A Puritan Catechism
by Ted Slater on 01/29/2008 at 3:07 PM
Jacob Douvier, whom we see commenting regularly on The Line, has started a series on his blog highlighting A Puritan Catechism. Questions addressed include:
- What is the chief end of man?
- What rule has God given to direct us how we may glorify him?
- What do the Scriptures principally teach?
- What is God?
This systematic collection of 82 doctrinal points was compiled by Charles H. Spurgeon, a man I greatly admire. Feel free to stop by Jacob's blog to leave a comment as each point of doctrine has its day, or visit Spurgeon.org to read them all in one sitting.
1. Jacob Douvier said the following at 5:17 PM on Jan 29:
I might add that it is very similar to the Westminster Shorter Catechism, which is another excellent resource, as is the Westminster Larger Catechism.
2. LauraW said the following at 9:43 PM on Jan 29:
I sense a massive Calvinist vs Arminian debate in our near future...
3. Rachael said the following at 11:11 PM on Jan 29:
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Do you know how people/churches/families/individuals typically use catechisms. Are they typically taught in Sunday School or memorized?
Jacob made the following comment on his blog: "In fact, a great bible study is to work through these questions and to examine them in light of Scripture."
I think that's a good idea. I did not grow up with catechisms but am interested to learn more, but it would be good to think about the ideas in light of Scripture to confirm that Scripture is the guide and not man's wisdom, even if the wisdom is based on Scripture.
4. Rachel Gray said the following at 1:02 AM on Jan 30:
Well, I already disagree with the Puritan catechism starting at Question Two. :) "The Word of God which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (Eph. 2:20; 2 Tim. 3:16) is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify God and enjoy him (1 Jn. 1:3)," says the answer. But this is simply an assertion; the answer doesn't provide a single verse from Scripture saying that Scripture is the *only* rule. If the Bible is the only rule of faith, then the Bible itself has to say so clearly.
Funny story about Spurgeon-- for Christmas I gave my mom a collection of his Christmas and Easter sermons, which she loved. Then I discovered that Spurgeon himself was strongly opposed to the celebration of Christmas. He wrote: "We will keep such feasts as the Lord appoints, but not those which Rome or Canterbury may ordain.... When it can be proved that the observance of Christmas, Whitsuntide and other Popish festivals were ever instituted by a divine statute, we also will attend to them, but not till then. It is as much our duty to reject the traditions of men as to observe the ordinances of the Lord." And now, 150 years later, people are marketing his works as "Christmas sermons". :)
5. Caleb S. said the following at 8:50 AM on Jan 30:
This post made me smile!! :)
Laura, why would that debate arise over this, the Puritans are huge part of Christian history. I don't see the debate in sight.
Rachel, point two is essentially saying the scripture is how God speaks to is, it is His authoritative word and means of revelation. We still benefit from sermons and books, but those have to be based on scripture, there is no ongoing revelation.
6. Jacob Douvier said the following at 9:18 AM on Jan 30:
Do you know how people/churches/families/individuals typically use catechisms. Are they typically taught in Sunday School or memorized?
Rachael,
As I understand it, the idea is for catechisms to be used by families to instruct their children, so they would initially be memorized by the children, preferably at a young age, and then as the children get older, the parents and pastors explain more and more of it. It could certainly be used for a sunday school, though. One of my favorite studies in college was when a group of us got together and began working through the Westminster Larger Catechism.
But this is simply an assertion; the answer doesn't provide a single verse from Scripture saying that Scripture is the *only* rule. If the Bible is the only rule of faith, then the Bible itself has to say so clearly.
Rachel Gray,
The Bible clearly teaches that men are sinful and this sinfulness affects even our rational faculties, thereby rendering human wisdom imperfect, at best. Since we cannot rely on the faculties of any human being, we must rely on the Word of God. Those who disagree with Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone as final authority) typically look to church tradition, which, while it does have some good things to teach us, has been passed down to us by fellow sinners who don't always believe rightly.
Monergism.com, an excellent theological resource, has links to several articles and essays on the topic for those who are interested in studying more: http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Sola%20Scriptura/
7. Daniel from the Maritimes said the following at 1:36 PM on Jan 30:
Jacob (and anyone else interested),
What do you think of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral?
My view is that the sentiment behind "Sola Scriptura" is great, but the term itself can be a bit confusing. Luther and Calvin were by no means ignorant of church tradition; I believe they drew on some of the church fathers quite heavily. And they certainly used reason (fallen and imperfect though it is) to interpret the scriptures. I assume they also considered their own experiences in developing their theology.
The point I'm making is that I see "Sola Scriptura" as a rejection of the belief that other sources than the Bible have final authority rather than a wholesale rejection of those other sources. Your response to Rachael Gray makes me think your view is about the same, but I'd be interested in a clarification.
8. Jacob Douvier said the following at 2:53 PM on Jan 30:
Daniel,
I am not familiar with the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, but it sounds interesting.
You would be correct in assuming we're thinking the same thing on the Sola Scriptura issue. As I said, there are some good and beneficial things to learn from church traditions, but the final authority is the Word of God. Interestingly enough, in Calvinistic circles, you have something called the "regulative principle," which serves as a rule of thumb for what ought to be included in a church service (and sometimes other places of the Christian life). In sum, this principle is that unless it was specifically commanded by the Apostles to the New Testament church, it ought not to be included. The Lutheran view (or at least as some Lutherans view the issue) is something of the inverse: unless it was forbidden by the Apostles in the New Testament, it's fair game. Interesting stuff....at least to nerds like me.
9. Jacob Douvier said the following at 3:54 PM on Jan 30:
For those interested, I wrote a blog post on the purpose and uses of a catechism:
This Purpose of a Catechism
10. Rachael said the following at 7:10 PM on Jan 30:
Thanks for the comments. So many issues I hope to learn about. I want to read more about reformed theology. I think I'm probably at least partially "reformed"...but ultimately I want to believe what the Bible says and I'm sure there are people from varying traditions that would also seek to submit their theological views to the authority of Scripture.
Daniel mentioned, "Luther and Calvin were by no means ignorant of church tradition." While I don't know their views of baptism, I think that many churches that consider themselves to be reformed or Calvinistic do infant baptisms. Perhaps part of the reasoning for that is tradition? That is one thing I don't think I'd ever wholeheartedly believe, but I'd like to seek to learn more about the reasoning for that (I kind-of know a couple of reasons, but it doesn't convince me, and also I think people have varying views of the meaning of infant baptism.)
Hope I didn't open up a can of worms, or the moderator will be very busy constantly moderating comments and it will get off-topic. Our blog comments alone shouldn't inform one's theology. :)
But anyway, back to the catechism. Thanks Jacob. I'll have to check our your purpose of the catechism link later.
11. Jacob Douvier said the following at 9:58 AM on Jan 31:
While I don't know their views of baptism, I think that many churches that consider themselves to be reformed or Calvinistic do infant baptisms.
This is true in most cases, however not always. I identify myself as a Reformed Baptist, and we practice credo-baptism (baptism upon profession of faith). Sovereign Grace Ministries identifies themselves as "reformed charismatic," and they also practice credo-baptism, so while infant-baptism is the norm for most Reformed and Lutheran churches, there are some exceptions.
If anyone is interested in learning about Reformed theology, I would either pick up Boice's Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace, or read through either the Westminster or London Baptist confessions of faith (both of which are linked to from my blog).
12. Daniel from the Maritimes said the following at 10:34 AM on Jan 31:
I'm interested in hearing some of the arguments for the "regulative principle" (am I correct to assume you favour the Lutheran view, though, Jacob?).
13. Jacob Douvier said the following at 5:33 PM on Jan 31:
Daniel,
I do think the regulative principle is safe rule of thumb when it comes to corporate worship as a church body. In my mind, the drama team doesn't need to "perform" during a Lord's Day service. I am not prepared to argue for it beyond that, at least at this point. That said, there are a lot of articles on the subject available at Monergism.com: http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Worship/Puritan-Worship-and-the-Regulative-Principle/
14. Michael said the following at 7:41 PM on Feb 2:
I don't know the fancy academic name for it, but in my church we basically believe that any doctrine or tidbit of divine truth not especially taught in scripture is potentially true, if not in contradiction with what has been revealed; but it is speculation to discuss it and therefore not worthy of discussion. I'm referring to issues of faith, not practical matters that might be classed under science, industry, society, culture, etc. The biblical basis for this is Deuteronomy 29:29: "The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." As well as other verses that talk about the foolishness of man, the vanity of human imagination, the completeness of divine revelation, etc.