   V O L U M E   X X I  ..                                                 . .  J A N U A R Y   1 5 ,  -1944 .                                 NUMBER 8

                                                                                                         Farao kan wel zijn' .hoogmoedig  "Neen!" stellen
                                                                                                 tegenover het "Ja !" van den oppersten Potentaat der
                                                                                                 Potentaten; enhij kan zich voor een oogenblik wel be-
                                                                                                 roemen op dat "Neen !`*. en wanen, dat hij als partij
                                                                                                 tegen den,Almachtige  optreedt. Doch allen roem wordt
                                                                                                 hem ras ontnomen. Want niet alleen gaat zijn "Neen !"
                                                                                                 er onder, en lblijft  Gods  "Ja !" eeuwiglijk, maar ook
                                                                                                 zegt de Schrift nog tot hem : hiertoe `heb Ik u ge-
                         il4aw  gij a2jt een uitv,erkorek  geslacht, een                        `zet!
                       koknklijk  priesterdom, een ,heilig  volk, een                                 Dengenen namelijk, die zich aan~het  Woord stooten,-
                       we&regen  wo,&,:  op,ci?at  giji zossdt werk~o~ndigen                     ongehoorzaam zijnde, waartoe zij ook gezet zijn!
                       (de deubclen.  Desgenen, Die u wit  de duistier&                               M a a r g i j ! . . . .  ..
                 .    gepoepen  heeft- tot Zijn wo:nd,erbaar licht.                                      Gij; ja, gij'zijt `een uitnemend volk! (Gij  komt tot
   ,$                                               -..
        ,$'                                                               I Petr. 2:9.'
                                                             .                                   den levenden Steen, bij God,  uitverkoren en dierbaar.,
                                                                                                 en gij wordt als levende steenen  agebouwd  tot een geeste-
               Maar gij! . -. `.' .                                                              lijk huis, tot een heilig priesterdom,  om' geestelijke
               Ontzettende, verbazingwekkende tegenstelling !                                    offeranden .op te offeren, Gode  _ aangenaam door Jezus
               Tegenstelling, <die dan alleen' door u kan `worden                                Christus. Gij gelooft. U is deze Steen kostelijk en
  verstaan en aanvaard, als ge verstaat, datze door den                                          dierba:ar.       En gij zult nooit beschaamd worden. En
  hoogen God,. en dan met .volstrekt sougereiniteit,  in                                        gij moet het ook hoaren,,;gij  moet het weten, dat ge een
  h e t   l e v e n   w o r d t   g e r o e p e n .                                              uitnemend voltk'zijt, `tipdat ge we-dure  roeping moogt
               Tegenstelling, ,die slechix dan door u han worden
                                       _ ~-:`=     -- __.                                        verstaan, om te'verkondig&  de deugden D,esgenen, Die
  overgenomen, en warvan ge slechts dan moogt `ge-                                              u uit de duisternis geroepen heeft 'tot Zijn wonderbaat:
  wagen, als ge eerst u voor den hoogen God, voor de                                                                                `...: :
                                                                                                 licht.
  :alleen hoge Majesteit in de hemelen in het stof hebt                                              En ge zijt dit alles in schrille tegenstelling met de-
 .geworpen; om te belijden, dat hier niets wordt gezegd,                                         `genen, die zich aan het Woord stoot&, ongehoorzaam
  waarop gij ook maar in het minst zoudt kunnen bogen,
 dat alle roem volstrekt is uitgesloten.                                                         zijnde.
                                                                                                      Maar ziet ge `dan niet, dat ge dit nimmer kunt of
   ~           Opdat geen vleesch. zou roemen voor Hem !                                         moogt zeggen, dat ge van uwe uitnemendheid nimmer
               Daar%jn  er eenerzijds,  die den Steen, door God ten                              moogt roemjen,  tenzij uw roem is in den hoogen God,
  hoofd hoeks gelegd, verachten en verwerpen, en voor                                            en alle zelfroem is uitgesloten?
wie deze Steen wordt tot een steen des aanstoots, en                                                  Verstaat ge dan niet, dat uw gewagen van deze uit-
 eene rots der ergernis.                          Het zijn zij, die zich a.an het                nemendheid niets is dan ijldele eigenwaan en gruwelijke
  Woord stooten.               En ook zelfs bij hen mag  ,er !geen roem                          zelfverheffing, tenzij d1a.n;  `dat ge haar laat opkomen
 ,ov.erblijven.            Ook in hun ongeloof, ook in ,hun verderf                              uit de eeuwige, souvereine  verkiezing, en hare ver-
  mogen ze zich ten slotte  .nog niet beroemen voor het                                          werkelijcking  louter aan Goddelijke genade toeschrijft?
 `angezicht des lvevenden Gods.                                  ,Ook  als z zouden willen
  roemen in hunne verachting van, in hun snoeven tegen                                                Alle roem is uitgesloten !
  den Steen, wordt hun ook nog dezen euvelen roem om-                                                ,Ge zijt een koniak1ij.k  priesterdom, ja, maar alleen
  nomen.              Want immers ze.`moeten. het Woord van ,den                                 omdat ge een z&we&oren geslacht zijt.
 `hoogen en alleen:souvreinen'God  hooren, dat ze.ook tot                                            Ge zijt een heilig volk, `t is waar, en ge moogt, ge
  dit zich stoot,en  aan het Woord gezet zijn!
                                                                   ..*                           moet. het weten ; maar vergeet het ,dan. niet, dat dit


               170                                       THE,   S T A N D A R D   B E A R E R

               alleen waar is, omdat God `nu Zelf. tot eene bezitting                Daarom is het ook een koninklijk volk, een kon~nl&%
               verkreeg!                                                          priesterdom !
                      Ge verlroadi:t  de deugden des allerhoogsten ,Gods,i            Immers, de knecht des !Heeren  is koning. Hij alleen
               goed ; maar. ht mqgen en het kunnen ,en het w612en van            mag koning zij-n. Zoo was reeds naar `t bestek Gods
               deze verkondiging hebt ge alleen van God  !                        over Adam in het eerste Paradijs.        Zich buigend voor
                      Hij riep LI uit de duisternis tot Zijn wonderbaar           den hoogen God mocht hij heerschappij voeren over'
               licht !                                                            "alle aardsche werken van Gods  h.a.nden.    Zoo wordt het,
                      Er is in uwe uitnemendheid niets van uzelf!                 maar nu in veel hooger zin, door .de diepte der zonde
                      Gode zij aIleen   d e   e e r !        '                    en des doods heen, centraal weer in Christus Jezus:
                                           ---                                    den Knecht des Heeren bij uitnemendheid. Hij is de'
                                                                                  Koning-priester in der eeuwigheid, naar de ordening
                      Wonderwerk van Goddelijmke,  genade !                       van Melchizedek.       En Zijner zalving worden allen,
                      Gods  volk is cene eenheid : een geslacht, een priestcr-    die van Hem en in Hem.zijn,  deelachtig.
               clom, een vol12                                                        Gods volk is een ~ko.n&kl@`k  pcriestewlom.
                      Ze zijn :-iet maar een zeker aantal, van geredde                Als zoodanig mogen ze met. eene goede  conscientie
               menschen, zonder verband, zonder idee, zonder ' har-                den strijd des Heeren strijden i,n deze wereld, den
               monie.        Integendeel, ze vormen tezamen n geheel.           .strijd tegen zonde en vleesch en Satan. Als zoodanig  .
               Ze hebben denzelfden geestelijken oorsprong, ze heb-               zijn ze in dien strijd altijd meer dan overwinnaars
               ben dezelfde zeden en gewoonten, ze spreken `allen de-             door Hem, Die hen liefgehad heeft. En als zoodanig
               zelfde taa.1,  ze behooren bij elkander; en zijn aan elk-          mogen ze straks, als dienstknechten Gods  eeuwiglijk
               ander verbonder.         En Geest woont in allen, n Chris-       regeeren .met Christus over a.lle de werken van Gods
               tus is hun Hoofd,- ze zijn door nen doop gewasschen, h a n d e n !
               afgezonderd van de wereld; ze hebben n geloof,  n?                 Daartoe zijn ze ook een heilig volk!
               hoop, en nen God en Vader, Die over allen en in lallen               Een priesterdom toch moet heiligezijn, zooals God
               is.     Ze -vormen eene eenheid, die door ne idee wordt           heilig is. Zooals God heilig is, d.w.z. Zichzelven ge-
               abeheerscht:  de openbaring van den rijkdom der God-                wijd is, Zichzelven zoekt en vindt, Zijn eigen eer zoekt
                delij.ke heerlijkheid in den Geliefde. Ze dienen allen             als de eenig Goede, zoo zijn ook zij heilig, d.w.z. afge-
                n doel: `de verkondiging van de deugden des Aller-               scheiden valn de zonde en van de wereld, en Gode  ge-
               hoogsten, en ze dienen ,dat doel op duizendvoudige wijze,           wijd. Met hart en ziel, met al hunne zinnen en ge-
               ieder op eigen wijs, op zijn eigene plaats, naar eigene            negenheden gaan ze naar God uit, zoeken en vinden ze
               mate van genade! . . . .                                            Hem, verhoogen ze Zijn eer.
                      Een geslacht, een volk, een priesterdom  !                      Ze zijn Gode  eene bezitting, eene erve.
                      En welk een volk !                                              Het doel van hun bestaan is in God alleen.
                 ' Waar vindt ge onder alle `volkeren der wereEd nu                   Uitnemend volk van God !
                zulk een volk? Waar zoudt ge geslacht.of  natie kunnen
                aanwijzen, dat in uitnemendheid ook maar een oogen-
               blik te vergelijken is bij dit wonderwerk  Go&,?
                      `t Is een priesterdom!                                          Gods  werk alleen !
                      En `dat wil immers `zeggen; dat dit volk .bestaat  uit
,                                                                                     Zijn Naam moet eeuwig eer ontvangen!
               knechten des Allerhoogsten, geroepen om dag en nacht                   Want dit volk heeft, Hij Zich geformeerd!        Zij zul-
     1          in Gods  huis te wonen, en te staan als dienstknechten            len lof vertellen!
               voor het aangezicht van de hooge Majesteit in de  heme-                Immers, het is een uitvedoren volk, het is een ver-
               `len! ;Het wil zeggen, dat. dit volk bestaat uit men-               kregen volk, het is een volk, dat Hij geroepen heeft
                schen, die van #den  kleinste tot `den grootste toe, van *den      uit de duisternis tot Zijn wonderb,aar licht!
          _     geringste tot den voornaamste, gezalfden' des Heeren                  Verkoren, verkregen, geroepen !
                zija, ambtsdragers, bij wie en in wie het moetien  en het             Daar hebt ge het eenige, maar ook-het geheele ant-
                mogen, het willen en het ,kwnne.v dienen van God in de woord op de vraag naar de oorsprong en de wording
               `meest volkomene harmonie zijn.           `t Is een volk, dat       van dit uitnemend volk.      En in dit antwoord is niets
                Gode  gewijd is; dat hier in beginsel en straks in eeu-           .van lden mensch.     God alleen, en dat in souvereine  vrij-
               wige volmaaktheid zingt :                                          macht, is de auteur van alles, wat tot de uitnemendheid
                       "Wat  vree heeft elk, die Uwe wet bemint  !                 van dit vol:k .behoort.
                          Zij zullen aan geen hinderpaal zich  stooten.             ! `t Is uitverkoren.
                          Ik, Heer, die al mijn blijdschap in U vind,                 Daarinligt de oorsprong van dit koninklijk priester-
                          Hoop op Uw heil met al Uw gunstgenooten  ;               dom. En de verkiezing is een eepwige daad van Godes
                          `k doe Uw geboon  oprecht en welgezind;                  vrijmacht. Hij verkoor dit volk, niet omdat het een
                          l.Jw liefdedienst heeft mij nog nooit verdroten"         koninklijk priesterdom was, maar opdat het dat zou


word.en. `Hij verordineerde juist het, en dat in Godde-          schuldig  ,en doemwaardig.         En wat hun betreft is het
lijke ondierscheiding  van anderen, niet omdat het in            gans&  onmogelijk, da.t ze ooi$ in Godes  gunst zouden
zichzelf me.er geschiktheid had als materiaal voor de            w o r d e n  hensteld.  Maar ook hier geldt het: wat  on-
formeering va.n e&. konink1ij.k priesterdorii,  maar ,opdat      mogelijh is bij ,de'rnenechen,  is mogelijk Mje God.              Hij
.hetgeefi *in zichzelf niets is <door hei wonder der genade      verordineerde Zijnen Zoon om ,a.an de spitse van <dit
geschikt zou worden.     De verkiezing is vo!strekt  eerst,      volk te staan. En aan het `hoof,d  v,a.n  Zijn vol,k  gaat deze
eeuwige oorzaak, bron leln obrsprong van dit volk en al          Zoon den dood in, betaalt Hij de schuld, verdient Hij
zijtie uitnemendheid. Door niets werd God in, Zijne              voor hen eeuwige gerechtigheid. ,God verzoende ons
verkiezing ,beperkt  of bepaald, .door niets buiten Zich-        met Zichzelven-door den dood Zijns Zoons, Opdat'Hij
zelven werd Hij bewogen.       Goddelijk. welbehagen al-         Zich deze bijzondere erve uit den dood zou verkrijg&!
leen is sde uiteindelijke, oorza.ak  van de uitnemendheid            Goddelijk wonder *der verzoening!            _._'
                                            1
van dit volk.                                                        En zooals ,Hij hun, die in zichz$ven doemtiaardig
    O p d a t   g e e n  vlees& zou roemen voor Hem..            zijn, het recht verwierf om Zijne bijzondere ,bezitting
    En zooals God dit volk ' van e@uwighei heeft uit-          te worden, zoo formeert Hij hen ook tot Zijne  erve
verkoren om een konin,klij-k  priesterdom, een heilig            door Goddelijke genade.
volk, eeqe bijzondere bezitting Gods  te `worden, zoo is             Hij roept hen!
Hij het `ook, en Hij alleen, Die met even vrije souve-              ,Roept he.n uit de duisternis tot Zijn licht!
reiniieif, Zijne verkiezing, Zijn eeuwig welbehagen                  En zooa.ls  d;e duisternis, w&rian  ze van nature wan-
openbaart en uitvoert in `den $ijd.         ~                    delen, vreeselijk is, le@&+  duisternis van dwaasheid ea
    Uit Hem, maar ook door Hm zijn alle dingen.                 leugen, van onreinigheid en verderf,  van ongerechtig-
 ' (Geen  meixchelijk element mag in de formeering               heid en vijandschslp  tegen God, van toorn en afgrijzen
van dit uitnemend volk medewerken met Goddelijke                 e n   e e u w i g e n  dood.; zoo  is dit licht wonder.baar, een
a.lmacht. Integendeel, juist omdat het Godadelijk won-           licht van Goddelijke wijsheid en waa.+heid, van kennis
der genade op het hoogst en heerlijkst tot openbaring            en gemeenschap, van gerechtigheid en heiligheid, van
moet Bomen, juist omdat het hier alles gaat om  .de heer-        leen- ingaan in Gods  tabernakel, van eeuwig, hemelse11
lijkheid ,Gods en de eere van Zijn Naam, daakom  moet            leven : het licht van de opstanding uit  ,de doocen !
de realizeerin@  van dit koninklijk priesterdom ,eene                Uit ,de duiste&s  -tot Zijn w0nderbaa.r licht zijn zc
menschelijke onmogelijkheid blij'ken te zijn.                    geroepen !
    Hij heeft dit volk v&i?regen.      ~                             Geroepen door het Evangelie!
   :Het woord, dat hier in het oorsp*onkelijke  wordt;               Geroepen door het Goddelijke Woord!
gebezigd, is eenigszins moeilij  weer te geven in onze               Verkoren, verkregen, geroepen !
taal. Het Engelsch  vertaalt "a peculiar people," of                 Godtdelijk   w o n d e r  !
volgens teene jbetere vertaling "a people for God's own
possessioti."    En dat is metterdaad de gedachte.      GodS
volk is eene bijzondere bezitting .Gods,'  eeti volk, dat
God Zich in geheel bijzondeyen  zin tot eene bezitting               Vit @em!
heeft verkregeL     Het is Zijne erve, Zijn bijzonder deel.       D o o r   H e m ! '
Hemel en aard zijn Zijne, ten `Hij doet er mee naar het              Maar dan ook bot Hem, en tot Hem alleen !
welbehagen van Zijnen wil. "Ook  de goddeloozen. en alle             Dit koninklijk- priesterdom is ook profeet Gods  !
machten dey duisternis zijne Zijne. Maar dit volk is                 En ze zijti  geroepen, opdat ze zouden verkondige
Zijne bijzondere bezitting, Zijn deel. `-In hen openbaart        de (deugden ,Gods,  Die hen alzoo geroepen heeft uit de
aHij  de heerlijkheden van Zijne ideugdeg.       Zij zijn het    duisternis tot Zijn wonderbaar licht!
voorwerp van Zijlne eeuwige liefde. In hen heeft Hij                 Gods  deugden zijn Zijne Goddelijhe heerlijkheden,
Zijn lust. Op dit volk heeft  -Hij Zijn hati gezet. Hen          de aanbiddelij,ke eigenschappen van Zijn eeuwig en
heeft Hij verordineerd om eeuwiglijk aan d,e spitse van          oneindig Goddelij,k wezen.         En ,die ,deugden  Gods  wor-
al Zijne wer.ken  te staan.                                      den onvermengd, en op het allerhoogst geopenbaard in
    Maar toch is de gedachte niet uitgesloten, dat Hij           ;de verkiezing, verkrijging, en roeping van dit  .konink-
adeze bijzondere erve op eene geheel bijzondere wijze            lijk priesterdom in Christus Jezus gijnen Zoon, onzen
ve%Yege% heeft.                                                  `Heer. Die cieugden aanschouwen ze. De macht, .de
    Hij heeft haar Zich gekocht door het bloed Zijns             wijsheid, de ondoorgrondelijke genade en liefde van
Zoons!                                                           den God hunner zaltgheid  hebben ze erva.ren,  gesmaakt.
    Want zooals zij j van nature zijn, worden `ze niet                Dat ze dan ,die deugden ve&ondigen  !
alleen gekenmerkt door. volkomene ongeschikthei:d  om                 Verkondigen, roemen en prijzen, voor het aange
een bijzoeder volk Gods  te worden, maar ze hebben               zischt Gods,  voor elkander, voor de wereld!
ook geen recht om als een koninklijk priesterdom in                 _ Bier en tot in eeuwigheid !           b
Gods  huis te staan en te dienen. Ze zijn vijanden Gods,                                                                  H. H.
















                                            T H E   S T A N D A R D   B E A R E R                                                            179


       with that of the Church of ,a11 ages, when it mainta.inx         human being.         He is not essentially and eternally God.

       in the thirty4hird  question and answer the true, essen-         but God 8e&owed  uj&i Him the unique honor of being

       tial, and distinct divinity of Jesus Christ.                     called His only begotten Son. The Nominal Trinitar-

          We say: the distinc't  divinity, of our Lord.                 ians did not  teach that Jesus is not the Son of God,

          For this it is, indeed, that the Catechism emoha-             but they insisted that the name Son of God denotes an
     Sizes.  Both in Scr$ture, and in the Apostolic Confes-             affluence or power' of-the  Father,  not a distinct ,persoh

       sion, Christ is called "the only begotten Son. of God."          in the trinity, and  that this power  or affluence of the
.      And the Catechism caIls special attention to this ex-            Father  WAS e%l&cially  strong in Chris't.              Hence; it is in
       clusive and distinctive term .oiily  begotten: Why should        virtue of this strong pr%eiiee  and pen-er  of Go'd  in
       Christ be called thus? What is the meaning of the                .Him,  and not  because He-is essentia;lly  `God, that He

       term? What does it teach us? Scripture calls. angels             is called the only begotten of the Father,:                The' Socin-

       also the sons of ,God.  Moreover, believers ar,e  called         ians and the Moderns of today  !have no objection to the
       by that name. And even Adam is so called. If there               doctrine that Jestis  is the'  Son of ' Gdd ; He may even
       are more sons of God, then, if Christ is .not the only           be calied  the only begot-ten; but to them this does not
       Son of God, how can `He be  cahed  the only begotten?*           mean that He is very God; the scconcl  person in the
       What does this exclusive term expr&?  And in the                 trinity: R&h&  d&s it mea.n  that.  He was so truly
       answer the Heidelberger  distinguishes between the               divinebecau&  He was so kpj~ly gfi&~re~l~j~  h$Gae_                  WC

       Sonship  of Christ, and that of believers.       It `is true,    ark all &ildi$n OT G~Bj for we ail are  made in God's
       that believers are also called the children of God; yet          image_ The distinction  of Ghri&  is that He was so

       Christ iii the Son in an altogether special and uniqu?           deeljly and  clearly &nsciio;us  of His Sonship;  and that
       sense of of the word.      Christ's sonshiP  belongs not to      H e  l.ived  so p&f&&~  a$ a; &M  of G6&  Th& C&d-

       time,. but in eternity, ours has a beginning; ,belongs           co~s~i~j&~&$  Qf&  c&y&g is .fi_Ii*!
       ts time: we are adopted. And the~Sonsship  of Christ                 It 1~; tJ&g;  dljif,&  &+&apy  f&t  &lieu&s  ire ill_
       is watuW;al; He is ziy nature;  essentially, the Son of God,     strutted  in the truth of Christ's unique, distinctive,
       we become children.of  God only through grace;                   essential So`nship:
          And it is well, that this distinction is made, and                For, secondly; with this fui:dl..mental  truth stands
       that thus the unique Sonship  of Christ, and His true            or falls, the -whole truth concerning our salvation.                  If
       divinity is maintained.                                          Christ is not very (God,  -there  is no Immanuel,  no In-
          For, first of all, this is necessary in opposition to         carnation, no' union of God and man; no tabernacle of
       all kinds of heresies that have arisen, and alwa..ys  do         God with men, no c.ovenant  of fr,endship,  no revelation
       arise `against this do%trine  of the true and essential          of the F&her.        If He, Who?die.d,on  Calvary; was a mere
       Godhead of Christ.                                               man, was not the S-on of God- in the flesh, there was no
         And the Chur,ch  must instruct her children clearly            p'erfect  sacrifice for sin on that accursed tree, there
       and definitely in this doctrine, in -order that they may         is no atonement,- God. did not reconcile us. unto Himself
       not be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine, but          in the blood,  of .His  Son:     If Christ is not very God His
       stand in .the `faith once #delivered unto the saints.            .own  resurrection is but a beautiful legend, and He

          The' matter would not be so serious, if those that            cannot be the resurrection and the life for us.                 In one

       deny this fundamental truth would only speak  i,ri plain         word; if Christ is not essentia.lly  and eternally God; our

       language, and unambi~guously  declare,that  Jesus is not         faith is vain; we are still. in our sins, and we are-  still
       the Son of God. But this they do not. Those who                  without God in the world

       desire to instill the poison of their  .false  doctrine into         And no beautiful philosophy of the Man of Galilee

       the minds and hearts of believers, and thus to destroy           can- take the place of the Christ of the- Scriptures.

       the Church of Christ, never proclaim their heresies                  But, thanks,  .be to God; God sent- His only begotten

       boldly and openly. ,On the contrary, they-try to hide            Son -into the world, that He might represent His ow:n,

       the real meaning of their views by preserving and                lay down His life for His sheep, bring to light life and
       speaBing in the same terms as the Church. And sot                immortality, reconcile;                 unto
                                                                                                        L~S              Himself, and unite us

       they try to deceive the people of God, and make-them             with Him for ever in the blessed fellowship of His

       believe that their heresies are harmless, that they are,,        eternal't~aaber.nacle  !
       in fact, fundamentally in harmony with the faith of                 . For this Jesus is very God!                           l3. H.
       the Church, a.nd  with the teaching of Holy Writ.                                #
          This is also true with regard to heresies concerning

       the !doctrine  of the divinity of Christ.    Old Arius did.
       not ,deny  that Jesus is the Son of God, but he pointed                   Have I the' weddi.ng  garment on,

       out that the name Son of GoZ is a title that is given to                  Or do I n&&d stand &lone  ?

       Christ, that is applicable to Him especially after the                    ,O!  quicker&  clothe, and feed  my soul,

       resurrectior$  and that .denotes  Him as a very exalted                   Forgive' my sins, and make me  whole.


                                                                           -,
 180                                     T    H     E      STB.NDA.RD  BEA-RER

                                                                  matter of the circumcision of his son. It was Christ
           The Lord Does Wotidrously                              who communicat&  to him the law and spake to him out
                                                                  of the tabernacle of the congregation.             When the  people
   As w&s  said, we learn from  the reactions of Manoah           of Israel took their journey froln  Egypt it was none
 to what his wife told him, that he, too, was sf that             other than Christ who Yvent  before ,them  by day in a
 number in Israel who feased God. Had- he been 3n                 pillar of fire to give them light.           Thle word of the Lord

% unbeliever he would have made light of her words.               that came to a21 the prophets, was a word t&at  was
 But he was deeply interested and concerned, believing            communicated to them by Christ.                   Through all the
 and hopeful, for he turned to the Lord in prayer.         I f    centuries of the Old Dispensation, Christ functioned
 only the messenger would appear unto them once more              `personally.
 and teach  them what they sha,ll do unto the child that              There can be no <doubt  that  the angel who appeared
 is to be born. As was said, the prayer was superfluous           to the parents. of Sa.mson  was the Angel of the Lo?d.
 for the instruction for which Manoah  prays had al-              Manoah  asked him to divulge his name. "What is
 rea,dy  been given.    It shows that the prayer rises noc        thy nalyle,"  he said to him, "that when thy sayings come
 from the need of more instruction as to how the child            to pass we may do ithee  honor." And he answers,
 is to be treated but from the need of the confirmation           "Why asketh  thou thus my name, seeing it is wonder-
 of his faith through the appearance of the messenger.            ful."          In Isa. 9 :5 it is said, "Unto us a child is born  and
 The tman  .of God-Manoab  knew not that the, man of              hi's name is a.ond.erful,  wonder-worker. Isa. 29 :14
:God who ha,d appeared unto his wife was the angel of             explains our present passa,ge.            It says, "I will continue
 the Lord-came again, and worked a sign that was                  to show myself doing wonders to this `people,  w&de1
 plainly indictive  of .his true identity. He did  so be-         ilpon wonder."              A wonder is a new, work of God.
 cause, as was remarked, the Lord  always  stands ready           Ex. 33 :lO, "And he said, Behold I make a covenant 
                                                                                             .-.                                      :
 to bring to ,full  fruition the faith of such who <by His        before all the people I will do wonders, such as have
 mercy want,to  believe.                                          not been done in all the earth,  `nor in any  nation: and

    `The messenger, who appeared unto Manoah. as his              all the `people among whom thou art shall see the work
wife, was notj !aa ordinary man. He was not an ordinary           of the Lord." &a. 43 :9, "Behbld  I will d.o a new thi.ng;
 angel but the Angel of the .Lord, the second person in           now it shall spring forth."             The wonder is a working
the, blessed. trinity, in His office of Mediator,- thus He        of God according to which Be redeems His people from
 whom we now .worship & &r <God  and Saviour Christ               !;heir sins and le&ls them to their everlasting destina-
 Jesus.     There can be no' doubt  that the Angel of the         tion.     Thus the wonder is the divine working of grace  ;
 Lord is Christ, the Son of. God.. The Old Testament;             and .it demonstrates that with God all things are  pos-
 Scriptures over and over identify .Him with the triune           siblie.  Hence, in the Old Testament Dispensation, God
 Jehovah.     0~ the other  *hand, they clearly distinguish       perf.ormed  `His miracles at those junctures in the his-
 between this angel and Jehovah. This is conclusive               tory of the church'when from ithe  point of view of ma;?
 proof ,that this angel is Christ,.    For Christ,. being as      ,and of nature .His  people and ,with them His cause was
 He is of .one  and. the same essence with God, is' the orily     ,doomed  to sextinction.  Only Jehovah ~performs  won-
one who can be identified with  God.          On the other        ders.          Thus the messenger who appeared unto Manoah
 hand;. being .as he is the Christ, the Mediator_ of God          is (Christ. For  He said that His name was wonder,
 and man, the incarnate Word, He in this                          wonderworker. Christ Himself is the wonder.
                                               ' capacity, is
also distinct  from God. The -distinction here is not                 The narrative contains still other evident;?  that the

 between the Son on the one hand and the Father and               messenger is C,hrist  the Lord.             Manoah  petitioned his

 the `Holy Spirit on the other, but between the Son in            visitor to ta;rry until he should have made  reed.y  for
:-His office. of. Mediator and the triune Jehovah.       Thus     him a Bid, p&pared  for him some food.                He wanted to
 long before His incarnation in the fulness  of time the          rqa.ke certain who *his visitor. was.             If he partook of

Son:of  God in His office of Mediator was manif_esting            food, he would  know that he was a real man of flesh
 Himself  to the .chyrch+o `Hagar  and Abraham and                and blood'and  not an angel.              But the visitor tolId  him

 now again id ihe parents of Samson in a real human               *that he tiould  not eat of his bread and that, if he

 form ; to Moses in tile burning bush ; to the people of          would offer him a burntoffering  he must offer ,it unto

 Israel in'the snake anfd fire that enveloped the `summit         the Lord: Manoah  was puzzled. Regarding his visitor

 of the mount of God; and to this same people in the              he now asked him his name that he might do him

 Pillar of cloud.    Thus the angel ,whom  Abraham called         honor  when his saying  came to pass.              The reply of the

 Jehovadh and -fey, ,yhoq  he fetched bread, `was verily          visitor was.  mysterious, thought-p,rovoking.  He says

 Christ.     It was-.C+ist  who called to Moses out of the        to Nanoai, "Why asketh thou after my .name, seeing

 burning bush anld+nt hini to &eliver Israel. It was              it is wonderful." `He means  to say that he can not .re-

 Christ who met-h& by the way in the inn and threat-              ve%l his name because-it is wonderful. Manoah  now

s ened to kill. hiti %' &&bunt  of his. negligence in the         offered his ,offering  upon a rock unto the Lord, as the


 ,visitor,  whose identity -was still hidden from him, had            Hi& name. is wondetiul  and ,that,  such being His name,

  instructed. And the visitor, who had just'said that                 He is the Lord of wonlderworking  power, with whom
  his name was wonderful, did wondrously and  @us                     all things are .possible.    Manoah,  the people of God qf

  made plain t,hat it was proper that he should be called             his day whom he represented, and to whom he would

  by such a name. With Manoah  .and his wife looking,                 certainly communicate the good news, had need of

  on, he ascended in the flame of the altar.       Then Manoah        heari.ntg  this. For, as was said, aat this juncture in

  Bnew  that he was the Angel of the Lord and they  both-             sacred history all things again united to proclaim that
  $ell on their faces to,the  ground.     Manoah  thought that        if the cause of God depended on man, it was ,doomed

  they must die,  beoanse -they had seen God. But his                 to failure, that thus Israel's hope was solely the God
  wife, who at that moment was more capable  than he                  of wonderworking power.            All things at this time com-

  of `clear thinking, reassured him. If the Lord were                 bined to proclaim this-the spiritual barrenness of
  pleased to kill them, he. would  .not  hat-e received a             Israel, its impenitence, as also  the unfruitfulness of+the
  burn-toffering and Ia meat-offering  at their hands,                woman from whom the promised deliverer was to `be
  neither would He have showed them all these things,                 born.

  nor would at -this time htiv.e.  told  them such things                 The Lord also did wondrously. He  receiveh  the
  as these.     This `was what she said to her husband.               burnt-offerihg and the meat-offering that Manoah
  It is plain even beyond the shadow of Ia4 doubt that                osfered  unto the Lord and thus received the person of
  the visitor was the .Angel-  of the :Lord,  Christ Jesus, the       Manoah  atild the person of his wife. It means that
  Son of God. His .name was wonderful.             (The Hebrew        he was merciful unto them and in Hislmercy  sanctified
  text has aworulerful-and-  not secred).      And he did won-        unto their hearts the truth symboltzed  by their offering

  der&ly. He sp&ke  with-the authority of God, The                    -the truth and fact that their sins were covered and
  woman and her hus'band knew tha.t He was God, knew`                 that in their penitence and contrition of heart, their
 _ by ,diirine  revelation which was given them in  connec-           praise and t.hanksgiv+ng  and consecration to their
 , tion with the. wondrous doing of their visitor.                    God they we?e  pleasing in His sight. The Lord con-
   The things here reported call for closer inspection                tinued to do wondrously. Before their eyes Hk ticended
  and fuller `explanation. Manoah  inquired after the                 in thie  flame of the altar. That was a mysterious
  ea'me  of his visitor, unaware whom he was address-                 doing. It pre-indicated the wholehearted and perfect
  ing. [Had the request bteen  .granted  the Lord would               coniecra.tion  df Chr.ist unto God in His suffering and
  have given Manoah  a Yull  revelation of the glories                dying on the cross in behalf of His people.         But it else
  of Gold, such as the church now possesses in.the face               pre-indicated the consecration unto God of the Christ
  of the incarnate son of ,God.     The request, unbeknown            resurrected and exalted. This then was the word of
  to Manofah,  was identical to that once voiced by Moses             God to Manoah  : "The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and
  when he said to the  :Lord,  "Show me-thy glory."         ,God's    gracious, longsuffering, and abunda*nt  in goodness and
  glory is the radiance-of His goodness; and the latter               truth, keping  mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity
  is comprehensive of the totality ,of His glories. And               and transgression and sin, anld  that by no means will
  this is His name. `Its-.miobscurei2  radiance would have            clear the guilty ; visiting the iniquities of the fathers
  destroyed -Moses.     It would have destroyed Ma,noah.              upon the children, and upon the children's children,
  For, like Moses,-he was a sinful man; and, besides, he              unto the third and fourth generation."           This was the
  moved among the ,shadows  of the Dispensation df the                word of God to Moses.         But it ,was  a word that  rose
  promise.     In his v&ion  J6hn  saw one like unto the Son          from every sacrifice by blood that was offered. Thus               L
                                                                      it was the word of God also to  Manoah  and to .the
 of man with hair' white li'ke wool, as -white`as  snow,
  and  with eyes .5s a flame of fire.        It was-the glorified     true ,church  in those fearful times.         The woman was
                                                                      right.    They had seen God and would live even because
, Christ. And John fell as dead at His feet; Paul knew
  :a man in Christ, whethler  in the -body he could not tell,         they had seen, Him.           !
 .or whether out of the body he could- not  tell:  caught up.             Why `did the Lord go to  a!1 this work in the pre-
  i-n the third heaven in paradise, where for an i.nlstant            paration of this particular Ideliverer  called Samson.

  he stood face to face with the heavenly:         And  he heard      This way be `a strange question and it also may be
  words not lawful for a man to -utter and that  no man               strangely put. But of several of these deliverers we

  can utter who still bears the image of the `earthy and  is          redd only that they were raised up and- that they de-
  occupied in his niind with ~earthy images of the heaven-            livered and judged Israel. But samson  must be a
  ly, `who now s&es through a glass daskly.  Thus the                 *Nazarite.  He must be born of one who  wa.s  ,ba%ren.
  Lord's reply to Manoah,  "Why-do&  thou inquire after               The mother had to dbs'erve the Nazarite rules in he-c
  my ,name,"  is understandable.         But He [does  neverthe-      otin  ,person  all iduritig  `the time of her pregnancy.    She
  less give the man a revelation, one that he could receiv?           he&s  all this from the-very mouth of God and not from
  :a..nd  that met the requirement of .his need -and the need         God through one of His servants. The Lord app.eass
  6f all his spiritual kin of that day.        He tells hini  that    first to the woman, then to her. husband  iri atiwe?  to


       182                                                     THE P~YARDARD~BARR
       _      _    _     _    _    _     _      .-__--._. __...__~  ---.---~-                   _._ .    _~._..._ _._


      tk lttk'i  fikpyr.  H do& wondrously  in bth their                              ggevn; ht vl~eesch Uwer gunstgnooten  aan ~het ge-
      @&ence. And al1 this is reported t US in th  S c r i p -                             dierte des land& Asaf  leeft uit het beginsel, dat God
      ti&& in mirititest  detail. `There can be but on reson                               de God des Verbonds is. Zijn gebed is van meet aan
      The matter was of gtieat .importance.  The Lord had                                    tt%folo@i,sch  n `niet &7ithvopzolog'isch.  Ik wil daar het
      ~somthinb  especially  gret  to say to His pepl through                            volgnd me zeggen.. Als men anthropologisch  bidt,
      the Si& that He now brought into being. And that                                       dan gaat het `om dn mensch; als men theolgisch  bidt,
      Si& Was Smsn.                    Through tlis  sign th Lord spaks                 dan gat het alles om Go,d  ! Hebt ge r opgelet, dat het
      wi.th `great &hph&Sis and_,with  &,Fity.  ~@&%&m & k                                   Asaf  ,a:an het hart gaat, dat Gods  volk vertrapt  wordt?
      Si@,.  w a s  uni@ie. HiS Nazariteship  w a s  unicje and                             Hij heft groote smdrt omdat ,Gods  tempel vernt-
      never repeated itself.  As was said, the significante  of                              reinigd is, enz. Dat toont, dat hij een diep in geleid
      BaSson is that he BO stri3kingly eSnbits  the connec-                                  kind vn `God is,.          Want zulk bidden gaat dwars tegen
      tien between holaess  e%pressing   i t s e l f   i n  covenant                        den .ouden  mensch in.            Er is vel bidden naar den
      fidelity  dnd power t Wr God's warfare.   W l  a t   w a s                          oudn mensch en da.t:  is geen bidden en God hoort het
      demonstrated through him in a striking way is thst                                     niet. ,Ge kunt nog verdek' gaan: God wordt er door
      God is th strngth  of His pople  in the way of their                                ontstemd;- het wekt Zijn grimmigheid op.
      obed$ence to Him.                                                                          Deze .overweging brengt ons tot het diepste beginsel
                                                                         G:. MI. O.,         van den Godsdienst, [den naam waardig, en het is dit:
                                                                                             alles is, bestaat, beweegt, roept en schreeuwt, wordt
                                                                                             zalig en wordt verdomd enkl en alleen om Godswil.
                                                 --                                              Daarti.  willen we de eerste onderwijzing van dezn
                                                                                             psalm accentueeren: Wilt ge idor  God verhoord wor-
                                                                                             den in den gebede? Welnu, zorgt er clan voor dat ge
                                                                                             thelo.giSch  bidt!

                                                                                                 Met en&' worden willen we U de billijkheid er
                                              (Psalfim 79)                                   van verklaren.
            De schrijver vati dezen psalm schijnt dezelfde Asaf                                  Eerst, God is God! Hij is ide zeer Lieflijke, de
'     te' zijn die door den Heiligen Geest gebruikt was om                                   Wonderschoon? en Aanbiddelijke. Het is geheel en al
      Psalm  74 te schrijven. Taal en stijl en inhoud  zijn                                  orrekt als het geheele heelal en alle schepselen om
      gelijkluidend. Toen we eenge regelen `schreven over                                   Zijn's wil bestaa;n en zich .bewegen  tot in eeuwigheid.
      Psalm 74, hebben we de gedachte geepprd;  dat dit                                     Hij is het middenpunt van alles en bzit alles wat Hem
      niet- dezelfde Aeaf #kan zijn die `in Davids  dagen zong.                              tot en middenpunt, tot den spil:maakt.
      @mldat  er van d Ve&voesting  des,  tempels en van Jeru-                                * Tweedns, gij zijt Zijn kind! En bij ,God  s t a a t
      zlem Igwagd werd; We dachten; dat het een god-*                                     het nu eenml onomstootelijk  vast: het -kind is er om
      vrii'chtige  jod was die geleefd heeft ten dage va-n                                  dn Vader, hoor !           De glorie van h't kind is de glorie
      Antiochus  Epiphais.                    Nu zuden  we er aan toe wil-                van Vader tot in eeuwigheid.
      len voegen, dat het ook niet &waa;rkhijriiijk &r-ge-                                      Nu ,dan al dit heeft Asf b~egrepen.
heeten $1~  w e  idze Asaf  p1aatSe.n  in de,  d a g e n   v a n                                Hij zit r over in, dat het verkeerd gaat mt lG$ds
      Nebchdnezer.                    Gok ten tijde van dat moxter is                      erfnis; tempel, volk en gun'stgenooten.  Ziedaar, zijn
      JeePni&lem  vrbrand  n de tempel ontheihgd.                           We wten       smart;
      het niet voor zeker.                                                                       Hoe warn ze' in zulk en smast  gekomen?
        . Be t&kdti.  ISak z,ich gemakkelijk verdeeln in drie                                 ,Ht antwoord is : ,omdat Jeruzalem zwaar gezondigd
      deel&.       Van vers 1 tot- 4 beliiistrn  wij en .klagende                         heft.      En nu- had d Here die znde  biocht bij Zijn
      b'esclirijving  van den hcheljken~  toesta&l  van Israel.                            volk. Hij had Israel  verbnnen en in lden smeltkroies
     Van vers 5 tot vers 12 hooren wij de bede om verlos-                                    van de' ellend gworpen.           H,ij had tot Nebucha;dnezar
      sing; en in ht, slotvers zin -wij het heilig vornemen                               (of tot enan eren
                                                                                                               d' i  booswicht) gezegd : Ko,m ! ` Verdelg
      van Asaf  en. het ware vol,k Gods  om, als d .Heere'  ver-                            Mijn volk en vertrap  Mijn Tempel en stad! Ik ga
      lossing mcht schenken, Zijn naam tot in eeuwigheid                                    M.ijn volk kastijden !
     te prijzen.                                                                                 En het was gebeurd.
            B%en we nu deze deelen in het bij'zondr.                                            En liet doel vn dit doen des Heeren?
            Het loopt direkt in het oog bj het lezen van de                                     Ik kn het U nooit schooner verklaren dan Jeaaja.
      eerste' vier verzen, hoe' Asaf  een Idiep ngeleid,Bind van                            ht doet :. "En Ik zl Mijne hand  tegen U keeren, en
      God is.           Let r op hoe'hij al de smart  van` Isral'  n                      Ik zl uw schuim ,op het allerreinste afzuiveren, en Ik
      Jeru.zalem .g,an God verbindt. De heidenen zija ,@..                                   zal al Uw tin wegnemen!" Jes.  1:25.  Het is er den
      komen in UW,  erfenis; zij hebben den Templ'  Uti~&r                                  .Here om te doen om Zijn volk te' zuiveren en te heili-
      heliglieid~ vero.ntre.ni:gd'; zj hebben de dode' lichamen                          gen in. den smeltkroes der ellende.
      Utie+- knechten  aan' ht gevogelte                              liehieis` tot @ijs
                                                              id$                               En, w.e kunnen in dezen psalm merken, dat ,de vrucht


                                                       T H E  STANDARD   B E A R E R                                                                183

  gevonden wordt. Asaf  bidt zijn smeekbede om Gods-                                     kleinen toorn heb Ik Mijn aangezicht van u een oogen-
  wil. En daarin is hij de vertegenwoordiger  geweest                                    b1i.k  verborgen. . . "' Jes. 543,  8. Voor Isr.ael is de
  van al ,Gods  ware voltk in ldie ,dagen.                  0 God ! geef ons             bezoeking `altijd' "een kleinen toorn vaneen oogenblik",
  zulke bidders vandaag !                                                                maar kunt ge -zoo  van Jezus' bezoeking spreken? Q
       Nog n ding moeten we opmerken vooraleer we                                      neen.      Als Hij in de Ibezoeking komt, dan klinkt Zijn:
  verder gaan. Het boven eeergeschrevene heeft -zijn                                     Hoe lange, Heere !" heel anders, veel dieper; Hij onder-
  algeheele vervulling ,ontvangen  toen Jezus bloedend aan                               schept al het lijden Asafs, Israels en van ons,            Hij
  de schandpaal hing.              In Hem hing daar Gods  volk'van                       leed den eeuwigen.toorn en smaa.kte de volle hittigheid
  alle eeuwen. En ze hingen daar in Hem vanwtege ,dc                                     van. Gods  gramschap over alle onze zonden en schuld,
  zonde en de schuld die op ons was. Daarom gaf Go1                                      Zoo luistere men naar het bange: Waarom Mij ver-
 Jezus over in de handenen  der heidenen. Waarlijk,                                      laten ?
  ge moogt het zingen op Jezus: "Zij hebben den Tempel                                       En dan komt de bede om vloek, om. straf, om ver-
  Uwer heiligheid verontreinigd !"                   Want, immers, Jezzus                gelding over de tir.a.nnen van Gods  volk.       0 ja, zij zijn
is de belichaming van Land, Tempel, Stad en Volk.                                        door God gebruikt om Zijn volk te tuchtigen.           Edoch,
       En dan gaat Asa.f  aan `t bidden om verlossing. ,En                               zij worden daarin juist rijp voor het verderf, want zij
  zijn .gebed  is verhoord.             Ik zou hiervan willen zeggen i                   doen het uit pure'boosheid en haat tegen ,God.        Daarom
  zijn gebed is vreeselijk verhoord en heerlijk verhoord.                                worden zij rijp voor het verderf. Dit wet Asa.f.        Hoort
  Vreeselijk,  waar hij bad om de verdelging van de in-                                  hem: Stort Uwe gri,mmighei,d uit over de Heidenen. die
  strumenten die God bezigdie voor het lijden van Zijn                                   U   n i e t  Bermen. . . .
  volk.     Heerlij.k,  in de%erhooring  toen Israel ten hemel                               Asaf  zal die vloekbede ook motiveeren. Luistert:
  voer van eeuw tot eeuw. Ze hebben `op U vertrouwd                                      Want men heeft Jakob opgegeten en zijne lieflijke wo-
  en Gij hebt ze uitgeholpen !                 Bad Mozes dit niet? Of                    ning verw.oest  !
  David? ;God  is de Hoorder ;dor gebeden.                                                   Dat is een goed motief. Zij  wete:i, dat God recht-
       :Hoe la.ng, Heere?                                                                va.ardig is. Rechtvaardiglijk moet Hij straffen. Wel-
       Ja, wie `bidt die bede niet? En dagelijks? `Het                                   nu, zij ykomen  aandragen met de zonden van de go8dde-
  cjuu~$  zoo vreeselijk lang! Hij had gas gezegd: Wij                                   loozen waar geen verzoening voor i3. Ziet aan de
  zijn onze naburen een.smaadheid geworden, een spot                                     gruwelijke zonden der Godvergetenen, Heere ! Die
  en schimp.`dien  die rondom ons zijn ! Hoe lange, Heere  !                             zonden zijn tweeerlei: Jakob at men op_; zij3 lieflijk
       Dat zal waar zijn. Voor Asa&f  waren dat Amman,                                   huis hebben. zij verwoest. Jakob is Gods  volk, het
  Moab, Filistia en wat vuil volk er meer rondom des                                     kleinood des Meeren.  Zij zijn kostelijker in Gods  oog
  Heeren erfenis woonde. In andere psalmen  laezen  we,                                  dan het fijnste goud van Ofir. Zoo kostelij*k,  (dat Hij
 `dat toen Babel kwam om Israel te tuchtigen, zij lach-.                                 Zijn eenigen Zoon niet spaarde, doch heeft Hem voo;+
  end en smadend dit vreeselijk schouwspel gade sloegen                                  ons allen overgegeven.. En de lieflijke woning is Gods
  en spottend tarden : Aha, aha !                   Voor .,ons zijn het- de.             huis.      Het is de gedachte van Gods trouwverbond  :
  goddeloo,zen  in de kerk en daarbuiten.                     n Israel aller            Hij zal met Zijn vol!k tot in eeuwigl1ei.d  wonen. Welnu,
  eeuwen Blaagt : Hoe lange, Heere !                                                     Jakob at men op en de Tempel vrwoestte  men.              Dat_
E n   v o o r   J e z u s ?   L u i s t e r t   n a a r   H e m  :  " G a a t   h e t    roept -om wraak.              Heere, HEERE, gedenk to,-,h  de
  ulieden niet, gij allen die overweg gaat?                       Schouwt het            smaadheid  en de groote goddeloosheid der boosdoeners !
  aan en ziet, of er eene smart zij, gelijk M.ijne smart Cie                                 En, Heere, wat onze groote zonden aaagaan:  Ge-
  Mij aangedaan is, waarmede d.e Heere* Mij bedroefd                                     denk die niet ! Machtig bid,den  ! Gedenk ze niet! 0,
  heeft tea dzge der hittighei'd  Zijns toorns !" (Klaagl.                               als onze zonden niet gedacht worden, dan zijn ze weg  ;
  1:12)       En als men zou denken, dat dit te ver gezocht                              dan worden ze vernietigd ; dan draagt Jezus ze weg.
  is, leze men Marcus 15 :29,30.                  Jeremia leed vooral d^                 Ziet, het Lam Gods,  dat de zonde der wereBd wegdraagt I
  smarten van Hem wiens naam is Man van Smarten.                                         Gedenkt ze niet, wil zeggen : #Geef  ons onze Zaligmaker !
  Denkt -ge, dat Hij niet geschacht heeft naar verlossing                                   Haast U, laat TJwe barmhartigheden ons vr.komen  !
  en in der eeuwen eeuwigheid van ,den eeuwigen dood                                         Dat Is de grond, de fontein waaruit de Zaligmaker
  geroepen heeft: Hoe lange, Heere? Vooral als we de                                     ons toekomt. Alle ideze dingen, zou @UILIS  zeggen, zijn
  volgende zinsnede beluisteren, denken we onwillekeurig                                 uit God ! Dat Uwe zonde,n niet meer :gedacht  worden
  aan GoPgotha: Zult Gij eeuwiglijk toornen? Zal Uw                                      bij God vloeit voort uit de fontein van  Gods  rommelende
  ijver als vuur branden ?              3k vraag U : Kunt ge van Uw                      ingewanden, en ,die zijn J:ezus. Barmhartigheidiis  die
  smarten zoo spreken?               J,a:, Asaf  ;deed ht !en wij volgen                deugd van God waardoor Hij bewogen is met de smar-
  hem na. Het schijnt `een eeuwigheid te zijn als de                                     `ten van Zijn volk, het verlangen om hen uit hun nood
  Heere Zijn aangezi,cht  voor een tijtd verbergt, doch als                              te verlossen. Wilt ge die barmhartigheden voor oogen
  wij spreken van "eeuwiglijk toornen" ,dan sp.reken we                                  ges,childerd?. Staat dan aan den voet van de kruispaal
  oneigenlijk. Van die bezoeking zegt God Zelf: "Voor                                    en ziet: en luistert, en aanbidt, <en siddert: in dat bloed,
  een kleinen oogenblik heb Ik U v,erlaten,  , I , in eenen                              die tranen, dat zweet, die schreeuw zingt God Zijn lied


                                                                                                                              . \
             184                                           T H E   S T A N . D A R D  B-EARER


       van.  eeuwige liefde tot U, mijn broeder ! Barmhartig-                                     . .               Debate
       heid is de beogen  liefde voor U, Gods volk!

                `Help ons, o God! `,God  onzes  heils! `Verzoen onze
       zonden!         En doe het ,alles om de eere Uws naams!                              RESOLV~D : - THAT HEIDELBERG'CATECHISM
                Ik vraag U : kan het schoorier, zuiverder, glorieuzer,                         PREACHING IS MINISTRY OF THE WORD
       ik' zou haast. zeggen : meer Gereformeer#d?                 Alles, om
      .Gods  wil! Soli Deo Gloria! .,Gode  .alleen  de eer. Gij'

       wordt verlost door Jezus, .en dat .is de ibarmhartighid
        G'ods.       En Gods diepste motief in alle ,dez d.ingen  is de                       When*the  Negative no_w undertakes a refutation of
       eere Zijns naams. -,Hij wil tot in alle eeuwigheid me&                               the .a.rguments  of the opponent, we must clearly  under-
       schen en engelen voor Zijn troon zien die <Hem  eeren..                              stand what the justi.fied  assumptions a>e.      The Affirm-
       En d:e menschen zullen.het Hem ~eeuwiglijk  toeroepen                                ative.  has plainly  assumed too strongly the a priori
                                                                               :
       U komt toe alle eer en dankzegging tot in eeuwigheid.                                validity  of his position, and  also  .assumed  tha.t he was
       En de dorpelen  der ideuren  bewogen zich en het Huis                                defending the status quo.

       `werd vervuld met rook. . . .                                                         We' take `this connection  to remind our esteemed
                                                                                    -...
                Z moet het.gaan.          0 ja, Asaf weet  de goddelijke                  %$ponent  that .his position far from a priori valid, is
       Theologie: waarom zouden de Heid'enen zeggen: Waar                                   rather  the decretal of group  of men subject to the

        is hun Goed? Hij voelt het aan: de heidenen mogen - weaknesstiss  that ma&  al1 men and its apriori prob-
       zulks niet zeggen. Der Heidenen mond gestioerd  in                                   ability of inherent truth  is as weak or strong as theil
      eeuwigheid. Wat ze zeggen  is klinkklare lmeugen.                     (God            power of judging ultimate things,  and that the burden
       Is de God van Israel.            Heere,"  neem die doodssteek uit                    of the proof  falls square&  on him as defetider  of the
       onze  ingmn.nden,  ;daar  de heidenen zeggen: waai!  .-is                            proposition.

     Uw God? Toon, o mijn God, dat  ,Gij onze God zijt.                                        Secondly, w,e would  remind  that the assumption of
               : iie `aan het  vergoten bloed.           Het roept om wraak,                my opponent &at he is ,defending  the status qu is too
       om Uwe wraak, van den aardbodem.                                                     easily adopted. For the fat  is that'not al1 churches
                Ei nog blijven we vragen.,         Dat bloed _is nog op'den                 nor al1 groups ,nor !even al1 members  of the Reformed
       aandbodem, beginnende bij het bloed van Abel en door                                 churches  adept his proposition. And he shall have  to
        de eeuwen  ,heen  toenemende, totdat het teen groote                                remember, moreover  that even those who  see the ad-
                                                                                            vanta.ges  of so,me  systematic  order of preaching are
        stroom is van onschuldig bloed.                    En het bloed vail
                                                                                            willing  always  to grant only th&  the Heidelberger  is
        Jezus is daarmlede  vermengd.  Al dat bloed zal  ge-
                                                                                            a valuable approximation to such  a systematic  study.
       ,ischt  wo&en  van dit geslacht.
                                                                                               So much  for the control  of these assumptions:
                `God zal dat`bloed eischen en het gekerm van Zijn
                                                                                               But notice  now how 5a.r the affirmative carries
       volk.horen.         Hij z.a.1 hun haastiglijk recht doen. Wacht
                                                                                            these assumptions. To express it in his own words
        op den Heer, gij vromen!                    "                                       "th$ onoe eech  Sunday the sermon material  should
       `I       En die ons `bespot hebben @en Nebuchadnezer                                 be basecl  on.`a  Lord's Day of our -Heidelberg Catechism
       kwam om ons te slachten,,geef  hen  zevenvoudi!g  weder                              +nnsteccd  of `(underscoring by negative) on the Word of
        i,n hunnen schoot hunnen smaad, waarmede zij U, o                                   God directly."    Her_eby  he has quite  outdone even the
        Heere, gesmaad hbben!  En dat is recht. God is  de.                                composers of the Church Order  who da.red  to prescribe
       `God  van Zijn verbond. Di,e ,God  smaadt, sma.adt  den                              that "The Minister shall on Sunday explain briefly
        God des Verbonds. En dal telt gij zevenmaal. Want                                  the  su& of the Christian Doctrine comprehended in  khe
j       het verbond is zeven. ,Het  is het heilige verbon:dsgetal.                          Hei'delberg  !Catechism".
        Vier plus drie. (IIk had moeten schrijven: Drie  plus                                   Observe here what the affirmation would  5advocate.
        bier. `God  eerst)..          ,God  is. drie en de mensch  met de                   It would  advocate that al1 right and- ability  to judge
      aarde is vier.         Die twee zijn ineengestrengeld in zeven.                       and develop the truth be taken  out of `che hands of the
        Tast `ge die ineenstrengeling aan, :dan Brijgt * ge eeq                             Christian people  and entrusted to one man-Professor
        zeyenvoudige  wrake.            (Het.  verbon$svolk  is ,Gods oog-                  Ursinus of Hei'delberg.      Obviously it is a precariouc
        & @ .        Vreeselijk te vallen in Zijn hand!                                     procedure_ to set the Scriptures  in the background and
             Doet  ,ge -dat, Heepe,  dan zullen wij U loven in                              to .give  undue emphasis to s platform of the chukch's
     eeuwigheid !                                                                           own doctrine, but it is'much worse to take this doctrine
                ZiedaaT  het slot.                                                          from the care  of tbe Church and giv'e.it  into the hands

               -) Wel, dat is.de  hemel.     %n Go,d.  zal het doen,  doet het              of one man who  liVe& 375 years ago.           Think  of what

             en :heeft  het ,ged%a.n:  Maar' het is nog niet ten volle                      this  means!  The Affirmative states that  the Heidel-

        Igeopenbaard.        Een klein beetje van dien roem vertellen                       rbegger  gives' US the faitb  of- the  living church  as .i
             we nu al.- :Gij,  o mijn God, zijt lieflijk!       Hallelujah!                 whole,  a `"fa% elicited  from the Scriptures through
, i.                                                               G. V.                    years of diligent  tid  -difficult labor  for future genera-
               2.


                                      .TH% :STANDARD,   B E A R E R                                                          185


tions.      But will he dare ,to  maintain that'the  ancient         removal of the symptom effect a cure? Any perpon

and Medieval church has giveti  us-a sound and ripened               who- `would not prea.ch  sound doctrine `withoutj  the

fruit-the church from 100 to. 1517 A.D.? : He darea                  catechism would not .do  so with it. Putting a P. A.

not of course:. Th'e history of diead Scholasticism and              on a liberal does not make him an `Orthodox. The

of heretical Romanism is too w.ell known.                            whole underlying fault is that the Word has been for.-

    But will he begin at 1517 and take the span of 45                saken  as the only foundation.

years up to .1563, ia beginning ,date  which he ~0~12                    `And has not Catechism preaching often been pre-

only take by using undue liberty, as the span in which               ,cisely  the occasion for much superficiality?    Is not the

the final formulation of the truth is rooted'?                       doctrine of sin in the first part often explained as hav-

    It will immediately appear how arb:trary  it is to               ing to do only with our -salvation, whereas the sphere

 separate ra span  of -some 45 years, -by what standard              of our natural life is said to be judged by the  sta.ndard

I have nowhere seen indicated, out of approximately                  of "civic righteousness"?     And is not `the law  often

 1300  years, ,and assign to it such a  liormative.va1u.e.           expounded as merely a rule for being a fine neighbor

 .: We are all convinced? I am sure that the living                  aed  a noblbe  citizeh?  This argument from experience
 church would not submit to such dominition, an,d  we                can surely `be turned back against th'e affirmative it-.

 also feel that a faithful minister  allways would take an           self.

 unsuppressible liberty toward such .dominition, when                    But we are eager to present our  final and most basic

he would be requir,ed  to preach  from, as it is cslled,  the        argument in refutation of the position adopted in his

`Heid'elberg  Catechism.      But the Affirmative would              positive thesis. .I quote from his Argument. ";Heidel:

 bring us to that pathetic phenomenon, that is  some-                berg Catechism prea,ching  can be abused, certainly,

.time.s  seen  of a minister of the Gospel giving-  some             when it is exegeted like Scripture itself, however this

 of his own* well based Scriptural thoughts, an'd then               cannot serve as an argument against its use.          CCom-

 wavering, <complete  his sel;mon  .according  to the pre-           mentaries can `be abused.       Everything good can be

 scription of some leader or a group of leaders or a                 abused.      What suffers tiore tha.n  Scripture itself?
 school.                                                      ..:    If catechism is not ministry of the word, neither is the
    :Heretiith  we have sufficiently disposed of the argu-           sermon of any minister.     When the sermon is preached,

 ment that the preaching of the ,Heidelberger  is pre-               is the `church r_eceiving  the Word of lGod  directly?

 sentation of the ripened fruit of the reflection of the             Of course not. . . . What she is getting is the exegesis,
 ichurch  of all ages, whereas the faithftul  conscientioila         the exposition, the interpretation. . . . the work of
 preaching, from a text. ip its c'omplete  context-. is con-.        man."

 sidered  the mere arbitrary, presumptuous word of                       Now what is the matter with this argument?         Sim-
 some'in8dividual.                                                   ply this-? And that is my basic objection to whole of

    There is, howev'er,  another argument which the'                 the Affirma.tive  poaition, that the Scripture which is
 affirmative has-put forth to bolster his position.      It.is       admittedly infallible and can bear up under the most

 tin argument from  experience.        It runs as follows:           penetrating exegesis without ever yielding a wrong
"How invaluabl!e  catechism preaching is can be  .ascer-             conclusion, is taken away from the Church as the

 tained from mere observation. What be'comes  of                     basis of her operation, ;a.nd  for this S&ipttire  is sub-

 churches that discard it? Examine  -churches that to                stituted the work of a man which is ,demonstrably

 our minds have depiarted  from. the pure truth, note                and admittedly imperfect.         And this weak product

 the preaching in such chur,ches, and do you not find                must on one han'd be faithfully abided by to safe-guard

 that in as .far as it is based on Catechism the preaching           the churc$,  but on the other hand we cannot know its

 is still comparatively sound, much. more so than  the               meaning as a norm, b,ecause  it cannot at all bear the

 exposition of free texts??'                                         exegesis as the Scripture itself.

    Now let us see how sound this .argument  really' is.                 To this situation the Affirmative has committed
 An illustration will make this plain.                               itself.    And it cannot extri&e  itself by any reference

     Perhaps the broad and general departure from the                to abuse, and misuse of the Catechism, for that is the

 truth -in modernizing churches is in a very general way             only way the Catechism ,on his stand can be used,

 concurrent with the shedding of the Prince Albert coat              whereas misLise  of thk Bible always  leaves the way

 in favor of the business coat. But will he now main.-               open to continued appeal to itself and thereby eventual

 tain that the. Prince Albert is essential to sound doc-             correction. This point I consider so strong and so

 trine? He will of course smile at such a suggestion.                damaging to the affirmation that, even though the

 The obvious fallacy here is th+t what is a vague symp-              preaching `of the Catechism .seemed  in general to be

 tom has been wrongly ta:ken for a cause. Buti.,  my                 very good, whereas that from the Bible itself seemed

 worthy opponent ,committed  precisely this fallacy when             to be rather poor, yet Catechism would effectively close

 he said "Observe. . . .what becomes of churches that the possibility of bringing the Pure .Word, while th?
 discard it."     He saw a symptom for a cause.      Will the        Bible-preaching  poor though it might be, would have


   _I%                                     T H E   S T A N D A R D  BEAR`ER,

   the open ro,ad to the ideal: The fact that grandfather           ACCE,PT  THnIS DEFINITION of the negative. It ir;

   John who chewed tobacco from his infancy  attained               not true that (Heidelberg Catechism preaching, in order

   the ripe old ?ge of nine-five, while his brother Peter           to be what the term implies, must be defined "as the

   by strict absten&nce.  could barely reach seventy, is            exposition of the sw~or/ids  of a given Lord's Day", if

   certainly no argument for the benefits of tobacco.               thereby is meant, that we are not  prea&&g  the Cate-

    - A,s true sons of the Reformers we will maintain               chism, unless we expos.it  its words as we do the words
   that regal-bless  of precarious position we appear to            of a text from S,eripture,  treat this symbol as we do

   assume by holding to the principle that Scripture is the         the Word of Go'd. itself, place this confession on a  par

   only judge of conscience, yet we would not think p_f             with ,Holy  Writ, make the Catechism as such -the basis

   surrendering it in exchange for the imposing powel-              of our predching,  and exegete and analyze it as we do

   of P,apal  Infallibility and Canonized Tradition.           '    the Scriptures. It is easy enough to see that on such
          And so as truly Reformed -we will maintain that. by       a basis preaching of the ,Catechism  could never be

   standing on the Scripture  immediately the way is al-            .preaching  of the Word of God. That would be sub-

   ways open for us to reach. ultimate truth, and that to           stituting the word of man for God's Word. Exactly

   the best of ,our aknowledge  we are now in accord with           what is meant by the phrase "without anticipation or

   it. But if we pla,ce the woEk of a man between our-              retrospection" in, the (defnition  of the brother is not

   selves and the Scripture, we have set up a, barrier by           clear to me.     If it means what I think it means, I re-

   which we ma& it permanently impossible to get ouj*               ject that part of the definition' also. Perhaps, how-

   feet directly on the iock of the Scriptures.       me have       ever, I'm niistaken  in ,wh.at I think it means; nor is  `.

   cut off the possibility of really preaching the Word.            this phrase pertinent to our discussion. I certainly

          Hereby, I trust we have convinced all those compe-        disagree with my opponent, when he states, th& Heidel-

   tent to judge that we  answkred  al! the germain argu-           berg Catechism preaching is only'what the phrase im-

   ments of our opponent and succe&fully  sustained our             plies, when it exposite the  ~~OPCZ.S of a given. Lord's Day
   contentfon  that Heidelberg .Catechism  preaching is not         "as words of unqu,a,lified  and infallible authority."

   preaching of the Woad.            .                              I agree, shall Catechism preachinfg  be ministry of the
                                                     A. P.          Word its,contents  will have to be .%f unqualified and
                                                                    infalli@e  authority".    TJzis it is, not because it is based
                                                                    on and $aws its materihl  from the infallible Word of

                                                                    aGod.

   AJlfiyma;tiue  Rabuttd :                                         . Heidelberg CateFhism  preaching, to me, is the
                                                                    official proclamation of the Word of ,God  as expressed,
          Had  the negative presented his arguments orally          :e%posited  in this Reformed confession by the church
   instead of on paper, I would open this rebuttal by say-          herself. Thus understood it will  ;be evident, that the
   ing: I enjoyed listening, .brother:  I invariably do.            pr~eaching  of the Catechism is very really preaching
   There is something about the style and method of the             of the infallible- Word of BGod.  ' The former, too, is
   R,ev. Petter that is truly refreshing  a.+ makes him             preachink  by the church in the Name of Christ Him-
   pl!easant  to hear and read. However, when in that               self.    It, too, is tlle  proclamation of the Mediator Him-
   same Petterian  style he ends his argument with the              self as the center of -all revelation. It, too;  ministers
   statement, as bold as it is sweeping, "These many                beautifully to the spiritual needs of the church in the
   arguments wil.1,  I trust, ,elicit  from all those compet,ent    world, opens and shuts the *kingdom  of heaven, feeds
   to judge, the verdict that notwithstanding the  unsur-           the elect kernel, instructs in the way of salvation in
   passed beauty, the almost prophetic spirit, power and            ,Christ, sdmonishes and exhorts and increases in the
   discernment that mark our Catechism, yet Heidelberg              grace and knowledge of Jesus.Christ,  our Lord. .Cate-
   Catechism preaching is not preaching of the Word of              chism is a preaching,  that lets Scripture spea.k, that
   God", he is carrying his trust too far, and seriously            holds'bef,ore  the church only the "thus saith the Lord"
   underrating the competency of those same judges.                 of God's own Word, that leads always and only to
   Brother, you made the best of a difficult situation,             Holy Writ as our only rule of faith and conduct, and
   but not ,enough  to force us to tha.t  dismal conclu-            that regards the Catechism- itself as a mere echo of

(I sion. .                                                          the Scriptures, lati empty vessel that receives every
          ?`o the (question: ,What  is preaching of the Heidel-     `pdrop of its contenti  from the living Word of God.
ber?g`  Catechism? my opponent replies, "To be honest                   Against the proposition, that Heidelberg  Cate.chism
   we will have to define this as the exposition of the             preaching is ministry of the Word the? negative raises
  `words  of a given Lord's  Day .without  anticipation or          a s@ries  of obj,ections,  the first three of. which are
   retrospection, and that as words of unqualified and              named `Tdamaging  presumptions" and the la& four of
   infallible authority".      In spite of the fact, that in        which are said to be "still more damaging to an un-
  `idoing  so my honesty is called into question, I DON'T           qualified trustworthiness of the Catechism." Let us


                                            T H E   S T A N D A R D   B E A R E R                                             137


      see how damaging these presumptions really are.                  We do not love and preach the Catechism as the work
              "Presumption" No. 1 complains, that the Heidelberg       of one man, nor even as the creed of the Reformed

      Catechism is principally the work of ,one  man. His-             *Churches, but for the .sake of the truth it contains
      tory shows clearly,_ says, the nega.tive,  that regardless       and .proclaims.  Regardless of authorship, the Cate-
      of the persons, the faculty, the councilors, and others          chism stands on its own merits.          Tested, prea.ched;
      that are mentioned ais advisors, the work grew from              criti,cized  and analyzed for more than 300 years, the

      the heart and mind of one man-Ursinus.           Nor, "pre-      Catechism is its' own defense, and stronger than ever

      sumption" N,o. 2 continues, did either the annual                is the conviction of the Reformed Christian that its

      Synod of 1563 or the great Synod of Dordt revise 04              preaching provides ;God',s  church with a welliba.lancecl
      recast the Catechism to any  marked'dzzree.         In fact,     `diet. All one sees when one studies the Catechisms  .is

      the negative ,doubts  that the great Synod, that exalted         not one man, not a group of men, not a church, but

      the Catechism to t,he dignity of a R,eformed  confession,        the living Word of God.

      made a careful study of the work as a whole, and he                  "Presumption" No. 2 objects, that the Catechism

      strongly suspects that the loud approval of said Synod           was written at a time when the doctrine of the Re-
      was not with a view to the work  as: a whole but had in          formation was only in th:e  beginning of thorough con-

      mind "a certain favorite portion or even :a favored              sideration and f,ormulation.    "How,`? the negative asks:

      person or small group".      Thus the one-man authorship         "can we regard the Catechism as a perfect reflection

      of the work remains sustained, and the Rev. Petter               of the.mind of the church, when we see the few short
      feels that' "what one man with his personal bias, his            years in which it rooted, as compared with the 375

      own peculiar spiritual experiences and his own  pe-              years of doctrinal development since its composition?"

      @uliar bent of mind, has produced ,cannot  be a balanced         My reply to this objection.      l/ Sound confessions are

      land full reproduction of the Gospel." To all of this            always born in just such times. ,History teaches that

      I beg to reply: l/ What of it?       That Ursinus was the        after a R,eformation  it is soon too late for such work.

      chief author of the catechism cannot constitute an ob-           2/ Irrespective when the Catechism was written, it

      jection. The majority of the Church's great docu-                was  accepted  as a confession more than 50 years after
      ments grew from the heart and mind of one man.                   it was written and more than 100 years after the Re-

      2/ The negative does not and  canot  tell just how much          formation ,of 1517. Why, then, should not the Cate-
      all these other persons contributed toward the compo-            chism be a faithful reflection of the mind of the

      sition of the Catechism and thus prevented it from               church? 3/ Those 375 years of doctrinal development

      Ibeing  wholly molded by the personal bias and peculiar          of which the negative speaks still have failed to pro-
     bent of mind of one man.        3/ the fatit?  that neither of    duce adequate reasons why the Catechism should be

      the above menti.oned  Synods revised or rec,a_st  the            drastically rev&d.  It is evident, therefore, that the

      :Catechism  is nothing to bemoan. The. simple con-               Catechism did and does reflect the mind of the church.

,     elusion is, that the church of God  dSd not feel the need        4/ Regardless of the time of its composition, the Cate-
      of changing this great work; 4/ The Rev. Petter does             chism stands on its own  merits. The negative `may

      not tell us nor does he know just how carefully the              say in amazement: IHOW  can it be?       It just isn't  pos-
      Synod of Dordt studied the Catechism before `approv-             sible !    But, THERE IT :IS,  speaking for itself, and
      ing it, and certainly he does not and cannot prove               bearing the testimony of all the ages, that it is in-
      that the fathers acclaimed this w0r.k  so loudly because         deed " a perfect  reflection of the mind of the church."

      of reasons that were personal and incidental.       Fact is,       _ f'Presumption"  No. 3 objects, again without a shred
      that the Catechism was read from beginning to end in             of evidence, that from the viewpoint of its practical
      the full gathering and that it was enthusiastically ap-          application it w!as written with a view to 16th century
      proved as excellent from the pedagogical point of view           life and problems. I beg to answer:  l/ THE CATE-
      and Scripturally sound.        B,esides,  by the time this       CHISM STAND.S  ON ITS OWN MERITS. What is

      Synod convened the Catechism was already 60 years                there in the entire symbol that does not apply dir-

      old.     Our learned fathers knew this work from A to Z,         ectly and beautifully to our own lives and problems.

      so well, no doulbt, by 1613,19  that they felt no need at        2/ The spiritual needs and problems of  Go,d's  people

      this time of much study and debate. `5/ The negative             remain essenti.a.lly  the same. The misery of man has

      should have proved that, the catechism bears the stamp           not changed since the Catechism was composed, neithe.r
      of the "personal bias, the peculiar spiritual experiences        have Redemption or Gratitude. The Apostolicum, the

      and peculiar bent of mind" of oee  man.            One who       Law and the Lord's Prayer are still the same' in mean-
      carefully studies and regularly preaches the Catechism           ing-and a,pplication.    3/ The neigative  should have pro-

      does not discover this fault at ,all. Our competent              ,du&sd  evidence for ,his contention. He calls this a
      judges, brother, demand ,evidence  for. such sweeping            "damaging presumption," shut  wisely refrains from

      assertions..    Your failure. and obvious., inability to ad-     attempting to show wherein the Catechism fails to

      duce such evidence ` destroys the entire argument. 6/ meet our present spiritual needs.                    His failure and
                             \
                                      .


       188                                       T H E  STAND.ARD   B E A R E R


       inability to tadduce proof destroys this argument, tod.           things, of exposing heyetical  views concerning the mir-

       4/ The one thing, that could perhaps be mentioned in              acles whi,ch tooB  place at the. time of the Old  Testa-

       support of this objection is the extra emphasis on                ment dispensation. He maintained, for instance,  tha.t

       the. Sacraments.       However, it may be said, that .dso         the fall of *the walls Ff Jericho was to be ascribed,

      her.e  the ,Catechism  is strictly Scriptural in contents,         not chiefly to a special  demonstrtition  of divilie power,

       `and that all it teaches about the sacraments applies             but to a divinely sent earthquake at the occasion of

       to us to,day  as well as it did to God's people of the            the sound of the trumpets and shouts of the people of

       16th century.                                                     Israel who encircled ,the  city.

          .The remainder of the arguments presented by the                It is, of course, understood, that it is not our  in-

       negative concern themselves with the so-called weak-              t,en$ion at all to treat the controversy of the years

       nesses and errors to be found in the Catechism. To                mentionqd  above. ,However,  although much has bee_r

       these I wish to reply: 1/ The viewpoint of Lord's Day             both said and written concerning the subject of mir-

       1 is not Anthropocentric (man-centered). .Also  this              acl,es  and their relation to the so-called "laws of

       statement is unaccompanied by one  iota of proof.          The    nature", it is certainly not superfluous to once again
      _ negative simply says, "It is well-known".         Perhaps,       acquaint ourselves with the sitbject.  Important issues
       but "those  :competent  to judge" demand proof. Read              such as these are easily neglected as the years pass`

       Lord's Day 1 and the entire Catechism and it will be              !by. `Hmence,  it is well that we guard  .against  such

       clear as crystal th,a.t  our confession does not. make            neglect, and freshen our minds in respect to the issue

       man the center and end of all things.        The mere fact        implied in our sulbject.

       that the Catechism consideris  and explains the truth                 Turning to the Word of #God.  which frequently

       fro~m  the -viewpoint  of the consciousness and subjective        employs the word miracle, we find that in the Old'

       experience of the Christian, from .the ,aspect  of faith          Testament there are especially four `Hebrew words
-1     and comfor!t,  does not warrant the .accusation  that is          which have reference to miracles.       Two of the words

       is nbt theocentric, but anthropocentric in character.             are usually found together, such as, for  in&a.nce, in

       2/,:The Rev. Petter seem  determined to prove tha,t               Deuteronomy 13 :l, 2 and Jeremiah 32:20.  Another
       Heidelberg Catechism preaching is not  preiaching  of             word is used in the boo'k  of Job, 37 :16 ; while Daniel
       the Word. We grant this at once. There are  wedk-                 excl&i$ely  employs still another word `denoting the

       nesses in the Catechism.        Answer 41 is weak and void,       miracle in Daniel 3:31,  32 (4:-2, 3, King James Ver-

       although the negative will find it quite impossible to            sion) an'd in 6 :28 (27). .
       find another answer like it. There is here  .a.nd there               The New Testament employs three words -denotihg

       a lack of due proportion.       And this goes to prove, that      the miracle. _ The chief of these is the one denoting
       the Catechism as such is the work of mere man.             For    the w@rd:  "sign".     Another word is also used only in

       that reason we must and do not preach  the confession             conjunction with the above mentioned word, and never

       as such.    We procl:aim;when  we preach the Heidelberg           .without  it, which woxd  means practically the same.

       .Catechism  the Word of God as it is reflected, con-              . Consequently w,e often read'  of : "signs and wonders".
       fessed, exposited in this Reformed :creed,  and he who            cf. John 4:48.      We also notice that even the very
       idoes so d,oes not bring the word of man, but preaches            common Greek word of which w'e have spoken, is isome-
       the Word of the .living God.                                      times translated by the -word : "`wonder".       (,cf.  Rev.
          .That,  I'm sure, will be the verdict of "those com-           12 : 1, `King aa.mes Version j . Attention must be `called
       .petent  to judge".                                               also to the less common word employed by thg  New
                                                         R. V.           Testament in respect to the idea of the miracle, namely
                                                                         to the woEd:     "dunamis" meaning : power. Reference
                                                                         to this use are to be found in Acts 2:22,  where Luke

                                                                         expresses the fact that .by miracles (powers) and
                                   -                                     wonders and signs Jesus was a man approved of God

                                                                         among the .jews.  Acts 8 :13 and II C?r. 12 :12 are

                                                                         other passages empl'oying the less common word "duna-
         Miracles and The Laws of `Nature                                mis" to denote the miracle or wonder.

                                                                             From all these Scriptural passages it becomes very
              To the person who is at all acquainted with doc-           evi'dent  that a,11 the words which are used to denote
       trinal cotitroversies  that hfave  arisen in the past, the        the miracle imply that the miFacl,e  is a Divine power,
       ,above  subject is familiar.    He will recognize it as being     .and too, that  iit is a power that is to be considered
       the topic of mech disciission -and deliberation in. the           `worth special attention land consideration.

       spher!:  ,of  Reformed circles especially during the years            From the pages of Holy Writ we also gather that
       1919-1920. At that time, it will be r,emembered,  the             the miracle is exclusively Divine in orifgin  : cf. Joshua
       well-known Dr. Jan&en  was .,accused,  among other                3 :5.    Also Deut. 4 :34, 35 refers to the fact that signs


                                           T H E   S T A N D A R D   B E A R E R                                            189


  and wqnders,  and other demonstrations of power were             is not a Scriptural term  whatever.        Rather is the *
  used by .God to show that Jehovah is Go'd  and that              term : "law,s  of nature" one coined, perhaps by n
  there is none else besides Him. Does not Nicodemus               scientist, who denies the power and work of God by
  testify in John 3 :2 that no man ca.n do these signs             using  the term; or by the believing theologian,* who,
  (miracles) except God be with Him? In John 9:16                  considering the ordinances and laws (by which it pleases
  the Jews even admit that no man who is a  iinner  can            God to work continually, cllassifies  -those-  deeds of
  do miracles:                                            _t       God',s  continual activity in the sphere of the universe:
   We notice, too, that at times God employs human                 "laws of nature".
  individuals to perform mil7acles.        This ,does  not mean       We n%ust then, not hesitate to employ the term:
!o imply that men: perform miracles and in doing                   "laws of nature", .provided  wle mean to express there-
  so give the power of (God  the glory.       Such is the con-     Iby that they are SGod's  laws for His creature a.ccording
  tention, of some, and this contention goes so far as to          to whi.ch the creature always functions in its God-
  say that: "the miracles Of Jesus are not evidences of            or,dained  manner and place. To put it in the words of
  His Divine nature but of His human na.ture.  He did              the late Dr. Bavinck: "A 1.a.w of nature ,expresses  only
  not heal the sick, nor cast ,out  demons as the Son. of          that `definite powers, under like  circumsta&es,  work
  God, but as the Son of man. He <performed  miracle.              according to the same manner always". (Dog. I).            :
 by virtue of His kingly offioe." (Rev. Van  Baalez                   It is always the law of the fish to live in the water.
  in "Th%e  Banner" March 3, 1933.)                                It is a.lways the God-ordained,`law  for the air-plane

     The truth of the matter is, however; that Go$l                that it-shall soar through the air, as well a:3 for the
alone has the power and the ability, and the dynamir               stars to travel through the firmament. It is the law
  to perform the miracle, and even though H,e may use              of the sun that it rise every morning in the East and
  the agency of men fo carry their performance out,                set every etening  in the West.       More need zot  be
  they are His doings, a.nd  IHis only.                            mentioned. The examples of God's "laws of nature"
     What strikes us too, when- we make a study of                 are abundant as well as extremely clear.

  the word miracle in. the Word of God, is the fact                   Now it is the question: what is the  #diff,e.rence  be-

  that we read of the .w&ked allso that they at times              tween the miracle and the "laws of nature?`? which,

  perform signs and wondlers.  Matt. 24:24  is, for in-            to my mind, must b,e answered in this writing. To

  sta.nce,  a. passage which speaks to that effect. II             this question many an azswer  has been given in an
  Thess. 2 :9 speaks of: "lying wonders". This -latter             attempt to arrive at a clear expression of the truth.

  passage immediately gives us the clue to what is                    Dr. Chas. Hodge affirms : "A miracle is an event
  implied when the  wicked performs wonders, for the               in the external world #brought  about by the immecliat~~

  passage informls  us that they are wonders of  falselhbod.       efficiency or simple volition of God;  Physical  causes

  They are wonders covered up by  tlie  cloak of apparent          are not simply ignored, but by intimation denied:' In

  genuineness and truth.                                           the miracle God contradicts .the  laws of nature.     It Is
     Finally, another tl$n!g which must not confuse us             something new."

  in respect  to the miracle is the facts that in John 6 :2            Somewhat the same is the contention of ,Dr. A.

  we read that the people followed Jesus because they              Kuiper who too affirms that in the sphere of'  th?

  beheld the signs which He did on them that were sick.            natural God works mediately, while in that of the

  In John `6:26 we read, however, t,hat  Jesus tells the           miracle He works immediately. (cf. Diet. Dogm. Locus
 multitude  they follow Him not because they  ha,d seen            de Creatione B, p. 23, 24)

  signs, (miracles) but because they had eaten of the                 Taking the above into c%reful  consideration we find

: loaves and wer,e filled. This apparent contradiction             that both these men do not clearly state the difference
  of terms is clarified when we  ta.ke  into consideration         betweep  the mirticle arid &he  "laws of nature" to the

  that as long as J,esus was healing the sick by means             fullest extent.    They speak of mediate and immediate

  of miracles, the things did not concern them person-             a.ctivities  of God ; the former coming to the foreground
  ally, and thus their desire to see more such miracle.3           in the laws of nature and the latter in the miracle.

  was aroused.     However ;' when Jlesus  multiplies the          The truth of the matter is, however, that even God's

  brea:d,  the' miracle in its outward manifestation and           activity in the realm of the natural is immediate since

 reffect,  touches them personally, and their persona!             i3.z Ispeaks and it comes to pass, He commands and it
  interest for bread covers up the value of the miracle            stands fast. This is true not only of God's activity

  as such for them. Hence they seek Jesus the next                 of creation but also of His work of provi'dence.

  day for the sake, of  bread.                                        The same Dr. A. Kuiper  ,states  in his `<Getieene

     Sinoe our attention has now been called to the fact           Gratie"  III, p. 106, that (I translate from the Dutch)

 that the term miracle,. or wonder, or sign, is clear'y            "Wonder is exactly the name of  th,e series of manifest-

 to be found iii the Word  of Gold, it is necessary for us         ations, which reveal powers in nature, which are not

 to understand secondly, that the term : f`laws  of nature"        out  of nature, (but are abpve  na.ture  and are being


190                                    T H E  STAND,ARD  BEA'RER
        `,                                                                                                                  I

added to it."     Here. too, we must differ with .Dr.  Kui-      0u.t the marvel and beauty of grace against the. dark

per, for on the contrary, it is  certainly'not  Scriptural       background of sin and the curse. Therefore Christ

language to speak of natural and super-natural works             Jesus is THE Wonder. He through the wonder was

of ,God.  `The mere fact that we become so accustomed            born of a v=irgin.  He was raised from the dead  the

to the way `God  always providentially upholds His               third day. .Overagainst  all the curse of the law He

creature is not a reason for us to claim those are               stands a.s the victorious One Who giveth                    the vic-
                                                                                                                      us
natural activities of God and that the miracle is  super-        tory.
lntural  in-as far -as we don't often experience such an            Our viewpoint does not undergo a change when

activity. The Lord our God does all things, a.nd  His            we cqnsider  the wonders of the. Old Testament dis-

work may not be called common or natural in any                  pensation.      The natural flowing of the Jordan and

sense whatever !                                                 the Dead Sea served as a .b.a,ckground  upon which
       There is still another prevalent idea, namely, that       was brought out the power of the mircle  ;by which

a miracle is something unusual and something which               Israel was led through on dry ground. The natural

we cannot understand. Also here we must contend.                 cours'e of the sun through the heavens serves the

that this is also not the chief element of distinction in        beauty of the work of God in His deliverance of,  `His

the miracle and the laws of nature. There is noth-               people at the time of Joshua when He caused the sun

ing in the whole sphere of the natural which is even             and moon to stand still for the salvation of Israel.

not unusual, because it is the manifestation of the              So, too, it is with the walls of Jericho. The natural

work of God the Creator to His creatures.           Neither      laws of the standing of the walls served the purpose

is it true that we cannot zmderstand  the miracle that           of bringing out the beauty of the power of the won-

it is a miracle.     Can we understa.nd  the most simple         der of God's grace by which He delivers the city into

work of God in nature? By no means.  .                           the hand of Israel .by the wonder.
       According to our opinion, the chief difference be-           `God opens the eyes of the blind signifying redemp-
tween the miracl,e  and the "laws of nature" is that the         tion from spiritual blindness, as well as the opening
former serves the purpose of grace~exclu&vely,  while            of the ears of the deaf signifies relief from spiritual
the, latter does not exclusively serve the purpose of            deafness. And so one could go on. Sin and grace,
grace.      This is especia.lly clear when we read in Matt.      life and death, light a.nd darkeess  are always the con-
13 :58 : "And He dilcl not many mighty works (duna-              trasts which must serve to bring out the glory of
meis)  (powers) there because of their un:belief."               grace and life and light. The natural always serves

However, let us hasten to add that the "laws                     the spiritual.      The earthly must alwtays  serve the

of natube"  certainly have something to do with the              heavenly. The chaff must serve the wheat. So, too,

miracles.      And this. function is that the "laws ,,of         thea  "laws of nature" serve the miracle.       cGo,d manifest.;

aature"  serve the miracles, so the miracles may serve           thereby that it eternally was His good pleasure to do

the purpose of grace. Then surely we rid ourselves of            a new thing for His people, in order that the old an-1

the possibility of :being  a>ccused  of dualism. If the          the natural might be shown to be inferior. Under-

miracle served the laws of nature, then it would  (seem          stand me well, not as  thou'gh  the natural is. not fit?

as though the miracle was some kind of after-thought             to serve God's purpose.       The natural is His work as

on God's part after `His attempt to use the laws of              we11  as. the miracle. But the former serves as the
natur,e  to attain His purpose, failed. Then the mir-            scaffolding to build the manifestation of the work of

acle would serve as the only  ,way  out of the curse and         the Lord Who alone :does  wondrous things.

the lie.                                                                                                            S. T. C.

       But now we have this i,dea.  God. always;  even

from eternity had prepared something new  zor His

people.      It never was God's intention to  h:ave man

remain as His eovenant friend in Paradise I, but in

order to bring out the marvel of His work, He brings

out this work in bold relief.     Just as t.he  artist paints
a beautiful scene against a dark background to bring                           O! may thy hand be with            still,         -
                                                                                                           us
out the details of the picture, so too, the "laws of                           ,Our , guide .and.  guardian .be ;
nature" serve the beauty of the `work of `Him  Who                             To Ikeep us sa.fe from ev'ry ill,
does.all  things well and for His own name's sake.                               Till death shall set us free:

       Then ,it is God's "law of nature" that man is born
from a woman as the result of the union of husband                             Help us on Thee to cast our care,

and wife, that he lives here. in this sin-cursed world,                          And ,on Thy wor'd  to rest;

and presently returns to the dust from whence he was                           That Israel's God, who heareth prayer
taken.       But now the miracles come, an.d  it brings                          Will grant us    our request.


                                           T H E   S T A N D A R D   B E A R E R                                        i9i


     . .                                                               Naw  both these theories have been attacked and
       \     The Presence.of  Christ in the                         proven' to be entirely without `basis  in Scripture, by
                                                                    our Reformed people, and in the denial of these two
                          L o r d ' s  ,Supper                      theories we see a danger that the true significance

                                                                    of the Lord's Supper will be lost to the believer when
            That Christ is present in the Lord's Supper can-        the church cel~ebrates  the Lord's Supper. The Lord's
     not and may not be denied, for the very simple                 Supper .is not merely a supper or meal wherein we
     reason .alone,  that Christ Himself told His ,disciples,       bring to remembrance the suffering and death of our
     when He' instituted the Holy Supper and broke the              Saviour. Then it would really be doubtful if it  has
     bread : "This is my body", and when- He poured the any benefit at all. In fact the Word of God, which is
     wine : "This is my #blood".         (Christ is surely very     the highest means of grace, surely also brings to our
     near, when we partake of Communion in the church               memory the passion and death of (Christ. After all,
     ,of Jesus Christ in the world.     But because we strong-      the preaching may never be anything else but es-
     ly oppose the theory of `Transubsta.ntiation  to which         sentially the preaching .of  Christ and Him crucified.
     thse  `Roman Catholics hold, and also oppose the theory        And therefore the preaching of the Gospel is surely  ,
     of Consubstantiation to which the Lutherans hold, we           sufficient to bring to memory the death of our Saviour.
     are apt to fall into the cold and unspiritual theory           If the Lord's Supper is merely such a memorial then
     hel,d to by the reformer Zwingli, who in reality denied        it would not be a loss to the  Church  of Christ to dis-
     all presence of the Christ at the  Lord's,`Supper,  be-        pense with communion entirely.        For a memorial-
     lieving that the Supper is only a memorial, bringing           is not a sacrament, and a sakrament  is much more
     to `our memory the death of our Lord. We will try              than a mere matter of bringing to memory. The
     to examine these things a bit more closely.                    sacrament of the Lord's Supper is a sign an.d seal, and

            It is well known to the readers perhaps that the        an undoubted testimony that God in Christ feeds  us
     Roman Catholic Church  believes that at the Lord's             with the brea.d  of life, spiritually nourishing us, and

     Supper, the believer literally eats and xdrinks the body       thus strengthening our faith. But to attain this end,

     a.nd  *blood  of Christ.    \Truly,  they say, it was bread    namely, to feed.us  the bread of life and to spiritually

     and wine, before it was put on the altar, but that             nourish us and strengthen our faith, it is not a mat-

     bread and wine actually changed into the body and              ter of choosing between the Transubstantiation of the

     ,blood  `of the ever ,blessed  Lord. Thus, when the be-        Roman Catholic or the Consubstantiation of the Luther-

     liever eats and :drinks this brea:d  aed  wine, then he        ans. Nor need we of necessity believe in the one or         j
     actually. eats' and drintks of Christ's body and blood,        the other theory, to bring Christ close to us during
     and thus partakes of Christ in the most real and               the communion service.

     literal sense of the word. And so the Roman Catholic              To be sure, Christ' our Saviour  !bS' near in the
     Church attaches great significance to the outward,             Supper, in fact He iS very much present. Sufficient
     physical, an'd visible signs partaken of, for a miracle        proof of this we have in the words spoken by  our
.    of God has ta)ken place with the original bread and            Lord when He instituted His Supper, "This  i,s my
     wme.  According to the Roman Catholics, the bread              body", and f`This  is my blood", Matt.  26:26.  And
     and wine are made HOLY and so it can be called a holy          these words ma,y  not be changed so that they simply
     communion.                                                     mean that, "this bread refers to my body", or "this

            The Lutherans, .alsp attach to .the bread and .wine     wine BRINGS TO MEMORY my blood." But that

     of communion, a power that is not merely physical but          bread and wine is symbolically the b,ody  and blood or'

     also `sgpiritcal.    Though they -do not believe as the        ,Christ  the Saviour. J.ust  as YOLK would see a picture

     R,oman Catholics that the bread and the wine have              of President Roosevelt hanging on the wall, you would

     literally been changed into the actual body and bloo'd         sa.y : "That is President Roosevelt", without in the
     of Christ, nevertheless Christ is present.        Yea;.  He    least meaning to imply that phy,sically'Roosevelt  hangs
     is present in that bread and in that wine which is             there on the wall.    But a symbol, of the president

     partaken of. Christ so attaches Himself to that bread          hangs there. `However with this difference we apply
     and wine, that when eating of the bread  aed drinking          thi,s to the Lord's Supper, that whereas with respect
     of th&  wine, the believer actually  eats and drinks           to the picture, the-president himself is not near, with
     Christ. Not because of a miraculous change wrought             the Lord's Supper, ,OUR  SAVIOUR IS VERY NEAR
     in the bread and wine, <but because Christ attaches            AND IS PRESENT. No not `his body is present, for
     ,Himself  to these means, and without those means will         His body is in heaven, .zt  the right hand of God, the
     not communicate Himself to the believer.            It can     Father.    He is in highest glory and not on earth.
     readily be understood that there is essentially no  dif-       ,That  is why Christ could say when  %He instituted the
      f'erence.  between the.Roman  Catholic or the L,utheran       Lord's Supper, "i. will not henceforth <drink of this
     t h e o r y .                                                  fruit of the wine, until that clay, when I drink it- new


                                                                                                                                    z-
                        ;'

                                                                                                    __~~~~~_  __~  ----`-                                                        :
  , 1 9 2                                       `TX-BE  S T A N D A R D  BEAR%R                                                            '
                                                                                                                                                               -._

    with- you,` in my Father's_  kingdom", Matt. 26 :29.                       believer is'-&$ed  with-the genuine stamp of .Gocl's
    Christ is not now an,d will not be on earth physically                     approval.              It is'.at the table of the Lord that the Holy
    snd  literally ..until WITH YOU (believers) He will                        Spirit testifies to, the believer that he is the  benefactor
    drink of thle fruit of the vine in the new, eternal king:                  of the deah of Jesus.Christ  our Lord and that all His
    dom of the Father. No, He is not physically and liter-                     benefits accrue to him, making him a. son of God, and
    ally present. But Christ is nevertheless present, and                      heir of the righteousness which is by faith and thus an..
   that very much so, spiritually. And spiritually Christ                      heir of `eternal glory:                                                                .-               ._.
   is eaten at the table by thespiritual believer.                                     Finally it thus .becomes  plain that the presence of
        In article 35 of our Belgic Confession we have a                       Christ at the Lor-d's, Supper is then a presence of
   beautiful an'd rather detailed explanation of the spirit-                   grace' and love to the believer but is :a.lso  a condemna-
   ual pr.esence  -of our Lord at the table.              In that article      ,tion to those who do.not  partake or -even to those who
   it is explained that the believer has a twofol'd  life.                     do partake only outwardly. Such as merely eat With- .
   He has first of all a natural and temporal life which                       outt faith; eat and drink to themselv.es  `condemnation.
   he receives in his first birth from the natural father                      Even ca.s the Christ is spiritually present in the preadh-
   and mother.                He has secondly also a spiritual and             ing of the Word; :giving grace`unto those who believe,
    eternal life, which he receives at regeneration and is                     for it is a tower of God to whoever believes, so also
    "affected by the Word of the Gospel". Accordiagly                          is Christ `spiritually present in the Lord's Supper,
   that believer is in need of a twofold nourishment:                          `giving grace only to those who believe, for it too- ia

  . Earthly bread and drink for the natural, temporal                          a power of IGod- to strengthen and nourish the faith of
   life and spiritual foo,drfor  the new and:.lieavenly  life                  the child of God. In the Supper of the Lord, Christ
   in. Christ Jesus.             This spiritual food now :is Christ            our S,aviour  therefore, comes very close to His people
  Himself, for in Him is all our salvation.                    Everything      and feeds them unto everlasting life.
   we ever obtain and receive pertaining to our eternal                                                                                                  L .   v .
   life and salvation comes solely.from Christ. .HeZ is

    our all and all we ever have or shall receive' is ex-
                                                                  `..                                                                                                            ,.
   elusively IN' HIM.              Thus at the Lord's Supper, He

   gives Himself to eat and to drink. !He is indeed very

   present in the Supper.             But His presence is spiritual
                                                                                                       NOtTICE  - SUBSCRIBERS
   and not physica.1,  even as the benefits of the Supper                                                                                                              .
;..,.  for the believers are also not physical but spiritual.
                                                                                       .To  make.possible  the binding of Standard Bearers
   TL-  y are spiritually fed and, sfliritually  they become
                                                                               for the Ministers, will those willing to donate copies of
   strong: Thus the Lord's Supper is surely a spiritual
                                                                               October 1, October 15 and November 1 of 1943, please
   feast, wherein Christ communicat~es  Himself _ with                         send or contact,
   all His salvation to the believer.                                    I,
                                                     ' _ .'                                                                     Mr. Ralph Schaafsma
        We must therefore not forget -that  only the be-                                                                        1101 Hazen  St. S. E.
liever  appropriates the Christ at the Lord's Supper.                                                                                                                       .
   He does that by faith.             Faith believes in Christ and i.s                                             -16        , Grand Rapids, Michigan.
   the bond that unites                     to Him. That faith appro-                                                                            :
                                     us
   priates all that is in Christ.             It`8nows  Him and trusts

   Him.      It relies on Him and looks away from self.

    It seeks Him and will not let Him go until  OHHe has                                                 ?
   blessed and given of His  fulness, even grace for grace.                                                               IN MEMORIAM

   And so as that faith takes hold of  a.11 the *benefits of

 .Christ  it is strengthened by the Lord's Supper and                             -The Con&tory  of the First Protestant Reformed Church

   b u i l t   u p .                                                           of Holland, Michigan hereby wishes to express its heartfelt

        `And this takes place by an operation of the Holy                      sympathy to our brother consistory member, Deacon T. Elzinga,

   Spirit upon the `believers.               Not the signs as such give        in the loss of his

   nourishment,. but the Holy Spirit gives this nourish-
                                                                                                                              MOTHEB
   ment -by  making an a.ppeal  to the signs which speak

   of the suffering and death of Christ for us.                  Even as               May the Lord of all grace comfort and sustain the bo-

   the Holy Spirit .appeals  to the spoken word and <thus                      reaved.

   works. in us through the hearing, so the Holy Spirit                                                                   The `Consistory  of the

   appeals to the signs of communion  an'd works or rather                                                    <           First'  Protestant Reformed Church of
    strengthens that faith in us through the sight of the                         .,           .         .,..             H o l l a n d ,   M i c h i g a n
    eyes upon the visible signs.              Thus that bread and wine            I     _ _                                               Rev. W. Hofman, Pres. .
    is:not only a sign, but also a seal.               The faith of the                                                            Mr. J. Kortering, Clerk.


