AND D EAT H Munch once said that art comes from joy and pain. Then he added, “But mostly from pain.” This contradicts the theologian of glory in all of us who bristle at weakness and failure as the means by which God is present with us, choosing to scour culture for beauty and power (as evidenced in virtue and morality) as the most appropriate vehicle for God, because we can enlist them in our life project. But Munch would have none of it. Munch grows old in his paintings. His eyesight fails, he loses his virility; he experiences the death of loved ones, drifts sleeplessly around his home lonely and afraid, dwelling in the growing isolation and desperation of a modern life in which even the most routine daily tasks have the potential to ignite into violent confrontations with his deepest fears. MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

C H R I S T & C U LT U R E

Indelibly scarred as a bedridden and sickly child by the death of his oldest sister whom he worshiped, Munch’s work is a confrontation with death and the pain of loss. One of the pictures on display at MoMA is a lithograph of his sister on her deathbed. Munch recounted that, in a burst of energy, she rose from her bed to sit in a chair where she died. Munch kept that chair with him for the rest of his life. Many shocked viewers, presuming that art’s role is to entertain or teach, found Munch’s confrontation with death, illness, and weakness sickening. And it is. BE O PE N E D !

Our ears are our first organs. The world—which existed as brute, unyielding nature—is returned to us as a gift through hearing the promises of God’s Word. The world—which pours forth speech (Ps. 19:2)—is given to us in all its sensory wonder. What then do we hear in The Scream? Silence.

“THE SCREAM FORCES US TO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS NOT MERELY THE PRODUCT OF A NEUROTIC AVANTGARDE ARTIST, BUT A DISCLOSURE OF THE HUMAN CONDITION WE WORK FEVERISHLY TO COVER UP, OFTEN BY GOING TO MUSEUMS TO LOOK AT ART OR TO CHURCH TO LISTEN TO SERMONS.”

In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus heals a man born deaf and mute in a manner that recalls the mystery of creation: “And taking him aside from the crowd privately, he put his fingers into his ears, and after spitting touched his tongue. And looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, ‘Ephphatha,’ that is, ‘Be opened’” (Mark 7:33–34). In 1538, Luther preached a remarkable sermon on this text. For Luther, Christ comes to open our ears so we may be able to hear his Word in the world. As Oswald Bayer observes about this sermon, “The whole world is filled with speaking” but, through sin, “the whole world is deaf!”3 Without Christ’s lifegiving Word, “Ephphatha,” we hear nothing but the sound of death, the sound of our own anxiety. Bayer continues, The most surprising point in the entire sermon is that Luther, without digressing and in a theologically bold way that is most strange to our ears, takes the Word that Jesus Christ

himself speaks in the miracle story and claims it as a Word that every creature speaks to us. For Luther, this means that Jesus Christ is so powerful when he speaks his Word that he discloses the entire world to us.4

MU NCH A S A T HE OLOGI AN OF T HE C ROSS

The Scream is deaf and mute. Munch knew that his paintings were silent, and it terrified him. For Munch, nature became an echo chamber where his own anxiety in the face of death could only yield a desperate, silent scream. Munch’s paintings force us to confront nature undiluted, red in tooth and claw. The Scream is the sound of our response to nature’s brute silence, undisclosed as a gift through God’s Word. About the origins of this work, Munch remembered that as he stood on a pier, he “felt a huge endless scream course through nature.”5 This is not a nature that can be idealized, improved upon, or completed with a little dose of grace. It needs to be re-created. The Scream gives us what the hiddenness of God in paint sounds like, feels like, and looks like. The Scream does not edify or teach us. It kills us. Perhaps we reject Munch’s paintings and those of other modern artists not because they look strange or express a “worldview” or “values” at odds with our own, but because they confront us with our own mortality, our own weakness,

THE LADDER AND THE BRIDGE

n the Western tradition, art has enjoyed the privileged position of being a means by which the artist could commune with the

divine. Art was considered an almost sacramental means to access the divine—a ladder by which we ascend to God. What is often forgotten is art’s worldly calling. What is forgotten is our neighbor. For that we need to retrieve a fundamental Reformation insight— the distinction between our vertical relationship to God and our horizontal relationship to the world. Our posture before the face of God is passive—we receive the faith that the Word both calls for and creates. Our relationship to the world, as a result, is freed to be active in love. Justified by God in Christ through faith (vertically), we are liberated to love our neighbor (horizon-

failure, and impending death. Luther said that the theologian of the cross has the courage to call a thing what it actually is (Heidelberg Disputation, 1518). Munch shows us that life is defined by suffering, pain, and death. The controversial German philosopher Martin Heidegger once said that Paul Cézanne’s paintings said one thing: “Life is terrifying.”6 But Heidegger could also have said as much looking at The Scream. We do not interpret The Scream. It interprets and interrogates us. It is not only Munch who, like Melville’s Ahab in Moby-Dick, is “gnawed within and scorched without.” This is your condition—and mine. The Scream forces us to recognize that this is not merely the product of a neurotic avant-garde artist, but a disclosure of the human condition we work feverishly to cover up, often by going to museums to look at art or to church to listen to sermons. This vulnerable little pastel, in its hermetically sealed silence, crowded by tourists in a museum in New York, calls a thing what it actually is. A LA ME NT

tally). Art operates on this horizontal plane. Art is not a ladder. It is a bridge. The bridge metaphor draws attention to the horizontal relationship of love, putting artistic practice in the earthy (ethical) context of loving our neighbor. The work of art, then, is a gift to another, recovering the distinctive and theologically rich relationship between art and the viewer, who through the art becomes the artist’s neighbor. It was this horizontal relationship of love that was the impetus behind Luther’s revolutionary doctrine of vocation, which was merely the extension of justification into the world. It is through our work, and

And yet, it is tempting to see The Scream, like much of modern art, as a lament. As Bayer observes, a lament asks in the face of suffering and injustice, “Is God keeping his promises?”7 A lament, however, is only possible when the promises are known. The Scream can thus be heard as a lament by those who believe the promise. Like all paintings, modern or otherwise, it yearns for a viewer who confesses, “All things were created through him and for him” (Col. 1: 15). The Scream is not the last word. But, in its articulation of pain and suffering and embodiment of a nature that must be re-created, not merely improved upon, it must be the first word we hear.

the exercise of our talents and expertise, that we love our neighbor. This bridge image returns art to the public sphere, to the community of seers, hearers, and

Daniel A. Siedell is an art historian on the faculty of Knox Theological Seminary.

feelers. Through the love of our neighbor, we can be means by which God is present and active in the world—through such a silly and vulnerable thing as a painting, a most mysterious yet often overlooked manifestation of love for our neighbor.

1 Sue Prideaux, Edvard Munch: Behind the Scream (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005). 2 Alex Danchev, Cézanne: A Life (New York: Pantheon, 2012). 3 Oswald Bayer, Martin Luther’s Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 107. 4 Bayer, 115. 5 Prideaux, 151. 6 Danchev. 7 Oswald Bayer, Living By Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 69.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

F R O M t h e H A L LWAY

HHIPSTER IPSTER HHERALD? ERALD? OR

FIVE EXHORTATIONS FOR YOUNG PREACHERS by JON D. PAYNE

n his noteworthy book Hipster Christianity, Brett McCracken describes the modern faddish approach to the Christian faith as being “more concerned with its image and presentation and ancillary appeal” than with real substance. “It assumes that mere Christianity isn’t enough or isn’t as important as how Christianity looks and is perceived by the outside world.”1 Relevance and contextualization outweigh biblical truth and distinctiveness. Regrettably, the leaders of this trendy movement are profoundly influencing a new generation of young ministers—not least in the area of preaching. The following is meant to be a direct word to young preachers, calling them back to the old and trusty paths of biblical proclamation.

PR E ACH TH E TE XT

A significant portion of evangelical preaching today is largely personal illustrations, stories, histrionics, and practical tips for a well-adjusted life. I don’t think I’m being unfair here. Examples of such homiletical infidelity are rife, and it is becoming increasingly hard to find faithful exposition. Therefore, young preacher, reject the faddish new measures of contemporary preaching. Preach the text. Be a servant of the Word and “present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed,” who rightly handles “the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). On entering the pulpit, be sure to read the text carefully, explain it clearly, refer to it frequently, and apply it specifically. Faith is created and nourished by the Word of Christ (Rom. 10:17; 1 Pet. 1:23–25; 2:2). God’s Word alone, by his Spirit, is efficacious to save, sanctify, and comfort the elect. It is a primary means by which Christ communicates his saving benefits. Therefore, heed the inspired words of Paul: “Preach the Word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching” (2 Tim. 4:2).

PR E ACH CH RIST C RUC IF IE D

The bold heralding of the person and finished work of Jesus Christ are the essence of faithful preaching. It is no stretch to say that preaching devoid of Christ can hardly be called Christian preaching. Daniel

Baker, the notable nineteenth-century Southern Presbyterian preacher, rightly expressed that “the sermon that does not distinctly present Christ in the beauty and glory of his mediatorial character is no better than a cloud without water, a casket without a jewel, a shadow without the substance or a body without the soul.”2 Summarizing the apostolic preaching ministry, Paul declares, “We preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23a). Subsequently he writes, “And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:1–2). Moreover, to the Galatians the apostle describes his preaching as that which publicly placards the atoning death of Christ (Gal. 3:1). Commenting on this passage, Calvin writes: “Let those who would discharge aright the ministry of the gospel learn, not merely to speak and declaim, but to penetrate into the consciences of men, to make them see Christ crucified, and feel the shedding of His own blood.”3 Therefore, young preacher, preach Christ and him crucified. Like the apostles, devote yourself to proclaiming Christ from all of Scripture (Col. 1:28–29). May you never be found guilty of preaching Christ-less or gospel-less sermons. When these are not easily discernible in the text, labor hard to make those gospel connections (cf. Luke 24:27, 44; Acts 2:14–41). Whenever you preach, devote yourself to joyfully announcing the good news that God “loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10b). MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

F R O M t h e H A L LW AY

PR E ACH T H E IM P E RAT IV E S

A troubling trend in contemporary preaching is the emphasis upon the indicatives of Scripture to the neglect of the imperatives.4 Afraid to offend, many young preachers are reluctant to explain and apply God’s law in its various uses—especially the third use that functions as a guide for Christian living. If the law is mentioned at all, it is referred to only as a mirror that shows us our sin and an impossible standard that can never be met, thus highlighting mankind’s colossal need for Jesus Christ, the perfect law-keeper and sin-bearer. To be sure, this guilt-exposing, need-revealing function of the law must always play a central role in preaching, but so must the law’s function as an inspired blueprint for godliness. God’s moral law, summarized in the Decalogue and woven throughout Scripture, is meant to do more than just expose the sinner’s inner corruption and spiritual privation. It is also meant to teach the regenerate how to “walk in a manner worthy” of their Christian calling (Eph. 4:4), and how to pursue holiness in every area of life (cf. 1 Pet. 1:14–16). Some may be secretly worried that preaching God’s commands will potentially undermine the gospel; an emphasis upon imperatives might lead to new forms of legalism or even weaken the believer’s assurance. Undoubtedly, Christ-less preaching can produce these adverse effects. However, the faithful preaching of biblical imperatives (that which is built upon gospel indicatives) in no way compromises the good news. The very structure of Paul’s Epistles underscores this point. The framers of the Westminster Confession of Faith wrote that rather than contradicting the gospel, the proper uses of God’s law “do sweetly comply with it” (cf. WCF 19.7). As a guide for the Christian life, the law sweetly complies with the gospel and should be viewed by every Christian as a precious gift from God, not a burden: “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3). Kevin DeYoung writes that “there is nothing sub-Christian in talking about obedience

to God’s commands. There is nothing inherently anti-gospel in being exhorted to keep the imperatives of Scripture. There is nothing ungracious about divine demands.”5 Young preacher, does your preaching reflect a faithful emphasis upon the third use of the law? Are you boldly teaching the flock how to live in the light of God’s sovereign grace? Renew your commitment to preach the “whole counsel of God.” Devote yourself not only to proclaiming the free gospel of grace, but also to teaching God’s people how to live in the light of it. The law cannot save, but in the hands of the Spirit it is a tool of sanctification for every believer.

P RE ACH WI T H AU T HORI T Y

Preachers are called to be courageous messengers of God’s authoritative truth, not timid crowdpleasers (2 Tim. 1:7). They are called to declare, “Thus says the Lord.” However, today we too often hear preachers gingerly and even apologetically tiptoeing through texts so as not to offend. This is a far cry from what we witness in the ministries of the prophets, the apostles, and the Lord Jesus Christ. They preached with power and authority. Those who heard them recognized it. There was something different about their preaching. It was not like the ear-tickling preaching of the false prophets or the self-aggrandizing preaching of the Pharisees. They preached with authority because they knew that they were preaching the authoritative Word of God. In a sermon on pastoral fidelity, Thomas Smyth (1808–1873), a Presbyterian minister in Charleston, South Carolina, wrote: Reckless of popularity, reputation, or comforts, [the faithful preacher] will proclaim the truth plainly and boldly. In common life he is the willing, humble servant of all men; and of all men most defenseless and unprotected, and ready to receive instruction and reproof from a little child. But his message in the sanctuary rolls over crowned and

QUOTABLE J. I. Packer on Preaching Christ Crucified: Preaching the cross “does not mean…that the evangelical will harp all the time on the bare fact of the crucifixion. It means, rather, that he will use all the lines of biblical thought to illuminate the meaning of that fact; and he will never let his exposition of anything in Scripture get detached from, and so appear as unrelated to, Calvary’s cross and the redemption that was wrought there; and in this way he will sustain a Christ-centered, crossoriented preaching ministry year in and year out, with an evangelistic as well as a pastoral thrust.” J. I. PACKER, “INTRODUCTION: WHY PREACH?” EDITED BY SAMUEL T. LOGAN, THE PREACHER AND PREACHING (PHILLIPSBURG, NJ: P&R, 1986), 9.

anointed heads; the king and the slave are alike unto him, and with a faithful and unsparing hand he will humble them alike into the dust. The unlettered man and the wise shall bow to the wisdom of God, and the weak and the strong together shall tremble at his power. Out of the pulpit the preacher knows no man below, and in the pulpit he knows none above him.6 These are timeless words that every minister should take to heart. Young preacher, as a lion for the Lord’s cause and a lamb for your own, preach Scripture with boldness and authority—confident that it’s not your own word you preach, but the living and abiding Word of God.

PREACH WITH SERIOUSNESS AND DIGNITY

The preacher is called to be a royal ambassador of the crucified, risen, and exalted Lord Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 5:20). The preacher’s message and appearance, therefore, should reflect the seriousness and dignity of his office and divine calling. Leading hipster preachers in our day, however, sometimes fail to communicate godly dignity when they incorporate

salty language and inappropriate themes in their sermons. One hipster megachurch in the South discourages children under the age of twelve from attending public worship with their parents because of the explicit content in the sermons. Moreover, dignity in preaching is severely impaired when pastors refuse to dress suitably for the occasion, or even appropriately for their age. There are reasons why presidents and prime ministers dress formally. They hold a dignified office, and they want people to take them, and what they say, seriously. In the late 1960s, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones once lamented that a nearby London preacher took great pains to “have his hair waved once a week and maintains an artificially produced tanned appearance of his skin.” 7 If only he knew what was happening today! This does not mean, of course, that every preacher must wear a Geneva gown or a three-piece suit and speak in the Queen’s English. It does mean, however, that the preacher’s message and appearance must, if possible, communicate the seriousness and dignity of his holy calling. DO THI S, NOT THAT Young preacher, beware of the faddish trends of contemporary preaching and preachers. Devote yourself to preaching sermons that are textual, Christcentered, authoritative, serious, dignified, and full of robust application. This is a faithful and enduring ministry. Not only will this kind of preaching bring a modern reformation to the church and a bold witness to the world, it will also serve, both in the study and the pulpit, to sanctify the preacher. The choice is yours: Will you be a cool hipster or a holy herald?

Rev. Jon D. Payne is minister of Christ Church Presbyterian (PCA) in Charleston, South Carolina, and series editor of the Lectio Continua Expository Commentary on the New Testament. 1 Brett McCracken, Hipster Christianity (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2010), 12. 2 Quoted in David B. Calhoun, Our Southern Zion (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2012), 24. 3 John Calvin, Commentary on Galatians, vol. XXI (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 80. 4 For a helpful treatment on this subject see John Carrick, The Imperative of Preaching (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2002). 5 Kevin DeYoung, The Hole in Our Holiness (Wheaton: Crossway, 2012), 52–53. 6 Thomas Smyth, Pastoral Memento: Love Waxing Cold; and Pastoral Fidelity Consistent With Pastoral Affection (Charleston, SC: John Russell, 1850), 63–64. 7 D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers: 40th Anniversary Edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 269.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

THE

G R E AT E ST STORY EVER TOLD

PART IV

THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING From Saul to Solomon

“

by ZACH KEELE

HERE WAS no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21:25). This is the opening song playing as the curtain is drawn back on 1 Samuel. Who will be the king that Israel truly needs? The people are on stage first. Saul—a tall, regal GQ model—receives the People’s Choice Award to be king over Israel so they could be like the other nations. We know, of course, how Saul performs: he sacrifices impatiently; selfishly, he does not kill all the Amalekites; he is the taker of rash oaths and the butcher of priests. Like the judges, Saul can swing a sword, but he cannot obey the law. He is unable to lead the people in righteousness.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

ext up, it is God’s turn to choose a king of a different sort. Now God selects a boy, the youngest of eight sons, who is not even invited to the feast but is left out in the field to tend the lambs. This boy is unfamiliar with a sword, but he is accustomed to the slingshot and the harp. The Lord seeks out a man after his own heart—David. The difference between the people’s choice and God’s choice could not be starker. As Saul is hunting down David, the Lord’s anointed, David will not harm a hair on Saul’s anointed head. In all things, David obeys the Lord. He is not a tyrant to God’s people, but a tender shepherd guiding in righteousness. So God grants David an everlasting kingship. David will eventually lie down with his fathers, but from David’s house God will raise up a son. The Lord will be a father to this son, establishing his kingdom and throne forever. This son will construct a house for God; he is the temple builder. Reading through 1–2 Samuel, all our hopes for the king had been piled on David, but now God shifts these upon David’s son. The Lord makes an oath that the son of David is the one. The son will be that perfect king to bear God’s people to the glorious summit of Zion. Our eager expectations are teeming on the surface: Come, son, come quickly. In fact, it is a good thing the Lord put our hopes on David’s son. After his covenant in 2 Samuel 7, David’s performance gets rusty: Bathsheba, Absalom, and the census. The gleaming armor of David tarnishes. So, with the excited giddiness of little children, we are singing Psalm 2 at the coronation of Solomon. The crowned king asks the Lord for wisdom and it is granted. The Lord tells Solomon, “If you will walk before me…doing according to all that I have commanded, and keeping my statutes and rules, then I will establish your royal throne over

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE UNITED MONARCHY FOLLOWING THE plotline of the Old Testament can be a mind-bending experience—stories like the rise and fall of the united monarchy are told and retold in several different books for different reasons with different emphases. It can be a tricky road to track, so we’ve made a great chart to help you navigate the desert of Israel’s good (and bad) times in (and out of) the Promised Land.

TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S T H E H I STO R I C A L B O O K S

T H E G R E AT E S T S T O R Y E V E R T O L D

1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther

THE BIG POINT As the king goes, so goes Israel! (If he ain’t righteous, she ain’t righteous.)

THE UNITED K I N G D O M M O NA R C H Y A period in Israel’s history when all the Israelite tribes were unified under one king.

P A R T IV

M A I N C H A R ACT E R S Saul The JFK of the Israelite world whose charismatic magnetism got him elected king of Israel.

David The short, scrawny youngest-son-of-theshepherd whom God chose to defeat Goliath and rule Israel.

Solomon The son of David and Bathsheba who began well, but unfortunately neglected to take his own advice about keeping covenants and seeking after wisdom.

Israel

Judah

T H E U N I T E D M O NA R C H Y Saul 1 Samuel

David 2 Samuel

Solomon 1 Kings

Tells the story of Samuel (the first prophet), Saul (the first king), and David (the king-elect).

Tells of the reign of King David.

1st HALF: Tells of the reign of King Solomon (David’s son) and the decline of the united monarchy. 2nd HALF: Traces the histories of the divided kingdoms, Israel in the north and Judah in the south.

DECLINE AND EXILE 2 Kings

1 Chronicles

2 Chronicles

Ezra & Nehemiah

Esther

Continues the tragic histories of Israel and Judah in their exile (Remember, as the king goes, so goes Israel!) The book ends as the tribes are carried off into captivity, Israel to Assyria in 722 B.C. (2 Kings 17), and Judah to Babylon in 586 B.C. (2 Kings 24-25).

R E-RUN ALERT !

RE-RUN ALERT !

Prophetic books

This book retells David’s story for the post-exilic community—the point is to focus on the messianic promise and rebuilding.

1st Half: Retells Solomon’s story.

This is a story about Israel in captivity—deliverance comes through a Jewish girl who’s made queen of Persia.

2nd Half: Gives you a handy recap of the succession of kings of the divided kingdom, focusing on Judah in the south up to the time of the exile.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

T H E G R E AT E S T S T O R Y E V E R T O L D

“SOLOMON WAS NOT THAT RIGHTEOUS SON, BUT GOD’S OATH IS SURE. THE ROYAL HEIR WILL COME. IT IS NOT TODAY, AND IT MAY NOT BE TOMORROW, BUT GOD’S COVENANT WITH DAVID IS UNBREAKABLE.” Israel forever” (1 Kings 9:4–5). If Solomon will be righteous, then he will be the king to bring the people into their inheritance. And how graceful are the sage hands of Solomon! With erudite piety he delivers justice to Israel, and he instructs the queen of Sheba. His healing hands weave peace that covers the land. Shaded by vines and fig trees, every person eats and drinks and is happy. As Garrison Keillor says of Lake Wobegone, so it also now seems that Israel is a place where “all the women are strong, the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.” The Lord gives Solomon rest on every side. There is neither adversary nor misfortune (1 Kings 5:4). Then there is the exquisite architecture of the temple, seven years of fine masonry, carving of olivewood, and overlaying of nearly everything in gold. Like a jeweled diadem, the temple crowns Mount Zion. And as a crescendo, with all of God’s people assembled in worship, the Glory of the Lord fills the temple. The fiery presence of the Almighty, enshrouded in cloud, takes his place above the cherubim. The Lord God of heaven and earth, Creator of all, and Redeemer of his covenant people, has come to dwell with his own. As readers we are

drawn into the congregation. Our eyes squint at God’s splendor. Our tongues let loose praises and thanksgivings: “The Lord is good, for his steadfast love endures forever.” And yet, as we sing for joy, our eyes begin scanning the congregation. What do we see? There is a wife of Solomon, and then another wife and another: seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines. The king’s palace catches our gaze: it is bigger and more glorious than the temple. In the windows of Solomon’s chateau, you notice the foreign gods that his wives brought with them. You peer across the Kidron Valley and there on the Mount of Olives are shrines to Chemosh and Molech. There are idols in Jerusalem. The people may be wealthy, but they work eighty hours a week. There is greed in the wisdom of Solomon. The mold of infidelity grows upon the obedience of the king. Solomon is not the son. We sang Psalm 2 too soon. Solomon had his good points, but he was not righteous. The excitement over Solomon is dashed; our hope is delayed. The words of Scripture tell us it is good to wait upon the Lord. Solomon was not that righteous son, but God’s oath is sure. The royal heir will come. It is not today, and it may not be tomorrow, but God’s covenant with David is unbreakable. And so like the Israelites who had to wait on the Lord, we wait. With one king after another, the righteous branch of David does not sprout and flower. After centuries of waiting and pent-up hope and expectation, you can imagine the elation of that young virgin when the angel tells her, “The child to be born of you will be called holy—the Son of God. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” With Mary the waiting stops and we behold our righteous king, Jesus Christ. We see him who bears us up on his righteous shoulders to the heavenly Mount Zion. Then we hear the sweetest words imaginable: “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man” (Rev. 21:3).

Zach Keele is pastor of Escondido Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Escondido, California.

Partner With Us.

HELP OTHERS KNOW WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND WHY THEY BELIEVE IT. Through your monthly support as a partner of White Horse Inn you will help others rediscover the riches of the Reformation. Our partnership benefits include a subscription to Modern Reformation, private partner podcast or CDs, books, and invitations to special events.

TO B E C OM E A PARTNER , VISIT W H ITEHO R SEI NN.ORG/SUP P ORT.

Feed Your Inner Theology Geek. VISIT THE STORE. Be sure to check out White Horse Inn’s online store. In addition to books, you’ll find mp3s, study kits, and videos for sale—everything you need to keep the conversation going offline.

VISIT W H ITEH O R SE IN N.ORG/STORE .

features 22

SPIRITUAL DISCIPLINES AND MEANS OF GRACE: CONTRAST OR CONTINUUM?

THE REFORMATION AND SPIRITUAL FORMATION

CHRISTIAN PRAYER

THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER

VITAL RELIGION MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

Spiritual Disciplines and Means of Grace:

CONTRAST OR

CONTINUUM? Q&A with DALLAS WILLARD

allas Willard, the late professor of philosophy at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, authored numerous books, including Knowing Christ Today: Why We Can Trust Spiritual Knowledge (HarperCollins, 2009), The Great Omission: Rediscovering Jesus’ Essential Teachings on Discipleship (Harper Collins, 2006), and Renovation of the Heart: Putting on the Character of Christ (NavPress, 2002). Would you give us a little background as to how you came to see the importance of spiritual disciplines and your theological journey?

My desire to be an effective minister, as a very young man, led me to intensive prayer. To make that effective, I was driven in turn to lengthy periods of solitude and silence and later to fasting. This made me see the Bible in a new light as embodying and holding forth a different kind of life, which in time I came to see as life in the kingdom of the heavens as a disciple or apprentice of Jesus, that to trust him meant to accept him as one who was right about everything and not just the way to forgiveness of sins. What writers, Christian and non-Christian, have particularly influenced you as you’ve thought about these issues?

James Gilchrist Lawson’s Deeper Experiences of Famous Christians opened the reality of Christians through the ages to me; it caused me to see that a life of holiness and power in the kingdom of Christ was possible. Next came The Imitation of Christ by Thomas à Kempis, then Lectures on Revival by Charles Finney and his autobiography, then the writings of John Wesley, and then A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life by William Law. After these, in slower progression in later life, the writings of Jeremy Taylor, Richard Baxter, Francis de Sales, John Owen, and others similar to them. In your estimation, what are the most effective methods of growing spiritually? What are the key spiritual disciplines?

a. First, on the basis of the gos-

pel’s vision of life in the kingdom of the heavens, we should decide to learn to do what Jesus taught and did. This will include what he did by going into solitude and silence for long periods of time, walking in fellowship with his Father, and in prayer. You rarely meet anyone who has actually decided to do this; but without such a decision, little of a spiritual life will come. It is difficult to say anything accurate in general terms about “key spiritual disciplines,” for they are not righteousness but wisdom, and their application depends to some degree on the condition of the person in question. Nevertheless, at the outset of discipleship, solitude and silence are basic and wisely used. This should never be done in complete isolation. I think service and secrecy (not letting your good deeds be known) are also vital. Study of the Scripture (especially memorization of substantial passages) is essential, and fellowship with some few individuals, at least, who are of like serious mind. These are all parts of discipleship to Jesus and can only succeed for growth in the kingdom if he is constantly guiding you. All of this is something we humbly learn as we go along. There is not a formula. It is a kind of life with and in God, after all.

You say that living a spiritual life depends on deciding to learn to do what Jesus taught and did. Don’t we risk making Jesus more an example to follow than a Redeemer in whom we trust? And since his primary mission was unique, should imitation of Jesus be made so central?

The issue is not a “spiritual” life, but a life of obedience and fulfillment. A spiritual life can mean almost anything. There are risks any way you take Jesus. The question is, how can you trust Jesus as Redeemer and not trust him in what he says to do? And of course what he says to do is what he did. People who say they trust Jesus as Redeemer and do not make every effort to obey him are self-deceived. They do not trust him. They trust some story about him. As long as you MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

are clear that your sins are not forgiven because you follow his example, or because you do anything else of “merit”—clear that obedience only succeeds by grace—you should, in the language of 2 Peter 1, “give all diligence” to do the things Jesus said to do. Because of misunderstandings of the basic nature of grace, people today are not only saved by it, they are paralyzed by it. Real grace makes you active as nothing else does (1 Cor. 15:10, 2 Cor. 9:8). You identify the disciplines of silence and solitude as essential to the life of Christian discipleship. But since everything necessary for faith and practice is taught in Scripture, on what basis can we call such disciplines “essential”?

Just drop everything not explicitly taught in Scripture from your practice and see how much is left of ordinary church activities. Just be consistent. Here is something essential that is taught in Scripture: “Set your mind on things above, not on things that are of the earth...mortify the parts of your life that are only of earth: immorality, impurity, passions, evil desire, and greed.…Also put aside anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive speech.…Do not lie to one another since you laid aside the old self with its practice and have put on the new self.…Put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience, bearing with one another and forgiving each other.…And beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity” (Col. 3). Now, is this essential? In fact, today’s consumer Christianity denies that it is—at least by its practice. How do you do it? This is the area of means. As I say in my Spirit of the Disciplines, if what you are doing accomplishes this, then you don’t need anything else. So how are we doing? Spiritual disciplines are taught in the Scriptures by practice, by example; as Paul said to the Philippians, “These things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things; and the God of peace shall be with you” (4:9). Because our practice is not one of example, we cannot understand this; but in the biblical context, this was something that didn’t even need to be said. Spiritual disciplines (as explained to painful lengths elsewhere) are not matters of righteousness, earning merit and so

forth. They are matters of wisdom. No one should practice them who doesn’t need them. Once you decide to obey Jesus, then you can deal honestly with the issue of means. Until you do, of course, you need nothing. What do you expect to happen to a person who faithfully practices spiritual disciplines over a long time?

They will increasingly manifest the fruit of the Spirit—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control (Gal. 5:22–23)—and this will be obviously easy for them; and there will be manifestations of divine power in conjunction with who they are and what they do. Earlier you said that reading certain books caused you to see that a life of holiness and power in the kingdom of Christ was possible. Here you say that faithful practice of spiritual disciplines over a long time will lead not only to our increasingly manifesting the fruit of the Spirit, but also to manifestations of divine power in conjunction with who we are and what we do. What specifically do you mean when you talk about such manifestations of divine power?

a. I mean that you will see accomplished by

your words and actions what cannot possibly be explained by your efforts and talents.

Spiritual discipline is, of course, closely associated with one’s understanding of sanctification. Some have suggested that Reformation traditions, for example, are less interested in spiritual disciplines than, say, Roman Catholic or Wesleyan groups, because of theological differences. Do you agree that one’s view of sanctification matters here, and how does your own theological perspective shape your advocacy of spiritual disciplines?

a. Talk of sanctification is now largely counterproductive, in my opinion, though I have tried to say something about it in my book, Renovation of the Heart. Basically, sanctification is living in

“THE SINGLE MOST HARMFUL OBSTACLE TO SPIRITUAL GROWTH IN WESTERN CHRISTIANITY TODAY IS A MISUNDERSTANDING OF GRACE THAT KEEPS IT OUT OF DAILY LIFE AND OBEDIENCE.” a relationship to the Master that brings and sustains right thoughts, feelings, choices, and habits, enabling one to do what is right religiously, morally, and prudentially—to do this out of who one has become rather than from external obedience. Theologically, the most important thing here is to understand that grace is for one’s whole life and not just for forgiveness. Grace is God acting in one’s life to accomplish what one cannot or will not do on one’s own. Grace is not opposed to effort, but to earning. One needs to study grace inductively throughout the Bible to learn what it is and how it works in daily life. The single most harmful obstacle to spiritual growth in Western Christianity today is a misunderstanding of grace that keeps it out of daily life and obedience. Reformational churches hold (at least in principle if not always in practice) rather strongly to a mediated relationship with God through Christ. Not only is Christ our only intercessor, but our relationship with Christ is mediated through Word and Sacrament. So when we talk about the work of the Spirit and the life of piety, we can’t help but talk about the ordinary means of grace (the preached Word, baptism, and the Lord’s Supper). What role do the corporate hearing of the Word and receiving of the sacraments play in a spiritual disciplines approach to piety?

They play an essential role; but if they are taken, as they often are, as the sole and sufficient activities to be engaged in, they will fail

miserably. Experience should make this clear to any observant and honest person. Beyond the corporate emphasis, classic Lutheran and Reformed churches have wanted to emphasize that while we are to be given to a life of prayer, regular Bible study and so forth, the basis of all real Christian piety is what happens when the Word is preached and the sacraments are administered. These are things God does for us that then give rise to faith and obedience. Out of this source, centered on what God has done for us in Christ by his Spirit through his Word, we then engage in regular family devotions and personal devotions. How would you respond to the criticism that the approach often associated with spiritual disciplines is too individualistic, self-focused, and oriented to what we can do for God rather than what he has done for us? That it starts with us and works its way to God instead of the other way around?

These are misunderstandings based on willing or unwilling ignorance of what it is like to practice spiritual disciplines in apprenticeship to Jesus. Just look, for example, at how Calvin and Luther actually lived and follow their example, and you will see that it was not an early version of today’s consumer Christianity. When one says, “While we are to be given to a life of prayer, regular Bible study, and so forth, the basis of all real Christian piety is what happens when the Word is preached and the sacraments are administered,” what is understood usually is that the only thing really required is attendance to preaching and taking the sacraments. Look at the lives of those who practice this and see if you think that is what the New Testament writers had in mind. Of course, that is an abuse of the Reformed teachings as they come from Calvin and Luther. They were very sensitive, as we must be, to the abuse of a life of spiritual disciplines. The only thing that can carry us beyond abuses from all sides is the sincere intent to obey Jesus and the steady will to find how to walk with him and receive his grace to actually do it. Anyone who proceeds in this way will find their way by his grace into a life of holiness and power. Without this, you can theologize all you want and in any way you want, but it will lead to nothing in the way of a spiritual life in Christ. MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

THE REFORMATION

& SPIRITUAL FORMATION

by MICHAEL S. HORTON

uther and Calvin have a lot to teach us about heady doctrines like justification and election. We have to

look elsewhere, though, when it comes to the brass tacks of Christian living. Any real engagement with the Reformers’ work, however, dispels this widespread misunderstanding. They knew nothing of the modern dichotomy between doctrine and life; like the ancient fathers, Luther and Calvin used the word “piety” to encompass both. The problem, I suspect, is that many evangelicals today have in mind a rather narrow definition of piety and a list of spiritual disciplines that are almost exclusively private and method oriented. It’s the whole framework, not just the details, that distinguishes Reformation piety from other approaches.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

Here are several such hallmarks of Reformation piety: 1. 2.

Reformation piety is not about moving higher than the gospel, but growing deeper into it. It is more communal and covenantal. It’s the external ministry through which the Spirit unites us to Christ and therefore to his visible church, and this public ministry defines our private piety, rather than vice versa. Reformation piety treats good works not as something we do for God or even for ourselves, but for others: fellow saints, our family, and our neighbors through our various callings in the world. Hence, Reformation piety is extrospective more than introspective—looking up in faith to God and out to our neighbors in love.

When we think we’re talking about piety, many of our brothers and sisters think we’re talking about something else. They are often focused on means of commitment that lead to grace, where we’re thinking of means of grace that produce commitment; private disciplines that we sometimes can do together, where we have in mind a public ministry that shapes our private disciplines; withdrawing from the world in solitude, when we’re imagining a piety that drives us out into the world. In many ways, contemporary evangelical approaches share more affinities with medieval than reformational piety. In fact, popular evangelical writers such as Dallas Willard and Richard Foster make this connection explicit by encouraging a revival of the practices that marked monastic spirituality. This more intensely personal relationship to God is promised by practicing the spiritual disciplines—especially private prayer, fasting, silence, contemplation, and solitude. Even in evangelical Calvinist circles, as well as Lutheran pietism, the Christian life is often individualistic and introspective. Even when informed by evangelical doctrine, the picture evoked is of the lonely pilgrim making his way to the Celestial City more than the “cloud of witnesses” cheering from the heavenly stands and the communion of saints on earth. While it is certainly better to preach the gospel than other things to ourselves, isn’t it more important to hear the gospel proclaimed objectively and publicly to us and ratified in sacraments? Often, the Christian life is identified primarily with things we do by ourselves, to ourselves, and for ourselves.

T HE ME DIEVAL S OU RCE S OF EVA NGE LI CAL SP I RI T UA LI T Y Reacting against individualism, some people put transforming the world above transforming themselves. From the Reformation perspective, this is an in-house debate within medieval spirituality. Should primacy be given to the contemplative life or the active life? Different monastic orders were founded in answer to that question. From the Reformers’ perspective, however, the whole paradigm needed rethinking. The connection with medieval piety should not be surprising, since in many ways the Anabaptist movement grew in that soil. This is true especially of the Brethren of the Common Life, a remarkably effective lay movement that anticipated the parachurch network of evangelical pietism (see sidebar on page 30). The basic approach was captured by the title of a best-seller by Brethren alumnus Thomas à Kempis: The Imitation of Christ. Like the Brethren movement generally, Anabaptists showed little interest in debates over justification and in some cases outright rejected it. In fact, many went beyond the more moderate mysticism of monastic spirituality, drawing especially on radical mystics such as Meister Eckhart and Johann Tauler. A sharp antithesis was maintained between spirit and matter, inner and outer, and direct experience within and the external ministry of preaching and sacrament. The main difference between medieval and Anabaptist-Pietist spirituality was that the latter expected not only an elite group of monks and nuns, but all truly regenerate disciples to commit themselves to the separated life of rigorous introspection and holy solitude. By separating from the world— and a worldly church—their souls could ascend away from everything material and achieve union with God in all of his majesty. This trajectory is evident in Lutheran pietism and among some Puritans, such as Richard Baxter, who were more inclined toward Arminian views. It continued with William Law, in John Wesley’s “Holy Club,” the Keswick “higher life” movement, and myriad evangelical leaders and movements that have been shaped by this trajectory. Whatever their differences on various points, Luther and Calvin were at one on the chief emphases of biblical piety.

UNION, NOT J U ST IM ITAT IO N

us what he has received from the Father, he had to become ours and dwell within us. For this reason, he is called ‘our Head’ [Eph. 4:15], and ‘the first-born At the very outset, Calvin, like Luther, put the brakes among many brethren’ [Rom. 8:29].”4 From this saving on the monastic ascent toward the God of majesty: union we discover our election, redemption, effectual calling, justification, adoption, sanctification, and gloThe situation would surely have been hopeless rification. All of these benefits belong to every believer had the very majesty of God not descended to in Christ alone through faith alone. us, since it was not in our power to ascend to In union with Christ we receive justification and him. Hence, it was necessary for sanctification as gifts. There isn’t the Son of God to become for us one gift ( justification) and then “Immanuel, that is, God with some other supposedly higher us,” and in such a way that his gift (sanctification) reserved for divinity and our human nature those who experience a “second might by mutual connection blessing.” Calvin explains that grow together. Otherwise the faith embraces Christ himself and nearness would not have been therefore all of his gifts together. near enough, nor the affinity Justification speaks to the legal sufficiently firm, for us to hope aspect of this union, while ScripEvangelical piety often that God might dwell with us…. ture draws on organic imagery for focuses on means of Therefore, relying on this pledge, sanctification, such as vine and commitment that lead to we trust that we are sons of God, branches, head and members. grace, where Reformation for God’s natural Son fashioned The piety in which he was reared piety focuses on means for himself a body from our body, emphasized imitating Christ by of grace that produce flesh from our flesh, bones from following his example (“What commitment. our bones, that he might be one would Jesus do?”). Calvin pointed with us.1 to something deeper:

KNOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE

Medieval-Evangelical Methods

The object of faith is not merely Let us know that the Apos➨ Private Prayer “God,” Calvin argues, but the Tritle [in Romans 6] does not ➨ Fasting une God, revealed in Christ, “as he simply exhort us to imitate ➨ Silence is clothed in his gospel.”2 To attempt Christ, as though he had ➨ Contemplation direct union with God apart from said that his death is a pat➨ Solitude Christ is to “seek God outside the tern which all Christians way.” It is to be trapped in a labare to follow; for no doubt yrinth, as one finds in Roman he ascends higher, as he Catholic piety. announces a doctrine with which he connects While the monk ascends to the God of majesty an exhortation; and his doctrine is this: that through contemplation, speculation, and merit, in the death of Christ is efficacious to destroy and the gospel God descends to us in humility, in our demolish the depravity of our flesh, and his resflesh, to rescue us. All of our salvation is found in urrection, to effect the renovation of a better Christ, not in ourselves. Indeed, “if you contemplate nature, and that by baptism we are admitted yourself,” Calvin warns, “that is sure damnation.”3 into a participation of this grace. This foundaThe Spirit who united the Son to us in the incartion being laid, Christians may very suitably be nation also unites us to Christ by his gospel. “As long exhorted to strive to respond to their calling.5 as Christ remains outside of us, and we are separated This is true of everyone who is united to Christ, not from him,” says Calvin, “all that he has suffered and just to a superior class, he adds. Thus this “ingrafting is done for the salvation of the human race remains usenot only a conformity of example, but a secret union.”6 less and of no value for us. Therefore, to share with MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

A MEDIEVAL CONNECTION: THE BRETHREN OF THE COMMON LIFE

ver a century before the Reformation, the

In some ways, the Reformation reflects the Brethren

Dutch-based Brethren of the Common Life

emphasis on widening the compass of Christian piety to

was founded and spread quickly across the

include the laity. With Luther leading the way, the magis-

Continent. A largely lay movement, the “Modern Devo-

terial Reformers translated the Bible into the languages

tion,” as it was also called, established a network of

of the people and made them widely available for use in

boardinghouses, grammar schools, and informal com-

public places, even homes. They also produced church

munities based on the idea that not only monks and

liturgies and prayer books as well as devotional guides,

nuns but every believer should be engaged in the spiri-

psalters, and hymns for use in public, family, and pri-

tual disciplines. The Brethren often criticized the church

vate worship. Common laborers and members of the

hierarchy for straying from the simplicity of following

nobility went to their martyrdom singing the Psalms

Jesus in daily life, and they also criticized the corrup-

together. In fact, the practice was so moving to onlook-

tion of the clergy and monks and abuses of the pope.

ers that the Inquisitors often would have the martyrs’

Out of this illustrious movement came the only Dutch

tongues removed before conducting them to the fires.

pope, Adrian VI, along with Nicholas of Cusa and the

Instructed by their pastors in the catechism, children

great humanist Erasmus, as well as Reformers Martin

often knew the faith better than Roman priests. Con-

Luther and Heinrich Bullinger. Distinguished alumni

sequently, they were prepared to live—and die—for the

also included Anabaptist leaders such as Balthasar Hub-

catholic and evangelical faith that had been obscured

maier and Hans Denck and the founder of the Jesuits,

and even denied by medieval teaching and practice.

Ignatius of Loyola. Brethren students even assisted Johannes Guttenberg in producing Bibles from his movable-type presses. Generally speaking, the Brethren downplayed the official church and its doctrine, liturgy, and sacraments in favor of a more direct and informal piety based on “the imitation of Christ.” Brethren alumnus Thomas à Kempis wrote a bestseller by that title, extolling the virtues of simplicity of life, denial of self and the world, and humble obedience to superiors. The movement also displayed a certain human-centered orientation, evident in Erasmus’s polemical exchange with Luther over free will. Today’s familiar calls to “deeds not creeds,” “life over doctrine,” and so forth, echo the Brethren.

PORTRAIT OF THOMAS À KEMPIS, ARTIST UNKNOWN, CIRCA A.D. 1600.

Christ is not only our hero, model, or pattern, but our vine—and we are branches. He is the head of his body of which we are members, the firstfruits of the whole harvest to which we belong. Calvin says that we are “in Christ (in Christo) because we are out of ourselves (extra nos),” finding our sanctification as well as our justification not by looking within but by clinging to Christ.7 The Christian life is not only a matter of getting used to our justification, but also of getting used to being in Christ, from whom we receive both justification and sanctification through the same gospel. Therefore, not only in justification, but in sanctification, faith receives every good from Christ alone as the source. There is no place for “first class” saints who move on from the gospel to a higher state of “victorious living” through monastic practices. “Certain Anabaptists of our day conjure some sort of frenzied excess instead of spiritual regeneration,” Calvin relates, “thinking that they can attain perfection in this life.”8 “Removing, then, mention of law, and laying aside all consideration of works, we should, when justification is being discussed, embrace God’s mercy alone, turn our attention from ourselves, and look only to Christ….If consciences wish to attain any certainty in this matter, they ought to give no place to the law.”9 Those who are preoccupied with raising their standing in God’s estimation offend God, deepen their guilt, and do nothing for their neighbors. The monk was the ideal portrait of this confused spirituality. THE D I R E CT I O N : O U TS ID E TO IN SI DE , PU B L IC TO P RIVAT E In various ways, Roman Catholic teaching collapsed personal faith into the believing act of the church and its sacramental operations. At the other extreme, radical Protestants tend to separate the personal from the public, the external from the internal, and the formal from the spontaneous. It is what the individual does with the Word that saves, rather than what the Word does with the individual. Baptism is the believer’s decision and pledge, not God’s. The Supper merely offers an opportunity for individual believers to reflect on Christ’s death and recommit their lives, but is not itself the gift of Christ with all of his benefits. Even in public prayers, the emphasis

falls on spontaneous expression—either of the individual pastor or of the people who are offering their own private prayers independently. This approach is especially true of the pietistic and revivalist traditions that have had such a wide impact. The apostles teach that we are born again by the preaching of the gospel (1 Pet. 1:23–25, Rom. 10:6–17, and so on). “So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom. 1:16). In Acts, conversion is identified with the public hearing of the gospel, baptism, and being added to the church. “And they gathered regularly for the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, the breaking of the bread, and the prayers” (Acts 2:42). In radical Protestantism, however, we are born again by inviting Jesus into our hearts. It is a personal relationship with Jesus that “none other has ever known.” “This is just between you and the Lord,” we are told. “Getting saved” is not only distinguished from but often contrasted with “joining a church.” One has a relationship with Christ that may be expressed publicly, but authentic faith is deeply individual, personal, and private. It begins privately, within, and expresses itself publicly. In the Reformers’ view, biblical faith is created by the Spirit through the external and public Word, creating faith within each of us. What results from this divine action are not only individual deciders, but a communion of forgiven sinners. There can be no doubt that the Reformers impressed hearers with their need for personal faith. They opposed with might and mane the idea of implicit faith, the corporate church acting as a surrogate for individuals. Nevertheless, personal faith is shaped by the public means of grace, as described in the following four points. 1. T HERE IS THE PUB L IC PREACHING OF THE WORD

Ministers are trained to interpret the Scriptures in the original languages, aware of the history of church teaching and grounded in the creeds and confessions, as well as how to bring this Word effectively to the people of God. Their calling by Christ through his church is to full-time study and prayer, and to share the burden of spiritual care of the flock along with the elders. According to the apostle Paul, pastors and teachers are “the gifts [Christ] gave” for the building MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

up of his church as one body, rooted in his Word (Eph. 4:1–16). When I read Scripture with my family or even alone, I am reading with the church. My reading is guided by what I have heard—together with my brothers and sisters—in the public assembly of Christ’s covenant people, through his appointed ambassadors. 2 . T H ERE IS P U B L IC B AP T I SM

The Reformers saw the whole Christian life as a daily living out and returning to our baptism, dying and rising with Christ. Again, in family life, friendships, and callings in the world, we are shaped by what God did to us and gave to us in baptism. Our personal relationship with Christ in daily life is formed by our sharing in “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:5).

3. T H ERE IS TH E R E G U L AR AD M I NISTR ATIO N O F THE LO RD’S SUPPE R

The Supper confirms and deepens our union with Christ, as the Spirit delivers Christ’s body and blood to us through his Word and the bread and wine. As we grow more and more in our union with Christ, we grow more and more in the communion of saints. Luther and Calvin disagreed over some important details, but they were at one in opposing both the Roman tendency to collapse personal faith into the public ministry of

the church and the Anabaptist tendency to separate them. “We are assailed by two sects,” Calvin told Cardinal Sadoleto, “the pope and the Anabaptists.” Both tend to separate the Spirit’s work from the external Word. According to Calvin, Rome binds God to earthly means, while the Anabaptists disallow that God can freely bind himself to them.10 4. EVEN THE PUBL IC PRAYERS IN CHURCH SHAPE OUR FAMILY AND P RIVATE PRAYERS

Indeed, writes Calvin, “whoever refuses to pray in the holy assembly of the godly knows not what it is to pray individually, or in a secret spot, or at home.”11 Even in our private prayers we are not alone but joined with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And, united to Christ, we are joined to our brothers and sisters beside us—indeed the whole church everywhere. Just as our private Bible reading is informed and enriched by the communal faith proclaimed and confessed in the church, our private prayers are as well. Elsie Anne McKee explains, “Although Calvin provided guidelines for private prayers, he was primarily interested in defining public prayers, the liturgy, because he understood all personal or individual devotional acts as an extension of the corporate worship of the body of Christ.”12 We have to resist the false choice between public and private, formal and informal, planned and spontaneous.13 A rich life of prayer in the family and in private will flourish in the fertile soil that has been tilled and tended by “the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, the breaking of the bread, and the prayers” (Acts 2:42). Anyone reared in synagogue worship would have known that “the prayers” meant communication with God—prayers the whole church said and sung as one body. When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray, he gave them—and us—the Lord’s Prayer. Like a trellis, common prayer trains our hearts to conform our communication with God to his Word. A trellis can’t make plants grow, but it helps them grow in the right direction.

“THE RESULT OF THE GOSPEL MINISTRY IS FAITH AND THIS FAITH BEARS THE FRUIT OF LOVE AND GOOD WORKS.” The public prayers we pray together do not stifle our more informal and spontaneous prayers in daily life. On the contrary, the public prayers train us to bring our thanksgiving, confessions of sin and faith, and laments and petitions to the Father with the whole church spread throughout the world. Because of this public ministry there is a place for more informal, individual, and spontaneous ways of interacting with God and his Word. Only now, even in our private praise, laments, confessions, and petitions, we are never alone. Our meditation on Scripture is now part of the creedal and confessional interpretation that we share in common with the whole church as we snack throughout the week on the rich morsels from the weekly feast. We live out our baptism in the concrete circumstances of daily life, and the body and blood of Christ we received sustains us in our fellowship with the saints and our witness to the world. T H E G I FT- G I V I NG ET H IC : WHERE G O O D WO RK S G O Theologies of glory ascend to heaven with humanly devised methods for bringing Christ down or for descending into the depths to make his living real to us; but a theology of the cross receives him in the humble and weak form of those creaturely means he has ordained.14 “And the ministry of the Church, and it alone, is undoubtedly the means by which we are born again to a heavenly life.”15 The Reformers were attracted to Augustine’s description of the essence of sin as being “curved in on ourselves.” Yet this was precisely what monastic piety encouraged: an inward-looking and upward-striving piety that ignored both God’s gifts and neighbors’ needs. Nobody benefited from

the monastic life. Far from being pleased, God was offended with works he had not commanded being offered to him as meritorious claim. The monk himself was not saved by such service, and the neighbor was not served. In short, the monastic life reversed the flow of God’s gifts. Taking a different approach, the Reformers understood Scripture to teach that we come to church first of all to be served rather than to serve. The result of the gospel ministry is faith and this faith bears the fruit of love and good works—not for us, but for others. The fountain is the public ministry of Word and Sacrament, and its gifts flow in ever-expanding concentric circles from the communion of saints to callings in the world. The flow of gifts is from God to us and, through us, out to others we encounter every day. God is pleased, we are delighted in God’s glory and our neighbors’ good, and our neighbors have a little more of what they need for that day. Although we may be surprised to learn that such an ordinary piety transformed millions of people, historians document how it happened—even if they don’t understand the reasons. May God send us a revival of this genuinely evangelical piety.

Michael S. Horton is editor-in-chief of Modern Reformation.

1 2 3 4 5

Calvin, Institutes 2.12.1–2. Calvin, Institutes 3.2.32. Calvin, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, 107. Calvin, Institutes 3.1.1. Calvin on Romans 6:4 in Calvin’s Commentaries Vol. 19, trans. John Owen (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 221. 6 Calvin on Romans 6:5 in Calvin’s Commentaries Vol. 19, 222. 7 Quoted in Mark A. Garcia, Life in Christ: Union with Christ and Twofold Grace in Calvin’s Theology, Studies in Christian History and Thought (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2008), 116. 8 Calvin, Institutes 3.3.14. 9 Calvin, Institutes 3.19.2. 10 Calvin, Institutes 4.1.5. 11 Calvin, Institutes 3.20.29. 12 Elsie Anne McKee, “Context, Contours, Contents: Towards a Description of Calvin’s Understanding of Worship” in Calvin Studies Society Papers, 1995, 1997: Calvin and Spirituality; Calvin and His Contemporaries, ed. David Foxgrover (Grand Rapids: CRC Product Services, 1998), 78. 13 McKee, 79–80: McKee puts it well: “Calvin, like most clerical reformers, gives more attention to liturgy than to devotional acts. It is significant that the two marks by which he identifies the true church, the pure preaching and hearing of the Word and the right administration of the sacraments, are both central to the liturgy. On the other hand, many lay reformers seem to give particular stress to the devotional life….Although it has long been popular to assume that Reformed Christians were fiercely opposed to written liturgies, this common notion is in fact false for the sixteenth century and even for many later Reformed communities. (A primary reason for the misinterpretation is owed to the effect of revivalism on parts of the Reformed tradition.)” One should add that even the Puritan’s antipathy toward the Book of Common Prayer lay principally in its being imposed by the monarch as necessary for worship. 14 Herman Selderhuis, Calvin’s Theology of the Psalms, 203, on Ps. 42:2 and 24:7. 15 Calvin on Psalm 87:5 in Calvin’s Commentaries Vol. 5, trans. James Anderson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 402.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

VITAL R by W. W ROBERT GODFREY

ELIGION GUSTAV KLIMT, FLOWER GARDEN, 1905-07 (OIL ON CANVAS).

E R H A P S S O M E O N E S H O U L D write a book titled

Silliness and Sanctification, because, sadly, church history is replete with examples of strange and silly suggestions about the pursuit of holiness. In the ancient church, pillar saints led an ascetic life living alone on a platform built on top of a column. In the contemporary church, Spirit-chasers pursue Pentecostal experiences such as the laughing revival, while neo-traditionalists follow quasi-medieval devotions such as walking a labyrinth. The warning of the Heidelberg Catechism is needed today more than ever that we must not seek to serve God in ways that would make us “wiser than God” (98). Christians who reject self-sanctifying human inventions may also fret about the dangers some approaches to sanctification pose to justification. So many American evangelicals seem to confuse the work of Christ for them creatures who live a new life. While always rejoicleading to justification with the ing in the indicative that tells us that in Christ we have peace with God, we need also always to hear work of Christ in them leading to and heed the call “to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holisanctification. Nevertheless, nei- ness” (Eph. 4:24). Here is vital, biblical Christianity. The Reformers well understood this biblical ther wrong ideas about holiness teaching and imperative on vital religion. We can nor the possibility of compro- see that clearly in the opening paragraph of one of the important Reformed confessions, the Belgic mising justification should lead Confession (1561), Article 24, “Man’s SanctificaChristians to abandon a bibli- tion and Good Works”: We believe that this true faith, being wrought cally balanced understanding of in man by the hearing of the Word of God and the Christian life and the necesthe operation of the Holy Spirit, regenerates [i.e., sanctifies] and makes him a new man. sity of vital religion. Therefore it is so far from being true that this

The Scriptures are clear that one of the benefits of Christ’s saving work is that his people have been given a new life. Second Corinthians 5:17 teaches, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold the new has come.” Similarly Ephesians 2:10 declares, “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” In Christ we are new

justifying faith makes men remiss in a pious and holy life, that on the contrary without it they would never do anything out of love for God, but only out of self-love or fear of damnation. Therefore it is impossible that this holy faith can be unfruitful in man; for we do not speak of a vain faith, but of such a faith which is called in Scripture a faith working through love, which excites man to the practice of those works which God has commanded in His Word.

This brief statement makes several basic points for us to remember and ponder. First, true faith is not the result of human freedom and decision, but the work of God. The hearing of God’s Word of truth and the work of the Holy Spirit causing that Word to bear fruit is the source of faith in our hearts. We need to look to the Word and the Spirit if we would possess the vital religion taught in the Bible. The Holy Spirit, who is Christ with us, is the divine strength for holy living, which is impossible without him. Vital religion is not man-centered, but remains always centered on Christ, his Word, and his Spirit. Second, the confession teaches that this true faith sanctifies the Christian. This faith is living and fruitful, bringing the new life in Christ more and more to expression. The confession here uses the word “regenerates,” not in the technical sense that regeneration would take on in seventeenthcentury Reformed theology (when it would come to describe an instantaneous work of God in the heart), but in its meaning in sixteenth-century usage as a synonym with the ongoing lifelong process of sanctification. True faith leads to real progress in sanctification. The Christian life is a daily conversion of putting to death the old man and of bringing to life the new man. Third, the Christian, as a new creature in Christ, is no longer in bondage to sin. Those without Christ are completely dominated by sin in their lives of rebellion against God. But those who are alive in Christ are no longer dead in sin and controlled by sin. Progress in mortifying the flesh and overcoming sins is a reality for the Christian. The reality of the new life and the deliverance from the bondage of sin must not lead Christians to any arrogance or triumphalism in regard to sanctification. Here the Heidelberg Catechism has a crucial reminder. Question 114 asks, “But can those who are converted to God keep

these [ten] commandments perfectly?” The answer is both humbling and encouraging: “No; but even the holiest men, while in this life, have only a small beginning of this obedience; yet so that with earnest purpose they begin to live, not only according to some but according to all the commandments of God.” We are humbled to know that our best growth in sanctification in this life is far from the perfection of holiness that God’s law teaches. But we are also encouraged to recognize that the new life in Christ grows in relation to the whole standard of holiness given in the law. Christians cannot use progress in keeping nine commandments to excuse complete failure with one commandment. Fourth, the confession insists that a right understanding of justifying faith does not undermine a commitment to holiness. The charge that the biblical doctrine of justification leads to moral laxity is at least as old as the apostle Paul. He too faced

“True faith is not the result of human freedom and decision, but the work of God.”

the accusation: “And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying” (Rom. 3:8; cf. 6:1, 15). But such a charge is false theologically and refuted by the history of the church. Those who have stressed grace and faith have also carefully pursued holiness. The prime examples of this were the Puritans who taught justification clearly (see the Westminster Larger MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

Catechism, Questions 70–77), and who also sought with remarkable fidelity to live according to God’s law. In popular culture, the word “Puritan” has come to stand for what is legalistic, hypocritical, and judgmental. The historical reality is very different. While the Puritans would have been the first to acknowledge that they were sinners, they were also those who studied the Word of God with the greatest care to seek to understand the will of God. They sought to live for God personally, but also to live out God’s will in their families, their churches, and their society. They were not perfect but were perhaps the best informed Christians about the content of the Bible, and the most serious people in promoting faith and holiness in the history of the church. In light of the Puritan experience, it is ridiculous to suggest that a belief in justification undermines a commitment to sanctification. Fifth, true faith lives out of the love it has for God. Indeed, the key motivation for Christian living is love for God, not selfishness or fear. Some forms of religion promote self-centeredness, but Christianity promotes God-centeredness. Some seek to motivate by inculcating a fear of damnation. But biblical Christianity primarily motivates out of confidence in God’s love in Christ. This teaching comes from Jesus: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15). Sixth, the confession reminds us that the holy life is guided by the commandments of God. The new life in Christ does not automatically or spontaneously know what pleases God. We continue to need God’s instruction that he gives us in his law. The Heidelberg Catechism (91) teaches the character of truly good works: good works are “only those which are done from true faith, according to the law of God, and to his glory; and not such as are based on our own opinions or the precepts of men.” As I wrote this article, television news was full of the preparations to elect a new pope in Rome. Cameras love Roman Catholicism because so much of its “holiness” is visible. Television has broadcast pictures of holy buildings and decorations, holy vestments, and holy ceremonies with altars, incense, and processions. One reporter, in speaking of the holiness of Pope Benedict XVI, showed pictures of a Christmas service in which the pope was venerating an image of the baby Jesus. All of this “holiness,” however, is not only beyond anything taught in the law of God, but is a distraction from true holiness.

UNDERSTANDING THE REFORMERS While this article has quoted a Reformed confession and catechism, its stress on vital religion and even on the importance of the law is in harmony with the teaching of Martin Luther. Consider Luther’s statement at the conclusion of his exposition of the Ten Commandments in his Large Catechism: Here, then, we have the Ten Commandments, a summary of divine teaching on what we are to do to make our whole life pleasing to God. They are the true fountain from which all good works must spring, the true channel through which all good works must flow. Apart from these Ten Commandments no deed, no conduct can be good or pleasing to God, no matter how great or precious it may be in the eyes of the world. Luther’s position is reiterated in the Epitome of the Formula of Concord, Article VI, “The Third Function of the Law”: We believe, teach, and confess that although people who genuinely believe and whom God has truly converted are freed through Christ from the curse and the coercion of the law, they are not on that account without the law; on the contrary they have been redeemed by the Son of God precisely that they should exercise themselves day and night in the law (Ps. 119:1)….On account of this Old Adam, who inheres in people’s intellect, will, and all their powers, it is necessary for the law of God constantly to light their way lest in their merely human devotion they undertake self-decreed and selfchosen acts of serving God. Christians need the law as they live for God.

Such external manifestations of holiness are likely to promote arrogance, not humility, self-confidence and idolatry, not God-centeredness. The true holiness of repentance, self-denial, love, and service cannot be televised. They are much more difficult to cultivate than external actions. But they are the true manifestations of holiness taught by the Bible. Seventh, after stressing the reality of sanctification in the life of the Christian, the confession again clarifies the distinction between justification and sanctification. “These works…are of no account towards our justification, for it is by faith in Christ that we are justified, even before we do good works.” Since justification by faith is full and finished before the Christian begins to do good works, sanctification cannot be confused with justification. The distinction between justification and sanctification has been wonderfully summarized in the Westminster Larger Catechism (77): Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof; in the former, sin is pardoned; in the other, it is subdued; the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation; the other is neither equal in all, nor in this life perfect in any, but growing up to perfection. Finally, the Belgic Confession concludes its article on sanctification by pointing to the vital importance of the distinction between justification and sanctification for the peace of conscience in the Christian. Since our good works always fall far short of the perfection of God, “we do not found our salvation upon them.” Our progress in sanctification could never give us real assurance and confidence. Rather, “we would always be in doubt, tossed to and from without any certainty, and our poor consciences would be continually vexed if they relied not on the merits of the suffering and death of our Savior.” Here we see spiritual realism linked to utter confidence in the work of Christ. The finished work of Jesus is the foundation and encouragement for Christian living. The Belgic Confession has largely been our guide

“WE SEE SPIRITUAL REALISM LINKED TO UTTER CONFIDENCE IN THE WORK OF CHRIST. THE FINISHED WORK OF JESUS IS THE FOUNDATION AND ENCOURAGEMENT FOR CHRISTIAN LIVING.” in this brief and partial reflection on vital religion. Guido de Bres, the author of this confession, was greatly influenced by the French Confession of 1559 of which John Calvin was the principal author. In conclusion, consider Calvin’s motivating words as he encourages us in the pursuit of holiness: We believe that by this faith we are regenerated in newness of life, being by nature subject to sin. Now we receive by faith grace to live holily and in the fear of God, in accepting the promise which is given to us by the Gospel, namely: that God will give us his Holy Spirit. This faith not only does not hinder us from holy living, or turn us from the love of righteousness, but of necessity begets in us all good works. Moreover, although God works in us for our salvation and renews our hearts, determining us to that which is good, yet we confess that the good works which we do proceed from his Spirit, and can not be accounted to us for justification, neither do they entitle us to the adoption of sons, for we should always be doubting and restless in our hearts, if we did not rest upon the atonement by which Jesus Christ has acquitted us. (French Confession, Article 22)

W. Robert Godfrey is professor of church history and president of Westminster Seminary California in Escondido.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

Christian Prayer

by HYWEL R. JONES

rayer is a feature of all world religions and also those of a more homespun variety. This is because human beings are made in the image of God and have some awareness of being indebted and accountable to some higher being or power. Pagan petitions for aid and thanksgiving for help are recorded in the Old Testament; for example, the Philistines (Judg. 16:23–24), the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:25–26), and the sailors on Jonah’s ship (Jon. 1:5). But this does not mean that our religiously pluralistic society is correct in regarding all prayer as being much the same. It is not! Christian prayer is unique, and Christians should make that clear by the manner in which they pray.

The Lord Jesus spoke about prayer in a discriminating and authoritative way. He discouraged followers from praying as the Jewish leaders and the Gentiles did (see Matt. 6:5–7), because God is neither deceived by masks nor pressured by mantras. Instead, he told them that prayer was “asking the Father in [his] name” and added that this was something they had not yet done (John 15:16; 16:23, 24). This is striking because they were to some extent familiar with the Old Testament and synagogue worship, and he had also taught them what to say in prayer and how to say it (Luke 11:1–13; 18:1–14). “Asking the Father in [his] name” was neither the same as the religious practices of the day nor the prayers of godly Jews like the father of John the Baptist and others (Luke 1:67–79). It was certainly not the same as asking him questions (John 14–16). Jesus explained what was special about it in the Upper Room, using the expressions “until now,” “a little while,” and “that day or hour.” These references point to that unrepeatable occasion when the death and resurrection of Jesus would mark the end of the old covenant and the beginning of the new, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon all believers. “In that day” harkens back to the Old Testament prophets’ predictions of the “Day of the Lord,” of his personal intervention to judge his foes and save his people. Jesus also described this as “the hour” (v. 25), which refers to his death on the cross and the exaltation as bound up with it (7:30; 8:20; 12:23, 27;

13:1; and 17:1;), or the consequences deriving from it (5:28–29). The last hour on God’s clock would shortly strike. The “end” would begin—and it would renovate prayer. A N EW DAY OF P RAYE R This new day was not only bound up with the accomplishment of redemption by the Son, but it also brought in an era of greater revelation by the Spirit. Jesus guaranteed this to his disciples with the words, “You will ask in my name” on “that day,” when he would no longer speak to them in parables but “tell them plainly about the Father” (v. 26). At Pentecost a greater light began to shine for the disciples on Jesus’ past teaching (see 14:26) and what he had not been able to teach them before (see 16:13–15). This clearer and fuller revelation of God as Father would lead them to think of God as revealed in his Son Jesus, and to pray to him in that light. The Holy Spirit would enlarge their understanding, remove their sadness, deepen their peace, and heighten their joy. Christian prayer is therefore praying to God as Father in the name of Jesus. “Name” is equivalent to the Lord God being present and active to save. Jesus is the sent one of the Father, his Christ, because he came in his Father’s name and not his own (see John 5:43). So to pray to the Father in his name is to crown him as Prophet, Priest, and King, and to serve him

by way of adoration, confession, thanksgiving, and supplication. John Calvin connects prayer with faith in Christ the mediator and also the aid of the Holy Spirit as promised in the gospel: Whatever we need and whatever we lack is in God, and in our Lord Jesus Christ in whom the Father willed all the fullness of his bounty to abide (Col. 1:19; John 1:16) so that we may all draw from it as from an overflowing spring …[and] just as faith is born from the gospel, so through it our hearts are trained to call upon God’s name (Rom.10:14–17). And… the Spirit of adoption, who seals the witness of the gospel in our hearts (Rom. 8:16) raises up our spirits to dare to show forth to God their desires, to stir

ILLUSTRATION BY DAVID PLUNKERT

up unspeakable groaning (Rom. 8:26) and confidently cry, “Abba! Father!” (Rom. 8:15). G ROANI NG I N T HE SP I RI T Christian prayer, then, is “draw[ing] from [Christ] an overflowing spring” and having our “spirit raised” by the Holy Spirit as we come to God as our heavenly Father. This is what marks out Christian prayer. It is the consequence of the distinct but complementary ministries of two advocates, one before the throne of God in heaven for the believer guaranteeing access to God as Father (see 1 John 2:1, 2), and the other in the believer assuring him that he is a child and heir of God (Rom. 8:15–28). The mediation of the Son MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

and the ministry of the Spirit were under a veil in the Old Testament, but they are the hallmark of the new covenant that emboldens the believer as he tells his heavenly Father everything with words and sighs. There are times when such thoughts will lie too deep for words and will only find vent in sighs and even tears occasioned by the sufferings of this present time as they affect the believer, the church, and the world. The Spirit understands this nonverbal language, and he translates it to the Father through the Son. Calvin says that the Spirit “arouses in us assurance, desires and sighs, to conceive which our natural powers would scarcely suffice.” According to the English Puritan John Owen, this is what is meant in the New Testament by “praying in the Spirit” (Eph. 6:18).

set forth what is worthy of him, acceptable to him, necessary for us—in effect, what he would willingly grant. It should not be forgotten, however, that Calvin does not restrict true and acceptable prayer to its words as a form. He acknowledges that there are many other prayers in the Bible whose words are “far different from it … yet composed by the same Spirit, the use of which is very profitable to us.” What is more, Calvin adds, “many prayers are suggested to believers by the same Spirit, which bear little similarity [to it] in wording.” The all-important factor is that the “sense does not vary” though “the words are utterly different.”

RECOMMENDED READING

P RAYI NG I N T HE SP I RI T

PRAY I NG A S HE TAUG HT U S The Lord’s Prayer can be regarded as a distillation of all prayers in the Old Testament and the mold for New Testament prayers—and all prayers until Christ returns. A word, then, about how the Lord’s Prayer should be regarded and used is appropriate. Rightfully, it has an important place in Christian thinking, and the exposition of it in the Heidelberg and Westminster Catechisms is of immense value, as are the studies of Reformed writers such as Herman Witsius and Thomas Watson. Discussion about the propriety of its use in public worship will doubtless continue, but there can be no doubt it should be used by Christians as a guide to all their praying. Calvin’s comment is well worth remembering:

HERMAN WITSIUS Sacred Dissertations on the Lord’s Prayer, vol. 24 (Forgotten Books, 2012)

THOMAS WATS WATSON A ON ATS

1. TRIN ITARIAN IN SH APE

When we say that our prayers are “Trinitarian in shape,” we mean that the doxologies, benedictions, wishes, and recorded prayers of the New Testament are structured in such a way as to lead to later creedal formulation. In these prayers, primacy is given to the Father to whom we pray, through the Son, and with mention of the Spirit’s work, because it is by him that we are

The Lord’s Prayer (Banner of Truth, 1960)

This prayer is in all respects so perfect that any extraneous or alien thing added to it, which cannot be related to it, is impious and unworthy to be approved by God. For in this summary he has

Three areas of this “praying in the Spirit” must be mentioned in conclusion. It is important to note that Christian prayer is: (1) Trinitarian in shape; (2) universal in scope; and (3) childlike in spirit. While the Old Testament is not silent on any of these, they can be seen to better advantage in the New Testament Scriptures from Acts to Revelation. They are incipiently present in the prayer of the church at Jerusalem recorded in Acts 4:22–30, which shows that Christian prayer looks just like Old Testament prayer, filtered, and filled out by new covenant realities and language.

“PAUL THEREFORE URGES A GREAT DIVERSITY OF PRAYERS FOR ALL SORTS OF PEOPLE IN KEEPING WITH HIS DESIRE THAT THE GOSPEL SHOULD BE MADE KNOWN TO ALL THE NATIONS.” empowered to pray. This is standard in the writings of the apostles Peter, John, and especially Paul. The latter generally addresses the Father and the Son and does so by the Spirit, even laying down the declaration, “Through him [Jesus Christ] we both [Jew and Gentile] have access in one Spirit to the Father” (Eph. 2: 18); and it announces the benediction, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (2 Cor. 13:14). This is an explanation of the divine name “Lord” (the one who hears in heaven, comes down to save his people, and leads out of bondage into a land flowing with milk and honey), but it had to await the “hour and the day” before it could be made explicit. 2 . U N I VE R S A L IN S C O PE

It goes without saying that Christians pray for churches and fellow believers. The prayers recorded in the New Testament Epistles are proof of this. Even John’s words, “I do not say that one should pray for that” (see 1 John 5:16), occur in the context of encouraging prayer for fellow Christians who sin. But the world is also to be included in such intercession. The Old Testament does not confine God’s goodness and grace to Israel alone: “The LORD is good to all and his mercy is over all that he has made” (Ps. 145:9). All people should pray to him, but even when they do not “he is kind to the unthankful and the evil” (Luke 6:35); Job and Rahab, the widow of Zarephath, and the Ninevites are all examples of

this. But in Anno Domini, this is even plainer. God loves his enemies (Matt. 5:44–45). He sent his son to die for a bad world of perishing human beings (John 3:16). His benevolent concern and activity are not limited to the church. Paul therefore urges a great diversity of prayers for all sorts of people in keeping with his desire that the gospel should be made known to all the nations. The gospel is to be freely preached to all, far and wide, and a ministry of “neighborly” intercession supports such proclamation. “This is good and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior [benefactor] who desires all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (see 1 Tim. 2:1–7). 3. CHIL DL IKE IN SPIRIT

One feature of Christian prayer that distinguishes it from all others is that God is addressed as “Father.” Old Testament believers were humble and trusting, but God was only “Father” to the king and to the nation (Exod. 4:22 and Isa. 63:16). By contrast Jesus gives each believer the right to call his Father theirs (Luke 11:2 and John 20:17), and his Spirit enables them to do so (Rom. 8:15 and Gal. 4: 6). He also gives them the sure promise that God will hear and answer their prayers—always! He can no more turn a deaf ear to his children than he can to their Elder Brother who is at his right hand in heaven. The Father sent his Son to gather his estranged children and bring them home. He therefore delights to hear them call on his name in faith and love (whatever words they use and in whatever language) and to respond positively to them. They pray according to his Word; he replies according to his will. These two are not diverse because he has expressed his will in his Word so his children may know what pleases him. They can therefore in so many cases be sure that they are asking the Father for what he wants to give them and that he will do so. They know that he has made abundant provision for all their needs and that he knows best what to give and when. They can trust because they know they will never be orphaned—and one day they will be amazed at how their unworthy prayers have been answered.

Hywel R. Jones is professor of practical theology at Westminster Seminary California in Escondido.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

T h e of

B O O K

C O M M O N

P R A Y E R by LEE GATISS

he Anglican Book of Common Prayer is a key text for understanding the Reformation in England. For centuries it formed the backbone of the spiritual diet of English-speaking peoples all over the world, alongside the King James Bible. With John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress and Matthew Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, Thomas Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer (BCP) has been one of the most formative influences in English piety and spirituality. In essence, what Cranmer did in his prayer book was to concentrate Protestant theology (of the Reformed or Calvinist variety) into a useable liturgical form, so that every day in every parish, and every Sunday morning and evening, the English people (and soon the peoples of their far-flung empire) began to pray in a new way. The new prayer book was in English, “understanded of the people,” as the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion put it, not the Latin of the medieval Mass. It took the best of Augustinian medieval piety,

translated it, and fed it into the spiritual diet of ordinary parishioners, strengthened by the renewed emphases of the Reformers on salvation by grace alone, through faith alone. The BCP is a prayer book, a service book, a book to aid us in our worship of the one true and living God. It’s a book to live, love, and die by—for baptisms, weddings, and funerals. It’s a book designed to fill us with awe and reverence as we participate in its rituals and regularities. It’s not an evangelistic tract to be read out to a congregation every Sunday. It’s more than that. But it has a sharp mission edge. It’s carefully put together to teach the gospel and to reach people’s hearts with the message of salvation. Its much-praised eloquence is all in the service of an impassioned plea to trust, obey, and please the Lord Jesus who died for his family, the church. So it’s not a stuffy old book for stuffy old people. It’s a way to reach liturgical people with the good news of Jesus. In the classic Anglican understanding of church as seen in the BCP, then, the church is not to be MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

centered on any earthly mediator, whether a mediating priest, a worship band leader, or a celebrity pastor. For prayer-book Anglicans, church is about gathering to hear God speak through his Word, confessing our sins and our faith, and responding to the Spirit in prayer for each other and for the world. THE VE RY PU R E WO RD O F G O D The piety of the Book of Common Prayer is a Wordcentered piety. In good times and bad, the prayer book encourages meditation on Scripture. Even in the prayers suggested for use by the bedside of a sick person, we find these words, “O merciful God, who hast written thy holy Word for our learning, that we, through patience and comfort of thy holy Scriptures, might have hope.” Prayers were to be suffused with biblical truth, carefully and deliberately alluded to and quoted. In the Communion Service we pray, “We are taught by thy holy Word, that the hearts of Kings are in thy rule” (cf. Prov. 21:1). We affirm that it is God “who by thy holy Apostle hast taught us to make prayers…for all men” (1 Tim. 2). Thus the Bible is seen as God’s Word through which he teaches us even now, although the human authorship of the Scripture is acknowledged as well. It is also the inspiration and guide for our prayers. In the justly famous words of the Collect for the Second Sunday in Advent, then, we pray that the Blessed Lord who caused the Scriptures to be written for our learning would help us “so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that by patience and comfort of his Holy Word, we may embrace, and ever hold fast, the blessed hope of everlasting life.” In all its prayers, the BCP focuses its users on the Bible as the source of all our illumination, encouragement, guidance, and hope in Christ. TH E LO R D ’S SUPPE R In 1555, English reformers Thomas Cranmer, Nicholas Ridley, and Hugh Latimer all died as martyrs because they refused to submit to the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Mass. The prayer book makes it clear that what is going on at the Lord’s Table is not a sacrifice on an altar made by a mediating priest on behalf of the people, which has to be repeated again

and again each week to be effective. But what did they put in the place of the Mass? What was it that they taught Anglicans to pray and to remember as they gathered around the Lord’s Table? They taught that the Supper is a divine instrument of assurance. There we confess “our manifold sins and wickedness” to God, and we are then assured by the words of Scripture itself that “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” and that “he is the propitiation for our sins.” People came to the table (not an “altar”) praying, “not trusting in our own righteousness, but in God’s manifold and great mercies.” They came with nothing in their hands to receive God’s mercy. The movement of the action in the BCP liturgy is from God to us—God in his grace reaching down to us in our sinfulness. We simply take and eat, in remembrance of what Jesus has done. Read theologically, the BCP service shows us that, although we are more wicked than we ever thought, we are also loved by a merciful God more than we ever dreamed. It demonstrates that Christ’s once-andfor-all sacrifice on the cross for us was utterly, completely, and totally sufficient to pay for our sins: “Almighty God, our heavenly Father, which of thy tender mercy didst give thine only Son Jesus Christ, to suffer death upon the cross for our redemption, who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world.” The result is that, pastorally speaking, our consciences are assured of God’s love toward us in Christ, even when we’ve been most searingly honest about our shortcomings and failures. So we can praise God that “by the merits and death of thy Son Jesus Christ, and through faith in his blood, we and all thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other benefits of his Passion.” The sufficiency of the cross for us and for our salvation could not be clearer in such prayers. THE CHRI ST I AN LI FE BCP prayers consistently emphasize Christ alone and grace alone as the hope for sinful men and women. As one of the collects (for the day called Sexagesima) says, “We put not our trust in any thing that we do.” According to the BCP, the Christian life is a

“THE NEW PRAYER BOOK WAS IN ENGLISH … NOT THE LATIN OF THE MEDIEVAL MASS. IT TOOK THE BEST OF AUGUSTINIAN MEDIEVAL PIETY … AND FED IT INTO THE SPIRITUAL DIET OF ORDINARY PARISHIONERS, STRENGTHENED BY THE RENEWED EMPHASES OF THE REFORMERS ON SALVATION BY GRACE ALONE, THROUGH FAITH ALONE.”

life dependent on God’s grace. We see that clearly in some of the collects, or short set prayers for each week. So the Collect for Trinity 19 (that is, the nineteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday) says, “O God, forasmuch as without thee we are not able to please thee; mercifully grant, that thy Holy Spirit may in all things direct and rule our hearts, through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.” The Augustinian/Reformed emphasis on being unable to please God without God’s own help (cf. Rom. 8:8; Phil. 2:12) is noticeable in the Collect for Trinity 19. It’s also there in the Thirty-Nine Articles: “We have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of Christ preventing us [going before us], that we may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will” (Article 10). Original sin remains even in those who are regenerate according to the articles and according to the rest of the prayer book, too. In one of the Advent prayers, we confess that “through our sins and wickedness, we are sore let and hindered in running the race that is set before us,” and so in turn pray that “thy bountiful grace and mercy may speedily help and deliver us.” In other words: Help us run the race, by your grace. The Collect for Innocents’ Day asks God to “mortify and kill all vices in us, and so strengthen us by thy grace, that by the innocency of our lives and constancy of our faith, even unto death, we may glorify thy holy name.” In other words: Kill our vices, by your grace.

As the collect for the fifth Sunday after Epiphany puts it, we “lean only upon the hope of thy heavenly grace.” Why? Because “the frailty of man without thee cannot but fall” (Trinity 15). The Christian life is about leaning on God’s grace to mortify our sins and live for others to God’s glory, praying for “Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Heretics” to be fetched home to Christ and saved (Collect for Good Friday). In the Communion Service, we recite the Ten Commandments, plead for mercy since we’ve broken them, and we ask God to incline our hearts to keep that law. But a collect also sums this up: “Because through the weakness of our mortal nature we can do no good thing without thee, grant us the help of thy grace, that in keeping of thy commandments we may please thee both in will and deed” (Trinity 1). In Trinity 11, we pray for “such a measure of thy grace that we, running the way of thy commandments, may obtain thy gracious promises.” So we see throughout the Book of Common Prayer an emphasis on the Bible and on letting the Bible lead our prayers. We see an emphasis on the cross and the definite, sufficient, and gloriously unrepeatable atonement. We are reminded constantly that we must pray for God’s continual grace to live for him and be transformed into the likeness of his Son.

Lee Gatiss is the director of Church Society and adjunct lecturer in church history at Wales Evangelical School of Theology in the United Kingdom.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

Theology On Tap.

DID YOU KNOW THAT WHITE HORSE INN RADIO ARCHIVES ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE? Join the conversation with the White Horse Inn hosts on “What the Gospel Is and Why We Should Believe It,” “Foolishness to Greeks,” and “Is Faith in Christ the Only Way to God?” Listen for free at your convenience. Comment, ask questions, and share the link with others.

TO L I S TE N TO DAY, VISIT W H ITEH O R SEINN.ORG/ARCHI VE .

book reviews 50

“The view of Luther as holding only a twofold use of the law is often skewed by a ‘heroic’ or ‘romanticized’ view of Luther.”

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

BOOK REVIEWS

Friends of the Law: Luther’s Use of the Law for the Christian Life BY EDWARD A. ENGELBRECHT Concordia, 2011 326 pages (paperback), $39.99

his useful and well-researched volume addresses an issue familiar to most readers of Modern Reformation: the threefold use of the law of God. Although Edward Engelbrecht’s primary concern is with Martin Luther and the Lutheran tradition, his consideration of how theologians in the early and medieval churches handled this issue, as well as a brief treatment of John Calvin’s views in comparison with Luther’s, makes this book of interest beyond Lutheran circles. From the outset, Engelbrecht acknowledges that for some years there has been a broad consensus among Lutheran theologians that Luther taught only a twofold use of the law; that is, a “civil” use (the law restrains the wicked and keeps social order), and a “theological” use (the law exposes people’s sins and drives them to Christ). This his consensus also holds that Luther’s younger colleague, Philipp Melanchthon, originated the idea of a third use of the law (the law as a guide for right living for Christian believers), an idea adopted in the Formula of Concord under Melanchthon’s influence. Yet Engelbrecht notes that Lutheran theologians formerly believed that Luther himself taught a third use of the law, and in this volume he sets out to recover this view and to correct the present consensus. Central to Engelbrecht’s recovery effort is his attempt to put Luther’s writings about the use of the law in proper context. The first context is patristic and medieval theology. Engelbrecht

surveys the views of a number of theologians of the early and medieval church and concludes that Luther did not invent the idea of the use of the law (as is commonly asserted), but learned it from his predecessors in previous centuries. Though he identifies several ways in which Luther spoke about the use of the law in new ways—particularly as it pertains to justification and the law-gospel distinction—Engelbrecht thinks the view of Luther as holding only a twofold use of the law is often skewed by a “heroic” or “romanticized” view of Luther that exaggerates the innovative character of his theology and underestimates his debt to earlier theologians. Context is also important for Engelbrecht when he examines Luther’s own writings across the span of his ministry. He acknowledges that while Luther at times spoke of a threefold use of the law, elsewhere he wrote only of two uses. consisDefending Luther’s consis tency, Engelbrecht notes that he tended to emphasize different themes depending upon the occasion and the pressing issues of the day. Thus, for example, he argues that Luther’s positive remarks about the threefold use in his lectures on 1 Timothy (1528) followed shortly after his friend John Agricola promoted antinomian teaching, while his strong argument for a twofold use in his 1531 Galatians lectures was written in the wake of Roman theologian John Eck’s refutation of the Lutheran Augsburg Confession, prompting Luther to be especially keen to defend the view that law-keeping did not contribute at all to justification. After extensive discussion of Luther, Engelbrecht turns to Melanchthon and then to Calvin (as well as to the Council of Trent, which he says virtually ignored the issue of the use of the law). He argues that Melanchthon was not

“HIS CAREFUL EXAMINATION OF MANY RELEVANT WRITINGS OF LUTHER … PRESENT A FORMIDABLE CHALLENGE TO ANYONE WISHING TO DEFEND THE IDEA THAT LUTHER HELD ONLY A TWOFOLD USE OF THE LAW.” the inventor of the threefold use of the law but did serve to “regularize” Luther’s varied terminology. The chapter on Calvin is quite brief. Elsewhere in the book, Engelbrecht recognizes that Luther’s and Calvin’s views are more similar than Lutherans think, and that advocates of the twofold-use-only view have sometimes been driven by undue desire to differentiate Lutheran from Reformed theology. Yet in this chapter Engelbrecht concludes that, despite some similarities in their positions, Calvin ultimately differed significantly from Luther. The differences lie, he claims, in Calvin’s emphasis upon the third use as the principal use of the law, over against Luther’s emphasis upon the theological use as it drives Christians to repent daily from their sins. Engelbrecht also sees a difference in how Luther stresses the believer’s spontaneous love to God and neighbor through the Spirit, while Calvin stresses how Christians excite themselves to obedience through the law. I find Engelbrecht’s handling of Calvin less than satisfactory, but to his credit he acknowledges that there is much more to be explored with respect to the relationships between Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin on the use of the law. Engelbrecht makes a robust and overall persuasive case for his claim. His careful examination of many relevant writings of Luther—as well as his attention to matters of context in patristic, medieval, and Reformation theology—present a formidable challenge to anyone wishing to defend the idea that Luther held only a twofold use of the law. And if his claim is correct, the thought that Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin stand together in

affirming a threefold use of the law, despite differences in detail, offers some encouragement in the face of the continuing divisions among churches who claim the heritage of the Reformation.

David VanDrunen is the Robert B. Strimple Professor of Systematic Theology and Christian Ethics at Westminster Seminary California in Escondido.

Calvin’s Theology and Its Reception: Disputes, Developments, and New Possibilities EDITED BY J. TODD BILLINGS AND I. JOHN HESSELINK Westminster John Knox, 2012 224 pages (paperback), $30.00

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way— in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.

n the beginning of The Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens might have been describing Calvin studies in the last thirty years. Following a long winter wherein Calvin was pressed into service on behalf of various agendas (most of which would have been completely foreign to him), historical study of John Calvin’s theology and practice has now developed by leaps and bounds. The work of historians such as David Steinmetz, Richard Muller, Elsie McKee, and others has recently brought about a complete revision of the study of Calvin. This historical reading strives to understand the Reformer in the context of the catholic movement of which he was a part. And yet, spring has not fully come yet: much work remains. In a recent book, Todd Billings and John Hesselink—theologians at Western Theological MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

BOOK REVIEWS

Seminary in Holland, Michigan—have gathered a thoughtful group of contributors to help us learn anew how to retrieve Calvin from the past for the purposes of our own day and for the church of our age. Calvin’s Theology and Its Reception offers close readings of Calvin’s life, thought, and ministry, while also focusing upon the reception of his legacy over the last several centuries. Billings and Hesselink are testaments to the importance, methodologically, of arriving at theological conclusions for our own day by way of genuine historical engagement with the Genevan pastor (xi–xii). As theologians in a mainline seminary setting, the editors are cognizant of efforts to jettison the Christian tradition as much as efforts to simply revert to the sacred way things used to be. This his volume moves thoughtfully between these two unhelpful paths and considers a thoughtful, faithful way forward that involves critical appropriation of the catholic and ref reformational tradition without lapsing into the temptations of revisionism or repristination (that is, the uncomprehending regurgitation of old formulas). The volume focuses upon five clusters: Scripture and revelation; union with Christ; election; the Lord’s Supper; and church and society. In each section, two chapters are included: an essay on Calvin’s theology and its early reception (by his immediate peers and successors), and an essay on modern reception and contemporary possibilities. The contributors are notable, by and large, in the world of Calvin studies and in the study of the Reformed tradition more broadly. Some are senior

figures (Hesselink), while others are recent doctoral graduates of great promise (Sue Rozeboom). All are worth reading. Of particular interest to readers of Modern Reformation may be the section on union with Christ. Todd Billings summarizes much of his trailblazing research on this theme in Calvin (argued more fully in his monograph, Calvin, Participation, and the Gift). Then Michael Horton reflects on the modern reception o f Ca l v i n ’s d o c t r i n e of union with Christ. Horton notes that many have contrasted emphasis upon union with Christ with a focus upon forensic justification (the sallegal framework for sal vation imagery), that they have argued that Calvin helpfully accents the former rather than the suplatter (which was sup posedly championed by scholaslater Protestant scholas tics, the sort who penned documents such as the Westminster Standards or the many tomes of Reformed Orthodoxy). Horton and Billings both show that this picture is skewed. Calvin did not pit union with Christ (the filial metaphor) over against forensic justification (the legal framework); he viewed them together as each addressing a crucial facet of the gospel mystery. Perhaps nothing is as needful as developing skills for drawing well upon the catholic and reformational tradition for the sake of faith and practice today. We have access to a wider literature from the church’s past today and to more detailed understandings of its complexity and continuity than in recent centuries. It is a good time to be involved in the theological task. But it is a time that calls for wisdom and discernment

regarding what faithful inhabitation of the Christian tradition—or, specifically, the Reformed tradition—looks like in this particular century. In his last lectures, Karl Barth reflected on the idea of reformation: “Reformation is not the restoration and conservation of the old and sacrosanct. Nor is it revolution. Fundamental crises are the last thing that the church needs. Reformation is provisional renewal, a modest transforming of the church in the light of its origin.” Barth’s description is similar to the sixteenthcentury Reformers, eformers, whether Vermigli or Bucer, Beza, or— yes—even Calvin. We are called neither to restoration nor to revolution, but to provisional renewal in light of our origin. Billings and Hesselink have provided wonderful resources to help us renew contemporary theology in light of a key point in our reformational origin: the theology of John Calvin. As with Dickens, the times are serious, so this book should be read.

Michael Allen is dean of faculty and the Kennedy Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Knox Theological Seminary in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Hold Fast the Faith: A Devotional Commentary on the Westminster Confession of 1647 BY MATTHEW EVERHARD Reformation Press, 2012 296 pages (paperback), $11.99

here are many reasons to commend Pastor Matthew Everhard’s Hold Fast the Faith: A Devotional Commentary on the Westminster Confession of 1647. There are already many commentaries on the Westminster Confession, so to write one for use in devotions makes it an intriguing contribution. His vision came to life, and we may

now benefit from an enriching devotional guide through the celebrated confession. The book is well balanced, engaging both the heart and the mind and compelling us to act. The Westminster Confession was not written just to set theological boundaries, but primarily as a guide to help pious Christians glorify God and enjoy him forever. It was for pilgrims on the journey with Christ. Hold Fast the Faith treats the confession for what it is and what it was intended to be. In my opinion, that is the most important aspect of this work. In our day it is safe to assume that many are not very familiar with Reformapost-Reformation tion and postWestmincreeds, such as the Westmin ster Confession, picturing them as a bit impractical, a little overly complicated, and most likely written by smart permen who were out of touch with the common per son in the pews. This book will prove theologically misunand historically useful in overcoming those misun derstandings. It will help orient not only Reformed and Presbyterian readers, but also the innumerable Calvinist evangelicals who have many affinities with the Reformed tradition. Although the aim of the book is personal devotion, it can easily be used in a variety of settings such as small groups. Its format and design make it manageable, and each chapter can function nicely as a stand-alone unit. Having the full text of the Westminster Confession and the associated Larger and Shorter Catechisms in the volume is convenient as well. Hold Fast the Faith is well organized, biblically grounded, and historically informed. It is definitely accessible to a wide audience and will be helpful to the new and the old in the faith.

Jonathan S. Marko is visiting assistant professor of philosophy and theology at Cornerstone University in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

GEEK S QUAD

B O O K O F C O M M O N P R AY E R T I M E L I N E

by LEE GATISS

here were several editions of the Book of Common Prayer during the Reformation. The first English language prayer book, replacing the ubiquitous Latin, was in 1549. This was further strengthened in a more Reformed theological direction by Archbishop Thomas Cranmer in 1552, after advice from the continental reformers Martin Bucer and Peter Martyr Vermigli. The prayer book was done away with under the Roman Catholic “Bloody Mary,” but returned under Elizabeth I with only a few changes to the 1552 volume. That Elizabethan edition was the prayer book of Shakespeare. From then on, there were only minor changes, until Oliver Cromwell made the Book of Common Prayer illegal during the troublesome days of the Civil War and Protectorate. After the restoration of the monarchy in 1660, a new revision was undertaken and published in 1662. This was essentially the same in its essence as Cranmer’s 1552 Reformed liturgy, but with some Restoration curlicues and idiosyncrasies. Over the century or so, from 1549 to 1662, those who pushed for further reform of the Church of England, often known as Puritans, made various complaints about the Book of Common Prayer. The Calvinist consensus in church and state that prevailed until

the 1630s, however, meant they were generally content with the Calvinist nature of its underlying theology, as well as with infant baptism and the Reformed understanding of the Lord’s Supper in Cranmer’s book (for which Cranmer himself, of course, was martyred).

Lee Gatiss is the director of Church Society and adjunct lecturer in church history at Wales Evangelical School of Theology in the United Kingdom.

See The Book of Common Prayer: The Texts of 1549, 1559, and 1662, ed. Brian Cummings (Oxford University Press, 2011).

1662

After the 1660 Restoration of the Stuarts, Charles II orders a revision of the BCP

Oliver Cromwell declares the BCP illegal

Elizabeth I restores the BCP

Cranmer’s second edition of BCP under Edward VI

“Bloody Mary” bans the BCP

Thomas Cranmer writes/compiles first edition of BCP under Edward VI (Henry VIII’s son)

BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER TIMELINE

1552

1553 –1558 1558 – 1603 1653 –1658 1549

MODERNREFORMATION.ORG

B A C K PA G E

S P I R I T UA L C L A S S I C S ON YOUR NIGHTSTAND

COMMUNION WITH CHRIST

ON YOUR READING LIST

John Owen

THE LAW OF PERFECT FREEDOM

THE RARE JEWEL OF CHRISTIAN CONTENTMENT

KNOWING GOD

Jeremiah Burroughs

THE PEARL OF CHRISTIAN COMFORT Petrus Dathenus

LIFE TOGETHER

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Michael S. Horton

J. I. Packer

PURSUIT OF HOLINESS Jerry Bridges

GROWING IN HOLINESS J. V. Fesko

IN STORAGE ON YOUR BOOKSHELF

RELIGIOUS AFFECTIONS Jonathan Edwards

SERMONS

John Wesley

THE IMITATION OF CHRIST Thomas Ã Kempis

THE INTERIOR CASTLE Teresa of Avila

LECTURES ON REVIVAL OR AUTOBIOGRAPHY Charles Finney

A SERIOUS CALL TO A DEVOUT AND HOLY LIFE William Law

Start A Conversation in Your Area. WHITE HORSE INN DISCUSSION GROUPS HELP PEOPLE GO FROM KNOWING TO ARTICULATING “WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND WHY THEY BELIEVE IT.” Connect and converse with fellow believers in your area.

INTER ESTED IN STARTING ON E I N YOUR ARE A? LEAR N MO R E AT W H ITEH O R SEI NN.ORG/GROUP S

week end WHITE HORSE INN

2013

J U L Y 2 6 - 2 7, 2 0 1 3

PARADISE POINT RESORT

SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA

You are cordially invited to join us for our first-ever WHI Weekend. Your attendance at the WHI Weekend will be more than filling a seat. You will be participating in and helping to support and develop a new initiative of White Horse Inn, namely multimedia study kits for group and individual study. ATTENDANCE IS LIMITED. VISIT WHITEHORSEINN.ORG/WEEKEND FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO REGISTER.