Saturday, 9 June 2012
CALVINISTIC METHODIST FATHERS OF WALES
Youth Drain From The Mainline Churches
In the Northern Ireland religious scene there is a burgeoning of independent 'churches' that are modelled on the Vineyard churches. They are sprouting up in many of our provincial towns such as Coleraine, Dungannon, Magherafelt, Lurgan, Portadown, etc.
Your people in particular are leaving the mainline denominations in droves, despite their trying to mimic the world in a bid to retain them. There churches, some of them professing to be reformed churches, have introduced the rock-style praise because, they say, this is what the young people want. It does not seem to dawn on them what God might want and how He desires to be worshipped.
I think that the reason for this exodus is that the mainline churches, while mimicking the world to keep the youth, are just not doing a great job at it. They are unprofessional, unskilled, ragged. Indeed, by their compromise with the world they are actually driving the young away from them.
They are succeeding sufficiently to keep them for a whole, but when their worship becomes too 'normal', they then need a stronger 'fix' of worldly worship to keep them interested in religious things.
The churches have been warned about this trend, but no one has paid a blind bit of attention to these sincerely given warnings.
The mainline churches need not complain at the exodus of young people from their ranks - they have only themselves to blame for driving them to where they will get a stronger 'fix' of unadulterated worldly religion.
Your people in particular are leaving the mainline denominations in droves, despite their trying to mimic the world in a bid to retain them. There churches, some of them professing to be reformed churches, have introduced the rock-style praise because, they say, this is what the young people want. It does not seem to dawn on them what God might want and how He desires to be worshipped.
I think that the reason for this exodus is that the mainline churches, while mimicking the world to keep the youth, are just not doing a great job at it. They are unprofessional, unskilled, ragged. Indeed, by their compromise with the world they are actually driving the young away from them.
They are succeeding sufficiently to keep them for a whole, but when their worship becomes too 'normal', they then need a stronger 'fix' of worldly worship to keep them interested in religious things.
The churches have been warned about this trend, but no one has paid a blind bit of attention to these sincerely given warnings.
The mainline churches need not complain at the exodus of young people from their ranks - they have only themselves to blame for driving them to where they will get a stronger 'fix' of unadulterated worldly religion.
Thursday, 7 June 2012
A TALE OF TWO REIGNS
Contrary to the general public’s uninformed exuberance (reinforced by a strange and popular sycophantic media), many of us are more than a little ambivalent about the Jubilee celebrations. Sadly, the well-based accusation of Her Majesty’s betrayal of her Coronation Oath is not only food for occasional sober reflection. The facts flashing all over the internet are too stubborn to be noted then politely ignored.
Of course, with the four-day euphoria yet to die down, it is difficult for people who prefer fantasy to engage with reality. Indeed, the fanfares, ceremonial pomp and public jubilation bear no relation to the current state of the United Kingdom. Consider this: the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) saw national, cultural,
political, economic, social, moral and—as its inspirational source—spiritual progress from a superstitious, dark and brutal medievalism to something far more civilized (despite undeniable lingering defects). On the other hand, the reign of Queen Elizabeth II has witnessed the opposite: national, cultural, political, economic,
social, moral and spiritual decline.
While Her Majesty is worthy of universal affection as a person—indeed has any monarch been so greatly loved?—it remains to be said that she has reigned not merely as a figure-head over the most disastrous and unprecedented period of political, moral and spiritual decline in our nation’s history. If Her Majesty’s
governments have been in the driving seat, is she not complicit through the Royal Assent in the nation’s numerous wrong turnings?
This being so, today's rejoicing should have included a large degree of repentance. In his eulogy, the Archbishop was predictably 'PC'. Failing to proclaim the comforts and challenges of the gracious, saving kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ, he failed to provide a prophetic note at this time of national crisis. While the hymns harked back to the best days of English, Scottish and Welsh Protestant Christianity, the moral
and social values they represent have long since been jettisoned from our British culture.
The Prime Minister, David Cameron read from Chapter 12 of Paul’s Letter to the Romans. In view of the appalling secularism currently driving the Government’s legislative programme, did he not have a twinge of conscience when he read ‘Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind’ (v. 2)? These words give impetus and meaning to the distinctive Christian values inculcated by the Apostle Paul in the rest of the chapter. In short, secularism is ruining us.
Paul’s Christianity—expounded so powerfully in the early chapters of Romans—is the only antidote for our numerous national ills.
May God have mercy upon us.
God save the Queen! God save the United Kingdom! God save the Commonwealth! God save the world!
Dr Alan C. Clifford
Of course, with the four-day euphoria yet to die down, it is difficult for people who prefer fantasy to engage with reality. Indeed, the fanfares, ceremonial pomp and public jubilation bear no relation to the current state of the United Kingdom. Consider this: the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) saw national, cultural,
political, economic, social, moral and—as its inspirational source—spiritual progress from a superstitious, dark and brutal medievalism to something far more civilized (despite undeniable lingering defects). On the other hand, the reign of Queen Elizabeth II has witnessed the opposite: national, cultural, political, economic,
social, moral and spiritual decline.
While Her Majesty is worthy of universal affection as a person—indeed has any monarch been so greatly loved?—it remains to be said that she has reigned not merely as a figure-head over the most disastrous and unprecedented period of political, moral and spiritual decline in our nation’s history. If Her Majesty’s
governments have been in the driving seat, is she not complicit through the Royal Assent in the nation’s numerous wrong turnings?
This being so, today's rejoicing should have included a large degree of repentance. In his eulogy, the Archbishop was predictably 'PC'. Failing to proclaim the comforts and challenges of the gracious, saving kingship of our Lord Jesus Christ, he failed to provide a prophetic note at this time of national crisis. While the hymns harked back to the best days of English, Scottish and Welsh Protestant Christianity, the moral
and social values they represent have long since been jettisoned from our British culture.
The Prime Minister, David Cameron read from Chapter 12 of Paul’s Letter to the Romans. In view of the appalling secularism currently driving the Government’s legislative programme, did he not have a twinge of conscience when he read ‘Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind’ (v. 2)? These words give impetus and meaning to the distinctive Christian values inculcated by the Apostle Paul in the rest of the chapter. In short, secularism is ruining us.
Paul’s Christianity—expounded so powerfully in the early chapters of Romans—is the only antidote for our numerous national ills.
May God have mercy upon us.
God save the Queen! God save the United Kingdom! God save the Commonwealth! God save the world!
Dr Alan C. Clifford
Wednesday, 6 June 2012
Religious Hypocrisy.
The politicians are said to be well known for their hypocrisy. This was demonstrated very clearly when two very senior UK politicians who profess to be atheists stood in St Paul's Cathedral, London, on Tuesday 5th June 2012, and sang hymns of praise to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Whom they do not believe exists. Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Nick Clegg, and Mr Ed. Milliband, leader of Her Majesty's Opposition claim to be atheists yet they sing praise to a God they do not even believe exists.
On Remembrance Sunday, they do the same. The incongruity of it all is sickening and a mockery of the highest degree. This is a form of simony, where religion is used for purposes other than what it was intended for. These men are not worshipping the living and true God - for them He does not exist - but they are "drawing near to Him with their lips but their hearts are far from Him."
They have created a god in their own image, and they worship that god using the precious words of the Christian church. This is sheer religious humbug of the highest degree. These men turn up at these civic events just because they are expected to be there. It is their duty to be there, whether they believe in the rightness of being there or not.
That raises the other question as to how much of their politics is exactly the same. Do they do and do they say only those things that others expect them to do and to say? Do such men have no principles whatever? Are they in politics for the take? Is seeking the applause of men the greatest driving force in their lives? Well, they have to be re-elected after all. So, principle does not come into it.
Another sign of hypocrisy, surely.
On Remembrance Sunday, they do the same. The incongruity of it all is sickening and a mockery of the highest degree. This is a form of simony, where religion is used for purposes other than what it was intended for. These men are not worshipping the living and true God - for them He does not exist - but they are "drawing near to Him with their lips but their hearts are far from Him."
They have created a god in their own image, and they worship that god using the precious words of the Christian church. This is sheer religious humbug of the highest degree. These men turn up at these civic events just because they are expected to be there. It is their duty to be there, whether they believe in the rightness of being there or not.
That raises the other question as to how much of their politics is exactly the same. Do they do and do they say only those things that others expect them to do and to say? Do such men have no principles whatever? Are they in politics for the take? Is seeking the applause of men the greatest driving force in their lives? Well, they have to be re-elected after all. So, principle does not come into it.
Another sign of hypocrisy, surely.
What is Reformed?
One could be excused for imagining that only those
who adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) and its theological siblings are
the truly reformed people of today, given the inordinate emphasis that is put
on that albeit excellent human document.
These same people also hold the Canons of Dort in high regard despite it
teaching a doctrine of the atonement that is different in emphasis from that of the WCF. They honour and believe the Belgic Confession
and the Heidelberg Catechism, and accept these as reformed documents. Some even accept the reformed character of
the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion as teaching reformed truth. These all teach a variant, and may I say so,
a more biblical doctrine of the atonement than does the WCF.
Yet there is an anomaly here because while these
other confessional standards are regarded as reformed by many reformed men,
they tend to cast aspersions on those who prefer the teaching of the other
reformed confessions and catechisms to the WCF.
It is not simply a matter of personal preference; it is based on careful biblical exegesis and on taking the teaching of Scripture in the round. They accept the other documents as reformed, but secretly they doubt the
orthodoxy of those who have difficulties with the WCF. Quite unbrotherly, is it not?
Why is this?
Is it because of a deeply ingrained partisan spirit that motivates those
who disenfranchise their brothers in Christ?
Is it just ignorance of the truth and content of these other reformed
documents that motivates them? If it is ignorance, then this
can be remedied by coming afresh to these documents and looking at their teaching
objectively and thus addressing the ignorance issue.
However, if it a deeply ingrained partisan spirit
that motivates them, then there is a serious problem. To believe as the gurus tell us to believe is
sheer credulousness, gullibility. Why
learn from second hand sources when the original and primary documents are
readily available to them for study?
Second hand sources have the tendency of incorporating the prejudices of
those who are thus regarded. The primary
sources have only the thinking, the prejudices, of their author.
It is so sad that those who shout loudest about
the truth are often those who steadfastly refuse to consider the truth. It is incredible that men who pride
themselves in being men of truth are also prepared to spin what other documents
say in order to keep in with those who hold those other man-made documents sacrosanct. This is nothing less than the fear of man
which brings a snare. It demonstrates an
uncertainty about what a man believes. Take
him out of his theological comfort zone and he is at sea. Challenge his theological position, especially if that position is also held by the reformed gurus, and he goes to
pieces. He shows that he cannot handle
the truth when he resorts to personal insults and ridicule and
mis-representation. How pathetic such
creatures really are.
What makes all this infinitely worse is that the doctrine of Scripture as held by these men is called into question. If the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments is the only infallible rule of faith, worship and practice, and the Supreme standard of the church, why do reformed men defer continually to the WCF in order to assess a man's orthodoxy? What is wrong with Scripture? Do they not really understand it? Have they their own secret doubts as to the final authority of Scripture implanted in their minds by their imbibing of theological liberalism? And they do not have to have been taught at a liberal college for this to happen! But these doubts seem to have appeared in their minds.
Let me 'cut to the chase' as we say: is Scripture your final authority in all matters theological and practical, or is it not? Do you turn instinctively "to the Word and to the testimony"? Do you rest your beliefs for time and for eternity on the clear teaching of Scripture, or do you not? These other documents are fine so far as they go. But they were composed by fallible human beings, therefore cannot be regarded as the final authority. We ought to be deeply thankful to our theological forbears for ensuring that Scripture alone is the supreme standard for all things pertaining to life and godliness. Use the writings of men, even of the very best of men, but as someone so wisely said, only follow a man so far as he follows Christ, and no further.
This, I think, is the best counsel available in this as in many other areas of Christian life and doctrine. Follow this dictum, and you will not go far wrong.
Tuesday, 5 June 2012
The Coronation Oath
The Coronation Oath Act, 1953
Herewith the actual words of the oath taken by the Queen on 2nd June 1953:
Archbishop of Canterbury: Madam, is your Majesty willing to take the Oath?
The Queen: I am willing.
Archbishop: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Pakistan, and Ceylon, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?
Queen: I solemnly promise so to do.
Archbishop: Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?
Queen: I will.
Archbishop: Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?
Queen: All this I promise to do.
**********************************************************************
Queen Elizabeth II has broken her ‘Coronation Oath’, and is the first Monarch to have done so. She has been fully non-compliant with the wording of the ‘Coronation Oath’. She has aided the take-over of the United Kingdom by her inactions, and has allowed a Despotic Labour-Government to remain in power. The Queen is a Traitor, and has disgraced her family, and betrayed the people of the United Kingdom. The Queen has also know of the Treason committed by previous Governments … dating back to 1972, and has done nothing to stop it. The Queen has been fully complicit in the take-over of the United Kingdom by a Foreign-Power (that being the EU).
Queen Elizabeth II …has without question betrayed her oath made before God and as a consequence has wilfully betrayed us!!!!!!
These were very solemn oaths that she took in full knowledge of their requirements. Has she maintained the Laws of God in our nation? Has she maintained the true profession of the Gospel? Has she done all in her power to maintain in the UK the Protestant Reformed Religion? Does she know what the Protestant Reformed Religion is? Regardless of the theological perversions conducted within the CoE, she has maintained that religious institution intact.
Do you agree with this assessment? If so, please provide evidence for your answer.
Herewith the actual words of the oath taken by the Queen on 2nd June 1953:
Archbishop of Canterbury: Madam, is your Majesty willing to take the Oath?
The Queen: I am willing.
Archbishop: Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Pakistan, and Ceylon, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?
Queen: I solemnly promise so to do.
Archbishop: Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?
Queen: I will.
Archbishop: Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?
Queen: All this I promise to do.
**********************************************************************
Queen Elizabeth II has broken her ‘Coronation Oath’, and is the first Monarch to have done so. She has been fully non-compliant with the wording of the ‘Coronation Oath’. She has aided the take-over of the United Kingdom by her inactions, and has allowed a Despotic Labour-Government to remain in power. The Queen is a Traitor, and has disgraced her family, and betrayed the people of the United Kingdom. The Queen has also know of the Treason committed by previous Governments … dating back to 1972, and has done nothing to stop it. The Queen has been fully complicit in the take-over of the United Kingdom by a Foreign-Power (that being the EU).
Queen Elizabeth II …has without question betrayed her oath made before God and as a consequence has wilfully betrayed us!!!!!!
These were very solemn oaths that she took in full knowledge of their requirements. Has she maintained the Laws of God in our nation? Has she maintained the true profession of the Gospel? Has she done all in her power to maintain in the UK the Protestant Reformed Religion? Does she know what the Protestant Reformed Religion is? Regardless of the theological perversions conducted within the CoE, she has maintained that religious institution intact.
Do you agree with this assessment? If so, please provide evidence for your answer.
Dedication and the Queen
Speaking at the Diamond Jubilee for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams based his remarks on Paul's letter to the Roman, chapter 12, verse 2. He demonstrated the inadequacy of the modern current understanding of 'dedication.'
Rather, he brought the meaning of the word as understood in the biblical and classical languages to the attention of his multimillion person global congregation, saying that dedication has to do with the giving of oneself to a particular calling without allowing anything to distract from that divine calling. It was about being single-focussed, single-minded determination to serve God first and foremost.
He then went on to say that in his application that the Queen was to do all she could to make her subjects happy.
What a reversal of what Paul actually wrote. Dr Williams could and should have called upon the Queen to keep her coronation oath to maintain the Protestant and Reformed Faith; but he failed to do so. He ought to have called her to repentance for her sins; but he failed in this too. He ought to have encouraged her to serve the living God, revealed supremely in Jesus Christ, and to serve her subjects through her dedicated service to Him; again, the Archbishop failed to do this.
He failed, but I will take it upon myself to remind the Queen, "Your Majesty, I am a loyal subject of yours and honour you for the civic work you have done over the past 60 years. I acknowledge the way you have united most of our people, as exhibited at the Jubilee celebrations.
However, I would remind you of your coronation oath which you took in the Presence of Almighty God to maintain the Protestant Reformed Faith. I humbly ask you to refresh your memory of what you vowed, and take whatever steps are necessary to change religious and ecclesiastical direction. Please do not listen to what your advisers tell you regarding matters religious and theological. It is quite obvious that they are mis-informing you. Get back to the Bible, back to the great English reformers, to the Puritans, to Whitefield and the Wesleys, to Isaac Watts and Philip Doddridge if you want to get the right end of things. Our country needs to be re-formed according to the Scriptures, and you can give a strong and positive lead in this movement."
Rather, he brought the meaning of the word as understood in the biblical and classical languages to the attention of his multimillion person global congregation, saying that dedication has to do with the giving of oneself to a particular calling without allowing anything to distract from that divine calling. It was about being single-focussed, single-minded determination to serve God first and foremost.
He then went on to say that in his application that the Queen was to do all she could to make her subjects happy.
What a reversal of what Paul actually wrote. Dr Williams could and should have called upon the Queen to keep her coronation oath to maintain the Protestant and Reformed Faith; but he failed to do so. He ought to have called her to repentance for her sins; but he failed in this too. He ought to have encouraged her to serve the living God, revealed supremely in Jesus Christ, and to serve her subjects through her dedicated service to Him; again, the Archbishop failed to do this.
He failed, but I will take it upon myself to remind the Queen, "Your Majesty, I am a loyal subject of yours and honour you for the civic work you have done over the past 60 years. I acknowledge the way you have united most of our people, as exhibited at the Jubilee celebrations.
However, I would remind you of your coronation oath which you took in the Presence of Almighty God to maintain the Protestant Reformed Faith. I humbly ask you to refresh your memory of what you vowed, and take whatever steps are necessary to change religious and ecclesiastical direction. Please do not listen to what your advisers tell you regarding matters religious and theological. It is quite obvious that they are mis-informing you. Get back to the Bible, back to the great English reformers, to the Puritans, to Whitefield and the Wesleys, to Isaac Watts and Philip Doddridge if you want to get the right end of things. Our country needs to be re-formed according to the Scriptures, and you can give a strong and positive lead in this movement."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)