January 2014

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for January 2014.

January 11: Pray for Your Pastor

11 January, 2014 in January 2014 by archivist | No comments

Pray for the Man Who Prays for You

It was on this day, January 11th, in 1818, that the Rev. John Mathews brought a sermon at the ordination of Wells Andrews. The full title of the sermon:—

The Duties of the Pastoral Office: A Sermon, delivered in the Second Presbyterian Church in Alexandria, at the Ordination of Wells Andrews, January 11, 1818, before the Presbytery of Winchester. (Alexandria: Printed by Corse & Rounsavell, 1818)

Time and history have erased our recollections of who these men were, but the sermon has been preserved and is available to us today, for how we may profit from it. The sermon concludes with a fine exhortation to the congregation to pray for their pastor. It is that portion that we reproduce here today. For those who may want to read the whole of this sermon, please click here. But for now, we will simply present the conclusion to the sermon offered that day by Rev. Mathews.

And having charged the newly ordained pastor, Rev. Mathews turned to charge the congregation:—

It was mentioned that your pious people would help you with their prayers : shall we be permitted to ask the members of this congregation, is this intimation true? Shall we let it remain for the support and encouragement of your pastor, or shall we recall the promise, and tell him, that if he is determined to undertake the duties of this office, he must not expect the assistance of your prayers? Do not your hearts with all the warmth of pious affection, reply—NO! Let it remain : we will verify the promise : we will pray for him. We see the arduous task, the numerous and difficult duties he is about to undertake on our account, and we will support him with our prayers. Be it so : the promise shall not be recalled. God is witness to the pledge you have given.

But will you not support and encourage him by all other means in your power? Parents, will you not aid him by your instructions, your example, by the prudent exercise of your parental authority in training up your children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord; in teaching them to love and reverence religion?

Beloved youth, what encouragement will you give? Will you embrace religion, become the disciples of Jesus Christ, dedicate yourselves to the service of God in the morning of life, and thus animate the heart of your pastor with the precious hope that when your fathers and mothers are laid in the grave, you will be ready, and willing to fill their places in the church, and support the worship of God? or will you, neglecting religion, pursue the pleasures and amusements of the world, and thus deprive him of this hope?

Dear little children, you are interested in the transactions of this day. When you see us lay our hands on the head of this man, and pray for him, remember that we are then appointing him to teach you the knowledge of God and religion. Wherever you see him then say to yourselves—this is the man who is to pray for us, and teach us the way to heaven : There may you, your parents, and your pastor finally meet, and spend eternity in ascribing salvation, and glory, and honor to God and the Lamb. Amen.


Words to Live By:
And with that, we are reminded to pray for those who are in authority over us. Paul’s words in 1 Timothy 2 are often taken to apply largely to magistrates or those in civil authority. But how much more should we pray for those in spiritual authority over us?

“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;” – (1 Timothy 2:1-3)

Tags: , , , ,

January 10: Dr. Samuel Miller

10 January, 2014 in January 2014 by archivist | No comments

The Important Ministry of Ruling Elders

miller01 copyWith a lineage from the Mayflower, Samuel Miller was born in 1769.  Reared in a family of nine, in the home of a minister, he was home schooled and eventually studied at the University of Pennsylvania.  After prayer and fasting, he decided to enter the Christian ministry.  With his minister father, his home schooling in theology was a natural arrangement, and he was soon ordained to be a Presbyterian minister.  Serving as the pastor of a New York city congregation, he became convinced of the need to ordain ruling elders just as the church had long ordained teaching elders.

On January 10, 1809, he presided over the first ordination of ruling  elders in a congregation in New Jersey.  That same year, he preached a sermon on “The Divine Appointment, the Duties, and the Qualifications of Ruling Elders.”  This theme eventually became a book in 1831.  This fundamental conviction was communicated to countless students when Samuel Miller was appointed to be the second professor at Princeton Theological Seminary in 1813.  Hear him as he enunciates his position:

“And as the members of the church session, whether assembled in their judicial capacity or not, are the pastor’s counselors and colleagues in all matters relating to the spiritual rule of the church, so it is their official duty to encourage, sustain, and defend him in the faithful discharge of his duty.  It is deplorable when a minister is assailed for his fidelity by the profane and the worldly, if any portion of the eldership either takes part against him, or shrinks from his active and determined offense.  It is not meant, of course, that they are to consider themselves bound to sustain him in everything he may say or do, whether right or wrong, but that, when they believe him to be faithful, both to truth and duty, they should feel it is their duty to stand by him, to shield him from the arrows of the wicked, and to encourage him as far as he obeys Christ.”

[Above right: Title page of Miller’s work on the ruling elder, as it appeared in the 1832 reprint.]

Words to Live By: “It is the elder’s official duty to encourage, sustain, and defend (the teaching elder) in the faithful discharge of his duty.” – Samuel Miller

Tags: , , ,

January 9: The Auburn Affirmation

9 January, 2014 in January 2014 by archivist | No comments

The Root of the Presbyterian Apostasy?

Or simply one of the earliest public manifestations of long-standing sins? Such things do not just suddenly appear out of nowhere. The errors espoused in the Auburn Affirmation had been brewing for decades. Some point back to the influence of Charles A. Briggs and how he continued to teach at Union Theological Seminary in New York, even after being found guilty of heresy. Others point to the reunion of the New School Presbyterians with the Old School in 1869, a reunion which failed to address the shortcomings of the New School faction. And there are other problems and issues that might be discussed. But the Auburn Affirmation came at a strategic time, early in the 20th-century. Thus its importance as an historical document. 

aubaff_1924When church historians evaluate the history of American Presbyterianism, the publication of the “Auburn Affirmation” will stand out in importance like the nailing of Luther’s ninety-five theses on the Wittenberg Germany church door in 1517.  Except this Affirmation, unlike that of the German reformer, constituted a major offensive against biblical Christianity.

The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in 1923 had repeated the earlier high court’s affirmations of five essential truths which made up the fundamentals of Christianity.  They were the inerrant Scripture, the Virgin Birth, the substitutionary atonement of Christ, His literal bodily resurrection from the dead on the third day, and supernatural miracles.  However the very next year,on January 9, 1924, one hundred and fifty Presbyterian elders issued an affirmation in Auburn, New York which stated that these five fundamentals were not necessary and essential doctrines for the church.  Eventually the number of ministers to sign it would increase to 1,294 ordained ministers, about ten per cent of the clergy on the rolls of the Presbyterian church.

[Above right, The Auburn Affirmation as it appeared in its first edition, including a list of 150 signers.]

The Auburn Affirmation used many familiar terms on which unsuspecting Christians might be deceived.  Thus, it affirmed inspiration, but denied Scripture to be without error.  It affirmed the incarnation, but denied the Virgin Birth.  It affirmed the atonement, but denied that Christ satisfied divine justice and reconciled us to God.  It affirmed the resurrection of Christ, but denied Jesus rose from the dead with the same body in which He was crucified.  It affirmed Jesus did many mighty works, but denied that He was a miracle worker.

The tragedy of this Affirmation was that not one of its signers were ever brought up for church discipline by their respective presbyteries.  This sin of omission hastened the apostasy of the church, as many of the signers would later find placement in every agency of the church.

Words to Live By:  “Beloved, my whole concern was to write to you in regard to our common salvation.  [But] I found it necessary and was impelled to write you and urgently appeal to and exhort [you] to contend for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints [the faith which is that sum of Christian belief which was delivered verbally to the holy people of God”] Jude v. 3 (Amplified)

For Further Study:
The Auburn Affirmation and the Response of Confessional Presbyterians, 1924-1946.

Tags: , , ,

January 8: A Tribute to Dr. Machen

8 January, 2014 in Uncategorized by archivist | 1 comment

The following is a transcript from a news clipping preserved among the Papers of the Rev. Henry G. Welbon, at the PCA Historical Center. [Scrapbook #5, p. 503]. The Rev. Emo F. J. Van Halsema writes in reply to a prior editorial [not available in Welbon’s collection], and the Editor then makes a final comment. Time has proven the Editor wrong, as you will see, and has only confirmed Rev. Van Halsema’s estimations. This is the last of the Machen tributes recently located among the Welbon Papers.

An Appreciation of Dr. Machen.

[from the People’s Forum of The Passaic New Jersey News, 8 January 1937]:—

Editor, Herald-News: — Kindly permit me making a few remarks anent your editorial on the late Rev. Dr. J. Gresham Machen in late Monday’s issue.

When you say that he was a very able, a wholly sincere man, a man of deepest convictions, whose conscience would not allow him to temporize with views he opposed, those who have known him will readily endorse these words. But what you add comes obviously from an unsympathetic pen. The general impression left with the reader is that though Dr. Machen was a capable leader, he was a sadly mistaken one, whose work will now, after his sudden and unexpected demise, come to naught.

This, Mr. Editor, is an attitude which fails to take into consideration the true significance of the movement in which Dr. Machen had so prominent a place up to the day of his death. The point which Dr. Machen for more than a decade tried to emphasize was that the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America should be loyal to its Westminster Confession as long as this Confession had not been officially repudiated. He was, for that reason, hostile to the Auburn Affirmation and consistently pointed out numerous deviations from the official Standards of the Church in publications which appeared under Presbyterian name. All that he persistently asked was that the Church uphold its Confessional Standards. That is the fight he fought. The trials instituted against him sidetracked the main issue. The ecclesiastical authorities frowned upon him for sowing the seeds of suspicion, for opposing the official church boards, for disturbing the peace of the church and finally unfrocked him. Ecclesiastical machinery won a questionable victory. The lonely man of Philadelphia met a glorious defeat.

It has been said by men prominent in the ecclesiastical trial that doctrinal issues had no bearing on the case, that Dr. Machen was free to think about theological matters as he pleased. The truth, however, is that doctrinal matters did enter in. In fact, loyalty to the Westminster Confession has been Dr. Machen’s plea from the beginning. A minister in the Presbyterian Church is not free to teach what he pleases. Dr. Machen held that he was bound by the Standards and that the Church was too. His many attempts at reform were of no avail. The doctrinal issue loomed up everywhere. It was the heart of the entire controversy, yet, it was consistently and conveniently sidetracked.

In June, 1936, the Presbyterian Church of America was organized to continue “true Presbyterianism.” This was a bold act. It was an act born of need. Dr. Machen did not seek his own martyrdom. The Assembly at Syracuse force it upon him. Said the Doctor, “We have made every effort, in accordance with our solemn ordination pledge, to bring about a return from modernism and indifferentism to the Bible and to the Church’s constitution. Those efforts having proved unavailing, we now are continuing true Presbyterianism in the Presbyterian Church of America. We are not ready to take the Bible off our pulpits and put the last minutes of the Assembly in its stead.” Organizing the new Church was an act of faith.

Your prophecy, Mr. Editor, that what you choose to call “the off-shoot sect” has reached its zenith and will now decline, is but a mortal man’s prediction. You spoke of Dr. Machen’s martyrdom. The Church willingly acted as executioner. We recall that the blood of martyrs has been before this, the seed of the church. Concluding your article you quote the words, “Man proposes, God disposes” in application to Dr. Machen and his movement. Does this not also hold true with uncomfortable consistency of the Church who tried to silence the voice of one of its “terrible meek”? I do not possess the gift of prediction, but the facts are that in the last five months the young sister church gained 69 ministers , making a total of 103, who are working in 23 States and five foreign Countries. The young church today is sad but does not despair. We read, “The cause which he espoused has suffered a terrific blow. But let no one assume that it is a blow of defeat. Those who are left must carry on the tremendous task, as he would have wished them to do. The road will be lonely and the burden of grief heavy, but the work will go on.”

When you state, Mr. Editor, that all Presbyterians wish to forget about the Machen episode, your wish is evidently the father of the thought. Thousands of Presbyterians and other Christians will never forget the sad proceedings of a Church against one of her truest servants who rose to the defense of a Constitution which was slowly being undermined. The Presbyterian Church of America will be a constant reminder to the mother Church of the sad breach among her children in 1936.

The following words written a few days before his death do more justice to Dr. Machen than your editorial. : “He has been bitterly reviled by enemies of the gospel and by many who pretend to love the gospel, but those who know him well and love the gospel dearly regard him as a profound scholar, a veritable Greatheart, a Christian gentleman, a devout child of God, a convincing teacher and preacher, a man with convictions strong as Gibraltar and courage indomitable as Luther’s at the Diet of Worms. It may be said without fear of contradiction that today there is no more scholarly and militant defender of the historic Christian faith against the onslaughts of liberalism than Dr. Machen.”

His voice is now silenced.
His work will go on.
The hammers break, the anvil stands.”

Rev. Emo F. J. Van Halsema
Pastor, Northside Christian Reformed Church
Passaic, January 6.

[With all respect, may we reply to the Rev. Mr. Van Halsema that our feeling was one of sympathy and our desire was to express it. We can express here no opinion as to the doctrinal questions which undoubtedly did enter, and which are not now ended because he has died. The contest between what is called Fundamentalism and what is called Modernism will continue unabated, and it is of course our opinion only that the particular movement, headed by Dr. Machen has reached its zenith and now will decline. We have many examples in history, but do not wish to insist upon it. In justice to the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (of which we are not a member) it should be pointed out that its proper jurisdiction held officially that there was no rampant Modernism in the Church as charged by Dr. Machen, and that his official condemnation rests almost entirely upon the fact that without authorization he organized an Independent Board of Missions, which appealed for Presbyterian funds, and refused to disband it or dissociate himself from it when commanded so to do by the General Assembly. — Editor Herald-News.]

Tags: , , , , , , ,

January 8: A Methodist Tribute to JGM

7 January, 2014 in Uncategorized by archivist | No comments

This is the second of the tributes recently located among the scrapbooks gathered by the Rev. Henry G. Welbon. At the very back of Scrapbook #5, tucked inside the back cover, is the first issue of a publication titled TOMORROW. This was an evangelical Methodist periodical, and the following tribute to Dr. Machen appears on page four:—

Dr. Machen

[excerpted from Tomorrow: In the Light of Scripture. A Methodist Testimony for the Imminent, Personal, Premillennial Return of the Lord Jesus Christ. (Williamstown, NJ: Kenneth Cornwell, editor), Vol. 1, no. 1 (January 1937): 4.]

Dr. J. Gresham Machen, valiant defender of the Faith, internationally known New Testament scholar and expounder of Christian doctrine, died in Bismark, N. D., January 1, while on a preaching tour.

He was greatly respected and loved by his students in the Princeton and later in the Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. Many a Saturday night were the theologs entertained in his apartment; many a football or baseball ticket did he hand out to some poor theolog; many a time did his reading of a humorous poem enliven the banquet hour!

Dr. Machen led the opposition to modernism in the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. This finally led to the founding of the Independent Board for [Presbyterian] Foreign Missions, to give Christians the opportunity to give their support to evangelical missionaries.

This in turn led to his trial and suspension from the ministry of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.; and let it be written large—not for heresy—but for standing true to the Bible and its proclamation of Jesus Christ as the only Saviour from sin.

There is an exact parallel between Dr. Martin Luther and Dr. Machen. Dr. Machen was the Luther of the twentieth century. Some have criticized his method; his method was logical because it was Biblical.

Too long have evangelicals paid the bills of baptized infidels! What care they how much evangelicals speak of the Blood, the Book, the Blessed Hope, as long as they get their fat salaries as professors, secretaries, bishops, or what not? But just begin to pull the purse strings shut on them, and see what happens!

Dr. Machen and his associates were following the Bible method. 2 Cor. 6:17 “Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord.”

2 John 11 tells us that fellowship or paying money to such agencies or men who do not preach God’s Christ is to partake of their evil deeds.

The man who starts out to reform any of the great apostate denominations today is just deceived. Five years ago we challenged a man, who has since compromised with Belial to gain position in Methodism, to give us one example of a denomination or faction gone over to apostasy that ever came back to orthodoxy. That challenge has never been successfully met, not because of that man’s lack of ability but because there is no evidence.

[*TDPH: Disputing with this author, there are at least two or three examples at hand. In recent times, the Southern Baptist denomination and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. And in the 19th-century, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.]

Clearly, Dr. Machen was right. Witness wherever you are. Then if wicked men rise up and usurp God’s place in the church, there is nothing left but separation—like Luther, like Machen! Oh, God, give us another!

[*TDPH: In his closing paragraphs, the author waxes eloquent as to how Machen’s position would have profited greatly if only he had been a premillennialist! We will spare our readers those closing paragraphs.]

Tags: , , ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »