January 2018

You are currently browsing the archive for the January 2018 category.

Dusting off one of the periodical collections at the PCA Historical Center, we come across this brief article in the inaugural issue of a Canadian Presbyterian journal, PRESBYTERIAN COMMENT, edited by the Rev. Dr. William Stanford Reid. After a brief introductory comment in that first issue, the following was Dr. Reid’s first editorial in the new publication:

After Four Hundred Years
by William Stanford Reid

In the year 1536, from the press of Thomas Platter and Balthasar Lasium, Basle publishers, appeared a thin volume of some seven chapters bearing the title of Christianae Religionis Institutio (The Institutes of the Christian Religion) written by a young French Protestant refugee, John Calvin. Although presented to the world as a defence of French Protestants, it was in fact a short statement of the new religious thought which came to be known as “Reformed Theology.” For the next twenty-three years Calvin repeatedly revised his work until in 1559 it appeared in its final form, now very much larger, and one of the most important books ever to come from a European press.

The reason for our valuing the Institutes so highly is that this work became the foundation of much subsequent Protestant thought. It did so for one thing because the author’s concise thinking and expression made it easy to understand. When Calvin wrote, he desired above everything else, to convince his readers of the truth of his message, not to impress them with his great knowledge, nor to confuse them with his swelling words.

The chief cause of the book’s influence was, therefore, the fact that men were able to see Calvin’s teaching so clearly. Since its first appearance it has been a classic, if not the classic, statement of the biblical doctrine of the grace of God in Christ Jesus. By it many people have found salvation in Christ, while others have been strengthened and built up in their faith.

Thus Calvin’s Institutes has been a truly formative work. Indeed in the case of some whole nations such as Holland or Scotland it has become part of the national heritage, helping to mold the people’s character.

But what is of more importance, today the thinking of Calvin, particularly as it is expressed in his Institutes, is experiencing a present revival throughout the Christian world. New translations and new editions of old translations are appearing in many different tongues: English, French, Japanese, Indonesian, etc. Thus Calvin’s influence, which some fifty years ago seemed about to die, is once again making itself felt.

The reason for this is that our own day is very similar to that of Calvin. Sixteenth century Europe faced the threat of a Moslem invasion from the east. At the same time new worlds and new peoples were coming into Europe’s orbit with Spanish and Portuguese colonial expansion. But what was even more important, Europe was passing through a veritable economic, social and intellectual revolution as the old order disintegrated before men’s eyes. Thus Calvin, writing for the sixteenth century, speaks to us today in our own terms concerning our own problems and needs.

Because of this, we who are Presbyterians and who owe much to Calvin and his Instituteswhich form the foundation of our Confession and catechisms, should desire to attain a greater understanding and knowledge of this man’s great work. “He being dead yet speaketh,” and if we listen we shall find that his words are indeed a guide for us in both faith and action.

It might be well, therefore, if our ministers began instructing our people once again in Calvin’s doctrines, and if our people began reading his works in order that they might be built up in their faith in these trying days.

[excerpted from Presbyterian Comment [Montreal, Canada], vol. 1, no. 1 (January 1960), p. 2.]

Words to Live By:
I would like to let our post today point us to the recent publication of the 1541 edition of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion. Not exactly a small volume, weighing in at 882 pages, but this particular edition has been termed “Calvin’s own essentials edition.” Plus, as published by the Banner of Truth Trust, it is very reasonably priced. Forgive me if I sound like I’m trying to sell you on it, but I would seriously invite you to consider getting a copy and making a serious effort to read through the whole of it this year. That’s basically three pages per day, which doesn’t sound so hard. 

Further description of the book is found on the Banner of Truth web site:

The Institutes of the Christian Religion is Calvin’s single most important work, and one of the key texts to emerge from the Reformation of the sixteenth century. The book accompanied the Reformer throughout his life, growing in size from what was essentially an expanded catechism in 1536 to a full-scale work of biblical theology in 1559/1560.

Among the intermediate editions of the Institutes, none deserves to be better known than the first French edition of 1541. Avoiding the technical details and much of the polemics of the final work, the Institutes of 1541 offer a clear and comprehensive account of the work of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in creation, revelation and redemption, in the life of the individual Christian and in the worship and witness of the church.

Not doctrine only but its practical use is Calvin’s abiding concern. The author of the Institutes invites us both to know and to live the truth, and thus allow God’s Spirit to transform us.

The present translation is newly made from the French of 1541. It has been designed and annotated with the needs of a wide readership in mind.

Practicing his Preaching
by Rev. David T. Myers

It is a rare combination for a man that he be an effective pastor as well as an effective professor.  And yet, Aaron Burr was such a man.

Born on  January 4, 1715, Aaron Burr graduated from Yale University in 1735. He was then ordained in the Presbyterian Church of Newark, New Jersey on January 25, 1737.  Just four years later, a remarkable revival occurred in the church with the result that the following winter, the entire town was brought under the convicting influences of the Spirit of God.  Four years past the previous work of God’s Spirit in the congregation, another revival of religion occurred among the church members, this time, among the young people.  Both of these religious awakenings tell us that Aaron Burr was an effective instrument of the Spirit, applying the whole counsel of God to the hearts and minds of the people.

On the death of Jonathan Dickinson, first president of the College of New Jersey, that infant educational institution moved to Newark, New Jersey, to be placed under the direct spiritual oversight of Burr in 1747.  For the next seven years, Rev. Burr would serve both as pastor and professor to the people and theological students.  In 1755, the pastoral side of his calling was dissolved and the students preparing for ministry had the full attention of his tireless zeal in their training.

It was Aaron Burr who recognized that Princeton, New Jersey, was a more suitable site for the college than Newark.  So in 1756, he moved the now seventy students to a building which had been built especially for it.  The college, which later on would become Princeton University and Princeton Theological Seminary, would never leave this town.

Burr was certainly an  intellectual in his teaching abilities.  Yet it was when he was preaching that he shone most brilliantly.  His life and example were a constant commentary on his sermons.

Words to Live By:  It is said that our lives preach all day every week.  Question? Are other souls being helped or hindered in the hearing and  reading of those lives?  Are those without Christ being convicted and convinced to become Christians?  Are Christians being encouraged, comforted, edified, and taught Christian truths?  What is our profession—not just of our lips, but of our lives—as we live before others? All these questions are good self-examination questions, especially as we begin this new year.

Through the Scriptures: Genesis 10-11

Through the Standards:  The what, how, and why of the Bible, as found in the catechisms:

WLC 3 “What is the word of God?
A. The holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the word of God, the only rule of faith and obedience.”;

WSC 2 “What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A. The Word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.”

For further study:
The finding aid, or index, to the Aaron Burr manuscript collection preserved at the Princeton University, may be viewed here.

Recommended reading on Princeton University:
Noll, Mark A. Princeton and the Republic, 1768-1822: The Search for a Christian Enlightenment in the Era of Samuel Stanhope Smith (1989). 340 pp.

[Images from Scribner’s Monthly, vol. 13, no. 5 (March 1877), pp. 627 & 629.]

In what he describes as a Sunday afternoon sermon, the Rev. Dr. Moses Drury Hoge delivered a sermon titled in publication, “Liddon, Bersier, Spurgeon”. The sermon is found in the volume THE PERFECTION OF BEAUTY, which was issued posthumously five years after Hoge’s death in 1899. Preaching from the text of First Samuel 25:1, Hoge first treats of the Anglican Canon, William Perry Liddon and then the Presbyterian Frenchman, Eugene Bersier. Lastly, Hoge turned his attention to the English Baptist, Charles Haddon Spurgeon [1834-1892]. Here excerpted is that portion of the sermon where Dr. Hoge paid tribute to Spurgeon. The parallels to our recent loss of Dr. R.C. Sproul are inescapable:

One of the greatest lessons that I want to derive from this discourse, and one of the greatest truths that I want to impress is this, that there ought to be a very earnest looking for a different class of men from many of those who are coming upon the stage now, and we ought to be praying that God will raise up men of great endowments, of splendid gifts and large scholarship, and devoted consecration to his cause ; men qualified to become the leaders of the great sacramental army for the conquest of the world. There never was a time perhaps when there were as many mediocre men as there are now, men who do not attain, and who have no prospect of attaining that learning which makes the leader of the church, and which makes the whole church to rejoice that God has honored such men with such powers. That is the great want of the day in which we live.

I have often had occasion to remark that I regarded Spurgeon as the most widely useful man living, the greatest power for good in Great Britain, and now that he has been removed from his great sphere, if I were to say that he is lamented by all to whom he was known and honored, it would only be another way of saying that he was lamented throughout all Christian lands ; for where was he not known, and where was he not honored? That this is not an extravagant estimate I think will be evident when we consider into how many departments of useful labor he was permitted to enter and manifest the greatest efficiency and success. He was one of the few men of whom biography gives us any account, who was able to maintain his popularity from year to year without abatement. His was a popularity which, so far from weakening, grew and advanced with successive years. There never was a time perhaps when there was more originality, more freshness and power, more that makes a sermon rich and good, than during the last years of his life. It is not extravagant to say that he was the greatest power for good in Great Britain, when we remember that his church, or tabernacle, on the Surry side of the Thames, had in it six thousand sittings, and it often held a larger number of people than that, for many could not get seats, and were obliged to stand ; when we remember also that these sermons, every one of them, was reported and published that very week ; when we remember that sixty volumes of sermons were issued during his life ; when we remember that they were read, not only throughout Great Britain, but through Australia, Canada, the United States, West Indies, and wherever the English language is spoken — when we remember, again, that they were translated into a number of modern tongues, and thus went all over the reading world. That was but one of the departments of his great life work ; and, therefore, it is not an extravagant statement that was made by my nearest ecclesiastical neighbor, my brother of the Second Baptist Church, in an article which he published in the Religious Herald, in which he stated that, “England was but the platform on which Spurgeon’s pulpit stood, and his audience was the world around.” I have read many noble tributes to the memory of Mr. Spurgeon. I have read none finer than the one to which I refer by my Baptist brother.

But this was only one avenue of his access to the people. Look at the great orphanages which he founded, and which he found the means also of maintaining. Hundred and hundreds of poor, degraded and destitute children were taken from positions where they would have died in vice and squalor, and trained them to occupy places of usefulness and respectability in the world. Then remember that theological school which has, I believe, seventy or eighty students every year, young men whom he has sent out, with the impress of his own example and spirit upon them, to preach the gospel, as far as in them lay, just as he preached it. When we remember these things, we have some idea of the channels through which he reached the great outside world. I do not know of any history more instructive in another aspect of his convictions, how a man with the courage of his convictions, how a man who is intensely loyal to the truth, and fears nothing but what is wrong, will at last triumph over all opposition. Very few men have lived in England that were subjected to the ridicule and misrepresentation Mr. Spurgeon was during the early years of his ministry. Hundreds of stories were invented reflecting upon his manners, reflecting upon him in every way, and yet he pursued the even tenor of his way without even a murmur, with his bright, genial spirit unchilled by the abuse that was heaped upon him. He went on quietly, with the pluck and perseverance that characterized him, until the time came that he won over to himself all the parties in England, and not only all the parties, but all the different classes of society. The upper class, that at one time scorned him, recognized his worth at last. Men in the highest positions, in Parliament, and men of great learning recognized his virtues, and the great indebtedness Great Britain owed him, and acknowledged it in their public letters. He won, not only the regard of all classes, but the regard of all sects, which was a great triumph in a country like England, and perhaps no man has ever lived who has done more to bring all the people in harmony with one another, and promote good fellowship and kind Christian regard among the different denominations than he. It was his joy to know before his death, by the public testimony of the most eminent men in Great Britain, how he was esteemed by the men most qualified to speak on such subjects, both in the church and in the state.

I have, of course, my friends, been compelled to make this discourse much longer than I usually make my Sunday afternoon sermons, and  I have protracted it more than I intended, such is the richness of the theme. You will see that I have tried to condense, as I went along, in order to compress into the limits of the discourse what I had to say in connection with those to whom I have called your attention this evening.

There are one or two other facts in regard to this man’s great usefulness in the world. It is sometimes said that Calvinism is dying out, that the world is abjuring Calvinism. My friends, I do not care to defend Calvinism this evening, because that is not my object or my present purpose. I want to say that the most popular preacher in the world was the most pronounced Calvinist in the world! No man has preached to as many people in the last twenty-five years as Charles Spurgeon. No man who ever lived during all the ages, during all the centuries has, during his life-time, come into contact with as many of his fellow-men on religious themes as Spurgeon ; and, during all that time, he has not preached a sermon perhaps in which Calvinism was not the fibre and the spirit of the discourse. Don’t tell me that Calvinism is becoming unpopular, when the man who could draw more people than any other man on earth was sure to deliver a Calvinistic discourse. When a conceited young theological candidate once made a disparaging remark about Spurgeon to a distinguished prelate in the English Church, he said, “Stop, young man ; there are eminent men in Great Britain, but the only man in England that can get an audience, if he choose, of thirty thousand people, in twenty-four hours, is Spurgeon.”

Then, another thing that deserves our attention is this. Such was his loyalty to the truth that he would sacrifice friends for it if need be. There never was a man more affectionate or loyal to his friends, but if need be, he would sacrifice friends before he would sacrifice a principle. That is a very rare thing in this world. He withdrew from the Baptist Union, three or four years ago, and in making the separation he parted from some of the most intimate friends of his youth and manhood. Inasmuch as he thought they held erroneous views, especially with regard to the divinity of our Lord, that was something he could not brook ; and therefore, while he never lost his respect or regard for them as men, yet ecclesiastically there was a separation.

It so happens that I have spent more time in London than in any city in the world except Richmond. There is no city that I know as well. Three months, at one time in my life, I did not go out of the city, and for thirty years I have availed myself of every opportunity that I could get of hearing Mr. Spurgeon preach. I have heard him oftener than any man south of the Potomac, and  I think, therefore, that I have had some opportunity to judge and some opportunity to speak with the confidence that I have spoken with regard to this man. And strange to say, during all these years, I never sought to make his acquaintance, though I had hundreds of opportunities for so doing. The sole reason was that I did not want to encroach upon that time, for every moment of which I knew he had imperative use. The only interview that I ever had with him happened on this wise. I was at his church one Sunday, when he gave notice that immediately after the service the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper would be administered. You are aware that although he belonged to the Baptist Church, he was in favor of open communion, and on that occasion he gave an invitation that was so tender, to all Christians of all denominations that might be present, to unite in celebrating the sacrament, that I remained. When the service was over, as I was going out, and was passing down the aisle, I went within five or six feet of where he was sitting in a chair on the platform, and I went up and said, “Mr. Spurgeon, I have been a hearer of yours for thirty years, and I now embrace this opportunity of introducing myself, and of giving you my best wishes.” He asked me my name, and his reception was so kind and so affectionate that I have often regretted since that I did not avail myself of the many opportunities I had of knowing him personally.

I will never forget the first time I entered his church any more than I can forget the last, which is the time of which I have just spoken. The first time I visited his church, it so happened that I arrived a little late. Every seat was taken on the lower floor, as well as every seat in the first gallery. There are two galleries, one above the other. I went into the upper gallery, and succeeded in finding a seat at the farthest point that I could have been (almost in the roof of the house) from the preacher on the rostrum. He had not been preaching more than ten or fifteen minutes before I heard a stifled sigh or sob from the man who sat next to me. I had not noticed this man before in the great crowd, but I looked at him, and he seemed like a man whose business was in some menial occupation, dressed in his Sunday clothes. He was coarse and vulgar looking, with very hard features ; but the tears were streaming down his cheeks. He was quivering with emotion, and I said to myself, “If Mr. Spurgeon, standing at that vast distance, can so preach the gospel in its richness and sweetness as to cause every fibre in that man’s heart to vibrate, then he is preaching right, and that man is my brother in Christ Jesus,” and I felt like taking him by the hand, and telling him so.

Such is the man who has been taken away from us. If we regret that we did not avail ourselves of the opportunities we had of knowing personally the good and great that have lived to bless their generation, there is one compensation and one anticipation — in the long hereafter there will be time enough. In the world of recognition, in the world of reunion, in the world of holy fellowship, in the eternal future, there will be time enough to make the intimacies of an innumerable multitude of those who have so lived in this world as to bless their generations, and then gone home to the rest and recompenses of the eternal kingdom, into which kingdom and rest and joy may the Lord, in his infinite mercy, bring every one of us at the last, for his dear Son’s sake. Amen!

[excerpted from The Perfection of Beauty, by Moses Drury Hoge, D.D., LL.D.  Richmond: The Presbyterian Committee of Publication, 1904, pp. 147-153.]

The author of the following brief article, Chalmers W. Alexander, was a noted businessman and a ruling elder at the First Presbyterian Church in Jackson, Mississippi.
He grapples here with the old, old problem of names and labels, those designations that can be so skillfully employed to malign an opponent, even to ruin their good name.
Trust in the Lord, and let the truth of your actions prevail over what people may say.   

Labels in the Current Controversy

The Use of Names And Terms In The Current Controversy

By Chalmers W. Alexander
Jackson, Miss.
[THE SOUTHERN PRESBYTERIAN JOURNAL 8.17 (2 January 1950): 7-8.]

As practically everyone in the Southern Presbyterian Church knows, there is a serious controversy going on in our denomination. At present the controversy is focused around the question of the proposed union of our denomination with the Northern Presbyterian Church.

But, in the broad sense, this is but one phase of the controversy. For this controversy arises directly from a difference in creedal or doctrinal beliefs. In the final analysis, there are two distinct groups in the Southern Presbyterian Church, and these two groups differ radically in matters of belief.

In discussing the views of the two groups it is necessary from time to time to use terms or names to designate the two groups and to identify their positions in doctrinal matters.

What names and what terms should be used?

The Wrong Use Of Names And Terms

One can, of course, pitch the discussion on a very low plane and refer to those with whom one differs as Dr. D. P. McGeachy, of our denomination, recently did, in The Christian Century, a non-denominational religious magazine with a wide circulation. Dr. McGeachy wrote therein a description of the 1949 General Assembly meeting of our denomination. The Presbyterian Outlook, in expressing its approval of Dr. McGeachy’s article, stated that it was “his annual classic describing the Presbyterian U. S. Assembly,” and that “there is nothing quite like it for color and for penetrating surgery.”

Now in his article in The Christian Century Dr. McGeachy referred to those of us in the Southern Presbyterian Church, who consistently hold to the Conservative position, in this manner:

“There will be a little handful of willful men who will persist in this sober-faced mummery,” and “They have all of the fearful and many of the rich and well-to-do on their side. Every tactic, good and bad, whether based on ignorance or prejudice, will be used,” and “We find Rome and the ultra-fundamentalists alive and unscrupulous in our very midst.”

In writing thus, and in using such insulting terms, Dr. McGeachy has given us a classic example of how the current controversy should not be conducted.

It is possible to put the current controversy on a very low plane by making such references and using such terms. On the other hand, it is possible to pitch the discussion on a much higher plane by using terms and names which are neither insulting nor slurring.

What terms should be used, and what names should be applied, to the two groups in the current controversy?

The Terms “Orthodox” And “Unorthodox”

Perhaps the most accurate terms that could be used would be the “Orthodox” group and the “un-Orthodox” group.

In discussing the meaning of that term “Orthodox,” Dr. J. Gresham Machen, the world-famed Bible scholar, once wrote in The Presbyterian Guardian:

“Many years ago, in that ancient time when jokes now hoary with age had the blush of early youth upon their cheeks, when a man first asked, ‘When is a door not a door?’ and when the answer seemed to be a marvelously fresh and brilliant thing—at some happy moment in that ancient time, some brilliant person said: ‘Orthodoxy means my doxy’ and ‘heterodoxy means the other man’s doxy.’

“The unknown author of that famous definition—unknown to me at least—may have thought he was being very learned. Knowing that the Greek word ‘heteros,’ which forms a part of the English word ‘heterodoxy,’ means ‘other,’ he built his famous definition around that one word, and ‘heterodoxy’ became to him ‘the other man’s doxy.’

“Possibly, however, he knew perfectly well that he was not being learned, and merely desired to have his little joke. As a matter of fact, the Greek word ‘heteros’ in ‘heterodoxy’ does not just mean ‘other’ in the ordinary sense of that word, as when we speak of ‘one’ man and ‘another’ man, but it usually means ‘other’ with an added idea of ‘different.’

“So if we are really going to indulge in a little etymology, if we are really going to analyze the words and have recourse to the origin of them in the Greek language from which they have come, we shall arrive at a very different result from the result which was arrived at by the author of the facetious definition mentioned above. The word ‘orthodos’ in ‘orthodoxy’ means ‘straight,’ and the word ‘heteros’ in ‘heterodoxy’ means ‘other’ with an implication of ‘different.’ Accordingly, the real state of the case is that ‘orthodoxy’ means ‘straight doxy’ and ‘heterodoxy’ means ‘something different from straight doxy’; or, in other words, it means ‘crooked doxy.’

“Now I am not inclined to recommend etymology indiscriminately to preachers in their treatment of their texts. It has its uses, but it also has its abuses. Very often it leads those who indulge in it very far astray indeed. The meanings of words change in the course of centuries, and so the actual use of a word often differs widely from what one would suppose from an examination of the original uses of its component parts. Etymology has spoiled many a good sermon.

“In this case, however, etymology does not lead us astray at all. ‘Orthodoxy’ does mean ‘straight doxy,’ and it is a good old word which I think we might well revive.”

Fundamentalist” Or “Conservative” Or “Evangelical”

Since the term “Orthodox” is not widely used in our denomination as a name to designate the group which holds to our position in doctrinal matters, let us consider for a moment some terms which are sometimes used.

The terms “Fundamentalist” and “Conservative” and “Evangelical” are used, but none of them is entirely satisfactory.

In this connection let us listen once more to Dr. Machen:

“For my part, I cannot say that I like the term ‘Fundamentalism.” I am not inclined, indeed, to quibble about these important matters. If an inquirer asks me whether I am a Fundamentalist or a Modernist, I do not say, ‘Neither.’ Instead, I say: ‘Well, you are using terminology that I do not like, but if I may for the moment use your terminology, in order that you may get plainly what I mean, I just want to say, when you ask me whether I am a Fundamentalist or a Modernist, that I am a Fundamentalist from the word go!’…

“The term ‘Fundamentalist’ seems to represent the Christian religion as though it had suddenly become an ‘ism’ and needed to be called by some strange new name. I cannot see why that should be done. The term seems to me to be particularly inadequate as applied to us conservative Presbyterians. We have a great heritage. We are standing in what we hold to be the great central current of the Church’s life—the great tradition that comes down through Augustine and Calvin to the Westminster Confession of Faith. That we hold to be the high straight road of truth as opposed to vagaries on one side or on the other. Why then should we be so prone to adopt some strange new term?

“Well, then, if we do not altogether like the term ‘Fundamentalism’—close though our fellowship is with those who do like that term—what term shall we actually choose?

“ ‘Conservative’ does seem to be rather too cold. It is apt to create the impression that we are holding desperately to something that is old just because it is old, and that we are not eager for new and glorious manifestations of the Spirit of God.

“ ‘Evangelical,’ on the other hand, although it is a fine term, does not quite seem to designate clearly enough the position of those who hold specifically to the system of doctrine taught in the Westminster Confession of Faith, as distinguished from other systems which are near enough to the truth in order that they may be called ‘evangelical’ but which yet fall short of being the system that is contained in God’s Word.”

Liberal” Or “Modernist”

In referring to those who differ with us in matters of doctrine, and who no longer hold to the commonly-called Conservative position in theology, the name “Liberal” is used often. In fact, those who are opposed to the Conservative position like very much to be referred to as “Liberals,” and they like to consider themselves as holding to “Liberalism” in matters of doctrine.

But the term “Liberalism,” as it is used today, is both inaccurate and a misnomer. The word “Liberal,” as used in political matters as well as in ecclesiastical matters, was once a noble and a respected term. But in recent years it has been so misused, in both the realm of politics and the realm of religion, that it no longer retains its former noble meaning. For instance, what passes as “Liberalism” in religion today is viewed as liberal only by its friends. To those of us who oppose it, ‘Liberalism” in theology, far from being truly liberal or broad, seems to involve a very narrow exclusion of many relevant facts essential to Christianity. In religion, as in politics, the word “Liberalism” has been so debased that it now often means something which is the exact opposite of what that once noble term originally meant.

The word “Modernist,” of which the so-called Liberals are not at all fond, is also a misnomer. For that which goes by the name of “Modernism” in theology at present is not really modern in any sense of the word. Far from being up-to-date or modern, that which is known in religion as “Modernism” is well over a century old. And today much of it is regarded as out-of-date by many who once adhered to it.

Safe Terms To Use

It seems that no terms are entirely satisfactory, even those which are in current use among us.

What, then, shall we call those in the Southern Presbyterian Church who hold to the full inspiration of the Bible and to the doctrinal viewpoint which is contained in the Westminster Standards? We shall continue to refer to them as Conservatives.

How shall we refer to those Presbyterians who have departed from belief in the full inspiration of the Bible and from the doctrinal position which is outlined in the Westminster Standards? For want of better or more widely acceptable terms, we shall continue to refer to them as Liberals or Modernists.

And if both sides in the current controversy will refrain from the use of such terms as “willful men” and “unscrupulous,” and from the use of such expressions as “every tactic, good and bad, whether based on ignorance or prejudice, will be used,” then the present discussion of high doctrinal issues will not degenerate into a low contest of name-calling.

A Twenty-eight Inch Square Parchment
by Rev. David T Myers

It is now a tattered parchment, smaller in size than when originally signed, in the hands of the Historical Society of New Hampshire, recording the names of three hundred and nineteen Scots-Irish immigrants. Most of the names were legibly written, with just thirteen signed with a mark, indicating that they could not write, but who wished to be included in the total number.

The following was attested to by these signatures: “We whose names are underwritten, Inhabitants of ye North of Ireland, Doe in our own names, and in the names of many others, our Neighbors, Gentlemen, Ministers, Farmers, and Tradesmen, Commissionate and appoint our trusty and well beloved friend, the Reverent Mr. William Boyd, of Macasky, to His Excellency, the Right Honorable Collonel Samuel Shute, Governour of New England, and to assure His Excellency of our sincere and hearty Inclination to Transport ourselves to that very excellent Plantation upon our obtaining from His Excellency suitable encouragement. And further to act and Doe in our Names as his prudence shall direct. Given under our hands this 26th day of March, Anno Dom. 1718.”

In short, here was a written appeal requesting approval to move to America to the powers that be of 319 persons, adults and infants. In that request, they would be successful to travel to the new shores of America.

Our focus today is on the appointed agent who was sent to these shores, a Presbyterian minister by the name of William Boyd. The latter minister was educated at the University of Edinburgh, receiving a Master of Arts and Divinity degree. He later studied at Glasgow College and University. Ordained as a minister of the gospel on January 1, 1710, he began to pastor a Presbyterian congregation in Ireland. When given an opportunity to affirm the Westminster Confession of Faith, he gladly placed his name down as a supporter of the confession.

The Presbytery requested that he take the above document to the Governor of New England. He did, and received from the latter his approval, although it may be noted that their idea of welcoming the coming Scot-Irish was to place them up in Maine as a buffer against the French-Indians of Canada!

Sending the welcome approval back to the folks waiting for the green light by another person, William Boyd stayed an extra period of time in the American colonies. Eventually he did return to Ulster, with excellent commendations of Rev. Cotton Mather. The latter wrote that the Rev. William Boyd adorned the doctrines of God our Savior; that he had an unblemished conduct in the quest and left a good name and reputation, with commendable conduct.

Rev, Boyd continued on at McCasky Presbyterian Church, North Ireland until 1725 and finished up his pastoral ministry at another Presbyterian Congregation. After a long pastorate there, he went to be with the Lord.

Words to Live By:
In his only printed sermon, Rev. Boyd preached on Jeremiah 6:16, “Thus says the LORD, Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, Where the good way is, and walk in it; And you will find rest for your souls.” God’s Way is truly the Best Way, which was Pastor Boyd’s title for this sermon preached in 1719. It was applicable for those who took part in that Scots-Irish emigration to the colonies. It is applicable for our faithful subscribers who seek to serve our Lord and Savior this new year of 2018. Dear reader: Memorize its words, and follow its commands in your home, church, and society. In so doing, God says, you will find rest for your souls this year.

Newer entries »