The Stand At The Show

Gerald Hanskamp. Trowel & Sword. Jan/Feb 1973

Preamble: Among other things Trowel and Sword was invaluable for informing the denomination what individual churches were doing in their own areas, thus providing the inspiration for others to follow suit. In this article Rev Gerald Hanskamp, possibly best known for his work with the World Home Bible League, now under the name of Bible League International, tells about the effort of a small group of volunteers who spent three days reaching out to the community at the Geelong Show. The group was led by an ordinary, (read: average but dedicated) man, who spent three days working himself to exhaustion in order to bring the gospel to the people of Geelong. His name was Jack Moritz, and if that surname is not familiar to you you haven’t been paying attention. If Jack could do this anyone can. If you currently have a “Jack Moritz”in your church, write in and tell us about it. We are just as happy to print current stories as we are to print articles from yesteryear.

The Stand At The Show

From certain quarters we have been accused of being evangelism-lazy. Reformed teaching, we are told, makes us that way. Yet according to the Canons of Dort we are to be zealous in going out “to declare and publish the promise to all nations, and to all persons promiscuously and without distinction”.

The evangelism material provided by the World Home Bible League has proved to be a great help in various Reformed churches in their endeavours to reach out, in some cases in conjunction with other churches. This could prove to be a break through.

From the Geelong branch we received the following information:  “This year we have had a WHBL stand at the Geelong Show in October. It was a very worthwhile experience for all who were involved in it. No doubt it took quite some organising before everything was under control. We needed a proper stand with a caravan next to it; an amplifier, a tape-recorder, proper lighting etc. We also had to select messages and hymns to be taped; we needed tracts, bibles, sample lessons, plenty of enrolment cards and so on. Space at the Show had to be hired and the “manning” of the stand to be organised. The Youth Club offered help in painting the signs and banners and in decorating the stand.

The show lasted three days. We met all sorts of people. A young American sailor coming from Sydney showed a keen interest. Although his parents attend an Episcopal Church in the States he himself knew next to nothing of the gospel. He knew about Moses because he had seen the film of the Ten Commandments but of Abraham and Paul he had never heard; but he was eager to listen and to learn and he was very happy with the New Testament we gave him. 

A boy of 14 from one of the sideshows, who could not read or write himself, wanted to buy a New Testament for his sister. A drunk wanted to confess his sins in tears. We encouraged him to do so when sober; but his son enrolled for the bible course.

Altogether 50 people enrolled for the bible study courses; we gave 10 Bibles and 50 New Testaments to people who promised to use them well and further we distributed thousands of tracts and enrolment cards. We were not the only Christian movement represented at the show. The “Brethren” were there and some revivalist or pentecostal groups. Some Mormons worked there too.

But we concentrated on Bible distribution. The Word of God is our weapon. Several members of the church took turns in attending to the stand and we had much help from the young people assisting in all kinds of ways. But we need more support particularly from the men in the church. One member (Mr. J.G. (Jack) Moritz), who did most of the organising and was there every night was dog tired on the Saturday night. When he sat down for a while in the caravan a Christian from a nearby church came to encourage him with a good word about Jesus Christ and His Kingdom.

We definitely hope to do this again, possibly in co-operation with other churches. We found it a very effective way of contacting people and confronting them with God’s Word. Our prayer is that the material we distributed, the New Testaments we gave out and the lessons to which people subscribed may be wonderfully used by God”.

So far the Geelong report. We will be happy to hear from others and their efforts under the WHBL scheme.

GERALD HANSCAMP

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Als Er Nog Vijftig In De Stad Zijn

J. Vander Bom. Trowel & Sword, (De Kleine Krant). November 1974

Preamble: Once again we have for your enjoyment an article from the Kleine Krant written in Dutch by Rev. John Vander Bom . As before it is followed immediately after by an English translation for those who cannot read Dutch.

Als Er Nog Vijftig In De Stad Zijn

Dit wordt een kort verhaal over de predikantenkonferentie in Wollongong, die dus toch is door-gegaan. De bedoeling van de vijftig in de titel hierboven kunt u aan’t slot vinden. Ze heeft niets uit te staan met het getal van de konferentie-deelnemers, al waren dat er, welgeteld ook vijftig: 31 pastores, waarvan er 19 hun betere helften hadden meegebracht. ‘t Was heel jammer dat het door de hoge kosten onmogelijk is geweest voor de bewoners van het verre westen om hun vrouwen mee te brengen. Want opnieuw hebben wij ontdekt, hoe broodnodig én vruchtbaar die paar konferentiedagen kunnen zijn om de band en verstandhouding te bewaren.

Want wij hebben wel een uitzonderlijke verscheidenheid in onze gelederen. En dat is mooi en boeiend, maar kan ook spoedig een debet-post worden als wij elkander niet meer kennen. Voorzitter R.O. Zorn kon behalve een paar afgestudeerden van het College in Geelong ook drie nieuwe gezichten uit den vreemde verwelkomen: ds Jack Postma die in de Verenigde Staten tot de reformatorische positie is gekomen, de van Ceylon afkomstige ds Winston Gauder, die in Grand Rapids heeft gestudeerd, en Dr Noel Weeks, uit de presbyteriaanse kerk, die ofschoon hij niet in de aktieve ambtelijke dienst staat, ook een belangrijk aandeel heeft gehad in de diskussies over de prediking en de praktische vragen van pastoraat en psychologie. Van de hoogleraren van Geelong was alleen professor Woudstra aanwezig, die ons erg geholpen heeft op het terrein van jeugd en evangelie. Zelf vertelde hij dat hij zich op dat gebied nooit zo thuis voelde als in het Oude Testament. Jammer genoeg moesten de andere hooggeleerden, ook professor Harman verstek laten gaan. Verder hadden wij deze keer geen gasten, en ook helaas geen vertegenwoordiger van de Nieuw Zeelandse schapenweide.

Wij hadden geen gasten, maar werden zelf wel met onderscheid en als eregasten behandeld. 

Fantastisch, welke mooie vergaderruimtes heeft die kerk van Wollongong ter beschikking! Er was ook een prima verwarming. En de dames der gemeente verzorgden iedere dag een kostelijke lunch. Maar aan het Wollongongse strand werd ons door de jeugd der kerk een barbecue aangeboden, waarvan veteranen als Stuyvesant of Van Raalte gesmuld zouden hebben! En tijdens een van de maaltijden in het prachtige Illawarra bejaardentehuis (waar onze kerk tien units beschikbaar heeft — ja, wie hapt?) werden wij aangenaam bezig door een gitaar trio, ook van de gemeente.

Onze eigen muzikale prestaties werden ruimschoots beloond op de laatste avond, een ontmoeting met de gemeente, die klonk als een klok. U begrijpt het wel: ds Arent de Graaf, ook in de kathedraal van Wollongong geen onbekende, kan geen rust vinden voordat hij iedereen aan het zingen heeft gekregen. Wie had ooit gedroomd van een predikanten-koor? Hij liet ons zingen in alle tongen van mensen en engelen. Nu mag natuurlijk een Duitse, Latijnse or Hebreeuwse tekst voor een dominee geen bezwaar zijn. En zijn vrouw zingt wel mee. . .  Maar het wordt moeilijker als je geen noten kunt lezen. Of, nog erger, als je niet kunt zingen! En toch zongen wij allemaal! Geneefse melodieen, canons, avondgebeden. . . Geen wonder dat de stemming zo goed bleef. Want wij waren heus niet samengekomen in een oase van onbezorgdheid. Maar in ons gezang deden wij belijdenis van wat voor ons allen het hoogste en heerlijkste is. En dan verdwijnen de moeilijkheden, en glijden ook de zorgen en het verdriet van ons af. Zoals een vliegtuig dat omhoogt stijgt de wolken en de bevuilde aarde onder zich mag laten. 

Want natuurlijk, wij waren niet met vakantie. Op de konferentie hadden wij tal van vragen en strijdpunten meegebracht. Of dacht u, dat wij buiten de strijdende kerk konden gaan staan? Maar wij weten ook dat strijd en gebed de lofzang niet uitsluiten. In het strijdperk van dit leven hebben wij immers Gods eigen Woord meegekregen. En iedere dag begon terecht met een tijd van bijbelstudie. En iedere namiddag hadden wij onze gebedstijd.

Het programma was deze keer uitermate praktisch. Prediking en pastorale zorg waren de hoofd-punten.

In een duidelijk exposé over Bijbelse Prediking, aan de hand van de waardevolle studie van de Amerikaanse Sid Greidanus (Sola Scriptura, dissertatie Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam) bracht ds Pellicaan de bespreking op gang over een onderwerp dat de kerk tot het einde der eeuwen zal boeien. Want door de prediking van het Woord is de kerk gesticht, en heeft zij zich verbreid. En het behaagt de Heer, schrijft Paulus, door de dwaasheid van de prediking mensen te behouden!

De prediker is echter geen automaat, die klaar is met het opdreunen van een aantal gemeen-plaatsen en bijbelteksten. Spurgeon gromde tegen zijn studenten, dat ze beter een christelijk draaiorgel konden kopen: dan kun je afwisselen met vijf verschillende deunen!

Maar wij kunnen ook te veel vertrouwen hebben in onze eigen vindingrijkheid of welsprekendheid. Het is onmogelijk, dat een prediker de indruk achterlaat dat hij een machtig spreker is, en tegelijk dat Jezus Christus alléén groot is, en machtig om te redden en te helpen. Er is een welsprekendheid waarvoor de hemel ons bewaren mag. “De Here was niet in de stormwind.” Wij moeten wel goed beseffen dat de preekstoel al evenmin aan de prediker toebehoort als het doopvont en de avondmaalstafel.

De schrijver van dit verslag had het voorrecht, op de laatste morgen van de konferentie dit thema van de prediking te mogen samenvatten. Het is onze geweldige opdracht, heerlijk en adem-benemend, dat wij aan mensen de stem des Heren mogen doen horen. Zo, dat zij achteraf kunnen zeggen ik heb het zelf uit Zijnen mond gehoord — ik heb vanmorgen de Heer horen spreken! Natuurlijk kan alleen de Heilige Geest deze wondere kommunikatie tot stand brengen. Maar dit betekent stellig geen premie op gemakzucht.

Op de konferentie hebben wij ook een heel gesprek gewijd aan het leven in de pastorie. Mrs. Del MacFarlane gaf de inleiding. Maar in de bespreking die volgde kregen de dames slechts een magere kans. En iemand zei, dat dat maar niet op ‘t bandje moest komen. Want dat was niet voor het nageslacht bestemd! De mannen namen natuurlijk de leiding in de bespreking — Wat is de funktie van de domineesvrouw? Is zij een vrouw in het ambt, hoewel onbevestigd? Ja zeker: zij draagt het algemene ambt, zij is een van de velen in het priesterschap van alle gelovigen!

Bisschop John Reid kwam uit Sydney over om ons te doen meeleven in het onlangs gehouden Internationale Congres te Lausanne, over de Evangelisatie van de Wereld. Professor Runia heeft er in een vorig nummer van Trowel and Sword iets over verteld. En op een bandje konden wij luisteren naar een bijbelstudie van het congres, door de bekende Rev John Stott van Londen. En ook was ds Henk de Waard op een bandje aanwezig, om ons te betrekken in de jongste ontwikkelingen in zijn werk.

Een andere bezoeker was de pas geemeriteerde Rev Neil MacLeod uit Hurstville. De mensen van de eerste generatie emigranten in West Australia herinneren zich hem nog wel! Schots en vurig! Hij gaf een inleiding op de situatie en verwachtingen in de presbyteriaanse kerk.

En wat zal ik nog meer vertellen? Professor Woudstra gaf een leerzame uiteenzetting over het leerprogramma van de kerk, voor jong en oud, binnen- en buiten-kerkelijk. Daar hoop ik nog wel eens op terug te komen. Van ds Keith Warren kregen we een boeiende, sprankelende boekbespreking op de twee veelbesproken Toronto-boeken, Out of Concern for the Church, en: With all the King’s Men. De algemene reaktie op deze boeken, en met name ook van hen die geen hollandse, vechtlustige traditie achter zich hebben, was: Zo Niet! Deze boeken, met hun arrogante, irritante radikale toon hebben onbedoeld een onberekenbare schade toegebracht aan de schone zaak van de christelijke wijsbegeerte. Met het verdrietige resultaat dat een groot en charmant geleerde als Dooijeweerd (lid van de Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen!) door buitenstaanders wordt gedoodverfd als een van de domme radikalen.

Wij hadden een seminarie over moeilijke pastorale gevallen. Met een bespreking van de boeken van Jay Adams. De grote vraag was, of hij met zijn direkte-bijbelse methode geen open deuren intrapt. En of wij de psychiater zo gemakkelijk en straffeloos kunnen negeren als hij doet. Mensen als Bavinck en Brillenburg Wurth zijn zo veel voorzichtiger, en onderkenden toch heus wel de gevaren van de moderne psychologie.

En dan hebben wij ook nog even gesproken over kinderkommunie, het werk van de ouderling en het huisbezoek, de Evangelische Alliantie en het Missie-jaar 1975.

Maar U zult wel hebben opgemerkt, dat ‘t volle, drukke dagen, en korte nachten waren. De tijd, het geld werd goed besteed. En wij zijn dankbaar naar huis gegaan. Het was goed, en brood-nodig dat wij konden samen spreken over de blijvende opdracht van de Bediening van het Woord des Heren aan mensen van onze tijd. Ja, wij waren wel heel erkentelijk jegens de kerkeraden en partikuliere vrienden die dit samenkomen in het jaar van de inflatie hebben mogelijk gemaakt. En wij verwachten dat de

. vruchten van het samenzijn zullen groeien in de gemeentes!

Wij weten, het is zeker niet gemakkelijk om kerk des Heren te zijn, en te blijven in deze eeuw. Wij denken aan het woord van de apostel: van buiten strijd, van binnen vrees. Maar wij mogen ons tevens verzekerd houden van de vele beloften van Hem, Die heerst, ook temidden van de vijanden.

Het is een moedgevend evenement voor ons geweest, dat wij op weg naar de konferentie een zondag in Canberra, de dure en deftige federale hoofdstad konden doorbrengen. Het is ruim twintig jaar geleden dat ik daar een zondag had doorgebracht. En toch herinner ik ‘t me als de dag van gisteren. Canberra was toen nog lang niet aan de twintig duizend inwoners toe. (Nu zijn er bijna twee honderd duizend). lk kwam er nog weleens op country bezoek. En wij hadden besloten, er een zondagse kerkdienst te organiseren. Wat een enthousiasme, toen wij er ruim zeventig bezoekers aan-troffen!

Nooit vergeet ik het gesprek dat ik na de dienst met een veertigjarige huisvader had. Dominee, zo begon hij, wat een geweldige dienst. Wie had ooit zo’n opkomst verwacht? Want, weet u wel — zo ging hij verder, weet u dat het hier Sodom is? Het is hier een verschrikkelijk land. En ik ga hier weg. Om mijn kinderen ga ik hier weg!

Toen heb ik het mijne gezegd. Als hij inderdaad van mening was, dat hij in Sodom woonde. moest hij maar heel vlug de gevolgtrekking maken. Niet langer rondhangen. Maar wegvluchten om zijn leven te redden. En niet achteromzien.

Terwijl er toch naar mijn mening iets tegenstrijdigs was in het feit dat hij nooit gedroomd had dat zulke kerkdiensten hier mogelijk waren. Dus toch géén Sodom? Als er immers nog vijftig recht-vaardigen in de stad zijn die de Heer oprecht willen zoeken dan is Australia nog niet verloren! Zouden wij dan niet liever beginnen om de Heer hier te dienen met een eenparige schouder?

En nu is de kerk in Canberra er gekomen! Ach, de geschiedenis van de kleine groep in de betoverende hoofdstad is ook weer een geschiedenis van veel verdriet en zorgen. Maar er zijn de vijftig rechtvaardigen in de stad. En daarom breken wij niet op, en laten wij de moed niet zinken. En is dit ook niet het beeld van, en de vertroosting voor ons kerkelijk leven in zijn totaliteitsaspekt? Zolang er nog vijftig rechtvaardigen zijn. . . zolang is er het Woord van Hem met Wie wij mogen pleiten! “lk zal de Stad niet verdoen! “

(J) VANDERBOM

If There Are Still Fifty In The City

This will be a short story about the ministers’ conference in Wollongong, which did go ahead after all. The purpose of the fifty in the title above can be found at the end. It has nothing to do with the number of conference participants, even though there were fifty – 31 pastors, of whom 19 had brought their better halves. It was a great pity that the high costs made it impossible for the residents of the far west to bring their wives. Because once again we have discovered how essential and fruitful those few conference days can be to maintain the bond and understanding, because we do have an exceptional diversity in our ranks.

And that is beautiful and fascinating, but can also quickly become a debit item if we no longer know each other. Chairman R.O. Zorn was able to welcome, besides a few graduates of the College in Geelong, three new faces from abroad: Rev. Jack Postma, who came to the Reformed position in the United States, Rev. Winston Gauder, who came from Ceylon and studied in Grand Rapids, and Dr. Noel Weeks, from the Presbyterian Church, who, although not in active official service, also played an important part in the discussions about preaching and the practical questions of pastoral care and psychology. Of the professors from Geelong, only Professor Woudstra was present, who helped us a lot in the field of youth and gospel. He himself said that he never felt as at home in that area as in the Old Testament. Unfortunately, the other professors, including Professor Harman, had to forgo attendance. This time we had no other guests, and unfortunately no representative from the New Zealand sheep pastures either.

We had no guests, but we were treated with distinction and as guests of honour.

The beautiful meeting rooms that church in Wollongong has at its disposal are fantastic! There was also excellent entertainment. And the ladies of the congregation provided a delicious lunch every day. But on the Wollongong beach we were offered a barbecue by the youth of the church, which veterans like Stuyvesant or Van Raalte would have enjoyed! And during one of the meals in the beautiful Illawarra retirement home (where our church has ten units available — yes, who will bite?) we were pleasantly entertained by a guitar trio, also from the congregation.

Our musical achievements were amply rewarded on the last evening; a meeting with the congregation, which sounded like a bell. You can imagine: Reverend Arent de Graaf, also no stranger in the cathedral of Wollongong, can find no peace before he has got everyone singing. Who would have ever dreamed of a choir of ministers? He let us sing in all the tongues of men and angels. Now, of course, a German, Latin or Hebrew text may not be a problem for a minister. And his wife does sing along. . . But it becomes more difficult if you can’t read notes. Or, even worse, if you can’t sing! And yet we all sang! Genevan melodies, canons, evening prayers. . . No wonder the mood remained so good. Because we certainly hadn’t come together in an oasis of carefreeness. But in our singing we made a confession of what is highest and most glorious for all of us. And then the difficulties disappear, and the worries and sorrows also slide away from us. As an airplane that rises upwards may leave the clouds and the polluted earth beneath it.

Because, of course, we weren’t on holiday. We had brought numerous questions and points of contention to the conference. Or did you think that we could stand outside the militant church? But we also know that battle and prayer do not exclude praise. After all, in the arena of this life we have been given God’s own Word. And every day rightly began with a time of Bible study. And every afternoon we had our time of prayer. The program was extremely practical this time. Preaching and pastoral care were the main points. In a clear exposé on Biblical Preaching, based on the valuable study of the American Sid Greidanus (Sola Scriptura, dissertation Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam), Rev. Pellicaan initiated the discussion on a subject that will fascinate the church until the end of the ages. For through the preaching of the Word the church was founded, and it has spread. And it pleases the Lord, writes Paul, to save people through the foolishness of preaching!

The preacher, however, is not an automaton who is finished with reciting a number of platitudes and Bible texts. Spurgeon growled at his students that they would be better off buying a Christian organ: then you can alternate between five different tunes!

But we can also have too much confidence in our own ingenuity or eloquence. It is impossible for a preacher to give the impression that he is a mighty speaker, and at the same time that Jesus Christ alone is great, and mighty to save and help. There is an eloquence that heaven may preserve us from. “The Lord was not in the whirlwind.” ‘ We must realise that the pulpit belongs to the preacher no more than the baptismal font and the communion table.

The writer of this report had the privilege of summarising this theme of the sermon on the last morning of the conference. It is our great task, glorious and breathtaking, that we may make people hear the voice of the Lord. So that they can always say, I have heard it from His mouth myself — I have heard the Lord speak this morning. Of course, only the Holy Spirit can bring about this wonderful communication. But this certainly does not mean a premium on laziness.

At the conference we also devoted a whole sermon to life in the parsonage. Mrs. Del MacFarlane gave the introduction. But in the discussion that followed, the ladies were given only a meager chance. And someone said that this should not be recorded on tape. Because that was not for posterity intended! The men naturally took the lead in the discussion — What is the function of the minister’s wife? Is she a woman in office, although unconfirmed? Yes, certainly: she holds the general office, she is one of many in the priesthood of all believers!

Bishop John Reid came over from Sydney to let us participate in the recently held International Congress in Lausanne, on the Evangelisation of the World. Professor Runia told something about it in a previous issue of Trowel and Sword. And on a tape we could listen to a Bible study of the congress, by the well-known Rev John Stott of London. And also on a tape was Rev. Henk DeWaard, to involve us in the latest developments in his work. Another visitor was the recently retired Rev. Neil MacLeod from Hurstville. The people of the first generation of emigrants in West Australia still remember him! Scottish and fiery! He gave an introduction to the situation and expectations in the Presbyterian church.

And what more shall I tell you? Professor Woudstra gave an instructive presentation on the church’s curriculum, for young and old, inside and outside the church. I hope to return to that sometime. From Rev. Keith Warren we had a fascinating, sparkling book review of the two much-discussed Toronto books, Out of Concern for the Church, and: Will all the King’s Men. The general reaction to these books, and especially from those who do not have a Dutch, combative tradition behind them, was: Not at all! These books, with their arrogant, irritating radical tone, have unintentionally caused incalculable damage to the fine cause of Christian philosophy. With the sad result that a great and charming scholar like Dooijeweerd (member of the Royal Academy of Sciences!) is being dismissed by outsiders as one of the stupid radicals.

We had a seminar on difficult pastoral cases. With a review of the books of Jay Adams. The big question was whether he was not kicking in open doors with his direct-biblical method. And whether we can ignore the psychiatrist as easily and with impunity as he does. People like Bavinck and Brillenburg Wurth are so much more cautious, and did recognise the dangers of modern psychology.

And then we also briefly discussed children’s communion, the work of the elder and home visits, the Evangelical Alliance and the Mission Year 1975.

But you will have noticed that these were full, busy days and short nights. The time and money were well spent. And we went home gratefully. It was good and necessary that we could talk together about the continuing assignment of the Ministry of the Word of the Lord to people of our time. Yes, we were very grateful to the church councils and private friends who made this gathering possible in the year of inflation. And we expect that the fruits of the gathering will grow in the congregations!

We know that it is certainly not easy to be and remain the church of the Lord in this century. We think of the words of the apostle: without conflict, within fear. But we may also be assured of the many promises of Him who reigns, even in the midst of enemies.

It was an encouraging event for us that we were able to spend a Sunday in Canberra, the expensive and posh federal capital, on our way to the conference. It is more than twenty years since I spent a Sunday there. And yet I remember it as if it were yesterday. Canberra was then not even close to twenty thousand inhabitants. (Now there are almost two hundred thousand). I still visited it occasionally on country visits. And we had decided to organise a Sunday church service there. What enthusiasm, when we found more than seventy visitors.

I will never forget the conversation I had with a forty-year-old father after the service. Reverend, he began, what a great service. Who would have ever expected such a turnout? Because, you know — he continued, do you know that this is Sodom? It is a terrible country here. And I am leaving here. For the sake of my children I am leaving here!

Then I said what I had to say. If he really thought that he lived in Sodom, he should quickly draw the conclusion. No longer hang around. But flee to save his life. And not look back. While in my opinion there was something contradictory in the fact that he had never dreamed that such church services were possible here. So, no Sodom after all? If there are still fifty righteous people in the city who sincerely want to seek the Lord, then Australia is not lost yet! Would we not rather begin to serve the Lord here with a united shoulder?

And now the church in Canberra has come! Ah, the history of the small group in the enchanting capital is also a history of much sorrow and worry. But there are the fifty righteous in the city. And therefore we do not break up, and we do not lose courage. And is this not also the image of, and the consolation for our church life in its totality-aspect? As long as there are still fifty righteous. . . as long as there is the Word of Him with Whom we may plead! “I will not destroy the City!”

VANDERBOM

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

A Woman’s View On Ordination

Diane Brummel Bloem. Trowel & Sword. August 1975.

From: The Banner.

Preamble: As you can tell by the date of this article, this debate has been going on for a long time and would seem to be no closer to being resolved. For the most part there seems to be an uneasy truce between the opposing view points, but still the debate continues. While it often seems to be a male versus female issue (these days also complicated by the “trans” debate), there are men and women on both sides of the divide. The following article gives one woman’s view on the ordination of women. Let it be said that there will be those that agree and those that disagree with her arguments. To us the sad fact is that most people in the Reformed churches are so entrenched in their own opinions that they will never accept the viewpoint of the other side. Also scripture itself would seem to be sufficiently ambiguous to allow a case to be made both for and against. And so, the debate goes on.

A Woman’s View On Ordination

I am a woman speaking out against the current trend in the church to ordain women to the ministry. 

If you are a man, before you say, “Aha, the women are finally getting some sense,” let me ask you to take a few minutes to consider some ideas with understanding and Christian love.

If you are a woman, do not think that I am betraying you. I believe that I have been given some answers and some challenges. Please consider them with me.

Already as a little girl considering career opportunities I wondered why the ministry of the gospel was stressed as an option for boys and not for girls.

After all, I loved to study the Bible, to analyse church doctrines and church history. I had an intense love for people, joy and confidence in my own salvation – all these plus a gift for public speaking. Why, I wondered, would God give talents and a desire to use them to one of His children and then say, “No, I don’t need or want your service because I made you a woman?”

These questions did not shadow my life with sadness. I had loving parents, teachers, friends who encouraged me to serve the Lord in every aspect of life. I was happy. The Lord gave me a wonderful Christian husband, precious children, a home filled with love. I felt a little sorry for men that they could not know the joys a happy Christian homemaker revels in. My family encouraged me to continue my education and God called me to a thrilling ministry in the church. I began studying and serving as Bible leader for women’s societies in several of our churches.

Then came the Women’s Liberation Movement. Magazine articles insistently and insidiously

asked me if I was really fulfilled. I began to wonder. My glow of happiness was tarnished. I began wondering why the institutional church used so few of women’s talents. Was it because the chauvinistic consistory felt that women were inferior to men? I began to bristle. When a few ministers were reportedly hurt because the women’s group in their congregations wanted women leaders I was bit indignant.

I needed answers from God, so I turned to His Word and with women’ groups in four churches began to study the role of the Christian woman. What beautiful answers we were given!

First of all we saw that men and women are equal before God – equally sinners and equally saved. Then we began to explore the unique purposes and tasks God had for men and for women. We saw the beauty of order He established in delegating authority to the man as the head and to the woman as his co-worker.

We looked at the criticisms the women’s libbers were firing at the Bible, blaming it for our so-called inferior state. We found that, rather than illustrating the suppression of women, Bible history demonstrates the opposite. The daughters of Zelophehad pleaded for the right to own property and God Himself granted it. Miriam was one of the highest leaders of Israel; Deborah was a judge; Huldah was a prophetess – chosen to reveal the word of the Lord. The picture of the virtuous woman in Proverbs 31 is of a fulfilled woman, a homemaker and a career woman.

In the New Testament we were thrilled to see how Jesus ignored the social customs of His day and taught women as well as men. He encouraged Mary in her desire to learn spiritual things; He revealed Himself as Messiah to the woman at the well. Paul stressed equal rights for women in the marriage relationship (I Cor. 7:5) and time and again showed his warm appreciation for the work of women in the church. We learned that Peter shared his ministry with his wife (I Cor. 9:5) and Paul seems a bit envious. We learned that the gifts of the Spirit were given to women as well as to men.

And although we found numerous instances in both Testaments in which the gift of prophecy was given to women, we did not find that God called them to the office of bishop or elder. Their calling was directed more to working as the complement of their office-bearing husbands or as a leader of their fellow-women. More important than all of this to me was I Corinthians 11:3, “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” Why are Christian women chafing at the idea of subjection when Christ, our Saviour and example, though claiming equality with God (John 5:18) was willing to put all His glory aside for the privilege of serving?

Philippians 2:5 and 6 says it all, ‘Have this mind among yourselves, which you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men’. I asked myself, “Am I better than my Lord?” If there is this beautiful order of subjection in the Trinity, reflected in the order of authority and subjection on earth, why should this grain of discontentment be harboured in my mind? Can it be that the Women’s Liberation Movement is blinding the eyes of Christian women to the calling to serve? Is the devil using this in the same way he used the piece of fruit with Eve?

Why is it that one denomination after another is bowing under pressure to ordain women? Is the Lord calling these women to serve as ministers because men have failed, or are women grasping for this calling to honour themselves and their sex? Jesus’ warning comes to us as it did to His disciples (Matt. 23:11,12), “He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”

If you are a woman, consider the many fulfilling ministries to which God may have called you. You may be called to be an understanding Bible leader, a sharing student in a study class, a loving Christian neighbour or co-worker, a church-school teacher, a missionary, a Calvinette leader, a minister of mercy, a minister of encouragement, a prayer warrior, an understanding listener, a missionary union leader or supporter, a Christian writer or editor, a complement and support to your husband. The unique calling to the ministry of Christian motherhood cannot be lumped with all other womanly callings. It is too special and too necessary and too endangered. It is a woman’s crowning calling.

All of these callings and the hundred more you can think of are callings to serve the Lord with all of your talents, education, intelligence, insight, understanding, and love. Each is a worthy challenge and in no way inferior to the unique tasks given to men. Do not disparage your calling. God made you a woman because He had special service in mind for you.

If you are a man, please ask yourself if you are in any way responsible for the discontent brought about by the Women’s Liberation Movement. Are Christian women dissatisfied with their calling and looking enviously at yours because you really consider them to be inferior? Do you realise and appreciate the special faithful work women do to keep our Christian lives growing spiritually as well as physically? Do Christian women know that you honour and appreciate their gifts and callings? Are you encouraging them to use their talents? Or do you suppress them because you are more interested in exalting yourself than in being a servant to your Master?

Perhaps all of us, men and women, must experience a renewed calling to serve one another. After giving advice to husbands and wives Peter concluded, “Finally, all of you, have unity of spirit, sympathy, love of the brethren, a tender heart and a humble mind” (I Peter. 3:8,9).

DIANE BRUMMEL BLOEM

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Rumour Round The College

Rev. Bill Deenick. Trowel & Sword. November 1974

Preamble: I must begin by declaring my own interest in the events described in the following article. I was a student at the RTC at the time that these events took place and was recorded in the minutes of a student meeting as the lone voice opposing an action by the students which sought to petition the Board of Directors regarding the teaching of Dr. Woudstra. Revisiting this article may well be seen by some as reopening old wounds, however this is not our intention. Its purpose is twofold. Firstly it is to remind us that the history of the CRCA, and by extension the RTC, has not always been plain sailing and that there have been many bumps along the way. More importantly, it is to remind us that the RTC does not belong the the CRCA but was set up as an independent institution for the training of men and women in the Reformed tradition; this being a first step in the eventual establishment of a Christian/Reformed University. In many ways it has also served as a model in the setting up of Christian schools around the country. (Bert)

Rumour Round The College

In the circle of its friends and supporters the Reformed Theological College is very much a topic of discussion and controversy at present; and not for the best of reasons. Many have asked questions; others have expressed concern and disappointment; some confess to being very angry.

The issue that has caused the commotion is a decision by the Board of Directors (BofD) to terminate the professorship of Dr. S. Woudstra. Dr. Woudstra has been loaned to the college by the Christian Reformed Board of Foreign Missions, and after having been in charge of the O.T. department since late 1972 he has been lecturing systematic theology since the beginning of this year. Since T&S has been in close fellowship with the college ever since its establishment it seems proper that we should comment on these events.

The BofD has published a statement on its decision, a copy of which the sessions and the individual members of the association will have received.

Before anything else, however, a few points should be made clear concerning the character of the college as an independent institution and concerning its relationship to the churches that co-operate in it.

1. The R.T.C. is an independent college; in fact it is the theological faculty of what is hoped to be in God’s time a Christian University. It was always meant to be independent. If the Australian Reformed Churches had wanted to establish a church-controlled seminary they could have tried, and might have succeeded, to do so. But they never did, and they never wanted it that way. The first president of the BofD. was a minister of the Reformed Presbyterian Church and from the start the principal of the College has been Prof. A. Barkley, also a minister in that church. The college always hoped to attract a wide range of students and when last year the (Free) Presbyterian Church of Eastern Australia decided to co-operate within the RTC and use it as the institution for the training of its ministers we were happy not only because this would mean an expansion of the college community but also because we saw in it a further step forward in Reformed ecumenicity, i.e. in making the RES fellowship between the Reformed Presbyterian Church, the Free Church and the Reformed Churches more meaningful.

The reformed ecumenical character of the RTC has been an essential aspect of the institution from the very start. The men who originally established the college were not narrow minded men. They saw the vision of a reformed theological training centre that could serve the orthodox reformed and presbyterian community in this country.

It is clear from the more recent history of the college that the men now responsible for its direction are not prepared to deviate from that policy. It has been firmly established in the constitution and the college has been blessed that way.

Those in reformed circles who would want to reverse that direction and would prefer a nice little seminary of our own with half a dozen students and one or two professors whom we could press to our heart and call our very own, have the right to make a proposition to that effect in the councils of the church, and the church could then decide upon it; but they must be well aware of the consequences of such a policy. Other Reformed and Presbyterian Churches would have the right to do the same and soon we could boast of three to seven miniature seminaries in this country all claiming to represent the Reformed Faith. Our dividedness would be shamefully confirmed by it. The men who established the college never wanted that and T&S will never support it.

Naturally, co-operation in a college like the RTC means certain sacrifices but the measure of unity that we have in the college is worth these sacrifices.

That there is a place and a future for this type of co-operation and for this type of college is clear from experiences also in other parts of the world. Elsewhere in this issue we publish a few RES news items, that deserve to be taken note of, concerning the Westminster Seminary at Philadelphia and the Reformed Theological College at Jackson, Miss. (where Dr. G. VanGroningen works).

2. That the RTC is an independent college also means that we must respect the authority that the institution has in its own affairs. The men appointed to exercise that authority are bound by the constitution under which they have been appointed. In the matter of professorial appointments and doctrinal supervision the churches co-operating in the RTC have (through their synodically appointed deputies) certain rights, privileges and obligations, stipulated in the constitution; but the final decision rests with the BofD. It is quite out of the question that local sessions or individual members of the association could have a say in such appointments. The evaluation of a professor’s qualifications (academically and otherwise), of his place in and his contribution to the college and of his doctrinal standing within the RTC is not the responsibility of any local church or any individual. It is the responsibility of the BofD which receives advice from church representatives and from the faculty.

In Dr. Woudstra’s case this means that the final decision re his professorship at the RTC is no one’s responsibility but that of the board.

3. One more question comes up in this connection. How far reaches the validity of a pronouncement by the BofD concerning a man’s orthodoxy? Obviously it has validity within the context of the RTC, but in the church it cannot have any authority. Yet, a man’s reputation in the church could be severely damaged by it. He stands accused before his case has been dealt with properly in the councils of the church. It seems necessary then that at this point (as well as at others) the constitution of the RTC be looked into carefully.

The evaluation of the work of a professor or a lecturer is properly within the jurisdiction of the BofD; and many different aspects of his work, also its doctrinal aspect, will come up for examination. But the authority to make (and to publish) a verdict on a man’s orthodoxy can (it seems to me) never rest with a non-ecclesiastical body. The present board has acted wholly within the limits of the constitution, but the constitution may well need revision at this point.

As far as Dr. Woudstra is concerned good order and fairness require that the church holds him innocent until the church finds him guilty if it finds him guilty. In what manner the church should act in his case is to be decided upon by the classis of the Reformed Churches in Victoria.

4. In reformed circles the question has been asked what in the present circumstances has been left of the (Dutch) Reformed contribution to the college. At this point many feel deeply disappointed and some refer cynically to the RTC’s finances and properties as the only contribution still expected from their side.

Understandable as this reaction may be, it is not fair to ignore the fact that the real reason for our troubles is the theological confusion in which the (Dutch orientated) Reformed community finds itself. This is not the mistake of the Reformed Presbyterians or the Free Presbyterians but of the Reformed theologians (in the Dutch tradition) themselves. That the many and consistent efforts by the BofD to attract Reformed theologians, suited for a small college of the character of  the RTC and willing to come, have been so unsuccessful has most certainly not been the mistake of the board or of anyone else connected with the college.

At the invitation of the Christian Reformed Mission Board Dr. Woudstra was prepared to come and teach here. For them it was not an easy decision to make. For us it was an answer to prayer. That his teaching and his position at the college have run into the present difficulties is a distressing disappointment for all and every one in the RTC; but it is not unrelated to the general state of uncertainty in (Dutch orientated) Reformed theology, for which no one in the Presbyterian world can be blamed and in which we in Australia do not want to be involved.

5. On the personal level the whole affair has caused very deep discouragement and bewilderment to Dr. and Mrs. Woudstra. In different ways they have become the victims of mistakes made in the College community. All this is the more disappointing since Dr. Woudstra had come to love his work here; while in the church his person and his ministry found ready acceptance.

6. Can the difficulties still be solved without dividing the college or jeopardising its doctrinal integrity? In order to answer that question we would have to know all the details and circumstances. But that is not really our business. It is the board’s business.

The church’s business is to maintain its own doctrinal honesty and its unity; and, in this case, to see to it that justice is done to Dr. Woudstra re. his standing in the church.

Finally, through experiences like these we discover again that even with the best of intentions and with mutual love and respect we do not necessarily solve theological problems and that the welfare of a theological college is not safe in the hands of theologians, deputies or directors but only in the hand of God our Saviour.

BILL DEENICK

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

Ten Years Of Trowel And Sword

Dr. K. Runia. Trowel & Sword. October 1964

Preamble: When we first saw this article it seemed like a good idea to save it for our own tenth anniversary – a mere eight and a half years down the track. This begged the question, Will the Lord grant us another eight and a half years just so that we could print this article? So here it is. An honest appraisal of what had been achieved so far; a desire for continual improvement, and an assessment of how invaluable T&S was, not only to members in the Reformed Churches but to a growing number of subscribers from outside the denomination. Trowel and Sword continued for another forty-six years. One might say a good innings. And yet it was, and is, also sad that it had to end. What have we lost? We believe, a great deal. We continue to hope that it can yet be resurrected in some form. We fear that if it can not, then it is not beyond the realms of possibility that the day may come that the whole denomination will go the same way. In the meantime, we will continue revisiting articles from the past with the weekly TSR, outlining the hopes, beliefs, aspirations and drive of a past generation of believers and their leaders.

Ten Years Of Trowel And Sword

The present issue is the first of Volume XI. That means that we have completed ten years of ‘Trowel and Sword’. We shall not try to give a survey of the history of our magazine (perhaps there will be an opportunity for this later on), but we would rather express our gratefulness to the Lord for His blessings bestowed upon this labour. In many respects it is surprising that ‘Trowel and Sword’ has continued to exist and even managed to grow, through all vicissitudes. And we can only say with the Psalmist: “Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory, for the sake of thy steadfast love and thy faithfulness” (Ps.115:1).

There can be no doubt that a denominational magazine is of great importance for a church. It is one of the ties that bind us together, It provides means of communication which do not exist otherwise. It gives possibilities of instruction which a local paper can never supply. I think I may say that in the course of these ten years ‘ Trowel and Sword’ has obtained a firm and familiar place in our church life.

But the importance of our magazine exceeds the bounds of our own churches. In the first place, there is the slowly growing number of subscribers not belonging to our Reformed Churches. In the second place, there is the factor of exchange subscriptions. Editors of other papers receive our magazine and read it, as appears from quotations from ‘Trowel and Sword’ in their papers. Occasionally one finds news and articles from ‘Trowel and Sword’ reproduced in such papers as ‘Centraal Weekblad’ (The Netherlands),

‘De Wachter’ and ‘ The Banner’ (U.S.A.), Church and Nation (Canada), The Irish Evangelical, and others.

When we mention these things, we do not mean to say that we have already reached our goal. In honest truth, ‘Trowel and Sword’ is still imperfect in many respects. Much can and must be improved. The editorial committee is aware of this and it is constantly trying to find ways and means for these improvements. One of the great obstacles is, of course, lack of finance. At the moment we can just manage, financially, but if we want to do more, we need more subscribers. We would ask all our readers to help us by recommending our paper to others, both inside and outside our churches. Please, do not throw your old copies in the waste paper basket, but pass them on to others, The printed word is still one of the most influential means for propaganda (sic).

In the meantime we hope to go on, doing our utmost to make our paper interesting and relevant. We cannot show our thankfulness for the blessings of the past better than by doing our best in the present and working hard for the future. May the Lord bless our efforts and enable us more and more to make ‘Trowel and Sword’ what it wants to be: A periodical for the EDIFICATION and DEFENCE of the REFORMED, PRESBYTERIAN FAITH AND LIVE in Australia and New Zealand.

K. Runia

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

Worship As Dialogue

Bill van Schie. Trowel & Sword. March 2003

Preamble: Last week, despite our “tongue-in-cheek” description of the approach of many people to attending a church service, we learned from Bill that attending a church service is serious business. How serious? Imagine the following scenario. The last day has arrived and all people have been raised from the dead and been joined by those who were still alive at the time of Christ’s second coming. All have been called before the throne of God. Are you rejoicing or are you terrified at what is about to take place? Now wind the clock back to the present. Same scenario. You are entering your place of worship – entering into the presence of God. Is your attitude one of deep reverence and respect or more a casual one of: “Well, I’ve done done church for another week. Now I can go out and enjoy myself and do what I want?” It boils down to this: Is God real for you?

Worship As Dialogue

Last month we saw that worship, to be truly worship according to the Biblical definition of the word worship and following the meaning of the English word itself, must always be God focussed. We saw that worship must never be human emotion centred. Or even human mind centred. Or congregational experience centred. For worship to be truly worship it must be focused on God whom we honour and on whom we declare worth.

But then the question can be raised, “What about those aspects in the worship service where we receive from God and we learn?” Is that not worshipping as well? How does the dialogue principle fit into this definition of worship?

The dialogue principle has been accepted as a Biblical concept and closely followed by the Reformers. In short the dialogue principle teaches that corporate worship is a conversation between God and us. That God speaks to us in the worship service and that we respond. In the Reformed understanding of worship we recognise four significant points in the worship service where God speaks and we respond.

The first is in the “Greeting”. God begins the worship service by beginning the conversation with His greeting. God welcomes us into His presence and invites us to worship Him. The traditional wording often used is taken from Ps. 124:8, Phil. 1:3 “Our help is in the name of the Lord, who has made heaven and earth. Grace to you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” The worship aspect is our response to God’s greeting. We declare our dependence on Him and we honour Him for who He is.

The second significant point of the conversation between God and us is the “Assurance of Pardon”. In the assurance of pardon God shows us through the summary of the Law that we are sinners. Then God assures us through a suitable Scripture verse the forgiveness we have in Christ. God then instructs us through the Ten Commandments or another suitable reading how we should live in gratitude.

The worship aspect in this section is twofold. We worship in the way we humble ourselves in confession and repentance and in the way that we rededicate ourselves to live in gratitude. This worship can be through prayer or song.

The third significant point of the conversation between God and us is in the “Preaching of the Word”. God speaks to us when the word is opened and expounded. The Spirit then does his work of illumination, correction, guiding and encouraging.

The worship aspect in this section is also twofold. The way we listen and open our hearts, minds and will to receive that word reveals our attitude of worship. The way we dedicate ourselves and commit ourselves to put that Word into practice is also an act of worship.

The fourth and last point of conversation between God and us in corporate worship is the “Benediction”.

It is in the Benediction that God blesses us with a farewell promise that He goes with us into our lives and into the world. The Benediction is the link between the worship service and our daily lives.

The worship aspect in this section is when we go out with a believing heart and go rejoicing leaving one presence of God in a corporate context for another in a more individual context.

Looking at the above we can see that the dialogue principle of corporate worship confirms our previous definition of worship. That worship must at all times be God focussed. When God speaks and declares his forgiving, grace empowering love to us in the greeting, in the assurance of pardon, in the Word and in the Benediction, it is then that we respond in worship.

Worship therefore must always be God focussed.

As it says in Psalm 100:1-3

Shout for joy to the LORD, all the earth. Worship the LORD with gladness; come before him with joyful songs. Know that the LORD is God. It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people, the sheep of his pasture.

The question can then be raised, How does this work in practice? Well next month we will examine this a little more closely by looking at different ways of doing the “Greeting”.

Bill van Schie

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

Worship – Focus

Bill van Schie. Trowel & Sword. February 2003

Preamble: Attending a church service would appear to most to be a simple process. You walk in, go to the same seat you have been sitting in, perhaps for years, and perhaps even “gently” admonish someone who has had the temerity to “inadvertently” sit in “your seat”. You sing some songs, listen (or not) while the minister recites one or more prayers, perhaps drop a few coins, or notes into the collection bag as it is passed around, settle in for a half hour sermon (lecture?), and wait patiently for the final “amen” which is usually an indication that the service is coming to an end. If engaged by the sermon you may listen intently and maybe even remark to a few other attendees that it was a “good sermon”. If not some will find other ways to occupy their minds; a favourite method being to scroll through their mobile phones. If any of this sounds familiar, the next few articles in TSR may be for you as Bill van Schie takes us through some of the fundamentals of what a church service should look like. We humbly suggest that there may also be some ministers in our churches who would also benefit from a reminder of why they are there.

Worship – Focus

One of the good things about writing a regular column in a magazine such as this, that it gives us the opportunity to enter into dialogue with others. We have the opportunity to wrestle together on the basis of the Word of God.

During the past months a number of people have written in and have questioned the concept that worship has “an audience of one” that is God alone. Some have emphasised that the worship service is primarily God speaking to us and that we are the audience. Whereas others have emphasised that we come to church “to be taught in the word”, that we are an audience of students.

This raises a very important question. What should be our primary focus in corporate worship? The answer to this question is significant because it can determine what blessings we receive from the Lord in the worship service. Again, let us not base our examination on what we are used to, not even our human customs and traditions. Let us go back to the Word of God. When the Word of God uses the word “worship” what does it mean?

The Hebrew word in the Old Testament most commonly used to describe worship is “Shachah”. This word means “to worship, to prostrate oneself, to bow down.” The fact that it is found more than 170 times in the Hebrew Bible shows something of its cultural significance.

The act of bowing down in homage is generally done before a superior or a ruler. Shachah is used as the common term for coming before God in worship, as in (1 Sam. 15:25) and (Jer. 7:2). Sometimes it is in conjunction with another Hebrew verb for bowing down physically, followed by “worship,” as in (Exod. 34:8): “And Moses made haste, and bowed his head toward the earth, and worshiped.” (from Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words)

The Greek word in the New Testament most commonly used to describe worship is “proskuneo.” This word means “to make obeisance, do reverence to” (from pros, “towards,” and kuneo, “to kiss”), is the most frequent word rendered “to worship”(sic). It is used of an act of homage or reverence (a) to God, e. g., (Matt. 4:10; John 4:21-24; 1 Cor. 14:25; Rev. 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 19:10) (2nd part) and (22:9); (b) to Christ, e. g., (Matt. 2:2,8, 11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9,17; John 9:38; Heb. 1:6)

These and many other words are used throughout Scripture to describe the activity of worship. Although they each emphasise different aspects of worship the one common denominator in all these words is the fact that true corporate worship is always God focussed. It is a humbling of sinful self in confession and reverence before a holy God. It is coming into his presence bringing him honour, glory and praise for who He is and what he has done and will do. It is a coming before God and serving Him as the pre-eminent one.

The focus of the concept of “worship” in Scripture is never the worshipper’s mind, feelings, will or in any other way, that would be idolatry. The focus of true worship in Scripture is always the Lord alone. True worship in Scripture has an audience, a focus, of one!

Our English word worship reflects this very value. “Worship” means “to proclaim the worth of a greater person”. To adore, to revere and honour, to venerate”. Again the focus of the word in English is not the worshipper in any way but the one being worshipped.

The Reformers understood that God is the primary focus of our worship. Calvin emphasised that “the object of our worship is God alone.” (Institutes 2.8.1 & 1.12T). Ursinus commenting on Lord’s day 38 states that the Sabbath day has been given primarily so “God may be publicly praised and worshipped in the world”.

The Reformers following the Biblical teaching that worship must be God focussed realised a very important principal. That it is in worshipping and being focussed on God alone that God’s people are blessed. To focus on God’s people as students who come to learn, or to focus on people who come to be satisfied with new experiences means that we can actually detract from God’s blessing and even dabble in areas of idolatry.

It is an awesome concept, and it is an amazing reality, that God calls us into his presence to focus wholly on him and that in that focus we are amazingly blessed as our almighty God actually connects with us.

But you may ask, What about those aspects in the worship service where we receive and we learn? Is that not worship as well? How does the dialogue principle fit into this definition of worship? Well more about this next time. (ie. next week. ed.)

Bill van Schie.

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

The Belgic Confession

(DE NEDERLANDSE GELOOFSBELIJDENIS). 
1561 - 1961

Dr. K. Runia. Trowel & Sword, November 1961

Preamble: Beginning with a history lesson, Dr, Runia moves almost imperceptibly into a discussion of what it means to be “Reformed”, until at last he comes to the real reason for writing this editorial. What is it? Read on and it will become obvious what is on his mind and on his heart.

The Belgic Confession

No Church of the 16th century has produced so many martyrs of the faith than the Reformed Church of the combined Netherlands (our present day Holland and Belgium). In Brussels, July 1, 1523, the first martyrs of Protestantism, Henry Voes and John Esch were burned at the stake, reciting the Apostles’ Creed and singing the Te Deum. They were only the first of a great multitude. According to Hugo Grotius more than 100,000 men and women were martyred under the reign of Philip II. According to Gibbon the number of Protestants who were executed in this period far exceeded that of the primitive martyrs of the first three centuries in the whole Roman Empire.

One of these martyrs was Guido de Bres, who was hanged on the last day of May, 1567, at Valenciennes, Belgium. That his name is still known among Reformed people all over the world is due to the fact that he was the chief author of the Belgic Confession. Born about 1523 he was converted to the Reformed faith by diligent study of the Scriptures. After a period of exile in England under Edward VI, he went to Lausanne, where he studied for the ministry. After that he became a travelling evangelist in South-western Belgium and Northern France. At the age of 45 he crowned his ministry with his martyrdom.

Because the confession written by him originated in Southern Netherlands, now known as Belgium, it has been called the Belgic Confession. But it was not just a confession representing the faith of one national group only. This confession was the embodiment of the Reformed faith, accepted by the followers of Calvin, all over Europe. It was originally intended as a defence against the common charge of rebellion and as a protest against the cruel oppression by the Spanish government and the Roman Catholic Church. Consulting the French Confession of 1559, de Bres, in co-operation with some other Reformed ministers of the Netherlands, wrote this confession to show that the adherents of the Reformed Faith are no rebels, but obedient citizens of their king, whom they will obey in all lawful things. Yet rather than deny Christ before men, they will “offer their backs to stripes, their tongues to knives, their mouths to gags, and their bodies to the fire, well knowing that those who follow Christ must take His cross and deny themselves” (quoted from the address presented to Philip II).

So this confession, as nearly all other great confessions, was not born of purely academic discussions, but of a struggle of life and death. For the author and his fellow-believers, the Reformed Faith was not just one religious opinion alongside others, but it was the Divine Truth of God’s Word, as they had understood it under the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Therefore they were not afraid to die for it and to seal their conviction with the most cruel death. Motley in his “History of the Rise of the Dutch Republic (Vol II, p. 504) said of the terrible reign of Alva: “The barbarities committed amid the sack and ruin of those blazing and starving cities are almost beyond belief; unborn infants were torn from the living bodies of their mothers; women and children were violated by the thousands, and whole populations burned and hacked to pieces by soldiers in every mode which cruelty in its wanton ingenuity could devise”.

What is Reformed?

We, who are the descendants of these martyrs, still call ourselves Reformed. But do we still know what this word means?

Many of us would perhaps say: it means that we belong to the Calvinistic tradition. As such this answer is perfectly correct. The Reformed faith is indeed the faith which embodies the Calvinistic interpretation of Scripture. And yet this answer is by far not sufficient. It is only an historical answer, which could be given by every outsider. The real answer, however, goes much further. It seeks to evaluate the truth of the Reformed faith, by subjecting it to the test of Holy Scripture itself. What is our answer to this question?

It is quite a common thing in our day to hear people say: Oh, the Reformed faith is just one of the many interpretations of Christianity. It is a real nice one, but, just as all the others, it is unbalanced and you need the others to see the whole truth. One can hear such an answer even among Reformed people. Usually they add: we should not be so proud as to think that we alone have the truth. The truth is not ours, but God’s and He has given part of it to all.

Does it not sound nice? Does it not sound humble? Yes, it does. But – it is the humility of the relativist.   It is the humility of the man, who actually does not have a real conviction, but who today is inclined to believe this and tomorrow that!

And what a far cry this is from the attitude of Guido de Bres and his fellow-martyrs. If they had been of the same opinion, there would not have been any martyr! There would not have been a Reformation! Even more than that there would not have been a Christian Church!

Surely, we have to be humble. It is not our merit to have a true and deep understanding of Scripture. It is pure grace, a mere gift of the Spirit. But at the same time, if we have received this grace, it is our duty to accept it in gratitude and acknowledge it freely. Shame on us, if we are ashamed of our convictions! In that case we are not worthy to call ourselves Reformed!

The other day the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney said: “We Anglicans believe that Anglicanism is the purest and most scriptural expression of the Christian religion, both in its faith and order. If we do not believe that, we have no right to be Anglicans”. Although I do not agree with Dr. Gough, I do honour him for his conviction. This is the language of a man who is convinced of the truth of his religion and church. And if we are truly Reformed, we should be prepared to say the same of our own faith.

Our  modern world is dying of relativism.  You find it everywhere. In politics, in the business world, in science, in art and also in religion. If we are Reformed we cannot be relativist. For Reformed is to be convinced of the truly scriptural character of our faith. Prof. R. B. Kuiper expressed it in these words with which we fully agree:

THE REFORMED FAITH IS THE CHRISTIAN FAITH IN ITS MOST COMPREHENSIVE AND CONSISTENT FORMULATION AND CALVINISM IS CHRISTIANITY IN ITS PUREST AND MOST PRECISE EXPRESSION.

(To Be or Not to Be Reformed. 29)

Because I believe this I am a member of the Reformed Church. Because I believe this I cannot be ashamed of my faith, but are prepared to defend it everywhere and before everyone.

Ecclesia Reformata Semper Reformanda

Do we mean to say on this that we are perfect? That our faith is perfect or that our Church is perfect? Not at all. The above mentioned Latin saying is perfectly true. A Reformed Church is never finished with its task, but has to subject itself to a continuous process of Reformation.

And yet we do believe that our Church holds and preaches the true faith in its most comprehensive and consistent interpretation. For this reason we cannot possibly understand how our Tasmanian brethren, who in the past years have re-discovered this truth, decided to establish a new denomination. I do realise that there were many difficulties. There were differences in tradition, practice and lately also in worship. But is that enough to establish a new denomination and to add another division to the Body of Christ? Recently I have heard it said more than once: They could not join us because our Reformed Churches carry so much dead weight. I would be the last to deny this. I can understand that for those who have just gone through a personal struggle such dead weight is repelling. But I am also sure, that after twenty-five years the newly formed Evangelical Reformed Church will be in the same position! And I am also sure that this can never be a reason for a new denomination. How different was the view of the “father” of the Reformed Reformation. (See: Institutes Book IV, Ch.I, 10-16.)

I cannot see it otherwise than that the establishment of this new denomination is a dark stain on Australian Calvinism. How tragic that this happened in the year of the commemoration of the Belgic Confession. We all are Reformed. We all do believe that the Reformed Faith is the true interpretation of Scripture. And yet we part company for subordinate reasons. Now there are five Reformed denominations in this Australia (apart from the many Calvinists in the Presbyterian Church, the Church of England, etc.):

The Free Presbyterian Church, the Reformed Presbyterian Church, the Reformed Churches, the Free Reformed Churches and the Evangelical Reformed Church. Are there real differences in Faith? No! Is there any of these Churches which cannot fully and whole-heartedly subscribe, e.g. to the Belgic Confession? No! How tragic! Or should we say: how sinful?

To be divided is not a sin in itself. On the contrary, it can be an act of true obedience. To be divided as Churches of the same confession is not a sin in itself either.

It may be due to  historical circumstances, which at first could not  be  overcome.  But to remain divided, while there is no doctrinal reason whatsoever, is  utterly sinful.,  To acquiesce in such a divided-ness is  contrary to the very essence of the Reformed Faith.

May God open the eyes of all  the Australian Calvinists, that they become more aware of the precious legacy, for which their forefathers died.

That they also become more aware of their  high calling to seek one another in unceasing love.  That would, no doubt, be the best commemoration of  the 400th anniversary of the  Belgic Confession!                   

K. Runia

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

Mysterium Incarnationis

Prof. K. Runia. Trowel & Sword. December 1961

Preamble: The mystery of the incarnation? What’s so mysterious about that? It’s quite straightforward, isn’t? Jesus comes down from heaven, is born as a human being, grows up, becomes a man, teaches a group of men for three years, all the time healing the sick and performing miracles, and then returns to heaven to be with the father once again. All very straight forward! Not so fast, declares Prof. Runia. How is all this possible, or even believable. Humanly speaking, it’s not. Why not? In the following article Prof. Runia explains why not. In a word, this is why we need FAITH. Belief in what we cannot understand.

Mysterium Incarnationis

What is that: Incarnation? What happened on that day, when the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary? What happened in that night, when a child was born in the stable of Bethlehem? What did really happen there?

We all know the story as told by Luke in his Gospel. It is such a moving story.

But WHAT happened there?

The word INCARNATION is actually a Latin word. You find the Latin word “caro” (= flesh) in it. Literally it means: to become flesh (“vleeswording”). Of course this immediately reminds us of John 1:14 “And the Word became flesh”. According to verse 1 of this same chapter this “Word” is the Son of God.

But how can that be? How can God’s Son, who fully shares in the eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being of God, how can He become flesh?

Let us be honest: this is an incomprehensible mystery. No one can understand this, let alone explain it to others. The most we can do is to say it in the negative.

The Incarnation does NOT mean that God’s Son CHANGES INTO a man. Some people have inferred that from the verbal form: “became” (The Word became flesh). True, quite often the verb “to become” indicates a change from the one thing into the other. When a caterpillar “becomes” a butterfly, a complete change is involved. The butterfly has lost all the characteristics of the caterpillar. But when you say: My son John became a doctor, no change is involved. Your son has not become another person. He is still the same John, with all his characteristics, but in addition he has acquired the abilities and the status of a doctor.

Along similar lines we have to understand the mystery of the Incarnation of the Son of God. When He becomes flesh, He does not change into a human being, so that now He is not God any more, but it only means that in addition to His Godhead He also assumes the human nature.  Now He is both at the same time: God and man. That this is John’s intention is quite evident from the second half of verse 14, where he says that he and his fellow apostles “beheld” His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father”. Being in the human nature, He still had all the glorious attributes of the Divine Son.

Does this, then, mean that in Him Divine and human attributes were mixed up, so that He was a completely new being: God and man mixed into one? On the ground of Scripture the early church at the Council of Chalcedon (451) said: No! He was God and man at the same time, but His two natures were “inconfused” and “UNCHANGEABLE”. The two natures remained what they were: fully Divine and fully human. Was it, then, not a real unity? Yes, the Council says, for the two natures were at the same time: “INDIVISIBLE” and “INSEPARABLE”.

The striking point in these four formulations is that they are all negative! A real divine mystery cannot be explained. At most you can put up some fences and say: do not go outside them, for then you will destroy the mystery. Keep within the fences.   THERE is the mystery! But also: there is the MYSTERY! God’s mystery, incomprehensible, immeasurable, unfathomable. Just imagine!

A BABY lies in Mary’s lap.  A real baby.  He cannot speak, cannot walk, cannot act.  He can only drink and cry and smile.  This baby is GOD’S SON. GOD IN THE FLESH.

A BOY plays with other boys in the small town of Nazareth.  In the morning he goes to school in  the synagogue to learn the Word of  God from the rabbi.  In the afternoon he gives his father a hand in the carpenter’s shop. This boy is GOD’ S SON. GOD IN THE FLESH.   And he plays with other children!

A YOUNG MAN walks through the fields accompanied by other young men. He points them to the birds and the lilies.  He tells them parables and other stories.  He performs miracles, heals the sick, feeds the multitudes, walks on the lake, etc.  This young man is GOD’S SON. GOD IN THE FLESH.

A man hangs on the cross, stripped of all  his clothes, “blood on his brow, anguish of the hell in his eyes.  Hear!  He cries out with a loud voice:  My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?  This sufferer, crushed under the wrath of God and  the  hate of man,  is  GOD’S SON. GOD IN  THE FLESH.

You can’t understand this.  No one can.

You can’t even believe it – unless the Holy Spirit opens your eyes. This baby, this boy, this young man, this sufferer on the cross God’s own Son?  Yes, says the believer.  Yes, that’s what I accept.

Does he understand it?  No, not at all.

But he falls on his knees and adores.  He adores this child, this boy, this man, this sufferer. He adores Him as His Saviour, with the simple shepherds, with the wise men from the East, with  Peter and Thomas, with all angels and all  saints,  in heaven and on earth.

MYSTERIUM Incarnationis.  Indeed! 

My LORD and my GOD in the flesh!

How incomprehensible and how wonderful! 

For He is  MY Lord and MY God!

K Runia

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.   To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com

Leave a comment

I Believe In The Holy Spirit

J.F.H. VanderBom. Trowel & Sword, (De Kleine Krant), May 1974

Preamble: For nearly thirty years the “Kleine Krant” (Little Paper) was part of Trowel & Sword, catering for readers more comfortable with the Dutch Language. While many have passed into glory we recognise that there may still be readers who would love to read articles in their native language. So every four to six weeks we hope to publishing an article written in Dutch, complete with an English translation. To ensure accuracy, Mrs. Henriet Vanderstoep has agreed to proofread each translation to ensure it is faithful to the original article. We are grateful to Henriet for her willingness to become a part of our team.

Whether we continue with this format will depend largely on its popularity. Therefore, if you, our readers, would like us reprint more articles in Dutch, with an English translation, please “like” this post or better still, write a reply in the comments section. We would also ask that you spread the word, particularly to our Dutch speaking members who would love to read some of the old articles in their native language.

Ik Geloof In De Heilige Geest

De Heilige Geest is de grote Getuige van God. Voor velen is God geen werkelijkheid. Ook als ze het nog eens over Hem hebben, dan is Hij voor hen een vaag begrip, een idee verweg en onwerkelijk.

En Jezus is voor velen een persoon, die weleens voor vele eeuwen geleden, ergens in Palestina geleefd moet hebben, en die wel een bijzonder en goed mens geweest moet zijn,— maar niet de NU-Levende in heerlijkheid. Waar de Heilige Geest komt, wordt dat alles anders. “Hij zal Mij verheerlijken”, heeft Jezus tot Zijn discipelen gezegd, “want Hij zal het uit het mijne nemen en het u verkondigen….” (Johannes 16:14). Dat is dus Zijn werk: getuigen van Jezus Christus, als de Zoon van de Vader; spreken van God zoals Hij Zich openbaart in de Heiland. Hij getuigt in de Bijbel, want de Bijbel is Zijn boek. Hij overtuigt ons dat dit Woord de waarheid is, en Jezus werkelijk de van God Gezondene. Hij daalt in ons hart in, om dat gesloten hart te openen en ontvankelijk te maken voor de werkelijkheid van God. Ja, dan gaan wij God zien, in Jezus Christus, Zijn Zoon. Hij gaat uit van de Vader en de Zoon, zegt de belijdenis van Nicea. Hij is eên in wezen met de Vader en de Zoon, Zelf waarachtig God. Waar de Heilige Geest komt, daar komt God.

Dit is het eerste, wat Zijn komst in u bewerkt: God wordt werkelijkheid voor u. U gelooft dat Hij er is. En dat Hij zó is als de Bijbel het zegt: heilig en rechtvaardig; uw God, met Wie gu te maken hebt en te maken zult krijgen! Dan ziet u opeens ook de grote afstand tussen God en u: een onoverbrugbare kloof. Alleen wie God ziet, ziet de werkelijkheid over zichzelf. Hij, voor wie God een werkelijkheid wordt, krijgt de waarheid over zichzelf te zien, te horen‚en dat betekent een doods-schrik ….. ! Zoals die tollenaar, die naar de tempel ging. Waarom ging hij? Hij móest! Want nergens anders kon hij meer rust of vrede vinden. Maar daar, in het heilig huis van de heilige God valt het op hem: Gód is hier. . . Maar hoe zal hij Gods heiligheid verdragen? Hij zal onder Gods ogen bezwijken. En hij durft zijn ogen niet opslaan naar dat Heilige der Heiligen. Hij slaat zichzelf .. op de borst: 0 God, wees mij, een zondaar‚ genadig! 

Dat is het eerste werk van de Heilige Geest in ons hart. Hij overtuigt ons van zonde, van de radikaal—verkeerde richting van ons leven, van onze opstand tegen God. Ja, Hij maakt God werkelijkheid voor u. En zó alleen — dat is het tweede, maar het komt soms vlak tegelijkertijd in ons leven — zo wordt Jezus werkelijk de Christus, de Verlosser, de liefdevolle Heiland. Door mijn angsten en tranen heen zie ik opeens Zijn lichtende, nodigende gestalte. Ik zie het kruis. Ik zie het Hoofd, bedekt met mijn vuile zonden. Nee, dan is Hij voor u niet meer alleen een geschiedkundig persoon, die vóór negentien eeuwen daar ergens in Palestina moet hebben geleefd. Hij treedt uit de Bijbel op u toe, in de veroverende, levende werkelijkheid van Zijn leven en sterven, Zijn kruis en opstanding. U ziet de Vader in Hem. God Zelf over u bewogen. God, die in liefde Zijn eigen Zoon voor u gaf. En ook dit is van de Heilige Geest. Alzo lief heeft God de wereld gehad, dat Hij Zijn eniggeboren Zoon voor ons gegeven heeft. Maar na het Kruis begint een volgend hoofdstuk. Alzo lief heeft God de wereld gehad, dat Hij Zijn Heilige Geest heeft uitgestort. De Geest Die ogen en harten opent. De Geest die mij leert om Jezus aan te grijpen en in Hem te geloven. Hij leert mij bidden, pleiten op de beloften, waar Gods Woord zo vol mee staat.

De Geest leert mij bidden en danken. Want Hij verzekert mij uit Gods eigen Woord dat God geen bidder afwijst, en dat Jezus aan zondaren genade schenken wil. Ja, dat is pas bidden, dat roepen tot de levende God, dat zoeken van Zijn aangezicht, dat u—beroepen op wat de Here Zelf heeft gezegd, dat grijpen naar de toegestoken hand van Jezus. Niemand kan zeggen: Jezus is Heer —, dán door de Heilige Geest! (l Corinthiers 12:3).

Zo komt al sterker vertrouwen in u, dat God hoort, ook u aanhoort en aanneemt als Zijn kind. U ziet de Vader in de Zoon, en durft vrijmoedig te bidden, en te aanbidden: Abba, mijn Vader! (Romeinen 8:15).

Schatrijk en gelukkig is hij die belijden mag: ik geloof in de Heilige Geest. Ik geloof maar niet alleen dat Hij bestaat. Ik werd Zijn werking gewaar. De Bijbel spreekt mij toe. Nu luister ik naar het Woord als naar het Woord van de levende God: Christus’ gestalte licht er in, Hij glanst me toe, en ik ontmoet in Hem de Vader! Zo weet een arme zondaar zich een kind van God, en is blij en getroost in tijd en eeuwigheid. Daarom heet de Heilige Geest de Trooster. Dit is onze droefheid, onze bewuste ellende of onze onbegrepen onbevredigdheid, dat wij mensen GOD verloren hebben. Wij missen iets; neen, alles. Want wij missen GOD. Vandaar het besef van bange verscheurdheid, van eindeloze leegheid, van volkomen verveling. Vandaar het heimwee van ons hart. Die diepste nood komt voort uit onze diepste zonde: wij missen God, omdat wij Hem moedwillig losgelaten hebben.

De Heilige Geest troost ons door in het Evangelie te getuigen van Christus en Zijn verzoening, en zo leidt Hij ons weer tot God. Zo maakt Hij ons bang en onrustig, om straks ons heimwee te stillen, als wij worden thuisgebracht bij de Vader! Hebben wij de Heilige Geest ontvangen? Die vraag maakt velen schichtig en onrustig. Sommigen zeggen, het is onbetamelijk om deze vraag te stellen. En toch is deze vraag de levens—vraag. Maar voor de christen moest dit zijn een vraag naar de bekende weg: Hebt ge de Heilige Geest ontvangen? Nee? Kent gij, kent gij Jezus dan niet? Die om ons te redden de hemel verliet? En zovelen die Hem aangenomen hebben, die in Jezus geloven, komen door Hem tot de vreugde van het Vaderhuis. En al deze vreugde is van de Heilige Geest.

”Bid; en ge zult Hem ontvangen”, zegt Jezus. “Want, indien u, hoewel u slecht bent, goede gaven weet te geven aan uw kinderen, hoeveel te meer zal uw Vader in de hemel de Heilige Geest geven aan hen, die er Hem om bidden.”

Vervul ons hart, o Heilige Geest,  opdat wij allen onbevreesd 

Vervul ons hart, o Heilige Geest, 
opdat wij allen onbevreesd
getuigen zijn van Christus' werk
dat Hij gedaan heeft voor Zijn Kerk.

Gij zijt de Trooster die ons leidt,
de gave, ons door God bereid, 
de bron waaruit het leven vloeit,
het vuur, dat heel ons hart doorgloeit.

Uw overvloed van hemels licht
bestrale ons aller aangezicht;
een bruiloftsfeest is ons bereid
aan't einde van den levensstrijd.

Breng al Gods kinderen tesaarn
en maak ons tot Gods lof bekwaam,
opdat in 's werelds wijd gebied
altoos weerklinke 't jubellied:
Halleluja! Looft God den Heer!
Looft God den Heer! Halleluja!
VANDERBOM

I Believe In The Holy Sprirt

 The Holy Spirit is the great Witness of God. For many, God is not a reality. Even if they do believe in Him, He is a vague concept for them, an idea far away and unreal. 

For many people, Jesus  is a person who must have lived somewhere in Palestine many centuries ago, and who must have been a special and good person, – but not the NOW-Living One in glory. 

Where the Holy Spirit comes, all that changes. 

“He will glorify Me”, Jesus said to His disciples, “for He will take of Mine and declare it to you….” (John 16). That is His work: to bear witness to Jesus Christ, as the Son of the Father; to speak of God as He reveals Himself in the Saviour. 

He bears witness in the Bible, because the Bible is His book. He convinces us that this Word is the truth, and that Jesus is truly the One sent by God. He descends into our heart, to open that closed heart and make it receptive to the reality of God. Yes, then we will see God, in Jesus Christ, His Son. 

He proceeds from the Father and the Son, says the Nicene Creed. He is one in essence with the Father and the Son, Himself truly God. Where the Holy Spirit comes, there comes God. 

This is the first thing His coming does in you: God becomes reality for you. You believe that He is there. And that He is as the Bible says: holy and righteous; your God, with Whom you have to deal, and will have to deal! 

Then you suddenly see the great distance between God and you: an unbridgeable gulf. Only those who see God see the reality about themselves. He, for whom God becomes a reality, gets to see and hear the truth about himself, and that means a death-fright ….. ! Like that tax collector, who went to the temple. Why did he go? He had to! For nowhere else could he find more rest or peace. But there, in the holy house of the holy God, it strikes him: God is here. . . But how shall he endure God’s holiness? He shall succumb under God’s eyes. And he dare not lift up his eyes to that Holy of holies. He beats himself .. on the breast: O God, be merciful to me, a sinner! 

That is the first work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts. He convinces us of sin, of the radically wrong direction of our lives, of our rebellion against God. Yes, He makes God real for you. 

And only in this way — that is the second, but it sometimes comes into our lives at the same time — that is how Jesus truly becomes the Christ, the Redeemer, the loving Saviour. Through my fears and tears I suddenly see His shining, inviting figure. I see the cross. I see the Head, covered with my filthy sins. No, then He is no longer just a historical person for you, who must have lived somewhere in Palestine nineteen centuries ago. He steps out of the Bible towards you, into the conquering, living reality of His life and death, His cross and resurrection. You see the Father in Him. God Himself moved by you. God, who in love gave up His own Son for you. 

And this too is of the Holy Spirit. God so loved the world, that He gave up His only begotten Son for us. But after the Cross, a new chapter begins. God so loved the world, that He poured out His Holy Spirit. The Spirit Who opens eyes and hearts. The Spirit Who teaches me to seize Jesus and believe in Him. He teaches me to pray, to plead the promises, of which God’s Word is so full. 

The Spirit teaches me to pray and to give thanks. For He assures me from God’s own Word that God rejects no supplicant, and that Jesus wants to grant grace to sinners. Yes, that is praying, that calling to the living God, that seeking His face, that you—calling on what the Lord Himself has said, that grasping at the outstretched hand of Jesus. No one can say: Jesus is Lord—except by the Holy Spirit! (1 Corinthians 12:3). 

In this way, there will be an ever stronger trust in you, that God hears, also hears you and accepts you as His child. You see the Father in the Son, and dare to pray boldly, and to worship: Abba, my Father! (Romans 8:15). 

Fantastically rich and happy is he who may confess: I believe in the Holy Spirit. I do not only believe that He exists. I became aware of His working. The Bible speaks to me. Now I listen to the Word as to the Word of the living God: Christ’s figure shines in it, He shines to me, and I meet the Father in Him! Thus a poor sinner knows himself to be a child of God, and is happy and comforted in time and eternity. Therefore the Holy Spirit is called the Comforter. 

This is our sorrow, our conscious misery or our misunderstood dissatisfaction, that we humans have lost GOD. We miss something; no, everything. For we miss GOD.

Hence the sense of fearful separation, of endless emptiness, of complete boredom. Hence the homesickness of our heart. 

That deepest need arises from our deepest sin: we miss God, because we have wilfully let Him go. 

The Holy Spirit comforts us by testifying in the Gospel of Christ and His reconciliation, and thus He leads us back to God. Thus He makes us afraid and restless, in order to still our homesickness later, when we are brought home to the Father! 

Have we received the Holy Spirit? 

That question makes many of us nervous and restless. Some say, it is unseemly to ask this question.

 And yet this question is the question of life. But for the Christian this should be a question along the well-known path: Have you received the Holy Spirit? No? Do you know, do you not know Jesus? Who left heaven to save us? And as many as have accepted Him, who believe in Jesus, come through Him to the joy of the Father’s house. And all this joy is of the Holy Spirit. 

“Ask, and you will receive,” says Jesus. “For if you, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him.

"Fill our hearts, O Holy Spirit,
That we may all be fearless
Witnesses of Christ's work
That He has done for His Church.

You are the Comforter who guides us,
The gift prepared for us by God,
The source from which life flows,
The fire that glows in all our hearts.

Your abundance of heavenly light
Shines upon our faces;
A wedding feast is prepared for us
At the end of life's struggle.

Bring all God's children together
And make us capable of God's praise,
So that in the wide world 
The song of joy may always resound:
Hallelujah! Praise the Lord God!
Praise the Lord God! Hallelujah!

VANDERBOM

Leave a comment