An Ashless Ash Wednesday for Anglicans

Editor’s note: This is a re-post from last year.

The Heritage Anglican Network has provided us with an article rightly denouncing the superstitious rites of Ash Wednesday. One of the reasons for the writing of the Westminster Confession and the formation of the Presbyterian Church was the rejection of all such superstitious rites as unbiblical. Meanwhile, many PCAs across the U.S. will be imposing ashes on the foreheads of their members, as you can see here. Perhaps we can learn something from our Anglican brothers. Here is their article:

In the sixteenth century the English Reformers abolished the imposition of ashes on the heads of parishioners on Ash Wednesday due to the superstitious beliefs that had become associated with the practice. The practice was too closely tied the Medieval doctrines of attrition, auricular confession, contrition, priestly absolution, and penance.

Continue reading »

Posted by Wes White on Wednesday, February 22, 2012, at 9:15 AM | Filed in General church news | 36 Comments »

On a Conditional Promise of Perseverance

Some argue that the precious promises to preserve all those who are saved in a state of salvation are conditioned upon our own perseverance. In other words, no one will snatch you out of Christ’s hand, but you may reject Christ and walk away. The problem is that a security from all that would destroy our salvation except our own willingness to walk away and apostatize is no security at all.

R.L. Dabney explains the error of such thinking in his systematic theology:

. . . if this supposed condition is to be understood, then this precious promise would be but a worthless and pompous truism. “Your souls shall never be destroyed, unless in a given way,” and that way, the only and the common way, in which souls are ever destroyed. “You shall never fall, as long as you stand up.”

Posted by Wes White on Tuesday, February 21, 2012, at 4:17 AM | Filed in Reformed theology | 5 Comments »

Response to the Dissent from Ohio Presbytery’s Intinction Report

By TE Andrew Barnes

Recently, the Ohio Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) released their study committee’s report on intinction. A few days later one of the committee members (Mr. Rae Whitlock) released his response to and dissent from the committee’s report. While I agree with the final conclusions of the committee’s report, I don’t think it presented the strongest arguments against the practice. At the same time, Mr. Whitlock’s response to the committee’s report was not convincing for a number of reasons. First I would like to respond to Mr. Whitlock’s arguments against the committee’s report, and then I will provide a positive case for the administration and partaking of the Lord’s Supper.

Mr. Whitlock’s Arguments Against the Committee
The first section, following the Preface, regarded the issue of whether or not intinction is a “disputable” matter. The committee’s report states that the practice of intinction is not a disputable matter for historical, Scriptural, and constitutional reasons. Mr. Whitlock’s response argues that intinction is disputable based on history. He relies on the committee’s work to show that intinction has been practiced as early as the fourth century, in Eastern and Western church traditions, in some early reformed churches, in the RPCES, and in some PCA congregations today. It is because of this historical practice that Mr. Whitlock states that intinction is “disputable.”

However, that same argument could be used to declare that Eutychianism or Arianism is disputable. These views have been held by some since early in Church History and still appear today in some circles, yet they have all been condemned as heresy by the Church. Apparently, intinction was also condemned at the Council at Braga in 675 AD. In any case, the historical argument is unconvincing. It really matters little except to give us background. Is it debatable or disputable? Everything is, isn’t it? Aren’t all men sinful, and don’t they all err? Thus, we need to check everything by Scripture, and history cannot be decisive.

The second section of the response regards the meaning of the word “drink.” Mr. Whitlock compares the use of the verb πίνω (to drink) that is found in the Last Supper narratives and in 1 Corinthians 11 to the verb ποτίζω (to give to drink) found in Mark 15:36 when Jesus was offered a sponge filled with wine vinegar. He does this in an attempt to show that the action of “drinking” as used in the New Testament “can apply to the intake or consumption of liquid, regardless of the instrument of the liquid’s delivery.” If I am reading him correctly, he is saying that as long as liquid is coming into the mouth in some form it can be considered drinking according to the New Testament word usage. Therefore, Mr. Whitlock states,

We can further conclude, then, from Mark 15:36, Matthew 27:48, and the light of human reason that both the eating of bread and the drinking of wine are indeed taking place when the Lord’s Supper is administered by intinction. (emphasis original)

Yet if we consider carefully the sponge offered to Jesus for him to drink we realize that the intent was not for him to eat the sponge, but rather for him to suck out the wine vinegar from the sponge. This action would obviously be considered drinking. So this line of reasoning doesn’t support Mr. Whitlock’s argument. To be a similar situation to the practice of intinction, the wine would have to be sucked out of the bread. This isn’t the normal practice of intinction, so this argument falls apart.

The third section makes additional observations. The first observation focuses on inconsistent exegesis. He says:

If “drinking” is absent in intinction, consistency in the exegesis that brought the majority to this conclusion would demand that any receptacle other than a common cup be likewise judged “out of accord with Scripture.”

Continue reading »

Posted by Wes White on Monday, February 20, 2012, at 4:00 AM | Filed in PCA news | 12 Comments »

Implications of the Water Covering the Mountains

To what degree they increased: they rose so high that not only the low flat countries were deluged, but to make sure work, and that none might escape, the tops of the highest mountains were overflowed—“fifteen cubits,” that is, seven yards and a half; so that “in vain was salvation hoped for from hills or mountains,” (Jer. 3:23). None of God’s creatures are so high but his power can overtop them; and he will make them know that wherein they deal proudly he is above them. Perhaps the tops of the mountains were washed down by the strength of the waters, which helped much towards the prevailing of the waters above them; for it is said (Job 12:15), “He sends out the waters,” and they not only overflow, but overturn, the earth. Thus the refuge of lies was swept away, and the waters overflowed the hiding-place of those sinners (Isa. 28:17), and in vain they fly to them for safety (Rev. 6:16). Now the mountains departed, and the hills were removed, and nothing stood a man in stead but the “covenant of peace” (Isa. 54:10). There is no place on earth so high as to set men out of the reach of God’s judgments (Jer. 49:16; Obad. 3:4). God’s hand will “find out all his enemies” (Ps. 21:8). Observe how exactly they are fathomed (“fifteen cubits”), not by Noah’s plummet, but by his knowledge who “weighs the waters by measure” (Job 28:25). — Matthew Henry

Posted by Wes White on Saturday, February 18, 2012, at 8:19 AM | Filed in Bible | 1 Comment »

The Word Works Faith; Sacraments Increase It

If we could understand that basic point, we would understand the Reformed view of the sacraments much better. Here is how one theologian expressed this crucial distinction:

The sacraments have no power to give or confer grace to the receiver, neither are they immediate instruments of our justification; instrumental means they are to increase and confirm our faith in the promises of God; of themselves they have no operation, but, as the Spirit of God worketh by them, our internal senses being moved and quickened by those external objects. Neither do we say that the sacraments are bare and naked signs of spiritual graces, but they do verily exhibit and represent Christ to as many as by faith are able and meet to apprehend Him.

Continue reading »

Posted by Wes White on Thursday, February 16, 2012, at 10:04 AM | Filed in Reformed theology | 10 Comments »

Minority Report on Intinction

Rae Whitlock was on Ohio Presbytery’s intinction study committee. You can read the committee’s report here. Whitlock concludes this way:

It is not the minority’s goal to preserve the practice of intinction in the Ohio Presbytery and in the PCA as an end unto itself, nor does the minority even find it to necessarily be a preferable mode of the administration of Communion for every church. The minority’s concern is that, absent conclusive Scriptural arguments and evidence against it, liberty to practice it continues to be afforded, and that without the threat of suspicion or harassment from those who do not. Moreover, it is the minority’s desire to see greater unity around the Table of our Lord between brothers and sisters in the PCA, even with diversity of practice.

Read his entire minority report here.

Posted by Wes White on Wednesday, February 15, 2012, at 10:50 AM | Filed in PCA news | 18 Comments »

How Do Believers Enjoy Heaven on Earth?

The members of the invisible church have communicated to them in this life the firstfruits of glory with Christ, as they are members of him their head, and so in him are interested [i.e., have a portion] in that glory which he is fully possessed of; and, as an earnest thereof, enjoy the sense of God’s love, peace of conscience, joy in the Holy Ghost, and hope of glory; as, on the contrary, sense of God’s revenging wrath, horror of conscience, and a fearful expectation of judgment, are to the wicked the beginning of their torments which they shall endure after death. — Westminster Larger Catechism Q/A 83

Posted by Wes White on Tuesday, February 14, 2012, at 8:04 AM | Filed in Christian experience | No Comments »

A Summary of Peter Enns’ New Book on Adam

Peter Enns has a new book explaining his views on Adam. You can order it here. In the meantime, Rachel Miller has written a summary of the book. You can read it here. Enns believes that Adam did not exist, even though he admits that Jesus and Paul did (they were wrong!), but he also commends a wholesale rethinking of Christian theology in light of evolution:

Although . . . sin and death are universal realities, the Christian tradition has generally attributed the cause to Adam. But evolution removes that cause as Paul understood it and thus leaves open the questions of where sin and death have come from. More than that, the very nature of what sin is and why people die is turned on its head. Some characteristics that Christians have thought of as sinful—for example, in an evolutionary scheme the aggression and dominance associated with “survival of the fittest” and sexual promiscuity to perpetuate one’s gene pool—are understood as means of ensuring survival. Likewise, death is not the enemy to be defeated. It may be feared, it may be ritualized, it may be addressed in epic myths and sagas; but death is not the unnatural state introduced by a disobedient couple in a primordial garden. Actually, it is the means that promotes the continued evolution of life on this planet and even ensures workable population numbers. Death may hurt, but it is evolution’s ally. (160)

Posted by Wes White on Monday, February 13, 2012, at 8:00 AM | Filed in General church news | 11 Comments »

How Do We Pursue Peace?

Peace should be a high priority for all believers. We should do all that we can to make sure that the church is a harmonious and pleasant place in which to worship. Each Christian should be peaceable. But what does it mean to be peaceable?

Wilhelmus à Brakel in his Reformed classic The Christian’s Reasonable Service gives this definition of peaceableness:

Peaceableness is a believer’s quiet and contended disposition of soul, inclining him toward, and causing him to strive for, the maintaining of a relationship with his neighbor characterized by sweet unity—doing so in the way of truth and godliness. (4:91)

Continue reading »

Posted by Wes White on Sunday, February 12, 2012, at 4:18 PM | Filed in Practical theology | 2 Comments »

PCA Savannah River approves overture on intinction

The PCA Savannah River Presbytery has approved an overture to the General Assembly that would amend Book of Church Order 58-5 to add the words: “Intinction, because it conflates Jesus’ two sacramental actions, is not an appropriate method for observing the Lord’s Supper.”

Posted by Wes White on Friday, February 10, 2012, at 9:39 AM | Filed in PCA news | 3 Comments »

PCA Savannah River Presbytery overtures GA to reject evolutionary views of Adam

The PCA Savannah River has approved substantially the same overture that Rocky Mountain Presbytery approved rejecting all evolutionary views of Adam’s origin. One addition is adding a rationale from the General Assembly’s 2000 Creation Study Committee Report:

We affirm that Genesis 1-3 is a coherent account from the hand of Moses. We believe that history, not myth, is the proper category for describing these chapters; and furthermore that their history is true. In these chapters we find the record of God’s creation of the heavens and the earth ex nihilo; of the special creation of Adam and Eve as actual human beings, the parents of all humanity (hence they are not the products of evolution from lower forms of life). We further find the account of an historical fall, that brought all humanity into an estate of sin and misery, and of God’s sure promise of a Redeemer.

You can read the whole overture here.

Posted by Wes White on Friday, February 10, 2012, at 9:33 AM | Filed in PCA news | No Comments »

PCA leaders speak on grace and law in Atlanta

The Gospel Reformation Network met in Atlanta this week to address the issue of sanctification and the role of the law in the life of the Christian. You can listen to audio recordings of the talks at the meeting by Harry Reeder, Liam Goligher, and others here. The Aquila Report describes the meeting:

The Gospel Reformation Network (GRN), a gathering of over 100 ministers and elders from the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), met in Atlanta on February 6-7, 2012, focusing on the gospel as sufficient for believers for life and ministry.

The GRN gathering came as a result of a consultation that was held in August 2011, which was held to discuss the nature of the gospel in light of what is sometimes called the contemporary grace movement. This movement appears to focus on grace to the apparent neglect of the place of God’s law in the believer’s life and ministry. As a result, the GRN centered its discussion on the definitions of justification and sanctification and how they function in the Christian life and affect ministry.

The discussion between the various groups has been framed in terms of opposite poles, the place of God’s law and God’s grace, legalism and antinomianism. The consultation recognized that the issues in this discussion are as old as church history, with just about every generation of the church wrestling with them, and is now a present reality in this generation.

Posted by Wes White on Thursday, February 9, 2012, at 9:25 AM | Filed in Reformed theology | 10 Comments »

PCA Fellowship Presbytery approves resolution on Adam

Fellowship Presbytery (in South Carolina) has approved the following resolution on Adam and Eve:

On the recommendation of the Membership Committee, Fellowship Presbytery adopted at its Winter Meeting the following position statement: “The members of Fellowship Presbytery affirm that the Scriptures, specifically Genesis 1 and 2, teach that Adam and Eve are historical individuals, that Adam and Eve were specially created by God through His direct intervention and that God formed Adam, the first man, from the dust of the ground. The members of Fellowship Presbytery deny that Genesis 2:7 means that God acted upon a group of humans or hominids to set apart the first couple. Anyone seeking to be ordained within Fellowship Presbytery or to transfer his ordination into Fellowship Presbytery must agree with the above statements.

Read the background to this resolution at The Aquila Report.

Posted by Wes White on Wednesday, February 8, 2012, at 9:14 AM | Filed in PCA news | 1 Comment »

Enns Reviews Collins on Adam

For those interested in the debate over the historical Adam, you will find it very interesting to read Peter Enns’ review of Jack Collins’ book on Adam. Enns states:

C. John Collins has taken on the important task of explaining who Adam and Eve were in view of evolutionary theory—which he accepts, at least in its broad outlines. More importantly, Collins wishes to instill in his readers a firm confidence in Adam and Eve as the historical “headwaters” of the human race, and so retain the biblical metanarrative of creation, fall, and redemption. In other words, Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? is an apologetic for the traditional view of Adam and Eve as the first human pair in light of evolutionary theory. I commend Collins for attempting to bring under one roof the truth of evolution as the proper paradigm for explaining human origins and the biblical story of Adam and Eve. The topic is timely, thorny, and absolutely unavoidable.

You can find the whole review here.

Posted by Wes White on Wednesday, February 8, 2012, at 9:10 AM | Filed in Bible | 66 Comments »

10 Reasons to Believe in Adam and Eve

Kevin DeYoung has 10 reasons to believe in Adam and Eve. You can read them here, and the comments are interesting as well. He quotes Tim Keller’s condemnation of anyone who would deny this doctrine:

[Paul] most definitely wanted to teach us that Adam and Eve were real historical figures. When you refuse to take a biblical author literally when he clearly wants you to do so, you have moved away from the traditional understanding of the biblical authority. . . .If Adam doesn’t exist, Paul’s whole argument—that both sin and grace work ‘covenantally’—falls apart. You can’t say that ‘Paul was a man of his time’ but we can accept his basic teaching about Adam. If you don’t believe what he believes about Adam, you are denying the core of Paul’s teaching. (Christianity Today June 2011)

Posted by Wes White on Tuesday, February 7, 2012, at 9:42 AM | Filed in Bible | 1 Comment »

Believing in the Trinity Is Necessary to Salvation

Even if Christians today do not want to make many distinctions between themselves but would rather downplay their differences, many draw the line at the doctrine of the Trinity (though even this seems to be changing). But why is it necessary to believe the Trinity?

Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676) wrote on this topic in his Select Disputations in an article entitled “The Necessity and Utility of the Doctrine of the Trinity.” Voetius was one of the greatest theologians of the 17th century. He attended the Synod of Dort as a young pastor, and was called to Utrecht to serve as a teacher at the University there a few years later where he taught for nearly 40 years. He was a great defender of the Reformed faith and promoter of godliness in the Reformed Churches. His Disputations amount to over 6000 pages. You can obtain the first four volumes online here, and Abraham Kuyper published a selection of them which are a little bit easier to read because of their modern font, which is available here.

The necessity of the Trinity was an important topic in the Netherlands. While the Remonstrants seemed to question some aspects of the Trinity, they generally held to the doctrine. However, they asserted that it was not necessary to believe it in order to be saved. Consequently, they allowed the Socinians (anti-Trinitarians) into their Churches. With this issue in mind, Voetius wrote his article on the necessity of believing the Trinity.

Continue reading »

Posted by Wes White on Tuesday, February 7, 2012, at 9:18 AM | Filed in Practical theology | 4 Comments »

Why Intinction?

A couple of months ago, I asked why people wanted to do the Lord’s Supper by intinction (or intincture). I was particularly interested in why people in Reformed churches wanted to do this. We had an interesting discussion, but I don’t recall anyone giving an answer to my specific question. Today, The Aquila Report has a story on Ohio Presbytery’s (PCA) report on intinction. The committee studying the question provided some answers to my question, though the committee itself rejected the practice. They wrote:

Practical considerations appear to be the primary reasons for intinction. During this study, the committee heard a variety of pragmatic reasons for the practice, including: (a) it is one of the “touch points” for a more meaningful worship, (b) it saves time, (c) it takes longer, (d) it may better appeal to those who come from church traditions that practice intinction (e.g., Catholic, Orthodox), (e) it avoids the Congregationalist practice of distributing the elements in the pews, (f) it better enables communion in the battlefield, and (g) it is practiced in the PCA.

You can read the whole report here.

Posted by Wes White on Monday, February 6, 2012, at 8:41 AM | Filed in PCA news | 11 Comments »

The Merit of Christ’s Obedience on Earth Applied to Believers

Christ maketh intercession, by his appearing in our nature continually before the Father in heaven, in the merit of his obedience and sacrifice on earth, declaring his will to have it applied to all believers; answering all accusations against them, and procuring for them quiet of conscience, notwithstanding daily failings, access with boldness to the throne of grace, and acceptance of their persons and services.

Posted by Wes White on Friday, February 3, 2012, at 11:59 AM | Filed in Reformed theology | 4 Comments »

PCA Potomac Presbytery proposes two rule changes to GA

Potomac Presbytery met on January 24, 2012 and passed two overtures requesting that the 40th General Assembly (GA) of the Presbyterian Church in America amend its Rules of Assembly Operation (RAO). The first amendment would send all proposed amendments to the constitution to the Overtures Committee (OC). The second would allow committees of commissioners (CofCs) to divide any recommendation from the permanent committees and agencies by two-thirds vote.

The first overture is similar to one that Great Lakes Presbytery passed on January 14 that would require all constitutional changes to be sent to the OC. Whereas the Great Lakes overture changes 15-1, the Potomac Presbytery overtures changes 12-1 and 15-1. Each permanent committee and agency has a committee of commissioners which consists of up to one representative GA commissioner from each presbytery. The CofC reviews the work of the permanent committee or agency, and it is the CofC that actually brings the permanent committee recommendation to the General Assembly either recommending it, modifying it, or asking that it be rejected. The current RAO 12-1 allows a permanent committee or agency to propose a constitutional change through its own CofC. The RAO amendment would change that and add the following sentence:

However, all recommendations proposing amendment to the Constitution shall be referred to the Overtures Committee for their review and recommendation to the General Assembly under the rules governing a committee of commissioners as applicable (RAO 14-6.d.-k.; 14-7.c.-d.; 14-9.d.-h.).

The rationale of the overture is that the OC is better equipped and designed to deal with constitutional changes:

Under the revised rules the Overtures Committee is the forum designed for full deliberation of and potential amendment to proposed amendments to the Constitution. However, should the committees in view in 12-1 recommend amendments to the Constitution, they should have the same rights as the other Committees and Agencies under the Committee of Commissioner rules.

Continue reading »

Posted by Wes White on Thursday, February 2, 2012, at 8:21 AM | Filed in PCA news | 7 Comments »

True Shepherds and Sheep

“Hence it follows that they alone are good shepherds who lead men straight to Christ; and that they are truly gathered into the fold of Christ, so as to belong to his flock, who devote themselves to Christ alone.” — John Calvin

Posted by Wes White on Wednesday, February 1, 2012, at 6:05 PM | Filed in Reformed theology | No Comments »

« Older Entries