John Chrysostom: Golden-Tongued Preacher

John Chrysostom: Golden-Tongued Preacher

Introduction

"Almighty God, who hast given to us grace at this time with one accord to make our common supplications unto Thee; and dost promise, that when two or three are gathered together in Thy name Thou wilt grant their requests: fulfil now, O Lord, the desires and petitions of Thy servants, as may be most expedient for them; granting us in this world knowledge of Thy truth, and in the world to come life everlasting, Amen."

This beautiful prayer, so appropriate for worship, is taken from the liturgy of Chrysostom. It was used in the worship services which he, as the most famous preacher in the early church, used in leading God's people to the worship of their Lord.

Preaching has always been the life blood of the church. From the preaching of the apostles in the early church to the pulpits of God's church today, preaching has always occupied a central and important place. Only when Rome introduced into the church meaningless and godless practices did preaching decline and all but disappear from the worship of the saints. The Reformation was, above all, brought about by preaching -- simple, biblical, expository preaching. And so it has been in the 400 years since the Reformation. When the church was strong, the pulpit was strong. When the church was infiltrated with false doctrine and worldliness, it was because the pulpit had failed. When reformation came into the church, it came on the wings of preaching.

It is not amiss, therefore, to consider the greatest preacher of the ancient church, John Chrysostom. Not only has his name become synonymous with preaching, but the last part of his name, "Chrysostom," was given him because the name means "Golden-mouthed," and was indicative of the high respect granted him as a minister of the gospel.

His Early Life

 John was born in Syrian Antioch in 347 from Secundus, a pagan military officer, and Anthusa, a godly woman of great moral force and character. She married young and was widowed at the age of 20. When Secundus died, John was an infant, and his spiritual nurture came from his mother. So careful was she in John's religious instruction that a prominent heathen of the day said in astonishment at her devotion, "Bless me! What women these Christians have."

 Antioch, where the believers were first called Christians, had become a worldly and godless city. One writer put it this way -- and it gives us some idea of the environment in which John was reared:

The warmth of the climate disposed the natives to the most intemperate enjoyment of tranquility and opulence, and the lively licentiousness of the Greeks was blended with the hereditary softness of the Syrians. Fashion was the only law, pleasure the only pursuit, and the splendor of dress and furniture was the only distinction of the citizens of Antioch. The arts of luxury were honored, the serious and manly virtues were the subject of ridicule, and the contempt for female modesty and reverent age announced the universal corruption of the capital of the East.

He was given an excellent education in the best schools in Antioch, studying especially philosophy and rhetoric in preparation for a career in law. He was not immediately baptized by his mother, chiefly because of some erroneous views of baptism which prevailed in the church at that time. These views, held by some in the church, consisted mainly in the notion that baptism washed away all previous sins. It was considered wise, therefore, to postpone baptism so as to be free of as many sins as possible. At 23 years of age John was baptized by Miletus, the bishop of the church in his city. Later John himself would protest this practice of delaying baptism, but he does mark his own conversion as happening in his 20th year.

After his conversion he abandoned his studies in law and a secular career and devoted himself exclusively to the work of the church. In preparation for this work, he studied under Diodore, who had founded a monastic school, but who was influential in the establishment of a Seminary in that city.

This is worthy of more than passing note, for the Seminary in Antioch was devoted to the principle of biblical interpretation which insisted that the literal meaning of Scripture was the correct one. Antioch took a position contrary to the Seminary in Alexandria, Egypt, which promoted an allegorical method of interpretation. The tradition of the Seminary at Antioch, however, was the tradition in the church during those periods when preaching was strong, and it is still the method held today in all orthodox Seminaries. God used this education to prepare John for his work as preacher. A fellow student was Theodore, later bishop of the church in Mopsuesta, and himself a leading church father.

John had strong leanings towards the monastic life, but refrained from entering a monastery because of his mother's wishes. Only after she died did he retire for 10 years to live the life of a hermit in the hills outside Antioch. As a hermit he brought irreparable damage to his health and bore bodily afflictions to his deathbed.

His Service to the Church

But God had more important work for John. He was summoned to return to Antioch where he first became a lector (reader of Scripture in the worship service), then a deacon in 381, then a minister in the church. It was during this period that he wrote a book on the nurture of children and another on the ministry entitled, "The Priesthood." Both gained for him a reputation of excellence, for they were filled with profound wisdom.

Nevertheless, he was above all a preacher. Already while he was studying for law, his oratorical gifts were noticed; but God put them to use in the service of the ministry of the Word.

For 12 years he occupied the pulpit in the church of Antioch. It was his custom, as it has been in our own Reformed tradition, to preach series. Many of his sermons are still extant. He preached 67 sermons on Genesis, 90 on Matthew, 88 on John, 32 on Romans, 74 on I and II Corinthians, as well as series on other books. He preached not only on the Lord's day, but also during the week, sometimes five days in succession. His auditorium was always packed with people, and sometimes the congregation, appreciative of his preaching, would break out in spontaneous applause -- for which he severely reprimanded them.

One noteworthy incident demonstrates the power of his preaching. During the Lenten season of 387 the people of Antioch rioted over new taxes imposed upon them by the emperor Theodosius and burned a number of statues of the emperor and his family. Theodosius threatened to destroy the city in his anger and sent troops into the city to quell the rioting and judges to try the instigators of the riot. John took the occasion to preach 20 sermons on the subject, "On the Statutes," in which he reminded the people of their responsibilities to those whom God had put over them and reminded the emperor of the evils of undue cruelty. These sermons served to bring about a quietness in the city and an amnesty from the emperor. One writer of the time said of these sermons: "Though such a crowd had come together, the silence was as deep as though not a single person had been present." One is reminded of Luther's sermons which quelled the disorders in Wittenburg, brought on by the unruly Zwickau prophets.

Because of his great preaching powers, he was appointed by the agent of the emperor to be minster in Constantinople. He had to be escorted out of the city by troops because of the great devotion of his people in whose midst he had labored for twelve years.

The pulpit in Constantinople was the most prestigious in the entire Eastern Church, and perhaps in the entire church. It was, after the time of Constantine the Great, the capital of the empire. on the shores of the Bosporus in Greece, it was the most influential church of the time.

But it was not long before John was in trouble. Great preacher that he was, he feared no one and preached the Scriptures regardless whom he offended. Because Constantinople was the imperial city, it was filled with luxury and corruption, intrigue and depravity. Against all these sins John preached with vehemence and force; and his preaching earned him the undying hatred of the Empress Eudoxia. Conniving with the bishops of Alexandria, she secured his exile across the Bosporus, but it was to last only a short time. He returned in triumph to his pulpit and continued to condemn the evils in the city. He probably, from an earthly point of view, made his fatal mistake when he called Eudoxia another Herodias who would not rest till she had obtained the head of John.

His Martyrdom

This time John had gone too far. The emperor deposed him; John refused to obey the command to abdicate his pulpit. The emperor sent troops into the cathedral during a baptism ceremony and mixed the blood of the worshipers with the water used for baptism. John was exiled to Cucresus in the Taurus mountains of Armenia. he described his feelings upon being exiled in a letter.

When I was driven from the city, I felt no anxiety, but said to myself: If the empress wishes to banish me, let her do so; "the earth is the Lord's." If she wants to have me sawn asunder, I have Isaiah for an example. If she wants me to be drowned in the ocean, I think of Jonah. If I am to be thrown into the fire, the three men in the furnace suffered the same. If cast before wild beasts, I remember Daniel in the lions' den. If she wants me to be stoned, I have before me Stephen, the first martyr. If she demands my head, let her do so; John the Baptist shines before me. Naked I came from my mother's womb, naked shall I leave this world. Paul reminds me, "If I still pleased men, I would not be the servant of Christ."

In Exile

Even in exile his influence continued, for people from Antioch and other parts of the empire came to visit him, and he carried on correspondence with all parts of the empire -- a total of 242 letters.

And so the empress had him banished to another place so far removed from the churches that he could have no influence at all: the remote northeast corner of the Black Sea called, Pitys. On the way, he was cruelly treated by the soldiers and died during the journey. The year was 407. He was buried in an obscure grave.

But the church honored him, and several years later exhumed his body and moved it to a grave in Constantinople. He died a martyr for the faith in a time when there was supposed to be no persecution.

"The personal appearance of the golden-mouthed orator was not imposing, but dignified and winning. He was of small stature (like David, Paul, Athanasius, Melanchton, and others). He had an emaciated frame, a large, bald head, a lofty, wrinkled forehead, deep-set, bright, piercing eyes, pallid, hollow cheeks, and a short, gray beard."

He was a preacher who emphasized the moral aspects of the Christian faith. He himself described his work in this way: "My work is like that of a man who is trying to clean a piece of ground into which a muddy stream is constantly flowing."

In keeping with his times, he held some views which were later considered erroneous by the church. Orthodox in all matters to which the church had addressed itself, he took a weak position on the depravity of man and the power of sin in man's nature. But these issues were not to be defined until the work of the great church father, Augustine.

He has gone down in history as one of the church's great preachers. Fearless, catering to no man, willing to suffer the consequences of his firm commitment to Scripture, he is an abiding testimony of the importance of the preaching in the church. May God give such preachers to the church today.

Taken from: Portraits of Faithful Saints, Chapter 6, by Herman Hanko

A Beautiful Prayer

God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Father of mercies and God of all consolation, you who live in the highest, but regard the lowest, you who know all things before they are, you who gave the rules of the Church through the word of your grace, who predestined from the beginning the race of the righteous through Abraham, who instituted princes and priests, and did not leave your sanctuary without a minister; who from the beginning of the world has been pleased to be glorified by those whom you have chosen, pour out upon him the power which is from you, the princely Spirit, which you gave to your beloved Son Jesus Christ, which he gave to your holy apostles, who founded the Church in every place as your sanctuary, for the glory and endless praise of your name. Grant, Father who knows the heart, to your servant whom you chose for the episcopate, that he will feed your holy flock, that he will wear your high priesthood without reproach, serving night and day, incessantly making your face favorable, and offering the gifts of your holy church; in the spirit of high priesthood having the power to forgive sins according to your command; to assign lots according to your command; to loose any bond according to the authority which you gave to the apostles; to please you in mildness and a pure heart, offering to you a sweet scent, through your son Jesus Christ, through whom to you be glory, power, and honor, Father and Son, with the Holy Spirit, in the Holy Church, now and throughout the ages of the ages. Amen.

Hippolytus ca. 215 AD

The 95 Theses.

1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, "Repent" (Mt 4:17), he willed
the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance,
that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is
worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true
inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those
imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it
has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases
reserved
to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were
disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all
things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.

8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to
the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the
pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of
necessity.

10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying,
reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.

11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory
were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Mt 13:25).

12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before
absolution, as tests of true contrition.

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far
as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.

14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily
brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.

15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other
things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the
horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and
assurance of salvation.

17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily
decrease and love increase.

18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture,
that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to
grow in love.

19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of
them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves
may
be entirely certain of it.

20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words "plenary remission of all
penalties," does not actually mean "all penalties," but only those imposed by
himself.

21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is
absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.

22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty
which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.

23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at
all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very
few.

24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that
indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.

25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to
the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own
diocese and parish.

26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory,
not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of
intercession for them.

27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks
into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.

28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and
avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in
the
hands of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we
have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.

30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of
having received plenary remission.

31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really
penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.

32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because
they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their
teachers.

33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope's
pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.

34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of
sacramental satisfaction established by man.

35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who
intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach
unchristian doctrine.

36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty
and guilt, even without indulgence letters.

37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the
blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even
without indulgence letters.

38. Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be
disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the
divine remission.

39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and
the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need
of true contrition.

40. A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for
his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes
men
to hate them -- at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.

41. Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously
think that they are preferable to other good works of love.

42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying
of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the
needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.

44. Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man
does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed
from penalties.

45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him
by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but
God's wrath.

46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need,
they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it
on
indulgences.

47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter
of free choice, not commanded.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs
and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.

49. Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if
they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear
of God because of them.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the
indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were
burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give
of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to
many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.

52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the
indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.

53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the
preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may
be
preached in others.

54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or
larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.

55. It is certainly the pope's sentiment that if indulgences, which are a
very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and
one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be
preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes
indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of
Christ.

57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many
indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the
pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death,
and hell for the outer man.

59. St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the
church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

60. Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given
by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.

61. For it is clear that the pope's power is of itself sufficient for the
remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.

62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and
grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be
last (Mt. 20:16).

64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most
acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly
fished for men of wealth.

66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the
wealth of men.

67. The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are
actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.

68. They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when
compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal
indulgences with all reverence.

70. But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men
preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.

71. Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be
anathema and accursed.

72. But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence
preachers be blessed.

73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever
contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.

74. Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as
a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.

75. To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even
if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.

76. We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very
least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.

77. To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater
graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

78. We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope
whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel,
spiritual
powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written, 1 Co 12[:28].

79. To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up
by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is
blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread
among the people will have to answer for this.

81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for
learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or
from
the shrewd questions of the laity.

82. Such as: "Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love
and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite
number
of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church? The
former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.

83. Again, "Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and
why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for
them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

84. Again, "What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a
consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to
buy
out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, because
of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love's sake?"

85. Again, "Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in
actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences
as though they were still alive and in force?"

86. Again, "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the
wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his
own money rather than with the money of poor believers?"

87. Again, "What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect
contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?"

88. Again, "What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope
were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred
times a day, as he now does but once?"

89. "Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his
indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously
granted when they have equal efficacy?"

90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and
not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope
to
the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.

91. If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and
intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed,
they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ,
"Peace, peace," and there is no peace! (Jer 6:14)

93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Cross,
cross," and there is no cross!

94. Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their
Head, through penalties, death and hell.

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations
rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).

If You Don't Like What Scripture Says, Cry, "Paradox."

"This author seems to swell in the conceit of his rational performances, as if never any fly sitting upon a cart wheel on a summer's day had made such a dust as he had made. And fashioning to himself a victorious conquest, as if all his adversaries were but Pygmies to this Anakim, glad to run into corners or into acorn-cups to hide themselves there. For his reasons like some hobgoblins do so fright them more than all the spirits that stand by the naked man in the book of moons: and therefore all the help they have, if we believe this Pyrgopolynices * is to charm them by saying that 'many things delivered in Scripture, which are above the reach of human capacity, among which this is one, etc…'" – William Twisse, The Riches of God's Love unto the Vessels of Mercy...

The book which I am citing is a refutation by William Twisse of the work a Mr. Hord, an Arminian who, true to form, took issue with the Reformed doctrine of Reprobation. At the heart of the doctrine of Predestination (in its two branches, Election and Reprobation), is the question of Divine Sovereignty and human responsibility. 

Beyond the ornate 17th century rhetoric, Twisse is making an incredible point. Notice what the defense of the Arminians of Twisse’s day was: “Paradox!” When they didn’t want to accept the plain words of Scripture, the appeal was made to mystery as a way to kill the discussion. “How can God be sovereign if men have autonomous free-will?” Instead of accepting the plain teaching of Scripture that God is sovereign and men do not have autonomous free-will, because their wills are enslaved by sin, they cry up mystery in order to shut down the conversation. “How can God be love if He has not willed the salvation of everyone?” – Don’t worry; you don't have to face a hard question and actually use your brain to exegete Scripture properly. No, you can just yell, “Paradox,” and all the bad Reformers will go away. No one is allowed to appeal to Scripture once the “paradox card” has been played. 

Notice also that Twisse is not impressed by this paltry argument. He flouts the argument as if its adherents were some silly Don Quixote attacking a windmill, - trying to get God off a hook He does not want off of.

More often than not, the "paradox card" gets played today under the guise of "paradox." There is no doubt that the Bible contains rhetorical paradoxes, that is, statements in which another idea is challenged in a way which startles the reader. But we must deny that Scripture contains logical paradoxes. It has been in vogue to affirm that Scripture contains logical paradoxes since Barth and the heyday of neo-orthodoxy. We ask, “Does God speak to us in logical contradictions?” Does God say one thing which contradicts, or at least appears to contradict something else He has said? No, says the apostle Paul, “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Corinthians 14:33).

So back to the question of Divine Sovereignty and human responsibility. Is this really a paradox which cannot ever be understood? John Gerstner didn’t think so. He wrote, “We do not see why it is impossible for God to predestinate an act to come to pass by means of the deliberate choice of specific individuals” (A Predestination Primer, 26).

The Westminster Confesstion of Faith didn't take it to be a paradox either. It is important to say this because William Twisse was the Prolocutor (Moderator) as that Assembly. The Confession states, “God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established” (WCF, III, 1). In III.8 the Confession calls this doctrine a “high mystery,” which means that it is difficult to grasp, but it does not call it “paradox,” meaning impossible to reconcile. The Confession goes on to say that the doctrine should be “handled with special prudence and care.” 

This love affair with paradox goes back to Karl Barth and his “Theology of Paradox,” as Kantzer called it. Therefore this assertion of logical paradoxes in Scripture has its roots in neo-orthodoxy. You will remember that in neo-orthodoxy, Scripture is NOT the word of God, but rather contains it. Hence, Barth can claim that the Bible is nothing more that the vulnerable words of men, who were fallible and erring in their writings (C.D. 1:2:507ff). In Barth's view, it is beneath God's dignity to reveal Himself in lowly propositional statements. Therefore we are bound to encounter paradox and contradiction when we read Scripture. For him, of course, that is OK because he thinks that God's “truth” can be conveyed even in error. The logical paradoxes so fondly adhered to by modern opponents of a solid “Westminster” theology are the result of faulty exegesis. They are not the fault of the Bible. 

Twisse wrote this complaint in the 1600s. I dare say things haven't changed.

* Pyrgopolynices is a swaggering, braggart soldier in Miles Gloriosus, a comedic play written by Titus Maccius Plautus (c. 254–184 B.C.)

Infant Baptism, Further Implications, 5

5. Many paedobaptists need to reform their practice to make it more closely reflect their principles.

Why do so many of the baptized youth, in infant-baptizing churches, grow up in ignorance of the faith and religion of their parents? Why do so many of them, when they reach the fringes of adulthood, stray from the faith and wander into systems of error or open wickedness? It's not a sufficient answer to say that our children have a sinful nature and are thus prone to the prevalent errors and foolishness of youth. There is no doubt that this is true, of course. But one never encounters this excuse when a baptized adult turns from the faith to live in open apostasy. It is true that these baptized young people do have a sinful nature, but that is not the whole truth. Much of the fault lies at the doors of the church itself and on the shoulders of their parents.

In a previous post, we mentioned the introduction to the Westminster Confession of Faith, written by the illustrious Thomas Manton. Here are his own words:

“Christian reader, I cannot suppose thee to be such a stranger in England as to be ignorant of the general complaint concerning the decay of the power of godliness, and more especially of the great corruption of youth. Wherever thou goest, thou wilt hear men crying out of bad children and bad servants; whereas indeed the source of the mischief must be sought a little higher: it is bad parents and bad masters that make bad children and bad servants; and we cannot blame so much their untowardness, as our own negligence in their education.”

Too easily the church has forgotten that the seal of baptism is as real to the children as is it is to the parents who receive it. Parents, who spare no effort in providing education for their children, criminally neglect the spiritual education of their children, and this after having solemnly bound themselves to this duty when they presented these children to God for baptism. These children have been shipped off to unbelieving teachers who didn't give a rip about the child's spiritual well-being. Then the same parents act surprised when the children turn from their Christian heritage and upbringing as they grow up. What did they expect? 

There is a great responsibility on the shoulders of Christian parents to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Part of this is firmly implanting in the child's mind the truth that he or she is bound by his or her baptism to be a true follower of Jesus.