“A number of sections are particularly noteworthy. The section on the covenant of redemption is excellent. What is clear from the study of seventeenth century Reformed Orthodoxy is that systematic theology must have a speculative dimension. It is not simply biblical exegesis but rather stands within the wider tradition of theological reflection going back through the Middle Ages to the patristic era. It is biblical exegesis in dialogue with prior dogmatic formulations and contemporary challenges which drive further dogmatic formulations. Like the Chalcedonian Formula, the covenant of redemption does not simply fall off the pages of scripture; it is the result of the careful co-ordination of Trinitarian and Christological concerns with the overall schema of Reformed soteriology” (Book Review by Carl R. Trueman of Joel R. Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life, in The Confessional Presbyterian, Vol. 10).

“In terms of extant manuscripts, the New Testament textual critic is confronted with an embarrassment of riches. If we have doubts about what the autographic New Testament said, those doubts would have to be multiplied at least a hundred-fold for the average classical author. And when we compare the New Testament manuscripts to the very best that the classical world has to offer, it still stands head and shoulders above the rest. The New Testament is far and away the best-attested work of Greek or Latin literature from the ancient world. Precisely because we have hundreds of thousands of variants and hundreds of early manuscripts, we are in an excellent position for recovering the wording of the original. Further, if the radical skeptics applied their principles to the rest of Greco-Roman literature, they would thrust us right back into the Dark Ages, where ignorance was anything but bliss. Their arguments only sound impressive in a vacuum” (Daniel B. Wallace, “Has the New Testament Text Been Hopelessly Corrupted?” in In Defense of the Bible, eds. Steven B. Cowan and Terry L. Wilder, 151-152).

“In mapping out its new work, the [Catechism] committee carefully observed the injunction to mind the Confession and early catechism. [The “early catechism” was abandoned; it was superseded by the Larger Catechism, and its abstract, the Shorter Catechism.] Notable was [Herbert] Palmer’s method of framing answers so that they did not depend “for their sense upon the foregoing questions.” [Footnote provides quotation’s reference, and also noting that “The Assembly’s Catechism postscript remarks: ‘So much of every Question both in the Larger and Shorter Catechism, is repeated in the Answer, as maketh every Answer an entire Proposition, or sentence in its self.'”] This innovation was carried over into the early catechisms and represented something of an advancement in catechizing technique. Now the learner could “improve it upon all occasions, for his increase in knowledge and piety, even out of the course of catechizing, as well as in it.” The Larger Catechism’s debt to the Confession is easily measured by the frequent recycling of phrases and even whole paragraphs. However, the Catechism also explored fresh areas by expanding on material covered in the Confession such as the fall, the covenants, the mediatorial office and life of Christ, and the benefits of redemption” (John R. Bower, The Larger Catechism: A Critical Text and Introduction, 19).

“Between the 1570s and 1660s, catechisms were so popular that over five hundred new works were published, ranging from primers for toddlers to advanced textbooks extending hundreds of pages” (John R. Bower, The Larger Catechism: A Critical Text and Introduction, 8-9).

“T. F. Torrance castigates the Assembly for what he considers to be a medieval conception of the ordo salutis, with various stages of grace leading to union with Christ. Superficially, it might seem so, since there is no chapter on union with Christ in the Confession, nor is union with Christ significant in the discussion of the elements of salvation. However, Torrance’s thesis is shattered by Larger Catechism 65-90, where all of God’s grace is said to be found in union and communion with Christ. The two documents need to be taken together, for their lines of approach are different but complementary. Torrance refers to the alleged revival of the medieval ordo salutis by William Perkins (1558-1602), and claims the support of an article by his brother,  James B. Torrance –whose argument Richard Muller had destroyed in one of his early publications. Torrance completely ignores Muller, rather like missing the proverbial elephant in the room” (Robert Letham, The Westminster Assembly: Reading Its Theology In Historical Context, 242-243).

“While catechizing was a familiar part of church life in both England and Scotland, English pastors were particularly adept in their composition and use. At least twelve [Westminster] Assembly members had published catechisms in England before 1643, and every clerical member was thoroughly acquainted with the duty and art of catechizing” (John R. Bower, The Larger Catechism: A Critical Text and Introduction, 4).

Last month’s published poem at the Paper Mill.

“What age, what place was there ever, which has not just cause to complain of subjects’ rebellion, children’s disobedience, and wives’ presumption? Therefore, the apostle does not without cause first declare the duties of subordinates [see Ephesians 5:22ff]. Besides, the apostle teaches those who are under authority, how to influence those in authority over them to deal equally and kindly, not harshly and cruelly, namely, by endeavoring to perform their own duty first. For what provokes wrath, rage, and fury in governors? What makes them that have authority deal roughly and rigorously? Is it not for the most part disobedience and stubbornness in those that are under government? Though some in authority are so proud, so savage, and inhumane, that no honor done to them, no performance of duty, can satisfy and content them. They will reward evil for goodness, like David’s enemies (Ps. 38:20). Yet, the best general direction that can be prescribed to subordinates to provoke their governors to deal well with them, is that subordinates themselves be careful and conscientious in doing their duty first. Even if their governors on earth are not moved by that, the highest Lord in heaven will graciously accept it” (William Gouge, Building a Godly Home, Vol. 1, 26).

“There is a great reason that all service should be limited by the fear of God. God is the highest Lord to whom all service primarily and principally is due; whatever service is due to any man, high or low, is due in and for the Lord. The Lord has set superiors in the high places where they bear the image of God. The Lord also has set subordinates in their places, and commended them as His charge to the government of those who are over them. He that does not obey those who are over him in the fear of God, shows no respect of God’s image, and he who does not govern those who are under him in the fear of God shows no respect for God’s charge” (William Gouge, Building a Godly Home, Vol. 1, 15).

“The fountain of salvation itself in the eternal election of the Father is “in Christ.” Paul says: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1:3, 4). The Father elected from eternity, but he elected in Christ. We are not able to understand all that is involved, but the fact is plain enough that there was no election of the Father in eternity apart from Christ. And that means that those who will be saved were not even contemplated by the Father in the ultimate counsel of his predestinating love apart from union with Christ–they were chosen in Christ. As far back as we can go in tracing salvation to its fountain we find “union with Christ”; it is not something tacked on; it is there from the outset” (John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied, 162).