United States

You are currently browsing articles tagged United States.

September 8: Rev. J. J. Janeway’s Call to Prayer

8 September, 2015 in September 2015 by archivist | No comments

A short entry this day, with the hope that you would reflect on this through the day, and take it to heart. We find in the diary of the Rev. Jacob Jones Janeway on this day, September 8, 1808, the following entry, well worth pondering :

“This day, agreeably to the recommendation of the General Assembly, has been observed as a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer, by the churches under their care. The reason of the recommendation was the aspect of our national affairs. Alas, that so few attend public worship! But God will hear, I hope, the prayers of the pious few. In other churches, perhaps the day was more generally observed. The Lord lend a listening ear, and in mercy spare our guilty land. My devotions in private were comfortable. I had liberty to mourn with grief over the sins of my country, this city, my family, my own, and to ask forgiveness. I concluded the whole by renewing my covenant. The Lord accept of my devotions, and pardon the sins of my holy things.”

[emphasis added]

Words to Live By:
In his sermon on Psalm 119:136, Thomas Manton concludes this doctrine from the text, “That it is the duty and property of a godly man to mourn bitterly, even for other men’s sins.” I dare say the times now demand such prayer. More than ever, this old doctrine of the Scripture must be revived and returned to practice. It is a duty resting upon all Christians, Manton says. God calls His people to grieve over the sins of those around them. Our prayers must be so focused and intentional.
There is more here than can be unfolded in short order, so with your indulgence, I present you with a reading list. You may have some of these works in your own library. If not, many are readily available on the Internet with a little searching. All are well worth your time to read, though the sermons by Thomas Manton are among the clearest in pressing home this vital doctrine.

Adams, Thomas, on the text of 2 Peter 2:7-10 in his commentary on 2 Peter.

Baynes, “A Caveat for Cold Christians,” in Naphtali Press Anthology, vol. 4, pp. 199-206. [text: Rev. 2:4-5]

Bridge, William, “Comfort to Mourners for the Loss of Solemn Assemblies,” Sermon 7 of “Seasonable Truths in Evil Times,” Works, 3. 407-426.

Bunyan, John, The Excellency of a Broken Heart, esp. pp. 42-43, 76.

Burroughs, Jeremiah, Gospel Fear (SDG, 1992), pp. 75-166, on 2 Kings 22:19.

Burroughs, Jeremiah, Sermons VI-XI, The Saints Happiness. Ligonier, PA: SDG, 1992, pp. 36-74.

Henry, Matthew, see his comments on Jer. 13:17; Ezek. 9:4; and 2 Peter 2:7-8.

Howe, John, “The Redeemer’s Tears Wept Over Lost Souls,” in Works, pp. 316-389.

Jenkin, William, “How Ought We to Bewail the Sins of the Places Where We Live?,” in The Morning Exercises at Cripplegate [aka Puritan Sermons], vol. 3, pp. 110-128. 

Kitchen, John, “How Must We Reprove, That We May Not Partake of Other Men’s Sins?,” in The Morning Exercises at Cripplegate [aka Puritan Sermons], vol. 1, pp. 121-142.

Lloyd-Jones, D. Martyn, “Blessed Are They That Mourn,” in Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, vol. 1, pp. 53-62.

Manton, Thomas, on 2 Peter 2:8, Works, pp. 183-184 and 423-426.

*Manton, Thomas, on Psalm 119:137, Vol. 3 of the 1990 Banner of Truth reprint set, pp. 139-154.

McCrie, Thomas, “Sermon on Psalm 119:136: Grief for the Sins of Men” in Naphtali Press Anthology, 2.2: 42-47.

Roberts, Maurice, “The Remembrance of Old Sins,” in The Banner of Truth, October 1994, pp. 1-5.

Sibbes, Richard, “The Art of Mourning,” in Josiah’s Reformation, Works, vol. 6, pp. 59-75.

____________ , “Spiritual Mourning, Works, vol. 6, pp. 265-292.

Spurgeon, Charles H., Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. 51, pp. 485b-486.

Watson, Thomas, The Godly Man’s Picture (Banner of Truth, 1992), pp. 55-60; 77-96; etc.

Welsh, John, Sermons on Repentance, in Naphtali Press Anthology, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 33-49 and 1.4, pp. 42-55.

Williams, Daniel, “What Repentance of National Sins Doth God Require, as ever we expect National Mercies?” in The Morning Exercises at Cripplegate [aka Puritan Sermons], vol. 4, pp. 585-616.

 

 

Tags: , , ,

August 27: Adoption of the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647)

27 August, 2015 in August 2015 by archivist | 1 comment

Westminster Confession Approved by Church of Scotland

You may ask upon reading the title of this contribution, why are we thinking about adoption of the Westminster Confession of Faith, when the whole This Day in Presbyterian History blog deals with Presbyterian history in the United States?  And that is a fair question.  But it is quickly answered by two considerations. First, this Reformed standard—The Westminster Confession of Faith—was, with few changes, the subordinate standard of all the Presbyterian denominations in the United States.  And second, the Scots-Irish immigrants who came over to this country in its earliest days held strongly to this Reformed creedal statement.

The Westminster Confession of Faith was formulated by the Westminster Assembly of divines (i.e, pastors and theologians) in the mid-seventeenth century, meeting at Westminster Abby in London, England.  To the one hundred and twenty divines, primarily from the Church of England, were added nine Scottish divines from the Church of Scotland.  While the latter were seated as non-voting members of that Assembly, still their presence was felt in very effective ways during the six-year study that produced this confessional standard.

When it was adopted by the Parliament in England, it then went to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, where it was adopted without amendment onAugust 29, 1647.  It then became the summary of the teachings of the Old and New Testaments which was adopted by both the teaching and ruling elders, as well as the diaconate in each local church, in every Presbyterian and Reformed church deriving from that tradition. Small changes have been made by conservative Presbyterian bodies in our United States which do not affect the overall doctrinal contents of the Confession. The majority of those changes were made in 1789. You can ask your pastor for more information about those changes.

The historic importance of this document is one reason why we have daily reference to it in this devotional guide, as we seek to make our friends more knowledgeable of its magnificent statements.

Words to live by: Most of the Presbyterian denominations do not require their lay members to take vows which speak of their adoption of these historical creedal standards in order to join the church.  Yet a careful study of, and acceptance of this Confession of Westminster will give you a solid foundation for understanding the doctrine and life of the Word of God.  We urge you to do so, perhaps asking for a class in your church on it, or just studying it yourself for your personal and family benefit.

Tags: , , ,

August 8: The Assemblies of the Church

8 August, 2015 in August 2015 by archivist | 2 comments

Continuing today with our journey through the Rev. R.P. Kerr’s little book, PRESBYTERIANISM FOR THE PEOPLE, we come today to chapter 7. [erroneously labeled as Chapter VI. in our print copy.].

CHAPTER VII.

THE ASSEMBLIES OF THE CHURCH.

The great principle of government by representative assemblies may be applied under many different forms and names, but still remain the same. Indeed, this is the advantage which a government of principle has over one of form, allowing elasticity and adaptability to the various conditions of mankind. Neither the number nor the names of the assemblies which govern a Church are essential to its Presbyterianism.

A body of Christians isolated from the Church by any cause might organize themselves under the Presbyterian principle and elect an assembly of elders. They might call it a Session or a Consistory—which is the name used in some branches of the Presbyterian Church—or they might invent some other designation for it. They might have no other assembly; a small body would need but one. If they grew, they must have higher assemblies; continuing to increase, they would organize higher ones still, until at last they would arrive at the order of assemblies which obtains in most Presbyterian bodies, and which is as follows:

I. The SESSION, or CONSISTORY;

II. The PRESBYTERY, or CLASSIS;

III. The SYNOD, or PARTICULAR SYNOD;

IV. The GENERAL ASSEMBLY, or GENERAL SYNOD.

All these are Presbyteries, of different names, rank and powers, arranged in an ascending scale. First comes the church Session, Consistory or lowest Presbytery.

I. THE SESSION.

This body is composed of not less than two ruling elders, if there be so many, and the pastor. The number of elders is not limited, and in some congregations it is very large. The duties of the Session, in common with all other assemblies of the Church, are administrative and judicial. In spiritual things no body of men on earth have any legislative power, in the strict meaning of that term. The Bible is the only law-book of the Church. Our Books of Order and Deliverances are but interpretations of divine law, entitled to respect and obedience so long as they conform to the inspired word, and liable to change whenever change may seem best to the Church. These interpretations ought to be observed by all, unless they violate an important principle; then it is the duty of those who differ to endeavor by lawful means to have them changed.

The Session adminsters for the congregation in spiritual things, and the deacons administer in temporal affairs, subject to the review of the Session. The Book of Order of the Presbyterian Church in the United States [the body embracing mainly the Presbyterian churches in the Southern States.] gives the following summary of the duties of this body.

“The church Session is charged with maintaining the spiritual government of the church, for which purpose it has power to inquire into the knowledge, principles and Christian conduct of the church-members under its care; to censure those found delinquent; to see that parents do not neglect to present their children for baptism; to receive members into the communion of the church; to grant letters of dismission to other churches, which, when given to parents, shall always include the names of their baptized children; to ordain and install ruling elders and deacons on their election by the church, and to require these officers to devote themselves to their work; to examine the records of the proceedings of the deacons; to establish and control Sabbath-schools and Bible classes, with especial reference to the children of the church; to order collections for pious uses; to take oversight of the singing in the public worship of God; to assemble the people for worship when there is no minister; to concert the best measures for promoting the spiritual interests of the church and congregation; to observe and carry out the lawful injunctions of the higher courts; and to apppoint representatives to the Presbytery and the Synod, who shall on their return make report of their diligence.”

The church Session is required annually to send its record to the Presbytery for review.

We will visit these sections of this longish chapter next Saturday:

II. THE PRESBYTERY.

III. THE SYNOD.

IV. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Tags: ,

January 24: Richard Clark Reed [1851-1925]

24 January, 2015 in January 2015 by archivist | No comments

reedrcOn this day, January 24, in 1851, the Rev. James Landrum Reed and his wife Elizabeth became the proud parents of a baby boy whom they named Richard Clark Reed. Richard was later educated at King College and prepared for the ministry at Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, Virginia. Graduating from Union in 1876, he was ordained by Memphis Presbytery and went on to pastor churches in Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee before being called to serve as a professor at Columbia Theological Seminary in 1898. A true pastor-scholar, he was well suited to this post, and the remainder of his years were spent teaching at Columbia, until his death in July of 1925.

In 1914, Dr. Reed had returned from attending the General Assembly of his denomination. What follows is a portion of his review of that Assembly, and it is interesting for dating a change in the conduct of the Southern Presbyterian Assembly, from that of a more deliberative body to something more akin to a business model. The Assembly had been in the habit of meeting for nine days, and now had, since 1912, been meeting for only six. Here Rev. Reed complains of the hurried nature of the Assembly and the resulting lack of patient, reasoned debate. Elsewhere we have noted that on one occasion, in 1880, the Rev. John L. Girardeau spoke at length for two hours on the floor of the Assembly. More remarkable still, the Assembly paid attention to his every word!

The General Assembly, reviewed by Rev. Professor R.C. Reed, Columbia, SC.

The fifty-fourth General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States, met in the Central Church, Kansas City, Mo., May 21, 1914, and was dissolved at 3:30 P.M., Thursday, May 28th. This is the third Assembly in succession which has limited the span of its life to six working days. These precedents will probably have the force of law for the future. Time was when the Assembly had to rush its business toward the close, in order to dissolution by the end of the ninth day from date of organization. The volume of business has increased rather than diminished. The recent Assemblies have shortened the time not by covering less ground, but by increasing the speed. The liberty of speech has been abridged. it has come to pass that by the time a speaker gets fairly launched, the cry of “question,” “question,” warns the speaker that further effort to get a hearing for his views will be useless. Age and distinguished services do not secure immunity from such discourtesy. The Assembly is ceasing to be a deliberative body, and coming to be an organization merely for business routine.

Obviously, our Assemblies are inoculated with the speed-madness of the age. It could hardly be otherwise. The members, who compose the Assembly, are accustomed by the use of the telephone, rapid transit, and other time-saving devices, to dispatch business at a rate that would have made a former generation dizzy. The speed at which we live is constantly increasing, with the result that we are growing more and more restless. The slightest delay is irksome. The train that pulls into the station ten minutes late creates almost a mob-spirit in those who have been constrained to lose so much of their precious time. When men, who live and move and have their being in an atmosphere charged with the frenzy of hurry, come together in a General Assembly, it is not surprising that they should begrudge every minute that does not show a decided progress in the calendar of business. They are not in the habit of having time to spare. Speech-making is not business, rather it is a clog on the machinery, and the less of it the sooner the members can record their votes and get at something else. The moderator is a good moderator in proportion as he rushes the grist through the mill.

Click here to read the remainder of this excerpt.

Words to Live By:
If only Dr. Reed could have seen the breakneck speed of our lives! Some people seem to thrive on it, but I think we all need times of peaceful quiet, though it can be very hard to come by. Why not begin to carve out a time each day when you will turn off the TV, the radio and all the many devices, and set your priorities for the day? And what better way to set the standard for the day than by getting alone with God in His Word and in prayer? Notice how often Jesus went out early in the morning, by Himself, to pray. Could we have any better example?  I admit it is a discipline, but rising a bit earlier to have that time alone with God is worth it. “My voice shalt thou hear in the morning, O Lord; in the morning will I direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up.” (Psalm 5:3)

Tags: , , ,

January 19: Who Owns Your Church Property?

19 January, 2015 in January 2015 by archivist | No comments

Two Cases that Came Before the Supreme Court.

When the Presbyterian Church in America was formed in 1973, most of the churches leaving the old denomination were able to keep their property. Off-hand, I know of only one church that lost its property. Moreover, these churches did not have to pay exit fees. This was a great providence of God in allowing the faster initial growth of the new denomination, and the legal basis for this provision came as a result of the  work of two churches in Georgia. Savannah, GA pastors Clifford Brewton and Todd Allen, together with their respective Sessions and congregations, had the decade before fought the matter through the civil courts, all the way to the Supreme Court, and so paved the way for the 274 churches that would later form the PCA. 

 

WHO OWNS YOUR CHURCH PROPERTY? A JURIST SPEAKS
Reprinted from Contact: Newsletter of the Presbyterian Churchmen United, Number 6 (January 1971)

(NOTE: The following address by Judge Leon F. Hendricks was delivered at a rally sponsored by the Presbyterian Churchmen United, and held at the First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, Mississippi.)

The question is simple. The answer is difficult and complicated.

Before an answer is attempted there are other questions that arise.

Is a congregation of the Presbyterian Church, U. S. in reality the true legal owners of the church property or does it legally belong to Presbytery, Synod, or to the General Assembly of the denomination known as the Presbytenan Church in the United States?

Ultimately, the question is whether a majority of the members of a local Presbytenan church may withdraw from the Presbyterian Church in the United States and take wIth them the title, use and control of the church property.

The United States Supreme Court in the case of Watson vs. Jones, 13 Wall 679, 20 L Ed. 666, decided in the year 1871, classified the questions concerning the right of property held by religious bodies under three headings.

Most of our local Presbyterian churches would fall in the third category, to-wit:

“Where the property is not subject to any expressed trust and is held by a congregation, whose church government is hierarchIal or connectional in nature.”

The Presbyterian Church, U. S. is representative in government. Some of our civil courts have put our Church in the same class as Catholic, Episcopal and Methodist, whose government is hierarchial or connectional in nature. For this reason these civil courts have held that the property of a congregation is subject to an implied trust in favor of the General Church. The Supreme Court of Florida and South Carolina have so held and one or two local congregations in these states lost their property when they withdrew from the General Church.

The Supreme Court of Mississippi has never had before it a case involving a congregatIon of the Presbyterian Church, U.S.

Prior to January 19, 1970 it would have been the opinion of many lawyers:

(1) “That if a Presbyterian Church is incorporated under the laws of Mississippi, as some churches now are, legal ownershIp is in the entity known as the First Presbyterian Church of Jackson, for an example;

(2) “That the legal title is in the Corporation but the Corporation holds title in trust for and on behalf of the Congregation which may be identified in case of division, by the governing body of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. The trust extends to an implied prohibition against diversion to uses not approved by the Presbyterian Church or foreign to its doctrines;

(3) “That ownership is in the Corporation. Control is in the Congregation, but identity is not determined by a majority of the members and the control is limited by and subject to the government of the Presbyterian Church in the United Church in the United States;

(4) “That a majority of the members of the local church cannot withdraw from the Presbyterian Church in the United States and take with the church properties without the consent of the general Church.” In my opinion the Presbytery could give that consent under the provisions of our Book of Church Order.

Now, what happened on January 19, 1970? The two Savannah Presbyterian Churches finally won the legal battle for their local church property. The Supreme Court of the United States refused by a vote to again hear the appeal of Presbyterian Church in the United States against the Savannah churches on the ground that no substantial federal question had been raised by the parent Church’s appeal. By this action the decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia, rendered on April 14, 1969, became final. Thus, The Hull Memorial and the Eastern Heights Churches of Savannah were awarded their property and the legal title was declared to be in the local congregations.

In 1966 two churches withdrew from the Presterian Church, U. S. The Presbytery of Savannah and the general church intervened and attempted to take the property of each of the churches. The trial court of Georgia decided in favor of the local churches and on appeal the Supreme Court of Georgia affrmed. On petition the Supreme Court of the U. S. took jurisdiction and reversed on the grounds that the Georgia Courts decided the controversy on ecclesiastical law which the Civil Courts could not do under the first and fourteenth amendments, and sent the cases back to the Supreme Court of Georgia for further proceeding not inconsistent with the decision of the U. S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of Georgia then adopted the “Neutral principle” approach and found the legal title in the local churches and awarded them their respective properties. So this ended the matter.

Hence, it is the judgment of many that in any future case involving local property of a congregation in the Presbyterian Church in the United States, a State Civil Court cannot apply the implied trust theory. This would violate the decision in the Savannah cases, and also the holding in the Maryland Church of God case.

This conclusion is reached because there is no ecclesistical law in the Presbyterian Church, U. S., which binds the local church property to any superior tribunal. Our Book of Church Order gives the control of local church property to the local congregation. It can buy, sell and mortgage such property. The only case where a superior ecclesiastical tribunal has anything to do with local church property is when a church ceases to exist and no disposition has been made of its property. Then and only then the property shall be transferred to The Presbytery. This has always been the historic position of The Presbyterian Church, U. S. This position may now be enforced in a civil court.

It is hoped and believed that the other states, as Georgia did, will adopt the “Neutral principles of law” approach; which means legal and equitable principles of ownership are studied and applied to a factual sItuation, such as, Where is the title vested? Who paid for the property? Who has the use and control since the church was built? Who controls the membership? Who has the authority to buy, sell or mortgage the property?

The State Courts will find that for most local Presbyterian Churches the answer will be the local congregations.

The State Courts may also now consider special state statutes govern:ng church property. We have a good one in Mississippi. which is Section 5350 of the Code of 1942.

When a church is organized under it the section provides that the church “shall be a distinct and independent society” and that its property “shall not be divested out of the same, or encumbered, except by a deed, deed of trust, or mortgage, duly executed under the authority of a resolution adopted by a majority vote of the members present at a meeting duly called by that purpose, at which meeting at least twenty percent (20%) of the members in good standing of such organized society must be present.” If your church is not incorporated under the provisions of that section I suggest that it be done. The procedure is simple.

Who Owns Your Church Property? At this time, it is my opinion that the local congregation does. The General Church recognizes this. Because it intervened in the Savannah cases, and one or two overtures were offered at the Memphis, 1970, General Assembly to change the Book of Church Order as to property so as to give control to The Presbytery. Thus our Higher Court realizes the force of the Georgia cases and the Maryland case. Careful watch will have to be made of the aforesaid overtures.

Tags: , , ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »