The pastoral (or ministerial) office is an office instituted by God, executed in the Old Testament under the title of “priest” and in the New Testament under the title of “pastor.” Although commission and calling are executed by human agency, they are nevertheless executed in the name of God. Each pastor must therefore conduct himself as an ambassador of God. “Now then we are ambassadors for Christ” (2 Cor 5:20).

WILHELMUS À BRAKEL, THE CHRISTIAN’S REASONABLE SERVICE, VOL. 2,131.

As believers have communion with their Head Jesus Christ, they likewise have communion with each other. I repeat, with each other, and thus not with other gatherings which assemble for religious purposes.

WILHELMUS À BRAKEL, THE CHRISTIAN’S REASONABLE SERVICE, VOL. 2, 97.

Any implications for Christians in light of American civil religion?

“What happens to our faith, what happens to the church, what happens to the Bible when it gets appropriated for purposes alien to it?”

Augustine’s writings certainly played a significant role in shaping Calvin’s doctrine, despite Calvin’s divergences from his thought. Augustine is referenced 222 times in the 1559 Institutes alone, and 25 of those are in the chapters on predestination, where Calvin repeatedly uses Augustine’s words to express his own understanding, to answer objections, and to summarize his teaching [cf. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.13-14.]. Nevertheless, thought Calvin defended Augustine’s doctrine of election, he parted ways with him on several significant factors relative to reprobation, and on Augustine’s view of the relationship between predestination and providence, as well as Augustine’s philosophy in general.

Joel R. Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination: Early Lutheran Predestination, Calvinian Reprobation, and Variations in Genevan Lapsarianism, 96-97.

The secret things of God are not to be scrutinized, and those which he has revealed are not to be overlooked, lest we may, on the one hand, be charged with curiosity, and, on the other, with ingratitude.

John Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.4. quoted by Joel R. Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination: Early Lutheran Predestination, Calvinian Reprobation, and Variations in Genevan Lapsarianism, 95.

Scripture is both the field and boundary of all pious teaching — the faithful minister ought to teach neither more nor less.

Joel R. Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination: Early Lutheran Predestination, Calvinian Reprobation, and Variations in Genevan Lapsarianism, 95.

Far from being embarrassed by the doctrine of full-orbed predestination, Calvin insists that volition and permission — though distinguishable from a human perspective — are identical for the utterly sovereign God [Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.11.]. Moreover, since God wills all that He permits, He determines reprobation in His eternal decree in the same manner as election, namely, out of His sovereign will and good pleasure [Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.5, 7; 3.22.6.].

JOEL R. BEEKE, DEBATED ISSUES IN SOVEREIGN PREDESTINATION: EARLY LUTHERAN PREDESTINATION, CALVINIAN REPROBATION, AND VARIATION SIN GENEVAN LAPSARIANISM, 85.

The doctrine of reprobation acts as a hinge upon which the entire doctrine of God’s sovereignty in salvation turns. If He chose some for salvation, then He must have chosen not to save others. To deny that God chose not to save some people is to raise the question whether God made any choice at all about whom He would save. One’s view of reprobation functions as a window into his understanding of election. . . .

In his definitive 1559 edition of the Institutes, Calvin unequivocally states: “Election itself could not stand except as set over against reprobation. God is said to set apart those whom he adopts into salvation; it will be highly absurd to say that others acquire by chance or obtain by their own effort what election alone confers on a few. Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.”

Joel R. Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination: Early Lutheran Predestination, Calvinian Reprobation, and Variation sin Genevan Lapsarianism, 83-84.

The chief interest of the Assembly centred in the processes accusing all the bishops of various derelictions of duty, breaches of law, transgressions, and horrible vices. With great foresight the Moderator, Henderson, gravely charged the Committee who were appointed to frame the indictments to see that they proceeded ‘accurately and orderlie, and that it may be upon some sure grounds, for our proceedings with be strichted [tested] to the uttermost.’ This judicial charge itself indicates the care with which the Covenanters proceeded to their solemn trial of the hierarchy.

J. K. Hewison, The Covenanters, Vol. 1, 299.

See also:

Acts of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland 1638-1842

Records of the Kirk of Scotland containing the Acts and Proceedings of the General Assemblies from 1638 by Alexander Peterkin

The rigour [sic] used against the Puritans had only created a popular feeling of esteem for them, and an impatience of temper at the repressive measures used against them.

J. K. Hewison, The Covenanters, Vol. 1, 275.

In separating themselves from them [i.e., heathen, papists, heretics], believers thus exercise communion with the church and her members. Part of the church is triumphant in heaven and part of it is militant upon earth. A believer exercises communion with both.

WILHELMUS À BRAKEL, THE CHRISTIAN’S REASONABLE SERVICE, VOL. 2, 98.