“An establishment may . . . be the occasional, but not the efficient cause of mischief. The machine may be faultless; but exposed, as it must be, while the species lasts, to the intromission of hands, which to a certain degree will taint and vitiate all that they come in contact with. The remedy is not to demolish the machine, and transfer the hands which wrought it to other managements and other modes of operation—There will still be corruption notwithstanding.” And even a reformed establishment can be re-corrupted: “The human nature which you thus transfer, will carry its own virus along with it” (Thomas Chalmers, Works 11:454).
Or, in other words, bad men can make a bad use of good things.
“But now, to apply all this to the subject under consideration—the earthly inheritance : If that inheritance was promised in a way which, from the very first, implied a resurrection from the dead, before it could be rightly enjoyed; and if all along, even when Canaan was possessed by the seed of Abraham, the men of faith still looked forward to another inheritance, when the curse should be utterly abolished, the blessing fully received, and death finally swallowed up in victory,—then a twofold boon must have been conveyed to Abraham and his seed, under the promise of the land of Canaan; one to be realized in the natural, and the other in the resurrection state, —a mingled and temporary good before, and a complete and permanent one after, the restitution of all things by the Messiah. So that, in regard to the ultimate designs of God, the land of Canaan would serve much the same purpose as the garden of Eden, with its tree of life and cherubim of glory—the same, and yet more; for it not only presented to the eye of faith a type, but also gave in its possession an earnest, of the inheritance of a paradisiacal world. The difference, however, is not essential, and only indicates an advance in God’s revelations and purposes of grace, making what was ultimately designed for the faithful more sure to them by an instalment, through a singular train of providential arrangements, in a present inheritance of good. They thus enjoyed a real and substantial pledge of the better things to come, which were to be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”
In the following passage, Thomas Chalmers writes of the secondary, ‘collateral’ benefits of an aggressive, national parish system in bringing the Gospel to the masses. The “moral distance” of estranged classes within society would tend to melt away, and so indirectly rejuvenate the outward social and political order of the nation:
“The more that this [moral] distance is alleviated by the subdivisions of locality, the more do the charities of common companionship mingle in the commotion, and exude an oil upon the waters that assuages their violence. They are the towns of an empire, which form the mighty organs of every great political overthrow, and if a right parochial system in towns would serve to check, or rather to soften, the turbulence that is in them, then ought the establishment of such a system to be regarded by our rulers as one of the best objects of patriotism” (Chalmers, Works, 14:388).
Not that we can revive a national establishment without a mass awakening and a groundswell of support both by people and princes. Yet, Chalmers contended, we can all engage in local parish mission at the grassroots level, seeking the regeneration of communities as we pray and wait for national repentance.
The following is drawn from William Ames’ Marrow of Theology 2.16, “Of Justice and Charity toward our neighbour.” A Reformed orthodox treatment of the ordo amoris or order of love.
* * * * *
13. The order of this charity is this: that God is first and chiefly to be loved by charity, and so he is, as it were, the formal reason for this charity toward our neighbour. Next after God we are bound to love ourselves, namely with that charity which respects true blessedness; for loving God himself with a love of union, we love ourselves immediately with that chief charity which respects our spiritual blessedness. But secondarily, we should love others whom we would have partake of the same good with us. Moreover, others may be deprived of this blessedness without our fault, but we ourselves cannot; and therefore we are more bound to will and to seek this blessedness for ourselves than for others.
14. This is why the love of ourselves has the force of a rule or a measure for the love of others: You shall love your neighbour as yourself.
15. Hence it is never lawful to commit any sin for another’s sake, even though our offence may seem small, and to be a chief good which we should seek for another. For he that wittingly and willingly sins, hates his own soul. Pro 8.36, He that sins against me, offers violence to his own soul. Pro 29.24. He that partakes with a thief, hates himself: he hears cursing and does not declare it.
Some more personal reading recommendations. First, finished reading Luther in Love to the family in our Sabbath down time. We’ve read a number of his other books for younger readers—and the young at heart—all of them well-researched and well-written. I thought this one in particular really exhibited Bond’s literary excellence. Very easy to read. My only quibble is that the book’s title would lead you to think that its central theme is his relationship with his wife, Katharina von Bora. Their relationship is prominent, to be sure; but it’s really more a life of Luther. But if you really want to read some historical fiction featuring their Christian romance, I’d highly recommend, Kitty, My Rib, by E. Jane Mall.
Another book I read to the family was the non-fiction book by David Murray, Why Am I Feeling Like This? A Teen’s Guide to Freedom from Anxiety and Depression. This is the best thing I’ve come across from a Reformed perspective, addressed to adolescents. He covers the range of emotional pathologies, whether full-blown disorders or just the phases of that often tumultuous transition from childhood to adulthood. Very insightful, very appropriate, and very accessible. This is helpful also to share with others who are trying to help their teenagers weather their feelings biblically and wisely. You can read the introduction and the first chapter here, where he introduces “Circular Sarah.”
Finally, my last recommendation is a modern, secular classic, the sci-fi I, Robot by Isaac Asimov. Now, this genre is not my typical go-to, but my son put me on to it, and I was not at all disappointed. Originally published in 1950 and written about a futuristic world set in the 21st century, it is quite striking how very prescient Asimov was in terms robotics and artificial intelligence. The book is a catena of short stories featuring a handful of characters and their robotic counterparts who really prove to be a foil and a looking-glass for themselves as humans, in all their fancy, fury, and folly. I was quite surprised with how Asimov combined the technical, literary, and philosophical in a compelling way. Definitely both sides of the brain were working full power! And yet so tragic to consider that the celebrated author was a Russian Jew turned atheist. Man can imagine artificial intelligence and foreshadow it with elegance; and time has shown that he can bring it into being. Yet in his hubris he cannot and will not return to the Source. “Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (1 Cor. 1:20-21). When one looks at the image above, what does he see but a dead idol, the stump of Dagon, the hollow shell of a man? Even so, the idol-maker is just “like unto them.”
I could use a tech-savvy helper for my Reformed Parish Mission work. I’m looking to create several videos of Spanish metrical psalms (Salterio de Ginebra) using slides such as these put to music sung by my family. Below are samples of both.
Continuing to follow with interest Timon Cline et al over at American Reformer. Still parsing the field of contemporary “Christian nationalism” and trying to discern the good and the not-so-good; so I share this with some tentativeness, yet general appreciation thus far. Classical Protestant ethics and socio-political ethics fascinates me, so anyone participating in a retrieval has my attention.
Have enjoyed reading this article about John Witherspoon and the colonial Presbyterian iteration of establishmentarianism, contra Kevin DeYoung’s pluralistic take of the American revision of the WCF 23. Looks like others there have also written on the same. I still wonder to what degree Witherspoon may have been influenced by Enlightenment liberalism and what bearing that may have had on how he approached Christian magistracy. But that there is more continuity with the original WCF 23 than not just seems to sync with what I’ve understood about public religion in colonial America. Absolute separation just seems laughable on so many counts. I am also reminded how Dr. William Young opined that the American revision of WCF 23 did not technically contradict the original 1646 statement. While my denomination is the only NAPARC body committed to the original edition, I am at least coming to appreciate that we may have more of a genetic connection with colonial Presbyterian than I had first thought.
O, that God would stir up the missionary spirit again! Let us humble and abase ourselves, and plead with the Lord for a fresh anointing of the Spirit of God! John Breckinridge (1797-1841):
The following are quotes are from A Body of Practical Divinity (1838 edition):
“We glorify God, when we give God the glory of all we do. . . . As the silk-worm, when she weaves her curious work, she hides herself under the silk, and is not seen; so when we have done Constantine did use to write the name of Christ over his door, so should we write the name of Christ over our duties; let him wear the garland of praise” (27).
“The word being begun to be preached, hear it with reverence and holy attention. ‘A certain woman, named Lydia, attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.’ Acts 16: 14. Constantine, the emperor, was noted for his reverent attention to the word” (381).
West Port Experiment 
