Justin Martyr. Apology I and II. in Ancient Christian Writers. New York: Newman Press, 1997.
SUMMERY
Justin Martyr has set forth an excellent defense of the gospel, especially in light of the context in which he wrote. Writing in the 2nd Century, the Church being less than 2 years old, Martyr writes his Apologies to the then Caesar defending the gospel and seeking justice. These are the two main purpose of his writing.
First, Martyr defends the gospel. He does so by explaining some of the misunderstandings about Christianity. To do so, he states what Christians are being accused of, explains what they do, why they do it, and how it lines up with current Greek thought, common sense, and revelation from common grace.
One of the things he discusses is the argument that Christians are atheist because they don’t worship the Roman gods or Caesar himself. This was an early accusation against Christians all rooted in the assumption that since they don’t worship the traditional gods, they must therefore be atheists and not worship any God.
Martyr sets the record straight. They are not atheists, they are monotheists. He makes it clear why they do not worship Roman gods and Caesar, but then sets forth his defense of who they do worship. They worship the Creator of the universe and His Song Jesus Christ who was executed and raised from the dead.
come from of their teaching of the kingdom. It was assumed that Christians seeking to set up an earthly kingdom, overthrow Caesar, and rule the world. Such a belief is dangerous to all government powers, and many argued that Christians were dangerous because of it.
But Martyr points out that this is a misunderstanding of what Christians believed. They do not seek a human kingdom, but God’s. He points out that if they were seeking a human kingdom, they would deny it in order to save their lives so that they could accomplish their goals. But since they do deny it and proclaim what sort of kingdom they seek, which is not human, and do not try to save their own lives, it goes against reason to say that they are seeking a human kingdom.
The other purpose of the book is to seek justice from the Roman government. Since it’s birth, the Christian Church had been persecuted and everyday Christians were being executed. Christians were considered enemies of the state and Justin Martyr seeks to explain that Christians are not criminals, and they are not the enemies of the State, but rather are obedient (unless it contradicts their moral code) to the laws.
Martyr makes it clear that the execution of Christians is unjust and wrong. Christians do no wrong (true Christians that is), and the State has no reason to suspect them of wrongdoing. Martyr is essentially seeking justice from his government. Why are Christians being chased down and murdered without ever committing a crime. Christians are innocent, and should therefore be left alone and not treated as criminals.
PERSONAL ENGAGEMENT
Justin Martyr’s approach to apologetics and meeting the needs of his situation is appropriate. Much of what he says and his approach to apologetics is still useful today. We must, therefore, look closer to what he has written, how he defends Christainity, and see if we can still follow the same format today.
One thing I really enjoyed about Martyr was the simplicity of his argument. Martyr does not spend his time trying to sound smart, rather he is trying to convert Caesar! Therefore, he uses words, illustrations, examples, and rhetoric that his readers would understand.
The gospel is simple, and if we make it difficult (by using large words, etc.) we loose the profound simplicity of the gospel. Martyr manages to show this simplicity of the gospel through Jesus Christ. He walks us through sin, and how his accusers and everyone else are guilty of it, the punishment of sin in hell, and the free grace of Jesus Christ offered to all those who repent.
Not only is he simple in his presentation of the gospel, he is simple in his defense of the gospel. From the beginning, Martyr takes the accusations make against Christianity, states them, and then explains the truth. Such accusations include atheism, immorality, disloyalty, and others. He states the issue, explains how his accusers are wrong, and then explains what they truly believe.
As the reader follows his argument, he is amazed at how simple and straightforward Christianity is. The accusers are wrong in making their accusations, while the Christians are a group of believers in a risen Savior who serve Him and His commandments. They are a moral, unrebellious people. And as he makes this clear, he does it so plainly that it is impossible to miss his point.
Another thing that we could use today is how he put Christianity in the context of his readers. Martyr is writing during the reign of the Roman Empire. He understands what Romans appropriate. Much of what he says and his approach to apologetics is still useful today. We must, therefore, look closer to what he has written, how he defends Christainity, and see if we can still follow the same format today.
One thing I really enjoyed about Martyr was the simplicity of his argument. Martyr does not spend his time trying to sound smart, rather he is trying to convert Caesar! Therefore, he uses words, illustrations, examples, and rhetoric that his readers would understand.
The gospel is simple, and if we make it difficult (by using large words, etc.) we loose the profound simplicity of the gospel. Martyr manages to show this simplicity of the gospel through Jesus Christ. He walks us through sin, and how his accusers and everyone else are guilty of it, the punishment of sin in hell, and the free grace of Jesus Christ offered to all those who repent.
Not only is he simple in his presentation of the gospel, he is simple in his defense of the gospel. From the beginning, Martyr takes the accusations make against Christianity, states them, and then explains the truth. Such accusations include atheism, immorality, disloyalty, and others. He states the issue, explains how his accusers are wrong, and then explains what they truly believe.
As the reader follows his argument, he is amazed at how simple and straightforward Christianity is. The accusers are wrong in making their accusations, while the Christians are a group of believers in a risen Savior who serve Him and His commandments. They are a moral, unrebellious people. And as he makes this clear, he does it so plainly that it is impossible to miss his point.
Another thing that we could use today is how he put Christianity in the context of his readers. Martyr is writing during the reign of the Roman Empire. He understands what Romans believe and where they are coming from, and uses that to his advantage.
He does so by quoting Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato, and by using Greek/Roman mythology as a starting point for defending Christian beliefs. But he doesn’t simply say, God is like Zeus and leave it at that. Rather, he points out the difference, and why the Christian God is better, bigger, and true.
One example of him using the Roman worldview and religion was his treatment on hell. He pointed to Greek philosophers teaching on hell, and even turns to Homer’s Odyssey as an illustration. From there, he explains the Christian doctrine of hell and why it is necessary and true.
Martyr’s approach is similar to Paul’s in Athens in Acts 17. There, Paul used general revelation in order to lead them to special revelation and the gospel. Martyr essentially does the same thing here. By quoting philosophers and the great writers of their time, he is able to show the logic of Christianity, and why his readers must put paganism behind and come to Christ.
We can do the same today. Believers in America understand the cultural context in which they live. Instead of living in a world of deep theology and the words that come with it, we need to return to the profound simplicity of the gospel (without compromising the message). This means we need to get on their level, meet them where they are, and share the saving message of the gospel.
Likewise, we must not be afraid of general revelation. Even in our society where evolution is accepted and creationism is rejected, starting with general revelation is still affective. And as we take this approach, we must use general revelation for the sole purpose of leading the hearer to special revelation, to Christ, and ultimately to the gospel. This is what Paul and Martyr did, and we can do the same today.
appropriate. Much of what he says and his approach to apologetics is still useful today. We must, therefore, look closer to what he has written, how he defends Christainity, and see if we can still follow the same format today.
One thing I really enjoyed about Martyr was the simplicity of his argument. Martyr does not spend his time trying to sound smart, rather he is trying to convert Caesar! Therefore, he uses words, illustrations, examples, and rhetoric that his readers would understand.
The gospel is simple, and if we make it difficult (by using large words, etc.) we loose the profound simplicity of the gospel. Martyr manages to show this simplicity of the gospel through Jesus Christ. He walks us through sin, and how his accusers and everyone else are guilty of it, the punishment of sin in hell, and the free grace of Jesus Christ offered to all those who repent.
Not only is he simple in his presentation of the gospel, he is simple in his defense of the gospel. From the beginning, Martyr takes the accusations make against Christianity, states them, and then explains the truth. Such accusations include atheism, immorality, disloyalty, and others. He states the issue, explains how his accusers are wrong, and then explains what they truly believe.
As the reader follows his argument, he is amazed at how simple and straightforward Christianity is. The accusers are wrong in making their accusations, while the Christians are a group of believers in a risen Savior who serve Him and His commandments. They are a moral, unrebellious people. And as he makes this clear, he does it so plainly that it is impossible to miss his point.
Another thing that we could use today is how he put Christianity in the context of his readers. Martyr is writing during the reign of the Roman Empire. He understands what Romans believe and where they are coming from, and uses that to his advantage.
He does so by quoting Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato, and by using Greek/Roman mythology as a starting point for defending Christian beliefs. But he doesn’t simply say, God is like Zeus and leave it at that. Rather, he points out the difference, and why the Christian God is better, bigger, and true.
One example of him using the Roman worldview and religion was his treatment on hell. He pointed to Greek philosophers teaching on hell, and even turns to Homer’s Odyssey as an illustration. From there, he explains the Christian doctrine of hell and why it is necessary and true.
Martyr’s approach is similar to Paul’s in Athens in Acts 17. There, Paul used general revelation in order to lead them to special revelation and the gospel. Martyr essentially does the same thing here. By quoting philosophers and the great writers of their time, he is able to show the logic of Christianity, and why his readers must put paganism behind and come to Christ.
We can do the same today. Believers in America understand the cultural context in which they live. Instead of living in a world of deep theology and the words that come with it, we need to return to the profound simplicity of the gospel (without compromising the message). This means we need to get on their level, meet them where they are, and share the saving message of the gospel.
Likewise, we must not be afraid of general revelation. Even in our society where evolution is accepted and creationism is rejected, starting with general revelation is still affective. And as we take this approach, we must use general revelation for the sole purpose of leading the hearer to special revelation, to Christ, and ultimately to the gospel. This is what Paul and Martyr did, and we can do the same today.
Another thing about Martyr’s approach to apologetics that is needed today is use of Scripture. Martyr could have easily defended his faith without Scripture, as so many apologests do today, but to do so would not be Christianity. He shows his readers that we have nothing worth saying, and we must therefore be driven by the Scriptures and use the Scripture in our defense.
Every subject he discusses, he always provides quotes from the Gospels, the Old Testament, and the Epistles. He wants to make it clear where he is coming from, why Christians believe what they believe, and why. All of that comes from a correct understanding of the Scripture.
Furthermore, he isn’t afraid to exegete the passage right before his readers. He assumes that they are capable to understand the text and walks us through them. He does this especially with the Old Testament prophecies about Christ and eschatology, but he also does it with the New Testament.
This helps us to understand how we must present the Scriptures. We must not quote the text in order to sound smart, but in order to utilize the text to make the gospel clear. We must, therefore, understand the text ourselves and how to apply it to ourselves and to others. Martyr never quotes the Scripture without explaining it. He shows how it is relevant and what it says about the gospel, the Christian, and life.
We can learn a lot from this great Christian apologists from almost two millennium’s ago. Martyr’s approach to apologetics and how he defended the gospel and took a stand for the Church is significant. We must take his approach and apply it to our current context. Are we willing to defend the gospel so vehemently like Martyr? And if we are, how do we do it? That question can be answered by diving into Justin Martyr’s two Apologies and follow his model.
The defense of the gospel is essential to sharing the gospel. We must be willing to defend the faith, not to just win arguments, but to lead people to Christ. And the model set forth by example from Martyr may just the model we should mimic in our own ministry of evangelism
and apologetics.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Pia Desideria
Philip Jacob Spener. Pia Desideria trans Theodore G. Tappert. Fortress Press, 1964.
SUMMARY
Philip Jacob Spener has written an excellent book on personal piety that can still be applied today. The book is broken down into three main sections. The first section begins by calling out the corrupt condition of the Church. In all aspects of life, he argues, Christianity is corrupt and not true Christianity. Many claim to be believers in Christ, but live lives contrary to that conviction.
To prove his point, Spener looks at different aspects of daily life. He begins with civil authorities. The society in which Spener lived was much different than our own. In his day, Church and State were wedded together. Therefore, the civil authorities were "Christians," and Spener points out that they were not acting as believers. Their decision making and their personal lifestyles were contrary to the gospel, and he calls them out on it.
From there, Spener points out the corruption of the clergy. Perhaps we can expect godliness from politicians, but from ministers of the gospel? Spener shows his readers how they have become corrupted and what they are doing wrong. One thing the clergy were doing was going from parish to parish trying to get rich. They essentially had turned the ministry into a money making scheme.
The problem Spener sees with this, besides the obvious, is what it says about Christianity. Whenever the lay person sees such godlessness in their civil authorities and from clergy, they assume that what they see is authentic Christianity. The clergy are to be the ones who are dedicated to preaching and teaching God’s Word, exhorting nonbelievers to come to faith, and believers to walk in light of the gospel. The clergy of his day, he complains, are not fulfilling their ministerial role.
The third group that is corrupt is the common people. He presents to his reader several examples of their ungodly behavior. First, he complains of drunkenness (a serious issue in German culture). Secondly, lawsuits, especially among believers. The problem here is bickering, complaining, and taking advantage of others. And finally, serving God (or the lack thereof)
From here, the author discusses that the Church can change. It is possible for the Church to overcome these obstacles, and it is imperative that they do overcome these obstacles. The author presents several passages in Scripture that illustrate this point. It is encouraging to the reader to know that there is hope in Christ and His Word.
The last and final section of the book deals with how to change the Church. This section is the most practical and in it, he lays out what the Church, and the individuals that make up the Church, can do in order to mend the corruption of the Church.
He has six suggestions. First, there must be a recovery of the proper understanding and application of God’s Word. This point is critical to all of the rest. If the Church fails on this point, then the Church will not overcome it’s corruption. Secondly, a proper understanding of Luther’s doctrine of priesthood of all believers. Spener takes us back to what Luther meant and explains how we apply it. The believer is to give his all for the sake of the gospel. He must deny himself.
Thirdly, he calls for Christians to practice their faith. Simply reading and understanding the text of Scripture is not enough. Proper application and living out God’s Word is essential. Christians are known by their fruits and it is critical that Christians live like Christ. Fourthly, we must watch how we conduct ourselves among unbelievers and heretics, especially in disputing and confronting them. We must act in love, for that is th greatest commandment.
The last two suggestions deal with seminaries, professors, and students. All of them must be focused on the task before them, study to prepare for ministry, and set themselves as examples. Unlike the corrupt clergy of his day, ministers of the gospel must live godly lives that reflect the knowledge and theology they learned in school.
PERSONAL ENGAGEMENT
Spener sets forth a book that is very much applicable today. His plea for personal piety is what many Christians, including civil authorities, the clergy, and the common people, need to hear. We need to return tot he basic principles and discipline of Christianity. In our day, the Church has become corrupt with Postmodernism, tolerance, and selfishness. Much of what Spener says, the Church is still dealing with. And his personal, practical steps for us to take still apply to us today as well.
One thing I noticed was his emphasis on the corruption of the clergy. He spends as much time on discussing the corrupt clergy as he does the corrupt common person. For he sees one leading to the other. Due to how ministers of the gospel conduct themselves, live their lives, and preach their theology, no wonder common people are so corrupt. They see the ministers lives and teachings and assume that that is authentic Christianity and therefore mimic what they see.
This is a sober reminder of the importance of integrity and personal devotion with Christ for the minister. The minister may be able to quote a lot of Scriptures, but until he gets serious about his faith, he is useless and only harming the cause of Christ.
Similarly, he defines the minister’s role as denial of self. It is not about us. The minister must be willing to give up everything for the sake of the kingdom. The ministers of his day were not doing this. They were going from parish to parish seeking a better position, in which paid better and gave them greater recognition. Ministers of today are no different. It is rare to see a pastor stay at one church for over a decade or more. Too many pastors are using churches to get to a bigger position. They have refused to give up themselves and their selfish desires for the sake of Christ.
The author also brilliantly explains the importance of good works and service in the believers life. He makes it clear that salvation is by faith alone, but that does not mean that good works plays no role in the believers life. A Christian is to act like a Christian. And without outward evidence of an inner change, it is doubtful they were justified to begin with. This is yet another reminder of the important of the Christian walk. Christ saved us from our sins, so we must continue to walk in them. Salvation is a radical change, and if the change isn’t evident, then it is doubtful we were saved in the first place.
I also greatly appreciated his long discussion on the seminary. He gives detailed instruction on what the purpose of a seminary should be, how the professors should teach and act, and how the students should learn and apply what they learn to their own personal ministry.
To the professors, they are to be examples to the men who are training to be examples to common people in their personal ministry. Professors are to live godly lives, be an example of what godliness looks like, and always be mindful that their students are constantly watching and learning from them. Spener traces the professors duties and warns them that they must continue to act as believers at all moments. This includes when the students are eating at their table. The conversation should be of edification, not ungodly chatter.
Likewise, the students must be aware of the goals of seminary training. The goal is not just to gain knowledge but to train for ministry. One great exhortation he gives is that knowledge without piety is worthless (104). One must apply what they learn in class, and be prepared to teach their congregation the same thing.
These exhortations to the seminary community are very applicable today. Professors need to be aware of how students look up to them. And students need to be watchful of whether or not they are applying what they are learning. Too often, students today only care about theology, and very little about personal piety. As a result, ministers become snobs and alienate their congregation.
The book as a whole was an encouraging read. Yes the Church is corrupt and is falling apart in so many areas, but with proper application of God’s Word, we shall overcome. That is the encouraging thing about Spener’s work. We do not have to look for new answers, but rather apply the one’s provided in God’s Word. Spener sets forth a great model of application in this book. He takes the reader, shows him where he is, and shows him where God wants him to be.
His exhortations are Biblical and theological. All application must be rounded in Biblical exegesis, and Spener does just that. This is not a self-help book, but a book that exposes the sins of the Church and of Christians of his day, and how, through the power of the gospel, such sins and corruptions can be remedied.
Personal piety is a lost art even in our day. Seminary students don’t care because they are lost in a world of theology, and many common believers only care about piety and not theology. Neither is good. There must be a balance. Theology is necessary, and so is personal piety. But you will never obtain personal piety, without first understanding theology.
SUMMARY
Philip Jacob Spener has written an excellent book on personal piety that can still be applied today. The book is broken down into three main sections. The first section begins by calling out the corrupt condition of the Church. In all aspects of life, he argues, Christianity is corrupt and not true Christianity. Many claim to be believers in Christ, but live lives contrary to that conviction.
To prove his point, Spener looks at different aspects of daily life. He begins with civil authorities. The society in which Spener lived was much different than our own. In his day, Church and State were wedded together. Therefore, the civil authorities were "Christians," and Spener points out that they were not acting as believers. Their decision making and their personal lifestyles were contrary to the gospel, and he calls them out on it.
From there, Spener points out the corruption of the clergy. Perhaps we can expect godliness from politicians, but from ministers of the gospel? Spener shows his readers how they have become corrupted and what they are doing wrong. One thing the clergy were doing was going from parish to parish trying to get rich. They essentially had turned the ministry into a money making scheme.
The problem Spener sees with this, besides the obvious, is what it says about Christianity. Whenever the lay person sees such godlessness in their civil authorities and from clergy, they assume that what they see is authentic Christianity. The clergy are to be the ones who are dedicated to preaching and teaching God’s Word, exhorting nonbelievers to come to faith, and believers to walk in light of the gospel. The clergy of his day, he complains, are not fulfilling their ministerial role.
The third group that is corrupt is the common people. He presents to his reader several examples of their ungodly behavior. First, he complains of drunkenness (a serious issue in German culture). Secondly, lawsuits, especially among believers. The problem here is bickering, complaining, and taking advantage of others. And finally, serving God (or the lack thereof)
From here, the author discusses that the Church can change. It is possible for the Church to overcome these obstacles, and it is imperative that they do overcome these obstacles. The author presents several passages in Scripture that illustrate this point. It is encouraging to the reader to know that there is hope in Christ and His Word.
The last and final section of the book deals with how to change the Church. This section is the most practical and in it, he lays out what the Church, and the individuals that make up the Church, can do in order to mend the corruption of the Church.
He has six suggestions. First, there must be a recovery of the proper understanding and application of God’s Word. This point is critical to all of the rest. If the Church fails on this point, then the Church will not overcome it’s corruption. Secondly, a proper understanding of Luther’s doctrine of priesthood of all believers. Spener takes us back to what Luther meant and explains how we apply it. The believer is to give his all for the sake of the gospel. He must deny himself.
Thirdly, he calls for Christians to practice their faith. Simply reading and understanding the text of Scripture is not enough. Proper application and living out God’s Word is essential. Christians are known by their fruits and it is critical that Christians live like Christ. Fourthly, we must watch how we conduct ourselves among unbelievers and heretics, especially in disputing and confronting them. We must act in love, for that is th greatest commandment.
The last two suggestions deal with seminaries, professors, and students. All of them must be focused on the task before them, study to prepare for ministry, and set themselves as examples. Unlike the corrupt clergy of his day, ministers of the gospel must live godly lives that reflect the knowledge and theology they learned in school.
PERSONAL ENGAGEMENT
Spener sets forth a book that is very much applicable today. His plea for personal piety is what many Christians, including civil authorities, the clergy, and the common people, need to hear. We need to return tot he basic principles and discipline of Christianity. In our day, the Church has become corrupt with Postmodernism, tolerance, and selfishness. Much of what Spener says, the Church is still dealing with. And his personal, practical steps for us to take still apply to us today as well.
One thing I noticed was his emphasis on the corruption of the clergy. He spends as much time on discussing the corrupt clergy as he does the corrupt common person. For he sees one leading to the other. Due to how ministers of the gospel conduct themselves, live their lives, and preach their theology, no wonder common people are so corrupt. They see the ministers lives and teachings and assume that that is authentic Christianity and therefore mimic what they see.
This is a sober reminder of the importance of integrity and personal devotion with Christ for the minister. The minister may be able to quote a lot of Scriptures, but until he gets serious about his faith, he is useless and only harming the cause of Christ.
Similarly, he defines the minister’s role as denial of self. It is not about us. The minister must be willing to give up everything for the sake of the kingdom. The ministers of his day were not doing this. They were going from parish to parish seeking a better position, in which paid better and gave them greater recognition. Ministers of today are no different. It is rare to see a pastor stay at one church for over a decade or more. Too many pastors are using churches to get to a bigger position. They have refused to give up themselves and their selfish desires for the sake of Christ.
The author also brilliantly explains the importance of good works and service in the believers life. He makes it clear that salvation is by faith alone, but that does not mean that good works plays no role in the believers life. A Christian is to act like a Christian. And without outward evidence of an inner change, it is doubtful they were justified to begin with. This is yet another reminder of the important of the Christian walk. Christ saved us from our sins, so we must continue to walk in them. Salvation is a radical change, and if the change isn’t evident, then it is doubtful we were saved in the first place.
I also greatly appreciated his long discussion on the seminary. He gives detailed instruction on what the purpose of a seminary should be, how the professors should teach and act, and how the students should learn and apply what they learn to their own personal ministry.
To the professors, they are to be examples to the men who are training to be examples to common people in their personal ministry. Professors are to live godly lives, be an example of what godliness looks like, and always be mindful that their students are constantly watching and learning from them. Spener traces the professors duties and warns them that they must continue to act as believers at all moments. This includes when the students are eating at their table. The conversation should be of edification, not ungodly chatter.
Likewise, the students must be aware of the goals of seminary training. The goal is not just to gain knowledge but to train for ministry. One great exhortation he gives is that knowledge without piety is worthless (104). One must apply what they learn in class, and be prepared to teach their congregation the same thing.
These exhortations to the seminary community are very applicable today. Professors need to be aware of how students look up to them. And students need to be watchful of whether or not they are applying what they are learning. Too often, students today only care about theology, and very little about personal piety. As a result, ministers become snobs and alienate their congregation.
The book as a whole was an encouraging read. Yes the Church is corrupt and is falling apart in so many areas, but with proper application of God’s Word, we shall overcome. That is the encouraging thing about Spener’s work. We do not have to look for new answers, but rather apply the one’s provided in God’s Word. Spener sets forth a great model of application in this book. He takes the reader, shows him where he is, and shows him where God wants him to be.
His exhortations are Biblical and theological. All application must be rounded in Biblical exegesis, and Spener does just that. This is not a self-help book, but a book that exposes the sins of the Church and of Christians of his day, and how, through the power of the gospel, such sins and corruptions can be remedied.
Personal piety is a lost art even in our day. Seminary students don’t care because they are lost in a world of theology, and many common believers only care about piety and not theology. Neither is good. There must be a balance. Theology is necessary, and so is personal piety. But you will never obtain personal piety, without first understanding theology.
"On the Necessity of Reforming the Church"
John Calvin. On the Necessity of Reforming the Church.
SUMMARY
John Calvin is righting this book seeking to reform the Church. It is obvious that he doesn’t necessarily want to create a great schism within the Church or break away from the Church, but realizes that unless these key things are met, there is no reconciliation. Calvin is clear what he wants and expects out of conviction of God’s Word.
Calvin begins by revealing the many evils that exists within the Church. He covers many of such evils and reveals what Scripture really says about them, and how the Roman Catholic Church is wrong.
One thing he mentions is their doctrine of salvation. Calvin points out the clear difference between the Reformers and Catholics. The Reformers were preaching Justification by faith alone, while the Catholic Church was still preaching salvation by fait and works. Because of this, the Church has added wrong sacraments, penanence, and many other things in order for men to be saved. This is wrong, to Calvin. Salvation is by faith alone, works has nothing to do with it.
As a result of this, Calvin points out the problems with the Church’s seven sacraments. He makes it clear that the Bible only allows two ordinances within the Church, baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but neither of them save. The Church has only added to the sacraments out of of evil desires, and it was not Christ’s will for the Church to be abused in this manner.
Another problem he has with the Church is their matter of worship. The problems within this category are numerous. One thing he disapproved of was the priests. They preached and spoke in latin, a foreign tongue to the common people. Calvin thought that this was wrong.
Furthermore, the priests were ignorant of the Word of God. This was unexcuseable to Calvin.
The second section in Calvin’s work includes ways to reform the Church. Here, his goal is for the Church to remedy it’s many "evils" and return to Biblical Christianity. He writes that the remedies needed fall into two categories, worship within the church and the doctrine of salvation.
In terms of worship, Calvin has a problem with relics because of idolatry, ignorant priests, right ecclesiaology, the sacraments, and many other things. He sets forth a plan and explains the necessity of fixing these problems in order to reform the Church.
In terms of salvation, Calvin insists on salvation by faith alone. Good works has nothing to do with salvation. Good works and Christian character must follow conversion. The sacraments do not save, nor does anything else manmade. Salvation is by grace through faith alone, and in order for the Church to be Biblical, they must adopt this doctrine.
The third section explains the necessity of reform now. The reforming church is long overdo. Here, again, he deals with some of the same issues he has discussed above, and with a sense of urgency. The Reformers are right and God was on their side. The Church needs to change it’s ways for they have betrayed Christ. They are leading men astray and are wrapped up in ungodly practices and doctrines.
The last and final section deals with some of the objections his readers would make against him. Calvin knew who he was dealing with, and so made a chapter dealing with the objections he knew his readers and enemies would bring up.
Some of the things he brings up include sinful living among reformed Christians. Here, Calvin realizes that many have taken the doctrine of justification by faith alone as an excuse to live sinful lives Calvin points out that such people, though not new to this world, are not true believers and are not justified. Calvin makes it clear that the true believer bears good fruit and does good world.
Calvin deals with many other objections that his opponents throw at him, and he deals with them with Scripture and defense of the gospel and the reformation.
PERSONAL ENGAGEMENT
There are many things within this book that very much applies to us today that is critical for the Church. It is wrong to think that the Reformation is over and the job is done. Even within Protestantism, there are wrong doctrines and false teachings. Therefore, we must continue to reform the Church against Rome and against other so-call Protestants.
Calvin goes about it the right way. Calvin never leaves Scripture. He sees Scripture as the primary source in which he speaks. He know that he has nothing to say unless Scripture reveals it. The very "evils" of the Church reveal that. Whenever man begins to decide what is proper doctrine instead of reading Scripture, such evils are created. Therefore, Calvin relies on the Word of God to defend everything he says.
This is appropriate for us today. Though many reject Biblical inspiration, it is still critical for us to speak what the Scripture says. We have nothing to say. The only thing we should speak is what God has given us through divine revelation.
Another thing that was real good about Calvin’s approach was his emphasis on justification by faith alone. Calvin saw this doctrine as one of the major differences between the Rome and the Reformers. One must not give up this critical doctrine because it is the doctrine that saves us.
Calvin is not afraid to deal with some of the common objections of his day against sola fida. Many said that Protestants didn’t believe in doing good works, and therefore did not act like Christians. Calvin deals with these issues, and he does so by laying out what the Scriptures say. Good works is the result of justification. Works do not justify, only faith in Christ does.
Today, we need to do the same. This doctrine defines our faith. If we give it up, we will loose what make us Christians. This is why Christ came. And anyone who rejects this doctrine of justification is not saved, and is not a Christians, and is not apart of the Church. Works is the result of salvation, not what leads to it.
Many people today argue the same thing. Many think that if they are good enough, then God will let them into heaven. There is no right thought of depravity or justification, only good works. Christians are to stand against this wave and explain how God is a just God, we are unworthy sinners, but through Christ and faith in Him, we can be saved. And that is the only way we can be saved. Works has nothing to do with it. Following our conversion, good trees (true Christians) bear good fruit (good works).
Since we are saved by faith alone, we must remove anything that compromises that. In Calvin’s day, this meant changing the way they did worship, including the Sacraments. The Sacraments were an important issue to believers in the 16th Century for it defined this critical doctrine of salvation. Catholics argued that the sacraments were part of the good works that believers were expected to perform for their salvation. To Calvin and the Reformers, this was wrong. This disrupted the doctrine of sola fida, and must be corrected.
Therefore, Calvin returns to the Scriptures, corrects the error of the Church, and reveals what the Bible really says about the ordinances, and what role they play in our lives.
Another important thing he discussed was celibacy in the priesthood. This issue greatly affects us today, and it seems it creeps into the news regularly. Calvin points out that though the priest are not married, and therefore celibate, they are committing all sorts of sinful, sexual acts.
Today is no different. Today, we obviously have to deal with Catholic priests molesting altar boys and other issues. This stems from their false understanding of what Paul meant by ministers not being married. It was never meant to be a command, and Calvin rightly points this out. If they cannot control their sexual desires, then they must get married lest they sin, as many in the Catholic Church over their history have and continue to.
Also, I appreciate Calvin’s use of Church history. Though he rejected in the inspiration of tradition, he did find the Church fathers helpful in understanding his own doctrine. He frequently quoted and referred to many of the Church fathers and great men of history to defend his doctrine and to point out the errors of the Catholic Church.
This was strategic on his part because by doing so, he reveals how wrong the Catholic Church is in interpreting history. To Calvin, the Church only considered inspired the parts they like. Calvin, indirectly, illustrates how the Church fathers agreed with him. They taught justification by faith alone, they were against relics in the church, etc.
This is helpful even today. We need to learn that studying Church history helps us form our own theology. Though Scripture is first and foremost, there is much to gain by looking through the lens of history. We must not be so proud as to assume that we are the only ones that have all the answers. By studying Church history, we can keep from believing in false, heretical doctrine, and learn how to deal with the struggles of our day.
Reform within the Church was critical in Calvin’s day, and it continues to be a mandate for believers today as well.
SUMMARY
John Calvin is righting this book seeking to reform the Church. It is obvious that he doesn’t necessarily want to create a great schism within the Church or break away from the Church, but realizes that unless these key things are met, there is no reconciliation. Calvin is clear what he wants and expects out of conviction of God’s Word.
Calvin begins by revealing the many evils that exists within the Church. He covers many of such evils and reveals what Scripture really says about them, and how the Roman Catholic Church is wrong.
One thing he mentions is their doctrine of salvation. Calvin points out the clear difference between the Reformers and Catholics. The Reformers were preaching Justification by faith alone, while the Catholic Church was still preaching salvation by fait and works. Because of this, the Church has added wrong sacraments, penanence, and many other things in order for men to be saved. This is wrong, to Calvin. Salvation is by faith alone, works has nothing to do with it.
As a result of this, Calvin points out the problems with the Church’s seven sacraments. He makes it clear that the Bible only allows two ordinances within the Church, baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but neither of them save. The Church has only added to the sacraments out of of evil desires, and it was not Christ’s will for the Church to be abused in this manner.
Another problem he has with the Church is their matter of worship. The problems within this category are numerous. One thing he disapproved of was the priests. They preached and spoke in latin, a foreign tongue to the common people. Calvin thought that this was wrong.
Furthermore, the priests were ignorant of the Word of God. This was unexcuseable to Calvin.
The second section in Calvin’s work includes ways to reform the Church. Here, his goal is for the Church to remedy it’s many "evils" and return to Biblical Christianity. He writes that the remedies needed fall into two categories, worship within the church and the doctrine of salvation.
In terms of worship, Calvin has a problem with relics because of idolatry, ignorant priests, right ecclesiaology, the sacraments, and many other things. He sets forth a plan and explains the necessity of fixing these problems in order to reform the Church.
In terms of salvation, Calvin insists on salvation by faith alone. Good works has nothing to do with salvation. Good works and Christian character must follow conversion. The sacraments do not save, nor does anything else manmade. Salvation is by grace through faith alone, and in order for the Church to be Biblical, they must adopt this doctrine.
The third section explains the necessity of reform now. The reforming church is long overdo. Here, again, he deals with some of the same issues he has discussed above, and with a sense of urgency. The Reformers are right and God was on their side. The Church needs to change it’s ways for they have betrayed Christ. They are leading men astray and are wrapped up in ungodly practices and doctrines.
The last and final section deals with some of the objections his readers would make against him. Calvin knew who he was dealing with, and so made a chapter dealing with the objections he knew his readers and enemies would bring up.
Some of the things he brings up include sinful living among reformed Christians. Here, Calvin realizes that many have taken the doctrine of justification by faith alone as an excuse to live sinful lives Calvin points out that such people, though not new to this world, are not true believers and are not justified. Calvin makes it clear that the true believer bears good fruit and does good world.
Calvin deals with many other objections that his opponents throw at him, and he deals with them with Scripture and defense of the gospel and the reformation.
PERSONAL ENGAGEMENT
There are many things within this book that very much applies to us today that is critical for the Church. It is wrong to think that the Reformation is over and the job is done. Even within Protestantism, there are wrong doctrines and false teachings. Therefore, we must continue to reform the Church against Rome and against other so-call Protestants.
Calvin goes about it the right way. Calvin never leaves Scripture. He sees Scripture as the primary source in which he speaks. He know that he has nothing to say unless Scripture reveals it. The very "evils" of the Church reveal that. Whenever man begins to decide what is proper doctrine instead of reading Scripture, such evils are created. Therefore, Calvin relies on the Word of God to defend everything he says.
This is appropriate for us today. Though many reject Biblical inspiration, it is still critical for us to speak what the Scripture says. We have nothing to say. The only thing we should speak is what God has given us through divine revelation.
Another thing that was real good about Calvin’s approach was his emphasis on justification by faith alone. Calvin saw this doctrine as one of the major differences between the Rome and the Reformers. One must not give up this critical doctrine because it is the doctrine that saves us.
Calvin is not afraid to deal with some of the common objections of his day against sola fida. Many said that Protestants didn’t believe in doing good works, and therefore did not act like Christians. Calvin deals with these issues, and he does so by laying out what the Scriptures say. Good works is the result of justification. Works do not justify, only faith in Christ does.
Today, we need to do the same. This doctrine defines our faith. If we give it up, we will loose what make us Christians. This is why Christ came. And anyone who rejects this doctrine of justification is not saved, and is not a Christians, and is not apart of the Church. Works is the result of salvation, not what leads to it.
Many people today argue the same thing. Many think that if they are good enough, then God will let them into heaven. There is no right thought of depravity or justification, only good works. Christians are to stand against this wave and explain how God is a just God, we are unworthy sinners, but through Christ and faith in Him, we can be saved. And that is the only way we can be saved. Works has nothing to do with it. Following our conversion, good trees (true Christians) bear good fruit (good works).
Since we are saved by faith alone, we must remove anything that compromises that. In Calvin’s day, this meant changing the way they did worship, including the Sacraments. The Sacraments were an important issue to believers in the 16th Century for it defined this critical doctrine of salvation. Catholics argued that the sacraments were part of the good works that believers were expected to perform for their salvation. To Calvin and the Reformers, this was wrong. This disrupted the doctrine of sola fida, and must be corrected.
Therefore, Calvin returns to the Scriptures, corrects the error of the Church, and reveals what the Bible really says about the ordinances, and what role they play in our lives.
Another important thing he discussed was celibacy in the priesthood. This issue greatly affects us today, and it seems it creeps into the news regularly. Calvin points out that though the priest are not married, and therefore celibate, they are committing all sorts of sinful, sexual acts.
Today is no different. Today, we obviously have to deal with Catholic priests molesting altar boys and other issues. This stems from their false understanding of what Paul meant by ministers not being married. It was never meant to be a command, and Calvin rightly points this out. If they cannot control their sexual desires, then they must get married lest they sin, as many in the Catholic Church over their history have and continue to.
Also, I appreciate Calvin’s use of Church history. Though he rejected in the inspiration of tradition, he did find the Church fathers helpful in understanding his own doctrine. He frequently quoted and referred to many of the Church fathers and great men of history to defend his doctrine and to point out the errors of the Catholic Church.
This was strategic on his part because by doing so, he reveals how wrong the Catholic Church is in interpreting history. To Calvin, the Church only considered inspired the parts they like. Calvin, indirectly, illustrates how the Church fathers agreed with him. They taught justification by faith alone, they were against relics in the church, etc.
This is helpful even today. We need to learn that studying Church history helps us form our own theology. Though Scripture is first and foremost, there is much to gain by looking through the lens of history. We must not be so proud as to assume that we are the only ones that have all the answers. By studying Church history, we can keep from believing in false, heretical doctrine, and learn how to deal with the struggles of our day.
Reform within the Church was critical in Calvin’s day, and it continues to be a mandate for believers today as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Sociable
