I have been ravishing the Dr D Martyn Lloyd-Jones books these past four months, and, my, what a profound spiritual blessing these have been to me. I am coming to a renewed appreciation of the Doctor; he was a man way ahead of his time so far as preaching is concerned. His understanding of the human predicament and what the only remedy is, are unsurpassed. What a treasure we have and what a legacy he has left us.
I am currently reading the very last sermon preached by the greatest preacher of the 20th century, DMLJ. This has been a bit emotional for me, but what has impressed me was his consistent testimony to the fact that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is the Saviour of the world. These were among his final words in that memorable sermon - Christ is the world's Saviour. Hallelujah! This evangelist knew the Gospel message accurately, and he applied it to all men, because it had something real on offer for all who would believe it - everlasting salvation. His heart was thrilled as he proclaimed such a mighty and majestic message.
If you haven't read any or much of the beloved Doctor, then may I encourage you to get hold of some of his volumes of evangelistic sermons, preached at every Sunday evening service in Westminster Chapel, and in Sandfields before that. My, what an evangelist he really was! What a 'messenger sent from heaven.' Thank God for every remembrance of him.
Friday, 19 August 2011
Thursday, 18 August 2011
Walk the walk for a change!
It is very strange that in today's confused world and church, a man's credibility is assessed on the basis of his political views, what he may or may not have done or voted in the past! Or, it is based upon which church denomination he belongs to! Or, which papers he reads, or even if he is a member of the Orange Order! This is but a measure of how far the church, including evangelicals, have departed from the Scriptures. They still claim to be 'reformers' within their churches, but where is the evidence? Why are they silent about issues that matter? Why are they not witnessing to the truth of the Gospel within their churches and denominations in a way that brings down the wrath of the liberals and ecumenicals in those churches? These same dumb witnesses - what a contradiction - tolerate theological liberalism, and support those who are taking them down the ecumenical road. They know this is happening, but do they care? Not a bit!
Yet, these same people have the audacity to criticise those who are of a reforming spirit, who know the difference between right and wrong, who can tell good from evil. They sit in their comfy chairs but will not raise a hand to promote fundamental change within the churches - all of them! For these people, it is much more important to keep in with their friends and neighbours and especially the religious authorities, than it is for them to show some genuine concern for the perishing souls that live 'cheek by jowl' with them. They will defend the indefensible, and protect their various establishments at all costs. But they will not become actively involved in the reform of the church to which they belong. Why is this? Why are you so uncaring about the spiritual life of your own church? Why do you not care about the eternal salvation of the lost in your church? Why do you tolerate the bankrupt theological system called liberalism? Why is this poison acceptable to evangelicals today? Why do they not care if there is "death in the pot" that their fellow denominationalists are drinking from? Have they become so hyper-calvinist in their theology that they just do not care about those souls for whom Christ shed His blood and died? Have they no compassion whatsoever for the lost? May God have mercy on their souls, for that is what they need.
But rather than criticise those who do love the church of Jesus Christ on earth, however imperfect she might be, these 'ecclesiastical do-gooders' should get off their backsides and throw their lot in with those who are seeking the reform of the church, and with those who a real concern for the salvation of sinners, whoever they may be.
Will you walk the walk, and not just talk the talk? Such a change is most welcome.
Yet, these same people have the audacity to criticise those who are of a reforming spirit, who know the difference between right and wrong, who can tell good from evil. They sit in their comfy chairs but will not raise a hand to promote fundamental change within the churches - all of them! For these people, it is much more important to keep in with their friends and neighbours and especially the religious authorities, than it is for them to show some genuine concern for the perishing souls that live 'cheek by jowl' with them. They will defend the indefensible, and protect their various establishments at all costs. But they will not become actively involved in the reform of the church to which they belong. Why is this? Why are you so uncaring about the spiritual life of your own church? Why do you not care about the eternal salvation of the lost in your church? Why do you tolerate the bankrupt theological system called liberalism? Why is this poison acceptable to evangelicals today? Why do they not care if there is "death in the pot" that their fellow denominationalists are drinking from? Have they become so hyper-calvinist in their theology that they just do not care about those souls for whom Christ shed His blood and died? Have they no compassion whatsoever for the lost? May God have mercy on their souls, for that is what they need.
But rather than criticise those who do love the church of Jesus Christ on earth, however imperfect she might be, these 'ecclesiastical do-gooders' should get off their backsides and throw their lot in with those who are seeking the reform of the church, and with those who a real concern for the salvation of sinners, whoever they may be.
Will you walk the walk, and not just talk the talk? Such a change is most welcome.
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
NO PLACE LIKE ROME? PREPARING FOR THE QUINCENTENARY OF THE GLORIOUS PROTESTANT REFORMATION (1517-2017)
Avoiding Rome’s predictable lies and her inevitable ecumenical deception in the run-up to this event, we unashamedly issue the following statement:
1. The Pope’s religion is not the Christianity of Jesus Christ.
2. The Pope’s church is not the true Church of Jesus Christ.
So, since the Pope may be identified as ‘antichrist’ (as many British theologians have cogently argued in past centuries), conversion to the Roman Catholic Church is a retrograde and tragic step. While the apostate condition of many Protestant Churches (including the ‘feminized’ and ‘sodomized’ Church of England) gives sufficient cause for disillusionment, the Roman option cannot provide a safe or satisfying spiritual home.
As affirmed in the doctrinal declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), Rome claimed to be the only ‘correct’ church. In a more recent decree (2007), we are told that ‘Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century’ cannot be ‘called Churches in the proper sense’. However, Rome’s claim could not be more invalid. The proof is as follows:
I The doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church are utterly inconsistent with the plain teaching of the New Testament.
The finality of Christ’s unique sacrifice and His priestly intercession (see Hebrews 9: 28; 10: 11-12) rule out the sacrifice of the mass and a human priesthood. The theory of transubstantiation is an absurd philosophical fiction and utterly detrimental to the simple symbolism of the Lord’s Supper - a memorial of our Saviour’s once-for-all sacrifice. Thus His blood shedding is remembered not repeated, on a table not an altar (hence ministers are pastors not priests); His real presence is spiritual, not physical, in the hearts of His people and not in the bread and wine.
II Justification by faith in Christ’s merit alone (see Romans 5: 1-9) and direct access to Him as sole Mediator (see Matthew 11: 28; 1 Timothy 2: 5) rule out the false, idolatrous and pretentious teaching that Mary is Mediatrix, a ‘female mediator’ through whom we approach our Saviour. Calling our Lord’s mother‘Queen of Heaven’ has turned her into a goddess! The idea that the merits of the faithful are a necessary contribution to their salvation undermines the all-sufficiency of Christ’s merit. Rome’s traditional mistake in making sanctification a part of justification arises from her reliance on the Latin justificare instead of the Greek dikaioo. While the former verb means ‘to make righteous’, the latter means ‘to declare righteous’ by the remission of sins through faith in the blood of Christ (see Romans 4: 5-8; 5: 1, 9). Our pardon is provided by Christ’s sacrificial righteousness alone, imputed to all who trust in Him.
While good works are a necessary and certain fruit of saving faith (see Galatians 5: 6; Ephesians 2: 8-10), their imperfection rules them out from justifying us. Our persons and our performances alike always require pardon. That said, Christian sainthood is the present status of true though imperfect believers (see Ephesians 1: 1-2) not that of dead believers canonised by the Church of Rome.
III Thus purgatory and prayers for the dead (including requiem masses) have no apostolic
warrant.
Those who die ‘in Christ’ have no need of our prayers. Those who die otherwise cannot be helped by them. Besides corrupting Baptism and the Holy Communion, Rome arrogantly added five more supposed sacraments to those commanded by Christ. Her realignment of the Ten Commandments - combining the first two and dividing the tenth - obscure in summary form God’s prohibition of the idolatry of such popular graven images as crucifixes and statues of Mary. Venerating the bones of the saints and other relics breeds superstition. Other distortions of divine truth are no less serious. The Pope’s title ‘Holy Father’ is a blasphemous insult to God the Father (see John 17: 11). His claim to be the ‘vicar of Christ’ is a further insult to the Holy Spirit, Christ’s true representative on earth (see John 14: 16-17). The political claims of a highly fallible Papacy conflict with Christ's words that His kingdom ‘is not of this world’ (John 18: 36). Rome’s entire governmental structure--pope, cardinals, archbishops, etc--has more in common with ancient imperial Rome than the apostolic Presbyterian order of the New Testament.
Rome’s growing ambition to dominate Europe as in the days of the Holy Roman Empire is a re-emerging tyranny to be resisted by individual Christians and national governments alike. Ever since the Reformation, the Papacy has always been opposed to the independence of the United Kingdom. Her arrogance is at odds with Christ’s liberating truth (see John 8: 32, 36; Galatians 5: 1).
IV In addition to theological objections, the track record of Roman Catholicism does not commend itself.
For violent and bloody persecution, no organization can compete with Rome. Since the true Church of Christ is ‘persecuted’ rather than ‘persecutor’, this one consideration alone makes Rome’s claim to ‘correctness’ null and void (see John 15: 20-1; 2 Timothy 3:12). Besides the burnings of the sixteenth-century British reformers, the dreadful cruelties inflicted on the ancient Waldensians, the French Huguenots, the Dutch Protestants and others (including Jews, Muslims and Eastern Orthodox) have never been truly repented of--since the doctrine directing these atrocities remains in tact. Indeed, under another name--The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Inquisition still exists. Current persecution of Protestants in Central and South
America shows no change in Rome’s methods where she has a free hand. The intrigue and corrupting influence of the Jesuits knows no parallel. Vatican complicity in the rise of Hitler and the Nazi holocaust is well attested. The evils of the confessional and the ‘unholy wedlock’ of supposedly celibate priests refute Rome’s sanctimonious image. While marital failure among protestant pastors is to be lamented, is it any wonder that paedophilia and HIV are rife among sexually-frustrated and homosexual Roman priests?
V Considering the post-reformation dogmas of Mary’s immaculate conception (1854), papal
infallibility (1870) and the Assumption of Mary (1950), the Church of Rome is even more apostate than she was in Luther and Calvin’s day. Thus any form of ecumenism on Rome’s terms is nothing but satanic delusion (see 2 Thessalonians 2: 1-12). Especially in the wake of Dominus Iesus, when naïve and gullible evangelicals, charismatics and others try to persuade us that ‘Rome is changing’, ask them which of her antibiblical dogmas has Rome renounced? Indeed, the late Dr D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was right to say that “The Roman Catholic Church is the devil’s greatest masterpiece.” May all God’s people understand the ‘signs of the times’ and cease not ‘contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints’ (Jude 3). Amen!
Dr Alan C. Clifford,
Pastor, Norwich Reformed Church
www.nrchurch.co.nr
1. The Pope’s religion is not the Christianity of Jesus Christ.
2. The Pope’s church is not the true Church of Jesus Christ.
So, since the Pope may be identified as ‘antichrist’ (as many British theologians have cogently argued in past centuries), conversion to the Roman Catholic Church is a retrograde and tragic step. While the apostate condition of many Protestant Churches (including the ‘feminized’ and ‘sodomized’ Church of England) gives sufficient cause for disillusionment, the Roman option cannot provide a safe or satisfying spiritual home.
As affirmed in the doctrinal declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), Rome claimed to be the only ‘correct’ church. In a more recent decree (2007), we are told that ‘Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century’ cannot be ‘called Churches in the proper sense’. However, Rome’s claim could not be more invalid. The proof is as follows:
I The doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church are utterly inconsistent with the plain teaching of the New Testament.
The finality of Christ’s unique sacrifice and His priestly intercession (see Hebrews 9: 28; 10: 11-12) rule out the sacrifice of the mass and a human priesthood. The theory of transubstantiation is an absurd philosophical fiction and utterly detrimental to the simple symbolism of the Lord’s Supper - a memorial of our Saviour’s once-for-all sacrifice. Thus His blood shedding is remembered not repeated, on a table not an altar (hence ministers are pastors not priests); His real presence is spiritual, not physical, in the hearts of His people and not in the bread and wine.
II Justification by faith in Christ’s merit alone (see Romans 5: 1-9) and direct access to Him as sole Mediator (see Matthew 11: 28; 1 Timothy 2: 5) rule out the false, idolatrous and pretentious teaching that Mary is Mediatrix, a ‘female mediator’ through whom we approach our Saviour. Calling our Lord’s mother‘Queen of Heaven’ has turned her into a goddess! The idea that the merits of the faithful are a necessary contribution to their salvation undermines the all-sufficiency of Christ’s merit. Rome’s traditional mistake in making sanctification a part of justification arises from her reliance on the Latin justificare instead of the Greek dikaioo. While the former verb means ‘to make righteous’, the latter means ‘to declare righteous’ by the remission of sins through faith in the blood of Christ (see Romans 4: 5-8; 5: 1, 9). Our pardon is provided by Christ’s sacrificial righteousness alone, imputed to all who trust in Him.
While good works are a necessary and certain fruit of saving faith (see Galatians 5: 6; Ephesians 2: 8-10), their imperfection rules them out from justifying us. Our persons and our performances alike always require pardon. That said, Christian sainthood is the present status of true though imperfect believers (see Ephesians 1: 1-2) not that of dead believers canonised by the Church of Rome.
III Thus purgatory and prayers for the dead (including requiem masses) have no apostolic
warrant.
Those who die ‘in Christ’ have no need of our prayers. Those who die otherwise cannot be helped by them. Besides corrupting Baptism and the Holy Communion, Rome arrogantly added five more supposed sacraments to those commanded by Christ. Her realignment of the Ten Commandments - combining the first two and dividing the tenth - obscure in summary form God’s prohibition of the idolatry of such popular graven images as crucifixes and statues of Mary. Venerating the bones of the saints and other relics breeds superstition. Other distortions of divine truth are no less serious. The Pope’s title ‘Holy Father’ is a blasphemous insult to God the Father (see John 17: 11). His claim to be the ‘vicar of Christ’ is a further insult to the Holy Spirit, Christ’s true representative on earth (see John 14: 16-17). The political claims of a highly fallible Papacy conflict with Christ's words that His kingdom ‘is not of this world’ (John 18: 36). Rome’s entire governmental structure--pope, cardinals, archbishops, etc--has more in common with ancient imperial Rome than the apostolic Presbyterian order of the New Testament.
Rome’s growing ambition to dominate Europe as in the days of the Holy Roman Empire is a re-emerging tyranny to be resisted by individual Christians and national governments alike. Ever since the Reformation, the Papacy has always been opposed to the independence of the United Kingdom. Her arrogance is at odds with Christ’s liberating truth (see John 8: 32, 36; Galatians 5: 1).
IV In addition to theological objections, the track record of Roman Catholicism does not commend itself.
For violent and bloody persecution, no organization can compete with Rome. Since the true Church of Christ is ‘persecuted’ rather than ‘persecutor’, this one consideration alone makes Rome’s claim to ‘correctness’ null and void (see John 15: 20-1; 2 Timothy 3:12). Besides the burnings of the sixteenth-century British reformers, the dreadful cruelties inflicted on the ancient Waldensians, the French Huguenots, the Dutch Protestants and others (including Jews, Muslims and Eastern Orthodox) have never been truly repented of--since the doctrine directing these atrocities remains in tact. Indeed, under another name--The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Inquisition still exists. Current persecution of Protestants in Central and South
America shows no change in Rome’s methods where she has a free hand. The intrigue and corrupting influence of the Jesuits knows no parallel. Vatican complicity in the rise of Hitler and the Nazi holocaust is well attested. The evils of the confessional and the ‘unholy wedlock’ of supposedly celibate priests refute Rome’s sanctimonious image. While marital failure among protestant pastors is to be lamented, is it any wonder that paedophilia and HIV are rife among sexually-frustrated and homosexual Roman priests?
V Considering the post-reformation dogmas of Mary’s immaculate conception (1854), papal
infallibility (1870) and the Assumption of Mary (1950), the Church of Rome is even more apostate than she was in Luther and Calvin’s day. Thus any form of ecumenism on Rome’s terms is nothing but satanic delusion (see 2 Thessalonians 2: 1-12). Especially in the wake of Dominus Iesus, when naïve and gullible evangelicals, charismatics and others try to persuade us that ‘Rome is changing’, ask them which of her antibiblical dogmas has Rome renounced? Indeed, the late Dr D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was right to say that “The Roman Catholic Church is the devil’s greatest masterpiece.” May all God’s people understand the ‘signs of the times’ and cease not ‘contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints’ (Jude 3). Amen!
Dr Alan C. Clifford,
Pastor, Norwich Reformed Church
www.nrchurch.co.nr
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
No Rod, Parental Shame
The riots in GB cities recently have thrown up the usual responses from politicians and other do-gooders. A "Community pay-back" scheme with offenders wearing luminous vests has been suggested by Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Glegg. Other forms of community service have been proposed, but these will come to nothing.
The Bible says the following: "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself brings his mother shame." This ties in with what some angry citizens have been saying, that the problem is lack of parental control and responsibility. Parents must surely get back to basics if their children are to be a blessing to them. They must consider (1) that proper correction in the home is beneficial to the child, the parents, other siblings and to the whole community. Teaching them from a young age the different between right and wrong, good and evil, can only be proper because it educates the conscience of the child. When they transgress, they must be appropriately corrected. If the child heeds the parents' reproof without recourse to the rod, well and good; but if not, then the responsibility rests on the parent to secure and ensure proper behaviour from their child. This produces wisdom. The child that takes the warning will gain wisdom.
(2) Any child that is left to his own inclinations is a child that does not know the right way to live. Such a child will bring shame on his mother and father. He/she will disobey the parents and bring disgrace on their good name. They will cause them needless worry and anxiety, not to mention embarrassment. Left to himself, that child could well end up in prison because he has stolen, or worse, murdered someone. A child does not have the wisdom to stay away from bad company, but does possess the unwisdom that takes them into bad company.
Had the British parents administered the rod in due measure, perhaps their children and young people would not have been involved in those riots.
The Bible says the following: "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself brings his mother shame." This ties in with what some angry citizens have been saying, that the problem is lack of parental control and responsibility. Parents must surely get back to basics if their children are to be a blessing to them. They must consider (1) that proper correction in the home is beneficial to the child, the parents, other siblings and to the whole community. Teaching them from a young age the different between right and wrong, good and evil, can only be proper because it educates the conscience of the child. When they transgress, they must be appropriately corrected. If the child heeds the parents' reproof without recourse to the rod, well and good; but if not, then the responsibility rests on the parent to secure and ensure proper behaviour from their child. This produces wisdom. The child that takes the warning will gain wisdom.
(2) Any child that is left to his own inclinations is a child that does not know the right way to live. Such a child will bring shame on his mother and father. He/she will disobey the parents and bring disgrace on their good name. They will cause them needless worry and anxiety, not to mention embarrassment. Left to himself, that child could well end up in prison because he has stolen, or worse, murdered someone. A child does not have the wisdom to stay away from bad company, but does possess the unwisdom that takes them into bad company.
Had the British parents administered the rod in due measure, perhaps their children and young people would not have been involved in those riots.
The Place of Feelings in Calvin's Thought
Calvin asks the 'death row' trainee Gospel ministers to pray for him. But he continues to pray for them, asking that God will make His holy protection effective for them, and that they might ‘feel what care He takes of your salvation.’ Again, the experiential comes to the fore in his closing words.
I sometimes think that we deprive ourselves of much heavenly blessing by not seeking the Lord to allow us to feel His blessings on us, and His presence near us. When God revives His church—
and, my, that is urgently needed at this hour—experience of God’s gracious salvation is magnified. Sinners feel their sin and feel they are under the wrath of God, feel their guilt, feel the judgement of God about to fall on them; and they come to feel the sweetness of Christ’s love for them, feel the Spirit’s power and work in their hearts, feel as if they did trust Christ, and had been born again. Calvin speaks in these terms to these condemned prisoners, but we ought to sue God for an awareness of His lovely presence with us and upon us.
Let us not be content to ‘walk by faith not by sight’ at all times, but let us sue God to give us a sense of His presence among and in us.
I sometimes think that we deprive ourselves of much heavenly blessing by not seeking the Lord to allow us to feel His blessings on us, and His presence near us. When God revives His church—
and, my, that is urgently needed at this hour—experience of God’s gracious salvation is magnified. Sinners feel their sin and feel they are under the wrath of God, feel their guilt, feel the judgement of God about to fall on them; and they come to feel the sweetness of Christ’s love for them, feel the Spirit’s power and work in their hearts, feel as if they did trust Christ, and had been born again. Calvin speaks in these terms to these condemned prisoners, but we ought to sue God for an awareness of His lovely presence with us and upon us.
Let us not be content to ‘walk by faith not by sight’ at all times, but let us sue God to give us a sense of His presence among and in us.
The Battlefield
Because the spiritual battle in which we are involved is not ours, but the Lord’s, that in no way implies that we are passive in the whole affair. Not at all. As called men, we are to be active in campaigning for the Lord’s truth. We, too, have the same quarrel to maintain in this evil world, against the enemies of Christ and the Gospel—the same enemies with which these five men had to contend. The battle never changes—it is always the world against God, error against truth, the devil’s agents against God’s servants. It is always the same, and it always will be the same, until Christ returns in splendour and glory.
You see, there are two sides to every spiritual conflict that we find ourselves in—God’s and Satan’s. These are the two great antagonists who are battling it out, where? In your life and mine. And as Calvin reminds us constantly, the outcome of this battle is never in any doubt. GOD MUST WIN! And He does!
Very often in the battle ground of our lives, we are not always aware of what is going on, or why. God and Satan are battling it out in us, as if we were, in one sense, in the wrong place at the
wrong time. Now, it’s no accident that the battle is being fought out in us, for we are already on the Lord’s side, the winning side, the victorious side. If we were no threat to the kingdom of darkness, then our lives would not have been chosen as the battlefield.
Remember Job? What a man and what a story! God and Satan in contention, and Job is chosen by God as the theatre of that war. ‘Through many trials, toils and snares’ poor Job had to come,
including incalculable personal loss, but ‘grace led him home’ to the full enjoyment of God’s fatherly love and kindness, and that triumphantly. Why? Because that’s the kind of God He is. This is His everyday work. And He’s our captain.
You see, there are two sides to every spiritual conflict that we find ourselves in—God’s and Satan’s. These are the two great antagonists who are battling it out, where? In your life and mine. And as Calvin reminds us constantly, the outcome of this battle is never in any doubt. GOD MUST WIN! And He does!
Very often in the battle ground of our lives, we are not always aware of what is going on, or why. God and Satan are battling it out in us, as if we were, in one sense, in the wrong place at the
wrong time. Now, it’s no accident that the battle is being fought out in us, for we are already on the Lord’s side, the winning side, the victorious side. If we were no threat to the kingdom of darkness, then our lives would not have been chosen as the battlefield.
Remember Job? What a man and what a story! God and Satan in contention, and Job is chosen by God as the theatre of that war. ‘Through many trials, toils and snares’ poor Job had to come,
including incalculable personal loss, but ‘grace led him home’ to the full enjoyment of God’s fatherly love and kindness, and that triumphantly. Why? Because that’s the kind of God He is. This is His everyday work. And He’s our captain.
Ministerial Support
Calvin describes those who persecuted Gospel ministers as ‘the enemies of the truth.’ Who else would dare have acted in such a way ‘against the Lord and His anointed Servants!’ In profound spiritual blindness, they lifted up their wicked hands against the servants of Christ and the Gospel. Who else but devil-inspired clergy and officials of state would dare to take such action against God’s anointed! Who else but the most hardened against the Gospel of Christ would dare to behave in such a vile manner! Calvin was right—only ‘enemies of the truth,’ however dressed, would stoop to such depravity.
Using such non-PC language would have rung bells of rejoicing in the ears of these five saints. The persecutors were the ‘enemies of the truth,’ and the prisoners were the ‘servants of the truth.’ No ‘moral equivalence’ was drawn or even inferred between these two groups of people by Calvin. There was ‘right’ and there was ‘wrong,’ and 'ne'er the twain shall meet'—unlike the Eames/Bradley report into dealing with Northern Ireland’s past.30 Calvin told it as it was, and no attempt was made to sanitise their vile actions.
How do we know that Calvin supported his brother ministers? Did he merely say to them that he was behind them all the way? Was his support purely verbal? Not at all. He took action to help at their time of vulnerability and need. The Gospel ministers in today's church must learn this lesson immediately.
Using such non-PC language would have rung bells of rejoicing in the ears of these five saints. The persecutors were the ‘enemies of the truth,’ and the prisoners were the ‘servants of the truth.’ No ‘moral equivalence’ was drawn or even inferred between these two groups of people by Calvin. There was ‘right’ and there was ‘wrong,’ and 'ne'er the twain shall meet'—unlike the Eames/Bradley report into dealing with Northern Ireland’s past.30 Calvin told it as it was, and no attempt was made to sanitise their vile actions.
How do we know that Calvin supported his brother ministers? Did he merely say to them that he was behind them all the way? Was his support purely verbal? Not at all. He took action to help at their time of vulnerability and need. The Gospel ministers in today's church must learn this lesson immediately.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)