Author: fundyreformed

Calvin on Fundamental Doctrines

~ fundyreformed ~ 11 Comments

In reading through Nine Mark’s e-journal on fundamentalism, I came across an audio lecture by Iain Murray (editor of Banner of Truth) on George Whitefield and Catholicity. Catholicity refers to a spirit of unity among the universal (i.e. Catholic) church, and not in any way to the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.

The lecture was very interesting as it deals with George Whitefield’s life and influence. It focused on his ideas of Christian unity across denominational lines. And Murray alleges that this emphasis on Christian catholicity directly resulted in the birth of modern missions and other evangelistic ventures such as Bible societies and publishing houses. Murray is careful to apply Whitefield’s story to today’s Christianity, and warns against both a radical ecumenism and a sectarian disregard for unity.

In his lecture, he quoted from John Calvin on the idea of doctrines being fundamental or not. And as we’ve been arguing the historicity and validity of this idea (that doctrines can be ranked as primary and secondary, etc.), I thought I’d share the full quote, which I found in Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 1, section 12.

What is more, some fault may creep into the administration of either doctrine or sacraments, but this ought not to estrange us from communion with the church. For not all the articles of true doctrine are of the same sort. Some are so necessary to know that they should be certain and unquestioned by all men as the proper principles of religion. Such are: God is one; Christ is God and the Son of God; our salvation rests in God’s mercy; and the like. Among the churches there are other articles of doctrine disputed which still do not break the unity of faith. Suppose that one church believes–short of unbridled contention and opinionated stubbornness–that souls upon leaving bodies fly to heaven; while another, not daring to define the place, is convinced nevertheless that they live to the Lord. What churches would disagree on this one point? Here are the apostle’s words: “Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, be of the same mind; and if you be differently minded in anything, God shall reveal this also to you” [Phil. 3:15]. Does this not sufficiently indicate that a difference of opinion over these nonessential matters* should in no wise be the base of schism among Christians? First and foremost, we should agree on all points. But since all men are somewhat beclouded with ignorance, either we must leave no church remaining, or we must condone delusion in those matters which can go unknown without harm to the sum of religion and without loss of salvation. (emphasis added)

Also note the footnote (at the place where the asterisk is in the above quote), where John McNeill notes several proponents of this fundamental doctrine ideal in the seventeenth century.

*What follows is the footnote in my copy of the Institutes (edited by John McNeill [Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960] ), emphasis added:

Cf. IV. ii. 1. The distinction of fundamental and nonfundamental articles of belief is woven into Calvin’s thought, though not definitively treated by him. F. Wendel remarks on the importance of this doctrine in Calvin’s championing of church unity, and cites Comm. I Cor. 3:11 (Corpus Reformatorum: Johannis Calvini Opera quae supersunt omnia XLIX. 1354): “The fundamental doctrine, which it is nowise permissible to break, is that we cleave to Christ, for he is the only foundation [unique fondament] of the church.” The doctrines here named are introduced by the word qualia (such as) and are of course not a full enumeration of those which Calvin would hold requisite. The notion of fundamental articles formed the core of various liberal projects of union in the seventeenth century when it was advanced by Georg Calixtus, Pierre Jurieu, Samuel Werenfels, J.A. Turretin, and others. See Rouse and Neill, A History of the Ecumenical Movement, pp. 79 ff., 92 f., 107, 111.

I’ll have more to say on Nine Mark’s e-journal later. For now, you should know that several excellent articles on the question of fundamentalism, separation and unity are brought together in this one resource. I find it very helpful.

Essential Reading on Fundamentalism

~ fundyreformed ~ 4 Comments

I don’t have time now to get in depth, but I wanted to at least give you the link.

9 Marks Ministries‘ March/April e-journal is on the topic of fundamentalism and separation.

Some of the very issues, I’ve been debating about recently here are covered (including article’s I’ve referenced by Albert Mohler and Wayne Grudem). There are other new articles and thoughts on this topic from Ian Murray, Mark Dever and others. And they include David Doran and Mark Minnick with a fundamentalist perspective. Ben Wright, of Paleoevangelical, also contributes.

Again, I’m pressed for time, so I’ll just give you the link to the PDF copy as well as a link to the page that introduces the journal and provides html links to the articles.

PDF / HTML

Approaching a Fearsome God — through Christ

~ fundyreformed ~ 3 Comments

Sunday Mediations — posts encouraging us all to meditate on the things of our Savior, on His day.

I don’t have a healthy enough view of God. I’ll be the first to admit that. I don’t comprehend his ultimate greatness, his “otherness” and transcendence. His awful holiness. Yes “awe-ful” and terrifying, holiness.

The Bible repeatedly calls on us to fear God. Yet fearing God is foreign to our nature. We live and breathe as if God isn’t. No wonder we don’t fear him.

And for those raised in Christianity (like me), we assume that we can approach God. We assume that we shouldn’t have to fear Him. And isn’t Christianity all happy-go-lucky anyway? What’s this about fear? Why should we tremble before God, don’t we have our ticket to heaven already?

With these thoughts in mind, lets approach a text this morning:

And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile, knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for your sake, who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1 Pet. 1:17-21)

I’ve been teaching through 1 Peter in our small group class every other Sunday night. This passage was a bit perplexing.

“Conduct yoursleves with fear” is one of four commands in this passage (“set your hope”–v. 13; “be holy”–v. 15; and “love one another”–v. 22 are the others). And I knew that the passage beautifully illustrates the relationship between Biblical imperatives and indicatives. Each command is expressly connected with facts that are true because of who we are in Christ.

So I was puzzled by the connection between vs. 17 and the verses that follow. In light of the preciousness of your redemption, fear God? That didn’t seem to follow, unless we are talking a debtor’s ethic where because of Christ’s sacrifice we should go on and labor in fearing God out of debt.

In looking at the text, it also seems to be disconnected. Fear God, knowing you were ransomed, not with perishable silver and gold, but with Christ. And Christ is like a lamb without blemish, foreknown and manifest for you, who believe in God. The main point of all this is still “fear God” so how does it all fit?

As I scanned through Calvin’s comments on this passage, his discussion of vs. 21 grabbed me. Here’s an excerpt:

…as faith unites us to God, we shun and dread every access to him, except a Mediator comes who can deliver us from fear. For sin, which reigns in us, renders us hateful to God and him to us. Hence, as soon as mention is made of God, we must necessarily be filled with dread; and if we approach him, his justice is like fire, which will wholly consume us.

It is hence evident that we cannot believe in God except through Christ, in whom God in a manner makes himself little, that he might accommodate himself to our comprehension; and it is Christ alone who can tranquillize consciences, so that we may dare to come in confidence to God.

As I really grasped the glory of what was being said in vs. 21, everything clicked. We are to fear God, and this is impossible in ourselves. So we are reminded that we’ve been ransomed from our futile ways. And not just ransomed with a fool’s gift of gold, we’ve been ransomed by the precious blood of Christ. The very Christ who like the Paschal Lamb of old, was foreknown and chosen to suffer wrath in our place. This Jesus came and died “for [our] sake”. And thus through him we believe in God. And God’s resurrection of Jesus was all designed “so that [our] faith and hope [would be] in God”.

We can fear God, and reverence him, not as a vanquished foe trembles before Him. Rather because of the sacrifice accomplished for us, and because God himself has worked so that our faith and hope are in Him, we reverently fear God with Christ at our side. Because of our mediator we can approach this fearful God. And from Jesus, we can learn the true extent of God’s wrath which should cause us to tremble, while we also learn that all of that wrath was taken away for us in Jesus.

Oh how happy we are to have such a glorious mediator! Let us respect and reverence, yea fear, our Holy God more. Yet we need never shudder at this command, because we remember that God is accepting us, yea welcoming us to come boldly before His throne (which for us is a throne of grace) by the new and living way of Christ our crucified and Risen Savior! (Heb. 4:16, 10:19-21).

More on Casting Crowns

~ fundyreformed ~ 4 Comments

Click to see this CD on Amazon (and listen to song samples)While we’re on the theme of music, I thought I’d point out a good review of some of Casting Crowns’ songs by my blogging friend Will Dudding.

It made me remember my previous look at the motivations behind Casting Crowns and Mercy Me, which might be a good follow up to Will’s post for you all to check out. Casting Crowns is one of my favorite Christian music groups and I’ve highlighted their great song: Who Am I?, and also their 2nd album Lifesong, and its title song.

As you see the challenging lyrics that Will shares, maybe one fact should encourage you. This group is enormously popular and has sold more than 2.5 million records in a couple short years. This doesn’t count there newest album which came out a few months ago. The first song on that to hit the radio was number 1 on the charts for 19 weeks straight, which gives you the idea of their popularity.

And in this case, I think this shows that Christians (at least the kind that listen to and follow CCM) are hungering for a deeper message and really are trying to grow in the Lord. Granted I wholeheartedly agree with the criticism that much of CCM is shallow and trendy today. But there is a real turn around happening. And Casting Crowns isn’t the only group producing some real soul-searching, deep, faith-building songs.

To check out Casting Crowns more I recommend using Rhapsody.com which allows you 24 free online songs a month. Just search for Casting Crowns and tune in.

Modern Hymn Writers

~ fundyreformed ~ 4 Comments

Keith Getty, one of the founders of what I term the “modern hymn movement”, was recently interviewed along with his wife Kristyn by Christianity Today. The Getty’s new CD “In Christ Alone” is doing very well, with some of its songs being sung on Christian radio, now.

The interview explores how and why the Getty’s are writing their hymns. “Singable Doctrine” is how CT describes them. The article is worth the read.

Some of Keith Getty’s songs that he either wrote or co-wrote, are: “In Christ Alone“, “The Power of the Cross“, “O Church Arise“, “My Heart is Filled“, and “Speak, O Lord“. We sing all of these at my church along with a few others. They are excellent songs that are singable across generations and music styles.

For more on the “modern hymns”, read my earlier post: “The Rise of the Modern Hymn Movement“.

[Thanks, Grace, for pointing out this interview to me!]