Required reading Ten virgins by Thomas Shepard (Available from Amazon or free here). Read Chapters 8 & 9.
My summary Chapter 8 is a brief chapter in which Shepard explains what the oil in the lighted lamps is: 'the readiness of the churches to meet and to have fellowship with the Lord Jesus.'
Then the much longer Chapter 9 gives four exhortations to have oil in your lamps. Shepard exhorts the readers by: (i) answering the objections of those that question the love of Christ to them; (ii) encouraging us to fix our love on Jesus and therefore look that our love be ready for his coming; (iii) encouraging us to do the work of Christ - to be daily at it, and finish it; (iv) encouraging us to be ever humble and ready to give the Lord honour of His grace that He ever gave anything to you to do.
What grabbed me I enjoyed the section on the love of Christ very much.
Particularly about the love of Christ during times he appears quite absent: 'Do not fear the love of Christ is not toward you, because he hides his face, and departs sometimes from you; husbands remain so when they depart, and leave the house for many a day; and it is simple to say he is not my husband now. So here the Lord loves his people, yet departs, (Is. liv. 1-7;) and truly it is very hard when inward blows, and sad desertions, and outward miseries, and no Christ found, though sought for. But how shall I then know and discern his love? Ans. Many things might be said this way, only one thing observe, whether thy love remains still to him for himself; for it is a rule that most commonly a Christian's purest and dearest love appears in Christ's absence from him. As it is with friends, while with us we lore them ; but when gone, we feel that love more quick than before.'
Just because our husband is absent, doesn't dissolve the marriage. Jesus still loves us very much.
Next week's reading Read Chapter 10.
Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading City of God by Augustine (available from Amazon or free on the internet, here for example) - Conclude Book 21 by reading Chapters 24 to 27. My summary Last week Augustine stated some false assertions and we began to see him refute them. This week he finishes refuting them..
Firstly he shows us that the guilty will not be spared through the intercession of the saints.
Next we see that the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper do not save people if they continue in disobedience. What counts is having Christ as your foundation whereby you put no earthly and temporal thing before Christ.
Then to finish Book 21, Augustine argues that doing good works does not atone for sin.
What grabbed me Augustine made a good point about the Lord's supper endangering people, rather than saving them: 'It follows that heretics and schismatics, being separated from the unity of this Body, are able to take the same sacrament; but it is not for their profit. No, indeed; it is for their harm. It will result for them in a heavier punishment rather than in their liberation, even a delayed liberation. For it is obvious that they are not in that "bond of peace" which is expressed in this sacrament.'
If you take part in the Lord's supper in an unworthy manner, instead of being less sinful you are more sinful.
Sadly too few recognise this and eat and drink judgement on themselves.
Next week's reading Commence Book 22 by reading Chapters 1 to 8.
Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading The life of John Knox by Thomas M'Crie (Available from Amazon or free here) - Read the Preface and Period 1.
My summary Today we start a new biography.
In the preface M'Crie outlines his reasoning for writing the book and provides a few details concerning the extent of his research.
Then we begin 'Period I' of the Knox biography itself. Period one concerns: (i) the origins of Knox, (ii) his education; (iii) the state of religion in Scotland.
What grabbed me A terrible picture was drawn of the corruptions of the Roman Catholic church at the time of Knox: 'The corruptions by which the Christian religion was universally disfigured, before the Reformation had grown to a greater height in Scotland than in any other nation within the pale of the Western Church. Superstition and religious imposture, in their grossest forms, gained ail easy admission among a rude and ignorant people. By means of these, the clergy attained to an exorbitant degree of opulence and power; which were accompanied, as they always have been, with the corruption of their order, and of the whole system of religion. The full half of the wealth of the nation belonged to the clergy; and the greater part of this was in the hands of a few individuals, who had the command of the whole body. Avarice, ambition, and the love of secular pomp, reigned among the superior orders.'
A shocking state.
But just because it happened to them, doesn't mean it can't happen to the Protestant church. Ministers must continue resist the allure of money and keep the gospel central in their ministry.
Next week's reading Read Period 2. Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading Tracts and Letters (Volume 1) by John Calvin (Available from Amazon or free here). Commence 'Articles agreed upon by the Faculty of Sacred Theology of Paris' by reading Articles I to XII.
My summary Today we begin reading the Roman Catholic articles of faith drawn up by the theological faculty of Paris.
Each article is accompanied by a defence from the Roman Catholic standpoint and then Calvin's rebuttal.
The articles we read today concern: (i) baptism; (ii) free will; (iii) penitence; (iv) justification by works; (v) transubstantiation; (vi) sacrifice of the mass; (vii) communion in one kind; (viii) power of consecrating; (ix) intention to consecrate; (x) confirmation and unction; (xi) miracles of the saints; (xii) worshipping the saints.
What grabbed me This is really good reading!
I love how Calvin refutes the articles not just with Scripture, but also with proofs from the Church Fathers.
Citing Scripture is sufficient for Protestants, but insufficient for Roman Catholics. Thereby Calvin is often playing ball on their terms.
This knowledge of the church fathers was particularly stunning to me regarding penitence: 'Of confession to be made in the ear of a priest there is no where any mention. Of satisfaction still less. Nay, it is even certain, that before Innocent the Third, no necessity of confession was imposed on the Christian people; for his decree, made at the Lateran Council, is extant, (Can. Omnis utriusque sexus.) Therefore, for about twelve hundred years the Christian Church had no knowledge of the dogma, that to repentance auricular confession was essentially requisite. And the words of Chrysostom are clear: "I do not say that you must confess to your fellow servant; let it be to the Lord," (Sam. ii. in Psal. 4.) Again, " It is not necessary to confess before witnesses. Let a searching out of sins be made in thought: let the decision be without a witness: let God alone see thee confessing," (Serm. de Pamit. et Confess.) Again, "I call thee not into the view of men. Show thy wounds to God, the best physician, that he may cure them," (Hom. v. Contra Anoma, Hom. iv. de Lazaro.) I do not, indeed, deny, that the practice of confessing is very ancient. But I say that it was free, as Sozomen relates in his Ecclesiastical History...'
How on earth the Roman Catholic church can demand confession to a priest as necessary for salvation is beyond me when Chrysostom strongly condemns it - let alone the lack of Scriptural proof.
Next week's reading Conclude 'Articles agreed upon by the Faculty of Sacred Theology of Paris' by reading Articles XIII to XXV.
Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading Knots Untied by JC Ryle (Available from Amazon or free here) - Read Chapter 7 (Prayer-book statements about regeneration). My summary
Today's reading is basically an in-house disagreement among members of the Anglican church about declaring baptised children regenerate.
Ryle affirms that ministers may say that a baptised child is regenerate but this does not mean that the child actually is regenerate. The statement is made on the basis of the profession of the parents.
Ryle then shows that his view is consistent with the principles outlined by the rest of the prayer book, the thirty-nine articles and the church homilies.
What grabbed me As a Baptist, my problem with this chapter is that Ryle wants to declare any living child as regenerate: 'The principle which the Church lays down as an abstract principle is this, that baptism when rightly and worthily received, is a means whereby we may receive inward and spiritual grace, even a death unto sin and a new birth unto righteousness. That an infant may receive baptism "rightly" the Church of England unquestionably holds, though the way and manner of it may be a hidden thing to us; for as good Archbishop Usher beautifully remarks, "He that hath said of infants, to them belongs the kingdom of God, knows how to settle upon them the kingdom of heaven." Her ministers cannot see the book of God's election. They cannot see the hidden workings of the Holy Ghost. They cannot read the hearts of parents and sponsors. They can never say of any individual child, "This child is certainly receiving baptism unworthily." And this being the case, the Church most wisely leans to the side of charity, assumes hopefully of each child that it receives baptism worthily, and uses language accordingly. '
I am concerned that anyone would base the salvation of someone upon the faith of another as I don't see any evidence for it in Scripture.
Next week's reading Read Chapter 8 (The Lord's Supper). Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading Desiring God by John Piper (Available from Amazon or free here) - Read the Preface, Introduction and Lessons from a Love Poem.
My summary In the Preface to the extended edition (1996) Piper reflects that in the ten years since the first edition he has seen his theory proved right in his own life.
Then in the Introduction Piper outlines the steps of his initial discovery that we glorify God by enjoying him. He then answers six objections to his thesis of Christian hedonism.
Then a Love Poem is given that Piper wrote to his wife on their 25th wedding anniversary.
What grabbed me I liked Piper's answers to objectors, particularly the first one: '...Christian Hedonism as I use the term does not mean God becomes a means to help us get worldly pleasures. The pleasure Christian Hedonism seeks is the pleasure which is in God himself. He is the end of our search, not the means to some further end. Our exceeding joy is he, the Lord-not the streets of gold, or the reunion with relatives or any blessing of heaven. Christian Hedonism does not reduce God to a key that unlocks a treasure chest of gold and silver. Rather it seeks to transform the heart so that "the Almighty will be your gold and choice silver to you" (Job 22:25).'
Well put. God is the end in our search for happiness.
Next week's reading Read Chapter 1.
Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading Thoughts on preaching by J. W. Alexander (Available from Amazon or free here) - Commence 'Eloquence of the French Pulpit' by reading up to the paragraph beginning 'The Oration for Henrietta, Princess of England and daughter of Charles I' (page 301 in the Banner edition).
My summary Now in his last section Alexander dedicates himself to demonstrating the eloquence of the French Pulpit.
Today we only read of the work of Bossuet who first appeared in Paris in 1659.
After a brief description of Bossuet's abilities, we are given a number of examples of his preaching from his sermons.
What grabbed me I liked the point that a preacher must be on par with his hearers and even be above them - very difficult in a period of French history where reason reigned with such great thinkers: 'To be truly eloquent, the speaker must feel on a level with his auditors—at times even exercise a kind of dominion over them. The sacred orator, speaking in the name of God, can do this under any government; in the most arbitrary monarchy, he can display the same lofty freedom which the equality of citizens gives to a speaker in the active scenes of a republic. Hence, in a country where no civil freedom was enjoyed, there was an eloquence of the loftiest kind, which long flourished, which was carried to the greatest height, and which is still the object of warm admiration.'
If we are to be the voice of God then we must be above our hearers in some sense and the hearers should feel that it is so.
This is one reason why in my sermons I try to remove most of the first person plural pronouns (we, our, us) and replace them with second person pronouns (you, your). Someone once told my use of 'you' sounded like I was above the hearers and I should stop it, but that is exactly what I wanted.
Next week's reading Conclude 'Eloquence of the French Pulpit'. Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading Ten virgins by Thomas Shepard (Available from Amazon or free here). Read Chapters 6 & 7.
My summary Firstly in Chapter Six Shepard gives us four motives to persuade us to love Christ and be espoused to him: (i) consider the glory of Jesus; (ii) consider that he makes love to you; (iii) consider that all he seeks for is love; (iv) consider what he will do for you, how he will love you, if you will love him.
Secondly we see in Chapter Seven that a man has no power in himself to do any spiritual work, but that he must receive all from Christ.
What grabbed me Good point about how a wife may defile herself: 'Secret defilement is by neglect of private communion with Him; this is whorish in a wife. Here is stronger temptation to neglect private prayer and meditation, partly by want of room, partly by multitudes of businesses, and work, and cares hereabout, that being weary in the day, sleepy at night, busy in the morning, prayer, meditation, daily examination are sent away as Paul from Felix...'
Busyness does not appear to be whoredom, but it is whoredom when it is done at the expense of time spent with the Lord.
Next week's reading Read Chapters 8 & 9.
Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
Required reading City of God by Augustine (available from Amazon or free on the internet, here for example) - Continue Book 21 by reading Chapters 9 to 23. My summary Augustine continues to look at the subject of hell.
Firstly he further examines what it means to burn for eternity - for humans and also for demons.
Then Augustine discusses why eternal punishment should be given for an offence that is committed in a short amount of time. He points out that earthly laws do not equate the time taken to commit the offence with the time taken to punish - rather it is the seriousness of the offence that determines the size of the punishment. And it is the same with sin.
Next Augustine deals with the suggestion that punishment in hell is merely purification, just like discipline purifies in this life.
Then the conclusion of today's reading is a series of short chapters outlining misunderstandings about hell: (i) humans and demons will not experience eternal punishment; (ii) by intercession, saints can save those in hell; (iii) Catholic religion with its sacraments and works of mercy will save people from hell.
Augustine will refute the majority of these claims in next week's reading, but today he once again emphasises that hell is eternal, both for humans and demons.
What grabbed me I liked Augustine's reasoning for why people would suggest an eternal hell is harsh: 'Now the reason why eternal punishment appears harsh and unjust to human sensibilities, is that in this feeble condition of those sensibilities under their condition of mortality man lacks the sensibility of the highest and purest wisdom, the sense which should enable him to feel the gravity of the wickedness in the first act of disobedience.'
If you truly understand how offensive sin is then you would agree that hell must be eternal.
Trouble is we minimise the offensiveness of sin and therefore are offended not by sin, but by the doctrine of hell.
Next week's reading Conclude Book 21 by reading Chapters 24 to 27.
Now it's your turn Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.
