USA > Virginia > City of Staunton > City of Staunton > The First Presbyterian Church, Staunton, Virginia > Part 14
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29
Now brethren, had we not already occupied so much of our time, we would have summoned all the great Church Councils of the past, called to make creeds, and compared them with our own Westminster Assembly. As it is, we rest with the assertion that we know of only one other such body worthy of comparison with the Westminster Assembly. That is the Synod of Dort. The moral and intellectual character of the Synod of Dort does approximate-some say it equals -that of the the Westminster Assembly. Nowhere else in all the past since the days of the Apostles do we find such a body. The First Ecumenical Council of Nicea and the Fourth, at Chalcedon, are far inferior in the learning, ability, and piety of their members; and they are universally esteemed the most venerated Councils in the Church prior to the Reformation.
The age of the Westminster Assembly was a great age, partic- ularly in religion. It may well be doubted whether in any age since that of Paul and John there has been such study given to the Word of God as these Puritans gave it-for the purposes for which they studied it-viz .; to get out the very heart and core of the Scriptural ethics and doctrine, as a rule of life and a means of salvation.
The Assembly was in every way worthy of its age. The study of the Assembly should, we believe, tend only to the further exaltation of the Westminster Standards, of the Bible, of the Grace of God, and His glory in the salvation of men. Amen.
[166]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
The address of Rev. Thornton Whaling, D. D., of Lexington, Virginia, was as follows:
THE WORK OF WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY
The Westminster Assembly met at 9 o'clock of the morning on Sat- urday, the 1st of July, 1643, in Westminster Abbey, and was opened with a sermon by their moderator, termed by them Prolocutor, Dr. Twisse, on John XIV; 18: "I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you." There were present at this opening session sixty-nine of the 151 members named in the ordinance of the Long Parliament conven- ing the Assembly of Divines; there were also present both houses of Parliament and a vast congregation which thronged the ample spaces of the historic Abbey Church. At the close of the protracted opening services (services so protracted that I fear they would have taxed and perhaps overtaxed the patience of modern Presbyterians) which according to the custom of the patient and heroic Puritans con- sumed many hours, the Assembly began its work in the gorgeous chapel of Henry VII, which three years before had been the scene of the Convocation of 1640, notorious for its forlorn attempt to carry that policy of "Thorough" which brought both Strafford and Laud to the block-"thorough" despotism in both Church and State. Light- foot, a member of the assembly and whose journals furnish us much of our knowledge of its proceedings, tells us that at this opening meeting "divers speeches were made by divers" [which would aptly characterize the proceedings of many of our church assemblies] "and that Parlia- ment not having as yet framed or proposed any works for the Assem- bly suddenly to fall upon, it was adjourned till the Thursday following." On Thursday the Assembly, with a wise and elaborate foresight, adopted the ample rules by which its procedure in future sessions was to be governed, and appointed the next day as a day of fasting and prayer for God's blessing on their work. Accordingly the Rev. Oliver Boyles preached all the forenoon of Friday before the Assembly, both houses of Parliament and a crowded congregation in the Abbey church, and the Rev. Matthew Newcommen occupied the afternoon in the same way. They had more preaching and fasting than is fashionable at ecclesiastical courts in our day. On Saturday the protestation or vow required of the Assembly was taken by the members present- peers and commoners as well as divines-to the following effect: "I do seriously promise and vow in the presence of Almighty God, that in this Assembly, whereof I am a member, I will maintain nothing in point of doctrine, but what I believe, to be most agreeable to the Word of God; nor in the point of discipline, but what may make most for God's glory and the peace and good of His church."
[167]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
At the same meeting by the advice of Parliament, it was resolved to proceed at once with the revision of the thirty-nine Articles in order to free them from false glosses put upon them by Pelagianizing and Romanizing divines, and especially to render impossible that inter- pretation of the Artcles which a bold pervert to Romanism, Dr. Daven- port, in 1634, anticipated Newman on his Tract No. 90, in publishing.
To facilitate their work the entire Assembly was divided into three equal committees, the first, of which Dr. Burgess was chairman, was to meet in Henry VII chapel and to take in hand the first, second, third and fourth Articles; the second committee, of which Dr. Stanton was chairman, was to meet in St. John's and St. Andrew's chapel, and proceed on the fifth, sixth and seventh Articles; the third was to meet in the Jerusalem Chamber and to take up the eighth, ninth and tenth. From the 12th of July till the 12th of October the Assembly was occupied with the revision of the thirty-nine Articles. And now as we have the Assembly at work, let us have some description of it from good old garrulous Robert Bailie, who was a member and whose letters are preserved for us to the extent of three octavo volumes, that reproduce for the historic imagination the most lively pictures of its proceedings. "They did sit in Henry VII's chapel, in the place of the Convocation, but since the weather grew cold they did go to Jeru- salem Chamber. At the one end nearest the door and both sides are stages of seats. At the upmost end there is a chair set on a frame, a foot from the floor, for the Mr. Prolocutor [moderator] Dr. Twisse. Before it on the floor stand two chairs for the two assessors [or vice moderators] Dr. Burgess and Mr. Whyte. Before these two chairs through the length of the room, stands a table, at which sit the two scribes [or clerks] Mr. Byfield and Mr. Roborough. The house is all well hung with tapestry and has a good fyre which is some dainties at London. Foranent the table upon the Prolocutor's right hand, there are three or four ranks of forms. On the lowest we find do sit the five Scotch commissioners. At our backs the members of Parliament deputed to the Assembly. On the Prolocutor's left hand going from the upper end of the house to the chimney and at the other end of the house and backside of the table, are four or five stages of forms. From the chimney to the door there are no seats but a void for passage. The lords of Parliament sit on chairs in that void about the fire. We meet every day of the week but Saturday. We sit commonlie from nine to one or two afternoon. The Prolocutor at the beginning and end has a short prayer. The man, as the world knows, is very learned in the questions he has studied and very good, beloved of all, and highlie esteemed, but merely bookish, and not much as it seems acquaint with conceived prayer and among the unfittest of all the
[168]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
company for any action; so after the prayer he sits mute. It was the canny convoyance of those who guide most matters for their own interest to plant such a man of purpose in the chair." [So that Bailie thinks that what the moderns call "log rolling " was practiced even in the choice of the moderator of the Westminster Assembly. Per- haps it was only Bailie's suspicion.] "The one assessor, our good friend, Mr. Whyte, has keeped in with the gout since our coming; the other, Dr. Burgess, a very active and sharpe man, supplies so far as is decent, the Prolocutor's place. Ordinarily there will be present about three score of these divines. They are divided into three committees; on one whereof every man is a member. No man is excluded who pleases to come to any of the three. Every committee, as the Parliament gives order in wryte to take any purpose to consid- eration, takes a portion, and in their afternoon meeting prepares matter for the Assembly, setts down their minde in distinct propositions, backs their proposition with texts of Scripture. After the prayer Mr. Byfield, the scribe, reads the proposition and Scriptures, whereupon the Assembly debates in a most grave and orderly manner. No man is called up to speak, but who stands up of his own accord, he speaks as long as he will without interruption. If two or three stand up at once, then the divines confusedlie call on his name, whom they desire to hear first; on whom the loudest and maniest voices call he speaks. They harangue long and very learnedly. When upon every proposition by itself and on every text of Scripture that is brought to confirm it, every man who will has said his whole minde and the replies and duplies and triplies, are heard: Then the most part calls to the ques- tion. Byfield, the scribe, rises from the table, comes to the Prolo- cutor's chair, who from the scribe's book reads the proposition, and says as many as are of the opinion that the question is well stated in the proposition let them say, 'aye': When 'aye' is heard, he says, as many as think otherwise say, 'no.' This way is clear enough and saves a great deal of time which we spend in reading our catalogue. When a question is once decided there is no more debate of that matter, but if a man will vaige he is quickly taken up by Mr. Assessor or many other confusedly crying 'Speak to order, to order.' I thought meet for once to give you a taste of the outward form of their Assembly. They follow the way of their Parliament. Much of their way is good and worthy of imitation; only their longsomeness is wofull."
Good brother Bailie is not the only man who ever complained of Puritan and Presbyterian preachers, "their longsomeness is wofull." He fails to mention the insufficient remuneration of a Westminster divine which at first was very irregularly paid and afterwards not paid at all. Satirists of that time make themselves merry over their
[169]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
per diem of four shillings, and yet because it was not paid, some were reduced to great financial straits and were compelled to cease attend- ance upon the Assembly. Even the Westminster divines were not birds of Paradise feeding upon the dews of heaven.
Before the 12th of October the Assembly had completed the revision of fifteen of the articles and were proceeding with the sixteenth when an order came from Parliament to lay aside this work and take up at once the government and liturgy of the Church. This order was the result of an alliance formed between the Long Parlia- ment and the Scotch Estate and General Assembly. While the revision of the thirty-nine articles was being carried on by the West- minster divines, the cause of the Parliament had experienced severe reverses in the country and the resolution was formed to outbid the King for the Scotch alliance. Negotiations were entered into for that purpose with the result of the adoption by both kingdoms of the Solemn League and Covenant, drawn up by the Scotch divine, Alex- ander Henderson, which pledged "the defense and preservation of the Reformed religion in the church of Scotland in doctrine, worship, discipline, and government, and the reformation of religion in the kingdoms of England and Ireland, according to the word of God and the practice of the best Reformed Churches and the bringing of the Church of God in the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in religion. Confession of faith, form of church govern- ment, Directories for worship and catechising," The work of the Westminster Assembly had been originally defined to be "to confer and treat concering the liturgy, discipline and government of the Church of England, and the vindicating of the doctrine of the same from all false aspersions and misconstructions," but its mission as indicated in this Solemn League and Covenant, was now broadened to include the provisions of formularies of doctrine, government, discipline and worship for the Church of God in the three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland. This solemn covenant between England and Scotland was not formed without meeting opposition even in the Westminster Assembly itself, Dr. Burgess, a leading member of that body, one of the assessors and chairman of the first com- mittee, spoke in opposition to it, and petitioned the House of Commons against it. For these offenses Dr. Lightfoot, equally prominent among the Westminster divines characterized, him as a "wretch to be branded to all posterity, seeking for some devilish ends of his own or others or both to hinder so great a good of the two nations." Even ministerial controversies had not always been tempered by a sweet and gentle courtesy. Paul and Barnabas, Lightfoot and Burgess. But the Covenant was adopted, and in consequence commissioners
[170]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
from the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, whose influence was destined to be so great, in some respects to be paramount, in future deliberations in the Westminster Assembly, took their seats in that remarkable body, amongst which commissioners were inscribed the venerable names of Alexander Henderson, Samuel Rutherford, George Gillispie, Robert Bailie, and John Lord Maitland.
And now began those interminable controversies over the govern- ment of the Church, which consumed more of the time of the Assembly than the framing of any of its majestic doctrinal symbols. The reason of this is found in the fact, not that the polity of the Church was regarded as of equal importance with its formularies of faith, but because while all were agreed in the acceptance of Calvinistic doctrine, there were many shades of opinion in the Assembly as to the Scriptural and convenient polity of the Church. There were advocates of Episco- pacy of the type of Dr. Featley, there were prudential Presbyterians who afterward conformed to Episcopacy at the time of the Restoration, of the type of Doctor, afterwards Bishop Reynolds; there were Jure Di- vino Presbyterians of the type of the Scotch commissioners, with whom agreed perhaps a majority of the Assembly; there were moderate Pres- byterians who denied the presbyter theory of the eldership; there were independents of the type of the five famous brethren, Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Nye, Mr. Burroghs, Mr. Greenhill, Mr. Bridge; there were Erasteans of the type of the learned and godly Selden, anti-quariorium coryphalus, in fact all parties were represented in it except extreme high church- men of the type of Laud and the anabaptists; a body thus composed must be racked with controversies when attempting to frame a form of church government and discipline for the Church of God in the three British kingdoms. There were three treatises upon the subject of ecclesiastical government and discipline prepared by the Westminster Assembly during the first two years of its history. On the 20th of April, 1644, more than six months after it began its work in the field of Church polity, the Assembly sent to the House of Parliament the first installment of its form of church government in the Directory of Ordination. Six months later, on the 8th of November, 1644, the second installment was remitted in the treatise entitled "Propositions Concerning Church Government"; these two were united and entitled "Form of Church Government" when they were adopted by the Church of Scotland, and with some amendment they constitute the form of government of the Presbyterian Church of America as well. The third treatise was a practical directory for church government and dis- cipline prepared in the latter part of the year 1644 and the earlier part of 1645, and delivered to Parliament on 7th July, 1645. This practical directory was never adopted by the Church of Scotland, which still
[171]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
clung to its old book of discipline, but was embodied in the ordinance passed by the House of Parliament in 1648, under the title, "The Form of Church Government, to be Used in England and Ireland"-so that the Presbyterian Church was for some years the established Church of England. This third Westminster treatise on church government, has never been adopted by any Church as a part of its form of govern- ment, save by the Anglican Church for this short time, but it remains as a valuable illustration of a large and liberal construction of Pres- byterian polity sanctioned by the Westminster Assembly itself, for if it be not invidious to constitute comparisons it manifests a more liberal and catholic spirit than any of the products of the Assembly in this vexed field of church government, actually sustaining, I do not hesitate to say I think incorrectly, the opinion that the people may be represented by idoneous persons as well as elders, since it asserts that "synodical assemblies to consist of pastors, teachers, Church gov- ernors, and other fit persons (when it shall be deemed expedient) where they have a lawful calling thereunto." * * *
But the chief work of this Assembly for which after ages will keep it in everlasting remembrance is in the sphere of doctrine. The revision of the thirty-nine Articles which in the providence of God constituted its work in the earlier months of its existence was an admirable preparation for the fresh and original creation of new symbols of faith. These Articles are often published in the shape in which they were adopted by the Long Parliament but never, so far as I have been able to discover, in the form in which they were presented by the Westminster Assembly. Dr. Mitchell tells us that its original Westminster form may be found in a rare volume of tracts in the British Museum. During the long controversy between the Parlia- ment and the Assembly, for such it ought to be termed, the Assembly prepared a short creed to be required of applicants for admission to the Lord's table and containing the fundamentals of the Christain faith. The noisy advocates who perplex the modern Church by arguing for the substitution of the longer and complex Confession by a shorter creed, should be referred to this short Creed in which their demands are anticipated but perhaps not in a form to their taste, as this Short Creed is as distinctly Calvinistic as the Confession or the Catechisms. Short Creed is the next best thing to no Creed to those who wish to rid themselves of all doctrine and dogma.
The real preparation of the present Confession of Faith began on the 20th of August, 1644, by the appointment of a committee to pre- pare matter for a joint Confession of Faith; the subject of most of the chapters embodied in the Confession being fixed by this com- mittee.
[172]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
The heads of the chapters of the proposed Confession prepared by this committee were later distributed amongst the three committees into which the whole Assembly was divided with instructions to fully discuss and elaborate them before bringing into the Assembly.
The exact form which our Confession assumed of thirty-three chapters covering the entire field of theology and Christian ethics is due to this distribution of topics amongst these permanent committees of the Assembly. The reports of these committees began on the 7th of July, 1645, but was much interrupted by the differences which arose in the houses of Parliament and the Assembly as to the autonomy of the Church. So far as appears from the minutes, the various Articles of the Confession were passed by the Assembly all but unan- imously. The main occasions on which there was a failure to secure unanimity were with regard to the omission of the word " blessed " before the Virgin Mother of our Lord; the dissent from the words " foreordained to everlasting death," and the decided protest against the Westminster doctrine of Church and State, which indeed has been completely revolutionized by the American Church. After five months of constant work by the Assembly, on the 4th of December, 1646, the completed Confession of Faith without Scripture proofs was presented to the House of Commons, but a new order was made that the Scripture proofs be added, and on 29th of April, 1647, a committee of the Assembly further presented to both houses the Confession of Faith with the Scripture proofs inserted in the margin. I am sorry that the proof-texts printed in our present Confession of Faith are not those adopted by the Westminster Assembly. The proof-texts which the Westminster Assembly spent three months in providing for the Confession and four months in providing for the Catechisms were removed by the First General Assembly of the American Presbyterian Church in 1788, which adopted the constitution without proof-texts, but in 1794 a committee was appointed to add proof-texts, and thus our present proof-texts are those provided by a committee of the American General Assembly and not those so carefully prepared by the Westminster Assembly.
The contents of the Confession may be described as Puritan theology, Puritan ethics, and the Puritan doctrine of the Church and the sacra- ments. It is true that all the doctrinal achievements of the Church in the past are conserved and utilized, the Athanasian and Nicene Trini- tarianism, the Chalcedonian Christology, the Augustinian Anthro- pology, the Anselmic and Reformed Soberiolgies are wrought into its organic structure but the organic principle which unifies and vitalizes all of its constituent materials is the doctrine of the Covenants, which all historians of the development of doctrine are now agreed in holding
[173]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
was not derived by the Puritan divines from the Dutch school of Witsins and Cocoeius, but which the Dutch divines derived from the English Puritans.
The preparation of the catechisms went on simultaneously with that of the Confession. Early in the sessions of the Assembly a com- mittee was appointed to prepare a catechism whose chairman was the most learned catechist in the kingdom, "the learned and godly little Palmer," as garrulous Bailie calls him. The Westminster Assembly was an Assembly of catechists; twelve or fourteen of them had pub- lished catechisms of their own and all of them practised the now obsolete art of pastoral catechising in their congregations and hence the work commanded enthusiastic and undivided attention; the pre- paration of the larger Catechism consuming more time than that of the Confession itself; indeed the most elaborate and complete exposition of Puritan and Westminster theology and ethics is to be found in this great catechism. The Shorter Catechism, however, has been far more popular and influential. But it makes one shudder to contem- plate how near the Westminster Assembly came to miss preparing the Lesser Catechism for the children. The Assembly's catechism had been prepared after a year's work by Mr. Palmer's committee, had been debated in the Assembly for four months, when, on January 14, 1647, after much discussion, it was resolved to prepare two catechisms, a larger and a smaller; the larger one to be explained to the people by the minister from the pulpit following the custom of the Reformed Churches on the continent, and the smaller one designed for the instruction of children. Even after the decision was reached to frame this shorter catechism, Mr. Palmer, supported by the Scotch commis- sioners, whose influence was great and often decisive, insisted on breaking up all the principal answers into a series of short questions admitting of the simple reply by the child "yes" or "no"-the result of which would have been to give us an entirely different cate- chism from that historic one with which all of us are so familiar. Certainly such a catechism would have violated the fundamental prin- ciple which guided the construction of the one we have as stated by Dr. Lazarus Seamon: "That the greatest care should be taken to frame the answer not according to the amount of the knowledge the child hath, but according to that the child ought to have." After a " longsome and woful discussion" in the good Providence of God " little Palmer " died and the catechism was prepared in the form in which we now have it. Many a good man has to die and get out of the way before God's work can go on in the way He wants it. And so the work went on, the Larger Catechism was completed October 15, 1647, and the shorter one, called indiscriminately in minutes of
[174]
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, STAUNTON, VA.
Assembly the "Little Catechism," the "Lesser Catechism," the "Short Catechism," the "Shorter Catechism," on November 25, 1647, and with their proof-texts, which it cost the Assembly four months to prepare, were presented to Parliament April 12, 1648. * *
It falls not within my purpose this morning to explain the failure of the Westminster Assembly to accomplish the purpose for which it was convened by the Long Parliament, viz: To secure uniformity in the Church of God in England, Scotland and Ireland in doctrine, worship, government and discipline nor is it my purpose to discuss the wide and helpful influences which its Standards exerted upon the Churches of Christendom, especially upon the Presbyterian Churches of Scotland and North America.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.