What to include as you cook up plans for the coming year

At present our thoughts inevitably turn to the year ahead. No doubt you have plans, hopes, ambitions, goals. Many of you will be laying plans, consciously or unconsciously, for 1998. Holidays, entertainments, meetings, visits, etc. Quite right too. God is a God of order and he wants us to be orderly too and to lay plans. 

However, before plunging in it is worth putting your thinking cap on for five minutes. Time spent sharpening the axe before swinging it is never time wasted. Imagine a blank 1998 Desk Diary before you. How are you going to start filling it in? Or think of it as a big empty pot. What ingredients will you use to fill it? 

Some obvious ingredients

In James 4:13 an imaginary person speaks. He sounds like a businessman. Many Greek commercial centres had sprung up in the Mediterranean area in James's day: It was as common for people to travel to new locations to open up fresh business opportunities as it is today. Things just happen a little faster these days. James's man sounds slightly vague but this is only a general example. A businessman would be more definite. 'On January 31 we will go to London. We will open a shop in Tottenham Court Road selling computer equipment. In the first year our profit will exceed £10,000!'. Nothing wrong with that as far as it goes.

All the obvious ingredients are there:

1. The which

Today or tomorrow. On a specific date I will .... That is okay. We must plan which thing we will or will not do.

2. The where

We will go to this or that city. We need to plan with this in mind. When will you be where?

3. The when

Spend a year there. The time factor is a vital ingredient. There are 24 hours in a day, 7 days in a week. We must recognise this obvious but stubborn fact and plan accordingly.

4. The what

Carry on business. Next you must choose just what to do at that particular time in that particular place.

5. The why

And make money. An obvious but sometimes forgotten element. We need to look at all we do with this question in mind, 'Why?'. There is no point in simply filling up the time-table. What is your aim in life? Every activity you undertake must be subservient to this overall aim. 

The vital missing ingredients

The above is fine as far as it goes but there is a vital element missing. It is like trying to make tea without the tea leaves or having all the trimmings but no turkey. That is the problem with the person James describes - not what they include but what they omit. They seem so thorough, so careful, so organised, but no. What is missing? 

1. Do not forget the most obvious thing about yourself

Despite the apparent thoroughness such planning is rather superficial. It misses a major factor of life: its brevity and unpredictability. Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow This is not a verse condemning insurance policies but a reminder of our weakness and ignorance. None of us know if 1998 will be our last year. We do not know if we will die or if the Lord will return. Do not boast about tomorrow for you do not know what a day may bring forth says Proverbs 27:1. Our lives hang on a heartbeat yet we confidently talk about 'Next year ....'. John Blanchard writes, 'We do have all the time in the world, but how much time does the world have?' 

James continues What is your life? You are a mist that appears ... and then vanishes. Repeatedly Scripture reminds us of this. Many illustrations are used. Life is a shadow, a breath, a puff of smoke, a weaver's shuttle, a swift runner, withering grass. Remember the parable of the Rich Fool. Life will not go on forever yet most live as though it will. 

2. Do not forget the most obvious thing about God

James writes to Christians. They had not stopped believing in God but they were living as though they had. There is such a thing as practical atheism. They had forgotten God is sovereign. He controls and wills all that happens. The future is not in my hands or yours but in God's. What happens is determined ultimately by his plans not ours. This is not an argument for not planning ahead but a call to remember God when we make our plans. 'Man proposes but God disposes'. We dare not forget to add, If the Lord will. Remember Paul typically in Acts 18:21 1 will come back if it is God's will. He says similar things in his letters. Advertisements for meetings in magazines such as this once all carried the letters DV. It means Deo Volente, God willing. Its demise, we trust, is not a sign of arrogance but a realisation that a right attitude is not a matter of adding DV to everything but of living in the light of God's power. We dare not leave him out of the picture. 

3. Realise the root of your problem if you have forgotten these things

It comes out in 4:16 where James condemns his readers' boasting and bragging. That is what failing to take God into account is. That is the problem. We need to humble ourselves before Almighty God and recognise his sovereignty. This is something James is most eager to say throughout his letter. The problem with the person imagined is not so much his desire to make money but his failure to leave room for God. It may sound innocent but it is not. It is arrogance. So many imagine they have a right to life; not just businessmen, all sorts. To fail to acknowledge God at every point is a great sin. 

4:17 is probably a contemporary saying. It applies here and, more widely, to all sins of omission. The Judgment will not only be about what we have done but about what we have not done. You know the good you ought to do. If you do not do it, it is sin. 

Libraries and their value Part 1 (Definition, Bible, history)

Hereford Cathedral Library

Let me begin by thanking those responsible for giving me the opportunity to deliver this lecture. I must say that it is an honour to have my name associated with that of Alan Tovey. It is good to see his widow here, now Mrs Lucy Beale.

I understand that Alan was from Hafodyrynys, only nine miles away from where I grew up, although Cwmbran, it must be said, has a different feel to Hafodyrynys. As a boy we in Cwmbran and Newport used to refer to such places as part of “Welsh Wales”. (Welsh Wales has been defined as “post-industrial South Wales, epitomised by the coal mining valleys that fan out northward from Swansea, Cardiff and Newport”. Assembling identities, Sam Wiseman, Cambridge, 2014, 72.)

I recall being up in Welsh Wales with my dad one day when we passed a very compact little soccer field. “That's where we used to play” my dad said. My father was from Newport and was a keen footballer and a decent one. For a little while (at the end of his career I think, in the early fifties I guess) he was goalkeeper for the Hafodyrynys team.

Definition
And so to libraries. A library can be defined as “a place in which reading materials, such as books, periodicals and newspapers, and often other materials such as musical and video recordings, are kept for use or lending”. (Free Dictionary). The word can also refer to such a collection of materials, especially when systematically arranged. The word is sometimes used more loosely as in toy library, tool library, even seed library. 

Today we are thinking specifically of books, which the original word suggests. Library is from Latin librarium. It originally referred to a chest of books. It is interesting to note that the Latin word Liber can refer to a book or with different inflexion (Lee-ber) a free person (the two decline differently liber, libri, libro, etc and liber, liberi, libero, etc). There is also the adjective liber, libera, liberum. It is tempting to give an attractive but false etymology – Library, a place of freedom!

The Bible

The Bible itself is often spoken of as a library, as it contains 66 books by different authors, from different times and situations, using different styles and genres and originally addressing different audiences. The statement is open to abuse but if we maintain both that the Bible is a library and one book we will not be far from the truth.

In one volume in the Library, 2 Timothy, we read (4:13) Paul's words When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments. We are not sure what the distinction between scrolls and parchments may be. Clearly Paul wanted books, however. He did not look down on book learning but was keen to use books. It is a fair inference from the verse that reading is important for Christians, especially ministers, and that libraries are potentially a good and useful thing. John Calvin (1509-1564) says the verse refutes “the madness of the fanatics who despise books and condemn all reading and boast only of ... their private inspirations by God” and “commends continual reading to all godly men as a thing from which they can profit.” (John Calvin, NT Commentary Corinthians, Timothy, Titus and Philemon, eds S W Torrance, T F Torrance, California, 1960, 341.) Matthew Henry (1662-1714) adds that we should thank God that he “given us so many writings of wise and pious men in all ages” and seek “that by reading them our profiting may appear to all.” (Matthew Henry, Commentary on the whole Bible, in loc cit.)

In another volume in the Library, Ecclesiastes (in 12:12) is a well known verse that makes a different point of making many books there is no end. It is often quoted. Our location today well illustrates the point. The following phrase is often quoted too, usually with a wry smile, and much study wearies the body!

Church father Origen (184-253), in his commentary on John, says that it appears to indicate two things - “that we ought not to possess many books, and .. that we ought not to compose many”. (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume IX, Chapter 2). Conscious that he himself is composing a book he is aware of the irony, as others have been addressing the text. He suggests that it is a caution rather than a prohibition, which must be right Solomon himself was composing a book when he wrote as he did. John Gill (1697-1771) picks out the application well when he says on the place (John Gill, Exposition on the whole Bible, in loc cit.)

A man may lay out his money, and fill his library with books, and be very little the better for them; what one writer affirms, another denies; what one seems to have proved clearly, another rises up and points out his errors and mistakes; and this occasions replies and rejoinders, so that there is no end of these things, and scarce any profit by them; which, without so much trouble, may be found in the writings of wise men, inspired by God, and in which we should rest contented …

My subject is the value of libraries. I am happy to address it but by way of a disclaimer it is fair to add a caution. In a fallen world, fallen men and women can be harmed as well as helped by libraries. The experience of Richard Baxter (1615-1691) perhaps offers a graphic illustration of the need for caution. On one occasion we learn that as he sat in his study one day

the weight of his greatest folio books broke down three or four of the highest shelves, … and they fell down on every side of him, and not one of them hit him, except one upon the arm. Whereas the place, the weight, and greatness of the books was such, and his head just under them, that it was a wonder they had not beaten out his brains, or done him an unspeakable mischief. (Baxter's Practical Works, Volume 1, ix)

One shelf just above him apparently held the huge Polyglot Bible edited by Bishop Brian Walton (1600-1661), the complete Works of Augustine of Hippo (354-440) and several other weighty tomes. The story serves as a reminder that libraries can do harm as well as good.

History

(A good introduction to this subject can be found in The Story of Libraries, Second Edition: From the Invention of Writing to the Computer Age, Fred Lemer, London, 2009.)

It is apposite to attempt a very brief survey of the history of libraries. It is generally agreed that the earliest were collections of clay tablets gathered and catalogued in Mesopotamia by the Sumerians and their Akkadian and Persian successors. There may have been other early libraries that used less robust materials. If so, they have not survived.

The first explicit reference to an ancient Egyptian library dates back to 1788 BC. A stele exists on which King Neferhotep records his desire “to see the ancient writings of Atum” in the library of the temple at Heliopolis. A famous Egyptian library also existed in the time of Rameses II (d 1213 BC), possibly the Exodus Pharaoh.

It was probably not until the fourth century BC that individuals, such as the Greek philosophers Plato (427-337 BC) and Aristotle (384-322 BC) began to amass personal libraries. A saying is attributed to Plato, though perhaps erroneously, that “a house that has a library in it has a soul”.

We know little about it but the most famous of ancient libraries is the Hellenic one at Alexandria dedicated to the Muses. Established in the third century BC by Ptolemy I (c 367-283 BC), it was part of the Musaeum there. Greatly reduced in the time of Julius Caesar (48 BC) and Aurelian (270 AD) it was tragically destroyed by fire in 391 AD and probably entirely lost when the Muslims invaded Egypt in 642 AD.

Roman Emperors commonly founded libraries and in the early years AD libraries were founded not just in Rome but all over the Empire. When Vesuvius erupted in 79 AD a library containing 1800 volumes was destroyed in the Villa of Pisones in Herculaneum. 

Christians were early aware of the usefulness of libraries. Bishop Alexander (d 251) founded one in Jerusalem before 250 AD and Origen did the same around the same time in Caesarea. Clement (150-215) used one in Alexandria to quotes from nearly 350 authors in his works. Christian Libraries were one of the targets of Diocletian (244-311) when he persecuted Christians. The one in Caesarea survived. We know that Eusebius (263-339) used it to write his Ecclesiastical History and Jerome (347-429) after him.

While the papyrus roll ruled for hundreds of years, by the first century AD, the use of vellum and parchment was coming in, the former being eventually supplanted. The other technological change, famously pioneered by Christians, was the codex or book. By the fourth century AD it had overtaken scrolls in popularity. (There is a hilarious sketch on Youtube where a mediaeval monk gets help with the new technology, which he does not quite have the hang of.See here (Accessed March 2017). 

In the mediaeval period libraries began to centre on monasteries and monks became famous for copying manuscripts. In the sixth century one of the first copyright disputes occurred in Ireland, when Columba (521-597) secretly copied a psalter, or perhaps a whole Bible, belonging to Finian (470-549). They took their dispute to High King Diarmait mac Cerbhiall (Dermot McKervil, d 565) who ruled against Columba, saying “to every cow belongs its calf and to every book its copy”. It was one of the reasons Columba left Ireland for Iona.

It was in this period that libraries began to chain their more valuable books in order to keep them from being purloined. One of the largest chained libraries, one that you can still visit today, is in Hereford Cathedral. Another, the first endowed for use outside an institution, is the Francis Trigge Chained Library in Grantham, Lincolshire, established 1598, a forerunner of later public libraries.

The invention of printing had its own impact, increasing the number of books and the ease with which they could be reproduced. Before 1602, The Bodleian Library was refounded in Oxford through Thomas Bodley (1545-1613). (Today one of six copyright libraries in the British Isles, ie one entitled to a free copy of every book published in the UK.) Other early libraries include Norwich City Library (1608) and Chetham's Library, Manchester, (founded through Sir Humphrey Chetham 1580-1653) which claims to be the oldest public library in the English-speaking world (1653). Other early town libraries are Ipswich (1612) Bristol (1613-15) and Leicester (1632). The British Library was established 1753. (Another copyright library.)

This is the transcript of part of a lecture given at the EFCC Conference 2017

Kan Yu Trust Feng Shui?

Newspapers recently reported the visit of feng shui expert, Paul Darby, to the notorious south dressing room at Cardiff’s prestigious millennium stadium at the request of the stadium’s owners. With Wembley out of action several soccer games have been played in Cardiff and it has been noted that the team that occupies the south dressing room almost invariably loses. In a bid ‘to counteract the static energy’ that Mr Darby claimed was trapped there he carried out various rituals and recommended several further steps, seemingly to no avail.

Similarly, last year it was reported that Hong Kong billionaire businessman Eric Hotung had decided to sell the house he had bought for some 6 million dollars from Senator Edward Kennedy in 1997. Why? Because he thought that the house suffered from bad feng shui.

Chi

Developing in China within Taoism feng shui or kan yu has been practised in various guises for over 2000 years. It was first used in regard to the siting of graves but was later taken up with enthusiasm by Buddhist monks when siting their temples and more generally by those siting new homes and towns. Feng shui (pronounced fong shwee or fung shway) is the popular name for the practice of Kan Yu. Feng means wind and shui means water. In ancient times a site was considered to be ‘lucky’ if it was sheltered from ill winds and untamed waters. Kan is to do with time and Yu with place and so is the study of a site with reference to a time factor.

Underlying the practice is the belief in chi or ki, an energy that is believed to be flowing through the universe on certain lines. Chi can take both yin and yang (literally, shade and light) forms and can attract both positive energy, sheng chi, which moves along curved lines, or negative energy, sha chi, which moves quickly in straight lines. (That is why straight pathways and similar features are avoided). There are also three categories of chi: heavenly, earthly and human, that further subdivide. The first includes meteorological and astrological considerations, the third social and personal ones. The five elements (earth, fire, water, air and metal) are also important.

Divination

Chi is held to be the source of life and harmony in the world. As with many forms of alternative healing the idea is that by means of various complex methods you can achieve harmony with nature by certain means. In feng shui it is positioning objects and structures such as buildings, rooms and their contents and gardens in a way that is sympathetic to this flow leading to health, wealth and prosperity. To do this divination is involved. Divination involves gaining information by reading hidden meanings in ordinary things, through spirit contact, or using tools. It is then an animistic approach, a form of geomancy, designed to manipulate the forces of nature to the advantage of the individual. It arose out of a desire for harmony between the elements, nature, and man, in order to prevent disaster and keep evil at bay in a world full of the unexpected.

In various forms (there are at least two major schools and many differences within these, quite apart from various offshoots and pseudo-practitioners) feng shui has become relatively popular in the west since the 1970s. The way it meshes with many of the eastern and new age ideas that are in the air has helped to popularise it. No doubt many have been attracted at first by the way its practice can often be aesthetically pleasing. Some of the advice makes obvious sense – a house should have ample sunlight and be well ventilated; avoid living by a straight road with speeding vehicles; use comfortable dining chairs; have a friendly fire in a cold room; balance the shapes and sizes of plants. Among the cures for problematic chi are the use of mirrors, wind chimes, certain plants and hexagrams. Also sometimes recommended are statues of a black tortoise, a blue dragon, a white tiger and a crane or heron. These can all look very attractive. However, the philosophy is built on a fundamentally flawed view of the universe and many people are not only paying good money for very poor advice but by believing these lies are endangering their immortal souls. It is not only a tedious, burdensome, unscientific and potentially expensive viewpoint that has no guarantee of success even on its own basis but it is also fundamentally flawed in its whole outlook.

The Prince of Peace

The truth is that this world is not controlled by impersonal forces. There are impersonal forces, of course, such as wind and electricity. However, none of it is at the mercy of luck or fortune. All of it is in the safe hands of the personal God who controls all things, the God revealed to us in Scripture and who is pleased to have all his fullness dwell in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. A mere force cannot bring peace or harmony to anyone. The Prince of Peace, however, can bring reconciliation with an offended God who is full of wrath against us not because we happen to live in a certain place or were born at a certain time but because we have broken his law. He can bring us into a perfect relationship with the Creator of the universe if we will simply trust in him.

Further, all forms of divination are strongly condemned in Scripture (see for example Deuteronomy 18: 10-12). The Lord wants us rather to turn to his Word and to the Christ revealed there. We must put our trust in him not in some supposed harmony brought about by various pieces of pagan mumbo-jumbo and sorcery. In the end, feng shui cannot deal with our real problems and it cannot satisfy our spiritual longings. It cannot provide forgiveness and it cannot bring us to God. When we meet those who are enamoured of this particular form of superstition we must do what we can to alert them to the underlying philosophy and seek to show them its emptiness. May God help us to introduce the to the Saviour, the one who can give them real harmony – with God himself in Christ. if they are interested in power in this universe they need to know about the power that raised Jesus Christ from the dead and that is now at work in the lives of believers to raise them from their sins to be with the Lord forever.

In compiling this article I was greatly helped by various websites and in particular by an essay by Marcia Montenegro which can be found here I believe.

First published in Grace Magazine

A Word of Testimony to Jesus

I was born in 1959 and grew up on a housing estate in South Wales. From my earliest years I knew the name 'Jesus'. I now know that not everyone refers to him that way. Some say Iesou or Iesu, others Isha or Yeshua, but to me he was always 'Jesus'. 

Early vague impressions

My earliest impressions were all positive but were unhelpfully embodied in traditional pictures of Jesus as a bearded young man in a long white gown. Our local chapel had a graveyard and one of the more flamboyant Victorian graves boasted a statue of an `angel' (ie a winged young hermaphrodite in a long gown). Despite the missing beard, I thought this must be a statue of Jesus (perhaps marking the site of his burial!). I think this was because from the beginning I had picked up the idea that above everything else Jesus is good. It seemed to me that anyone who was good must look good. 

As I grew a little older I remember pointless arguments in my unbelieving home as to Jesus' physical appearance. I had come to the conclusion that there was no reason to suppose him to be the blue-eyed, blonde of Sunday School pictures. I was particularly keen on the idea that he was of African appearance. I had never met anyone of a different race to my own European one but this was the 1960s and I think I came to this rather odd conclusion because I was aware of the oppression of people of colour in different parts of the world. Jesus, it seemed to me, was a man on the side of the oppressed, one who himself had been persecuted and so even if not black in reality he was at least so in spirit. 

A little more research established the fact that Jesus was most likely to have been of Middle Eastern appearance. We had a beautifully tooled book at home (a Seventh Day Adventist production I later learned). It included several pictures of Jesus, still very romantic, but clearly suggesting he was Jewish. 

So I came to believe that Jesus was a Jew (whatever that might mean). I believed he was a man, but no ordinary man - one who transcended racial barriers and even human ones. Sometimes this latter perception was bolstered in rather bizarre ways. For instance, at the Sunday School we would sing a song I knew as `Jesus bits of shine' (you may know it better as 'Jesus bids us shine'). Yes, I thought, Jesus was majestic, a 'sparkly Jesus' even. Then from somewhere else I picked up the chorus of the Negro spiritual 'Michael row the boat ashore'. When I asked my mother who Michael was she told me it was another name for Jesus. She held to this view, I guess, under the influence of the Watchtower teaching that she was receiving at the time. I believe Calvin also identified the Archangel and the Christ but most evangelicals would not accept that today. For me, even though the information was not necessarily accurate, it added to my conviction that this man Jesus was definitely someone very special indeed. 

Later clear impressions

So, throughout my pre-teens, my notions of Jesus remained decidedly vague. However, in 1970 I began to sit regularly under the faithful preaching of the Word of God. The Scriptures speak first and foremost of Jesus Christ and it was through the exposition of the Word, in public and in private, that I eventually came to a clear understanding of who Jesus really is. Since about 1971 I have felt that Jesus knows me and that I know him, personally. In 1973 I sought to underline that conviction publicly by being baptised by immersion. 

I now realised Jesus is not simply a very special man but the God-man. He is God, it is true, yet he is also a man. As a man he came to earth from the glory of heaven and as a man he died on the cross on behalf of sinners. Also as a glorified man he is now at the Father's right hand in heaven. By means of his Holy Spirit he comes to those who put their trust in him. I have put my whole life in his hands and I firmly believe that he lives with me and in me by his Spirit. It is a developing relationship not a static one but from my own viewpoint I would say there are five leading characteristics in my relationship to him. 

I. Jesus is my Friend

Who is your best friend? Without hesitation I have to say Jesus is. That can sound trite I know but I have no-one like him. I tell him absolutely everything. There are no secrets nor can there be. There are things I tell Jesus I would not tell my own dear wife. Not a day passes, sometimes scarcely a daylight hour, without us speaking. Often - on my best days - we are inseparable. We are always together. Life without Jesus is impossible to contemplate. It would have no meaning. I love him with all my heart. Nothing grieves me more than to let him down. The better I know him the more amazed I am that he should want to be a friend to me but that is what he has always been. 

2. Jesus is my Saviour

Of course, he is far more than a friend - he saved me. He lived and died so that all my sins could be forgiven and that I might live with him in Paradise forever. I truly believe that if I were the only sinner on earth Jesus would have died just for me and that there is no other way I could possibly have been delivered. To say I am indebted to him for everything is an understatement. Apart from Jesus I am nothing.

3. Jesus is my Shepherd

The Lord is my Shepherd. I say this because although he is my Friend and Saviour and although he lives in me, yet I still feel, within, a temptation to wander from him. It is madness I know but sometimes the temptation can be strong. When I do wander he gently brings me back and on my best days I am more than willing to follow wherever he leads. I am convinced this can be only for my good. Even when I pass through the darkest times I am not afraid because he is with me. Both blessing and trouble assure me of his guiding hand. He will bring me safely home. I trust him. 

4. Jesus is my King

He is also my King., my Lord and Master. Whatever he commands I am willing to do. Wherever he sends I am willing to go. I honour him. I respect him. I look to him. If necessary I am willing to give up my life for his sake and for the sake of his kingdom. 

5. Jesus is my God

Finally, I do not simply love and serve him: I worship him. I bow down before him not simply as my King but as my God. He is the absolute Lord of all of my life. Nothing is hidden from him. He has the right to demand from me what he will and to do with me as he please. I am nothing. He is all.

First published in Grace Magazine

Madness, evil and death

Flowers outside Kensington Palace following Diana's death

This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The .I. same destiny overtakes all. The hearts of men, moreover, are full of evil and there is madness in their hearts while they live, and afterwards they join the dead. Ecclesiastes 9:3

. 

I was only 4 years old on 22 November 1963, but I remember it. It was the day President Kennedy died in Dallas. I guess my young sons will remember equally well 31 August 1997. It was the day Diana, Princess of Wales, died in Paris. Certainly they will remember 6 September 1997, when we walked the two streets from our door to where thousands had gathered to see the hearse containing Diana's coffin pass. The outpouring of grief that has followed this tragic death has been unparallelled. Not even the deaths of Eva Peron, Elvis Presley or other so-called 'icons' have caused such widespread grief. Even Mother Teresa's death has not been met with the same world-wide attention. 

We were all stunned by the news. Sometimes God shocks us. You do not know what a day may bring forth he says. At the same time no doubt, our hearts went with compassion to the families involved and especially to the young princes, William and Harry. 

But such a death also makes us stop and think. We need to consider, when God does such shocking things. Consider what God has done ... When times are bad consider (Ecclesiastes 7:13,14). There is no point in seeking to pry into God's inscrutable providence. We cannot say, for instance, 'If they had not divorced, she would not be dead'. There are too many Ifs between the two events. God has not built a law into this present world that evil always leads to pain. 

DEATH

Rather, as with every death, we call to mind God's sovereignty in life and in death. The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; may the name of the LORD be praised (Job 1:21). Similarly it is a reminder of our own mortality. As the Preacher says All share a common destiny (Ecclesiastes 9:2). Even from the under the sun point of view, without considering the eternal dimension of heaven and hell, it is clear that everyone dies. Nothing can exempt you. The death of the princess brings this home. 

Beauty exempts no-one. Diana was lovely and benefited from the best beauty treatments of the day. But beauty is fleeting. Beautiful or ugly, all die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Fine clothes exempt no-one. It is tempting to think a person in fine clothes will never wear a shroud. Sharp dressers or slobs, all die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Youth exempts no-one. She was only 36. One can die at any age. Babies die, children, teenagers .... The same destiny overtakes all.
Personality exempts no-one. Diana had personality, charisma. But it could not save her from death. Life and soul of the party or rather lacklustre, we all die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Fame exempts no-one. She was the most famous woman in the world. Celebrities and nobodies die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Riches exempt no-one. Wealth could not save her either. Man, despite his riches, does not endure; he is like the beasts that perish. Rich or poor, all die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Power exempts no-one. Politicians failed to get land mines on to the political agenda; Diana succeeded. Yet your power cannot deliver from death. The same destiny overtakes all.
Troubles exempt no-one. Her life was certainty not without its troubles. But no matter how many troubles we face we still have to face the last enemy. The same destiny overtakes all.
Overcoming troubles to find happiness exempts no-one. She seems to have overcome many of her troubles. It is easy to get a false sense of security when that happens but only Christ has conquered death. Winners and losers in life, all die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Good works exempt no-one. A great deal has been said about Diana's compassion and concern. There is no denying her good works but they have not preserved her from death. Good works or none, all die. The same destiny overtakes all.
Religion exempts no-one. Sadly, there is no evidence that Diana knew the Lord. One of her last reported brushes with anything remotely spiritual was to consult an astrologer. Was she told what would happen? Even the true religion of faith in Christ leads to the glory of heaven by way of death. Whatever your religion you will die. The same destiny overtakes all.

EVIL AND MADNESS

Then think of the evil and madness surrounding Diana in life and death. Think of the divorces that marred her life; the adulteries; the way she was photographed and turned into an `icon'; the way her presence could totally transform the presentation of issues. Think of the bizarre circumstances of her death - the jet-set romance that led up to that night, the paparazzi, the excessive speed, the apparently drunken driver, the furore that has followed. Think of the massive TV and radio coverage - and scarcely a word of biblical truth and sense. Think of the supposedly Christian funeral that centred on the one created not on the Creator, its high point not a hymn but a secular song from an avowed homosexual, no sermon from God's Word but a powerful scathing speech that mentioned God but once. Great is Diana taken out of the pagan stadium and into the church itself! Think of the banishing of the National Lottery from the TV screen, hiding in a corner as it were until the coast was clear! Think of supermarkets and sportsmen respecting the Princess but not the Prince of Glory. Think of the madness and evil of a nation spiritually empty with a religious hierarchy so bankrupt as not to have a word of genuine comfort for the spiritually starving. 

Meanwhile from 'above the sun' it has been made clear: After death, the judgment. Diana, Dodi Al-Fayed and the chauffeur are all either in heaven or hell. We are all headed to one or other too. In the madness and evil of this present time let's look to the Lord and pray for mercy.

this article first appeared in Grace Magazine at the time of Diana's death

The creativity of a 19th century evolutionist

Ernst Haeckel

DOWN'S SYNDROME is a chromosomal disorder found in certain babies. Not so very long ago it was better known as mongolism. The reason for this is that in the 20th century evolutionary science held to the view that as the embryo develops it recapitulates the supposed evolution of the species from its more primitive forms. A baby found to be suffering from Down's syndrome was thought to be under-developed, having reached only the stage of development of the (supposedly) inferior Mongol peoples.

It sounds staggeringly inept, frighteningly racist and staggers belief. Yet that is why until surprisingly recently the word mongol was used to refer both to people of a particular Chinese ethnic origin and those suffering from Down's syndrome. 

One of the chief popularisers of this so called biogenetic law or recapitulation theory was the Professor of Zoology at Jena, Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919). His 1868 History of Creation popularised and extended Darwinism. He denied being a materialist but much of what he said sounded very much like it. He coined the now familiar term ecology and in his best selling Riddle of the Universe he claimed that plants were conscious. It is perhaps understandable that one of his followers declared that Haeckel's name would become a shining symbol that would 'glow for centuries'. 

However, the recapitulation theory, though warmly greeted at first, was not set to last for long. The theory is often summarised in the phrase 'ontology recapitulates phylogeny'. The idea was that the various stages of human evolution are observable as a fast forward re-run in the development of the human embryo. Thankfully this nonsense has long been discredited and is no longer acceptable to modern scientists. 

Haeckel was an atheist. He endeavoured to apply Darwinist principles in politics and society. He has been described as attempting to synthesise 'romantic folkism with scientific evolutionism'. Through his later Monist league he was a major ideologist for racism and nationalism. His likely influence on the future author of Mein Kampf (`My struggle') cannot be overlooked. Thankfully, however, the horrendous racism of the Third Reich has also been rejected on a large scale. 

On the other hand, if you pick up a modern edition of Gray's Anatomy or a textbook such as Scott Gilbert's Developmental Biology you will find that they contain drawings based on Haeckel's 1874 work that purport to show embryos of various species all looking remarkably similar in their early stages of development. 

However, it seems that this part of Haeckel's legacy is no more trustworthy than his recapitulation theory and scientists are being slowly awakened to the fact. Haeckel, if we may put it this way, was rather creative in his efforts to promote an evolutionary view. Last summer an essay appeared in the journal Anatomy and Embryology by Dr Michael Richardson of St George's Hospital Medical School in London. There he says (according to The Times) 

This is one of the worst cases of scientific fraud. It's shocking to find that somebody one thought was a great scientist was deliberately misleading. It makes me angry.

He describes the drawings as 'misleading and inaccurate' or, in the vernacular, 'fakes'. 

Dr Richardson has put together an international team of experts to demonstrate the inaccuracy of Haeckel's drawings and it seems that this particular plank of evolutionary theory is being abandoned for good. Of course, for Bible believing Creationists there are few surprises here. As long ago as 1989, in his book The Long War Against God, Henry Morris wrote that even in his own lifetime Haeckel was

forced to admit that he had "Schematised" (or better "fabricated") the famous series of sketches supposedly showing that the embryos of all mammals (including man) are essentially identical for some time after conception. These fallacious drawings have been reproduced in text after text since they were first developed by Haeckel as part of his atheistic propaganda.

But, of course, no-one listens to Creationists and their crack-pot ideas! 

We do not suppose that all evolutionists are crooks. Nevertheless, their blind faith in an unbiblical and atheistic theory does leave them susceptible to being hoodwinked in this way. If Dr Richardson was angry when he realised that Haeckel had deceived him, how will he feel when he realises that the whole evolutionary theory, to which he continues to be committed, is built on sand? How we should weep in compassion for those who have believed this lie.
This article first appeared in Grace magazine

Our great loss: Robert Sheehan 1951-1997

It is difficult to put into words how great the sense of loss felt by those who love the Reformed faith at the passing of our dear brother Bob Sheehan. One correspondent quoted from Southey's Life of Nelson: 'The death of Nelson was felt in England as something more than a public calamity; men started at the intelligence and turned pale, as if they heard of the loss of a dear friend.'

If this were a more godly time that is how Bob's death would be greeted. It is certainly how it has been greeted not just in this country but across the world by those who have benefited from Bob's ministry either personally or through his writings.

We all have personal memories, of course. I picture Bob in full flight expounding Scripture and explaining truth to eager listeners. I see him in private conversation on a tube train or immediately after a meeting, typically with a smile at some anecdote or other. I remember too his ability to cut through the fog of confusion and disagreement that sometimes descends in a committee to bring us safely to a united decision. Then I think of an impressive spontaneous contribution at a Banner Conference, listing five reasons why Spurgeon eschewed the systematic expository method. I remember too how, with typical self-effacement, as he sat down he whispered that he was only able to say what he had as he had recently been preparing a paper on Spurgeon.

Then I recall a Sunday morning at Childs Hill early in my ministry when he and Wendy turned up unexpectedly. My reaction at the time reminds of an anecdote I later heard Bob share. It was of how as a student he was out preaching. Before going in a deacon warned him that if he should see an old man at the back slipping out just before the final hymn he was not to worry ... Dr Lloyd-Jones often did that! Bob's application to himself then and subsequently was that if the presence of a great preacher makes me fearful, how much more should the fact that I preach always in the presence of the Living God. In my situation, however, things were exacerbated by the fact that we were attempting a capella singing that morning in the absence of our only pianist. During the second hymn the singing broke down and I was at a loss to know what to do. Suddenly it was Bob to the rescue. He strode to the piano and taking the tune book from my hand he proceeded to accompany us with competence through the rest of the meeting.

Finally, I remember Bob in his final extremity, following the first of three brain haemorrhages that combined to take his life. Though flat on his back he was still typically lucid and systematic as he explained his situation. 'There are three possible outcomes ...' he explained. And then I remember him saying, `But I feel so weak, so very weak'. It is sobering to see how low our heroes can be brought by the hand of God. As he raised up Bob to preach his Word so now he has taken him to be with him - which is far better. He gave. He took. Praise to his name.

The loss, however, is ours. Our hearts go out to Wendy and to the rest of the family and to the congregation at Welwyn in their great loss. We in the wider Reformed world share in that loss too. We shall especially miss:

1. His commitment to the Reformed Faith. There was no question of his solid orthodoxy. One felt safe when he was tackling a subject either in print or at a conference or in private conversation. He not only held to the truth firmly but was able to articulate it clearly.

2. His erudition. Bob trained as a young man at the London Bible College but his theological education clearly did not end there. I remember him once at the Metropolitan Tabernacle revealing that he was considering his study programme not just for the coming year but for the coming ten years. His valuable contributions to systematic, historical and practical theology were all equally learned.

3. His youth. Bob was born in the fifties. There is a difference between the generation that grew up in the fifties and sixties and those from before that time. To hear someone this side of fifty expound ancient truths brings its own particular encouragement. It is tempting to ponder what might have been had he lived another 40 years but we submit to the Lord and give thanks for the years in which we did benefit.

4. His wisdom and vision. I was particularly aware of this in connection with the Evangelical Library. Bob became chairman of the trustees just a few years ago. His efforts did not please everyone but there can be no doubt that the situation there has been transformed. The Library is on a better financial footing than it has been for many years.

Bob's wisdom was not only biblically informed but of a very practical nature. I remember once arriving at the station in Derby, following a Carey conference, to find that flooding was blocking the line. My instinct was to sit and wait patiently. But not Bob. There he was over at the taxi rank negotiating a good price for the trip back to Welwyn for himself and his companions. Such practical wisdom is rare. How it will be missed.

5. His energy. Although there were enforced periods of inactivity due to illness and a great deal of time must have been spent on study there was a tremendous energy about Bob that will again be sorely missed. He wrote a great deal for Grace and for other magazines, spoke at several conferences and colleges, travelled to various countries and was often in the vanguard of new initiatives. His very manner breathed life. Part of the tragedy of his final weeks in coma was to see a man so active reduced to virtual stillness. How we need men of such energy!

6. His broad fellowship. Bob lectured and taught Greek at the School of Evangelism in Welwyn. He also lectured at the LRBS and had recently accepted an invitation to join the faculty at LTS. Few would find themselves acceptable at all three institutions. Despite clear and decided views and little appetite for organised unity there was nevertheless a real desire for that true organic unity found in Christ. The widespread sympathy evoked by his illness and death bears ample testimony to that fact.

So what shall we say? This death is sobering. It forces us to look to God. We dare not forget that we are entirely in his hands. But is there not more to say? Surely this loss should stir us, under God, to seek a better grasp of the faith, study harder, seek greater vision, work more vigorously for the kingdom and do what we can to foster organic unity. By God's grace, may it be so.

This article first appeared in Grace Magazine.

Metempsychosis

When I was 11 or 12 I started to go along to the Young People's Fellowship at the chapel around the corner from my home. One Friday they had decided would be an 'Any questions' night with a panel of speakers. We were invited to submit written questions before hand. The idea appealed to me and so I put a question in the box - anonymously of course. On the night, they dealt with my question first. I had asked Does the panel believe in reincarnation? The chairman of the panel was rather facetious at first and simply said `No'. He did go on to give a proper answer, however, although I do not recall what it was. I was in gross ignorance at the time and it seemed to me that reincarnation was at least as likely as any of the other religious ideas I had heard tossed around. Where I had first come across the idea I do not know. 

Truth not imagination

Reincarnation, or metempsychosis as it is sometimes known, is the belief that the human soul passes through a succession of lives. It is a basic tenet of Hinduism and other eastern religions and is also found in various forms of animism. Plato, Pythagoras and other Greek philosophers taught similar things. Even the Church Father Origen is accused of sympathies with the idea. No doubt it is an idea which appeals to many. 

The theory holds that when a person or an animal (or even a plant) dies its soul transmigrates and is reborn to be another person, animal (or plant). Modern versions of the doctrine tend to limit transmigration to the human form alone. The late Laurens van der Post, with what one writer describes as a 'disarmingly naïve streak of vanity', believed that he had previously fought on the walls of Constantinople and had been a knight of the Holy Grail. New Ager and actress Shirley MacLaine believes she has been an Inca, a Russian ballet dancer, a monk in a cave and has had many other incarnations. Often people become convinced they have lived previous lives after hypnosis, acupuncture or use of some other 'therapy' or `channelling' process. Such experiences rather reveal the power of the human imagination and Satan's ability to deceive. Some supporters of reincarnation will also quote the 'evidence' of near death experiences. To be fair, such evidence is open to interpretation and often cuts both ways. 

The Fall not Karma

In Hindu thought reincarnation is closely connected with the idea of Karma. Evil deeds of past lives relate to this one and how we live in this life will affect future incarnations. According to this theory only those who are holy enough break through the cycle of rebirth into a moksha of ultimate reality and oneness with the Absolute. It can be a rather pessimistic and discouraging doctrine. I remember a former Hindu describing his disillusionment when he became convinced that a deceased uncle of his who was very holy had been reincarnated only as a cow! In John 9:2, 3 Jesus's comment on the man born blind rules out the idea of sins in some past life affecting this one. The man's blindness was nothing to do with anything that he or his parents had done before his birth.

Unlike the Christian doctrine of the Fall the Hindu theory cannot answer the question of the origin of sin and suffering, it merely pushes the question back in time. 

Scripture not human logic

Reincarnation does seem to take seriously the fact the soul never dies. However, each reincarnation is considered to be a new person and so the doctrine is denied in reality. There is an inner logic to reincarnation but it is not what the Bible teaches. Rather, there we read Man is destined to die once and after that to face judgment (Hebrews 9:27). We live only one life. At the end of this one life we will go either to heaven or to hell. We will either be punished for our sins in hell or, if we have gone to God through the Lord Jesus Christ, we will be forgiven. You cannot earn this forgiveness. It is the free gift of our gracious God. After death the believer's soul enters Paradise - not mere nothingness but a real and lasting encounter with the Lord of Glory himself. Nothing can begin to match such a hope. 

Resurrection not reincarnation

When we die our souls go to God and our bodies are left to rot. But a resurrection day is coming when body and soul will be re-united to stand before God for the final judgement. God has guaranteed this resurrection by raising the first already - Jesus himself. Jesus did not teach reincarnation nor did he live it. Rather he taught resurrection (eg Mark 12:26) and he himself rose from the dead. To believe in reincarnation, whether it leads to comfort or despair, is to believe a lie.
This article first appeared in Grace Magazine

Katherine Hankey Sermon Class

We sang the famous hymn Tell me the old old story recently by the Clapham sect poetess and one time missionary nurse in South Africa, Arabella Katherine Hankey (1836-1911) and it struck me that what she says there ought to be in the mind of every faithful preacher as he preaches.

1. Stick to the main thing
Tell me the old, old story of unseen things above
Of Jesus and his glory, of Jesus and his love

We want it to be fresh and relevant but not new and not earthbound - just the good old gospel and how to get to heaven. Tell them about Jesus - that's what they need to hear.

2. Keep it simple, stupid
Tell me the story simply, as to a little child,
For I am weak and weary and helpless and defiled.

Don't try to be clever or expect too much. You're dealing with the weak and weary and with wanderers who need help.

3. Easy does it
Tell me the story slowly, that I may take it in,
That wonderful redemption, God’s remedy for sin.

Don't be in a rush and don't assume things. Patiently explain it all - the whole plan of redemption and how sinners are saved.

4. Let's go through that again
Tell me the story often, for I forget so soon;
The early dew of morning has passed away at noon.

Be subtle but don't be afraid of repetition. You'd be surprised how quickly people forget things. And don't be afraid of repetition. It's amazing how quickly people forget things!

5. This is serious
Tell me the story softly, with earnest tones and grave;
Remember I’m the sinner whom Jesus came to save.

Don't be flippant or uncaring. There is seldom need to shout. Seek to be filled with compassion. Be earnest. Love them. Take it seriously. Remember this is the gospel you are preaching.

6. What they really need
Tell me the story always, if you would really be,
In any time of trouble, a comforter to me.

Never forget that what they need more than anything else is not your pop psychology or the latest cliches but the gospel. Whatever their particular trouble, the answer is found ultimately in the gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ.

7. The ministry of warning
Tell me the old story when you have cause to fear That this world’s empty glory is costing me too dear.

A warning note needs to be sounded for some. A gospel call implies a call to leave the world and its supposed charms. Don't be afraid to be negative where necessary.

8. With an eye on the goal ahead
Yes, and when that world’s glory is dawning on my soul,
Tell me the old, old story: “Christ Jesus makes thee whole.”

Death is fearful thing even for the Christian and the people you are speaking to will all have to face it one day, some sooner than others. In death, as much as in life, what they really need to face the final enemy is the same gospel that they needed in life. Preach conscious of that fact.

Getting to grips with Proverbs

Let a child choose between 500 pennies and a £5 note and he will choose the coins, while you, knowing the value of portable cash, probably prefer the banknote. Proverbs contain portable wisdom. They are brief and to the point. 

Proverbs is one of the Bible's more unusual books. It begins fairly conventionally but after Chapter 9, proverbs dominate. Proverbs appear elsewhere in Scripture but not in such profusion. How do we get to grips with them and with the book? To remember the following points will be a great help.

1. Seek Christ. To get the most from any Bible book you need to work hard, concentrating on seeing Christ there. In Proverbs wisdom is presented as a desirable, omni-competent woman who the father wants his son to marry. In light of the New Testament we see that such wisdom is found ultimately in Christ alone. He is the one to marry! 

2. These proverbs form a collection. Each one needs to be matched with others and compared with other parts of Scripture. As everywhere in Scripture there is repetition. Some proverbs are repeated exactly or with slight variations. An examination of context usually reveals their particular aim. Even where verses apparently jump from subject to subject, appreciating the context is important. Also take care not to let their intensely practical concern with material things and this world lead to an imbalance. Worldly success does not equal righteousness, as we surely know. 

3. Proverbs are proverbial! Do not read them as laws or in a literalistic way. We do not do it with English proverbs. We recognise the truth both of ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’ and ‘many hands make light work’. However, with biblical proverbs, conscious it is Scripture, we tend to absolutise in a wrong way. Proverbs are designed to be memorable rather than theoretically accurate. No proverb is a complete statement of truth. It will not automatically apply in every situation. We must use common sense. If blessings or rewards are promised, it is important to remember they are likely to follow. There is no legal guarantee of success.

10:22 says The blessing of the LORD brings wealth, and he adds no trouble to it. In the Old Testament God’s blessing was often of a more obviously material sort. To argue from this verse that ‘every believer is a wealthy believer’ is to ignore the rest of Scripture, which makes clear that wealth can be a curse or a blessing. It teaches rather that God's blessings are not superficial but worth having. Truly it can be said of those in Christ, All things are yours (1 Corinthians 3:21). 

14:23 says All hard work brings a profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty. Sometimes hard work brings no profit. Every gain is wiped out in one fell swoop. However, there is a proverbial truth here that we must accept. 

See also 15:25 The LORD tears down the proud man’s house but he keeps the widow’s boundaries intact, 16:3 Commit to the LORD whatever you do, and your plans will succeed.

4. Many proverbs need “transculturalisation”. Some proverbs are expressed in terms rooted in Old Testament practices and institutions. Forgetting that leads to trouble.

25:24 reads Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife. The verse may conjure up a man sitting on the corner of a house with a sloping roof, his feet in the guttering. That is not the picture intended. A transculturalised version may be ‘Better to be in the spare room than share the house with a quarrelsome wife’.

What about 30:17? The eye that mocks a father, that scorns obedience to a mother, will be pecked out by the ravens of the valley, will be eaten by the vultures It sounds pretty gruesome until you recall that this comes out of a culture living on the edge of a desert. The boy is warned not to wander off but will not listen. Maybe he gets away with it once or twice but a day comes when he wanders off and is lost. Days later they find his ravaged remains.

5. Proverbs follow a number of common patterns. Hebrew psalms employ various sorts of parallelism and Hebrew proverbs have certain characteristics too.

• Chapters 10-15 contain mostly antithetical or contrasting proverbs, the ‘on one hand … but on the other …’ sort. 10:1 A wise son brings joy to his father, but a foolish son grief to his mother. Some contrasts are simple, others more complex: 10:8 The wise in heart accept commands, but a chattering fool comes to ruin.
• Chapters 16-22 contain mostly synonymous and synthetic proverbs. In synonymous proverbs the first line is repeated in different words: 11:25 A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed See also 16:11.
• In synthetic ones, the first line is added to with a subsequent one: 10:22 The blessing of the LORD brings wealth, and he adds no trouble to it. See also 16:3.
• Simile. Straight similes predominate in Chapters 25-27 and one or two appear earlier: 10:26 As vinegar to the teeth and smoke to the eyes, so is a sluggard to those who send him.

Some proverbs defy neat categorisation. Even within categories, there can be variation. Two more distinctive types worth noting are:

• Ten better than proverbs, including 12:9 Better to be a nobody and yet have a servant than pretend to be somebody and have no food.
• Six how much more proverbs, including 11:31 If the righteous receive their due on earth, how much more the ungodly and the sinner!

Awareness of such things can help us better appreciate the book.

Proverbs is not always easy to get to grips with but it is very worthwhile doing. Its own introduction promises to help you attain wisdom and discipline, understand words of insight and live a disciplined, prudent, godly life. It can make the simple prudent, give knowledge and discretion to young people and extend the learning of the wise and guide them. What a book!

Spurgeon once warned that though Solomon made a book of proverbs, a book of proverbs never made a Solomon. Getting to grips with Proverbs cannot guarantee anything by itself but it is a God-given book that can help you to be wise and holy. Do all you can to take full advantage of it.

This article first appeared I believe in the Protestant Truth Society Magazine

Our late brother and our late sister

`... get me to the church on time ...' is an old musical song. It is not only brides or even bridegrooms who get to the church late. Every Sunday it is a problem for some.

There are different types of latecomer

Habitual

Such people have been late so often it is now the norm. They are hardly embarrassed at turning up ten or fifteen minutes late and more. It is their regular pattern.

Occasional

Others are quite embarrassed when they arrive late. Once every six weeks, six or seven times a year, it happens. The norm is to be on time but sometimes not.

We all have our days

Perhaps there is no-one reading this who has never been late. Maybe it was not your fault or may be it was. We all need to consider the subject. Most of us could arrive earlier than we do. 

People are late for various reasons

Bad Planning

Most arrive late because of bad organisation. God is a God of order. We are in his image and he expects us to be orderly too. Some mistakes are common. People fail to allow for:

Travelling

No matter how near or far from the church you live you need to allow time to travel there. This is why so often the nearer people live to the building the more likely they are to arrive late. Those far away allow plenty of travelling time but those who live near forget this factor.

Preparation

This is equally obvious but often forgotten. This is one reason why it is more difficult for a family to arrive on time than for an individual. Children also have to be got ready.

The unexpected

Oversleeping, a little accident at the breakfast table, an unexpected telephone call, a traffic jam. All sorts of unexpected things can cause delay. Your routine must make allowance for such things.

Bad Habits

Trying to do other things before church

Sunday School lesson preparation, a chapter of a book, a telephone call. Whatever it is, if it is allowed to interfere with the routine of getting ready for church a late arrival is likely.

Getting up late

If you want to be in church on a Lord's Day morning, the time you rise is crucial. Use your alarm clock. Many like a little lie-in on Sundays but evidence points to the benefits of rising at the same hour every day of the week. If you love the Lord's Day you will want to be up earlier, not later, anyway.

Going to bed too late the night before

One reason some are slow to rise on Sunday morning is a late Saturday night. 'No work tomorrow', they think, so stay up late, then wake up late and arrive at church late. 

Deeper Problems

A disorganised lifestyle

Some are not just late for church but for everything else. Such a lifestyle is a pain to others and dishonouring to God. It must be dealt with.

A low view of the importance of order and punctuality

Further back is a failure to see lack of order and a lack of punctuality as sin against God, a failure to reflect his image.

A low view of the Lord's Day

Another problem is a low view of the Lord's Day and corporate worship. Christians disagree about aspects of the Lord's Day but all agree it is a special day. The last thing it should be is a day for lying in bed. Like our Lord we should be up early and doing on his Day. When we have agreed to meet with fellow believers we should be especially prompt to fulfil our duty and enjoy our privilege. 

There are other problems. In multi-cultural churches sometimes it seems that those of certain cultures are more likely to arrive late. This may be deceptive as, where some say 'Better late than never', others say 'There on time or not at all'. In my experience stereo-types are often proved wrong. Whatever our culture we must not be bound by it but in Christ rise above it. Another matter worth considering, where families are concerned, is the matter of harmony and team work. Without this such families are likely often to be late.

Late arrival at worship meetings is a bad thing because of the effect it has on -

Yourself

You miss out on parts of the worship

The minister has carefully prepared each part of the meeting. If you arrive late you inevitably miss out on some of that.

You come in unprepared

At the start of a meeting, allowance will be made for the fact we often come with cold hearts but if you are late, and come in at a point when it is hoped hearts are warmed, you may find worship difficult.

Others

No matter how careful you are you almost inevitably disturb others in their worship

The last thing one needs is distractions but if you are late you give the devil one more opportunity.

You are likely to discourage and disorientate the preacher

In most assemblies the minister will know if you are late. It may encourage him to know you are there but it cannot encourage him to know you are late. It may disorientate him for a moment as he takes into account your presence.

Your bad example

encourages others to be slack and gives the impression that God does not matter. This may not be your intention but it is likely that this is how others will react.

Practically

Get a right perspective

It is clear from what we have said that a high view of the Lord's Day, of corporate worship and of orderliness as part of a holy life will do a great deal to deliver from the sin of lateness. A careful study of our Lord's lifestyle could do wonders to our thinking by God's grace.

Get organised

A little preparation on Saturday night can make a big difference. Cleaning shoes, choosing clothes, peeling potatoes. All can save precious minutes. Do not go to bed late either and remember to set the alarm for your usual rising time. Plan a routine, remembering to allow for the unexpected and not attempting too much before church. Above all get into the habit of arriving in good time. You will enjoy it.

This article originally appeared in Grace Magazine

The Great Ejection of 1662

This year (2012) sees the 350th anniversary of what is known as the Great Ejection, when about two thousand ministers and others in the pay of the national church in England and Wales were silenced or ejected from their livings for failing to conform to what the Church of England required. 

Most of the names of the men who were ejected and their wives who suffered with them are unfamiliar to us, though names such as Richard Baxter, Thomas Manton, Thomas Watson and John Howe should mean something to you. Though some few good men did remain in the national church, Gerald Bray is right to say that almost all of the ejected “were Puritans, and so the Act may be said to represent the expulsion of Puritanism from the national Church.” 

It is right, therefore, that those who claim admire the Puritans should know something of this history. However, discovering good material on the subject is not easy and in an attempt to remedy this I have established an internet blog (www.greatejection.blogspot.com) and a short book that Evangelical Press hope to publish this year. We have also arranged a one day study conference at the Evangelical Library in London on March 27. 

Back in 1962, speaking at the Evangelical Library, Dr Lloyd-Jones said that practically all that is good in evangelicalism finds its roots in the Puritanism so fiercely persecuted then. He also declared that “the very greatness of the men themselves as men of God demands our attention”. That testimony ought to be heeded. 

Joseph Alleine 

Take as just one example of such men, Joseph Alleine 1634-1668, the author of the posthumous bestseller Alarm to the unconverted ejected from his living in 1662 and imprisoned in Ilchester the following year. His older brother Edward had been a minister but had died aged only 26, prompting him also to go into the ministry. He worked in Taunton alongside George Newton 1602-1681, “a plain, profitable and successful preacher, eminent for meekness and prudence”, also ejected in 1662. In 1655 Alleine married his cousin, Theodosia Alleine fl 1654-1677, whose father Richard Alleine 1610-1681, and uncle William Alleine 1613/14–1677, were also ejected. Theodosia subsequently wrote of her husband that 

He would be much troubled if he heard smiths or shoemakers,or such tradesmen, at work at their trades, before he was in his duties with God: saying to me often, “O how this noise shames me! Doth not my Master deserve more than theirs?” 

She also tells how they were at home one Saturday evening in 1663 when 

my husband was seized on by an officer of our town, who would rather have been otherwise employed, as he hath often said, but that he was forced to a speedy execution of the warrant by a justice’s clerk, who was sent on purpose with it to see it executed, because he feared that none of the town would have done it. 

The warrant required Alleine to appear at the house of a justice about two miles out of town. He asked if he could eat with his family first. This was initially denied but a prominent man in the town agreed to guarantee his speedy appearance after that. Theodosia continues “His supper being prepared, he sat down, eating very heartily, and was very cheerful, but full of holy and gracious expressions, suitable to his and our present state”. 

After supper, having prayed with the family, he went with the officer and some friends to the justice’s house, where he was accused of breaking the law by preaching, which he denied. He was accused of “being at a riotous assembly” though involved in nothing but preaching and prayer.
Then he was much abused with many scorns and scoffs from the justices and their associates, and even the ladies as well as the gentlemen often called him rogue, and told him that he deserved to be hanged, ... with many such like scurrilous passages,which my husband receiving with patience, and his serene countenance showing that he did slight the threatenings, made them the more enraged. They then urged him much to accuse himself, but in vain. 

Despite a lack of evidence, after keeping him until twelve with their abuse and mocking, they made out an arrest warrant committing him to gaol the following Monday. It was about two in the morning by the time he was home so he lay on his bed still dressed to sleep for a few hours before rising to pray at about eight o’clock, by which time several friends had arrived. He was not allowed to preach but was free to speak with the various groups that flocked in from the town and nearby villages and to pray with them. Theodosia continues 

He was exceeding cheerful in his spirit, full of admiration of the mercies of God, and encouraging all that came to be bold, and venture all for the Gospel and their souls, notwithstanding what was come upon him for their sakes. For, as he told them, he was not at all moved at it, nor did not in the least repent of anything he had done, but accounted himself happy under that promise Christ makes ... that he should be doubly and trebly blessed now he was to suffer for his sake; and was very earnest with his brethren in the ministry that came to see him, that they would not in the least desist when he was gone, that there might not be one sermon the less in Taunton; and with the people, to attend the ministry with greater ardency, diligence, and courage than before; assuring them how sweet and comfortable it was to him to consider what he had done for God in the months past; and that he was going to prison full of joy, being confident that all these things would turn to the furtherance of the Gospel, and the glory of God. 

Not wanting to leave his people without some final words, he met with them in the small hours of the following morning. Several hundred gathered to hear him preach and pray for about three hours. 

At about nine, again with friends accompanying him, he set out for Ilchester. The streets were lined with people on either side. Many followed him out of the town for several miles, earnestly lamenting their loss. Alleine was very moved by all this but did his best to look cheerful and say something to encouraging. He carried his arrest warrant himself, and had no officer with him. When he came to the prison the gaoler was not there so he took opportunity to preach one final time before entering, which he was later vilified for. When the gaoler came, he delivered his warrant and “was clapped up in the Bridewell chamber, which is over the common gaol”. 

On arriving, Alleine found there his friend John Norman 1622-1669 from Bridgwater, imprisoned a few days before. Norman's great fear was ending up as an indentured labourer on one of the plantations of the West Indies, a realistic fear for a nonconformist at that time. 

Alleine spent the next four months in this hole. At that time the gaol held 50 Quakers, 17 Baptists and about 12 others who, like Alleine, had been arrested for preaching and praying. Through the summer months, the heat inside the low ceilinged prison was quite unbearable. There was little privacy and nowhere to eat. Night and day they could hear the singing, the cursing and the clanking chains of the criminals in the cells below. The professed Quakers could be a nuisance too. 

Alleine and his companions took it in turns to preach and pray publicly once or twice a day. There were usually crowds from the villages around listening at the bars of the prison. The rest of the day was spent speaking to those who thronged to him for counsel and instruction. He would spend much of the night studying and in prayer. He was allowed to curtain off a corner of the room big enough for his bed, where he could pray in private. Theodosia bravely chose to share imprisonment with him. After some weeks he was allowed to walk in the countryside, if the gaoler was willing. Friends supplied him with food and money and he stayed healthy in body and mind. 

On 14 July he was taken to court in Taunton and indicted for preaching. Despite a lack of evidence he was returned to prison where he and his companions would soon have to face the cold of winter, every bit as trying as the heat of summer. It was a whole twelve months before he was released. He kept busy writing books including an exposition of the Shorter Catechism. There were also weekly letters to his people, a number of which were later collected and published. He also sent out catechisms for distribution among poor families. When the gaol chaplain fell ill, he dared to take his place, and, until prohibited, preached to the criminals in the gaol and helped them in other ways. He was much in prayer throughout his time in prison. 

Once free again Alleine set about his work with alacrity but some three years on he was re-arrested, along with his wife, her aged father, seven other ministers and 40 others. Alleine was not well when he entered prison this second time and it greatly weakened him so that after returning to Taunton in February, 1668, his health broke down completely. Nine months later, at the age of only 34, weary from hard work and suffering, he died. 

How such a story should stir us up to zeal for serving the Lord in our generation. This is only one example among hundreds of such faithfulness. As Spurgeon once said, these were men 

who counted nothing their own. They were driven out from their benefices, because they could not conform to the Established Church, and they gave up all they had willingly to the Lord. They were hunted from place to place ... they wandered here and there to preach the gospel to a few poor sheep, being fully given up to their Lord. Those were foul times; but they promised they would walk the road fair or foul, and they did walk it knee-deep in mud; and they would have walked it if it had been knee-deep in blood too. 

The events that lay behind all this 

What led up to Alleine's ejection, imprisonment and eventual death was a series of far reaching events in the political sphere. Firstly, in May 1660, the monarchy was restored. Charles II, heir to Charles I, who had been executed in January 1649, was recalled. Although many good men were keen to see the monarchy re-established they did not realise what it would lead to. For a while things were moderately bearable for the Puritans but a series of acts were passed against them between 1661 and 1665, acts that since the 19th century have together been known as the Clarendon Code, after the Lord Chancellor, Edward Hyde, the first Lord Clarendon. 

The Corporation Act 

The first of the four acts was the Corporation Act of December 1661. It required three things from all municipal officials - mayors, aldermen, councillors, borough officials. These were an oath of allegiance to the throne, a formal rejection of the Solemn League and Covenant and the taking of communion in the parish church within a year of taking office. Its effect was to exclude nonconformists from public office and some conscientious dissenters lost important posts. Further, some unscrupulous corporations took advantage of the situation and voted such men into office then fined them when they declined to serve! 

The Act of Uniformity 

Obviously with the ascent of a new ruler a new Act of Conformity was expected. Once Charles's new Parliament was in place they brought in such a bill. The bill was so strict that it was almost impossible for even the least dogmatic of the Puritans to accept it with a clear conscience. The act received royal assent on 29 July, 1662. It gave all ministers of the Church of England, university fellows, school teachers and private tutors too, until 24 August, St Bartholomew’s Day, to conform to its demands or be ejected. 

Ministers were expected to affirm the supremacy of the monarch in all things ecclesiastical and spiritual and to signify ‘unfeigned assent’ to everything in the forthcoming Book of Common Prayer. Most were unable to see this book in time, as it was not out until 6 August. Those who had not been ordained by a bishop were also expected to be re-ordained. Further, there was again the need to repudiate the hated Solemn League and Covenant and to acknowledge that the oath taken to maintain it involved no moral obligation. A declaration was further required that it was unlawful under any pretence whatever to take up arms against the King. 

The Great Ejection 

Estimates vary but it seems that, including those ejected before 1662 and some who jumped rather than waiting to be pushed, two thousand were silenced or ejected. There will always be some vagueness about the figure as some changed their minds. A G Matthews says some 210 later conformed. 

Edmund Calamy's Nonconformist Memorial deals with some 2,465 people altogether. Matthews and Michael Watts say that the number unwilling to conform in 1662 was 2029. Some 200 of these were university lecturers. Matthews points out that a further 129 were deprived at an uncertain date between 1660 and 1663 and with the ejections of 1660 as well, he gives a total of 1760 ministers (about 20% of the clergy) thrust out of the Church of England, silenced from preaching or teaching because they could no longer conform by law and so deprived of a livelihood. 

Many preached farewell sermons the week before their ejection and some of these are still in print. Robert Adkins, ejected from St John's, Exeter, spoke for many when he said in his farewell sermon 

Let him never be accounted a sound christian that doth not fear God and honour the king. I beg that you would not suffer our nonconformity, for which we patiently bear the loss of our places, to be an act of unpeaceableness and disloyalty. We will do anything for his majesty but sin. We will hazard anything for him but our souls. We hope we could die for him, only we dare not be damned for him. We make no question, however we may be accounted of here, we shall be found loyal and obedient subjects at our appearance before God's tribunal. 

Iain Murray has written of the day itself that the atmosphere “was electric and charged with emotion; the popular discontent was great and strong guards stood ready in London”. Of the sermons,however, he rightly says that they seem far removed from all that. 

There is a calmness, and unction and a lack of invective. Great though their sorrow was for their flocks and for their nation, they had a message to preach which was more than equal to the strain of the crisis. An eternal God, an Ever-Living Saviour and a glorious hope of heaven, carried them through this heaviest trial. 

Persecution 

The years 1660 to 1689 saw great variation in the levels of persecution and understandably things varied from place to place. The persecution launched against the ejected also swept into its net others already outside the national church. John Bunyan is the most famous example. He was imprisoned in 1660 and remained there for the best part of the next 12 years. His congregation had previously been meeting in the parish church in Bedford but that all came to an end with the Restoration. Their conscientious stand for the truth and their great courage and wisdom in the face of persecution give an example that ought to be known and emulated. 

Conventicle Act 

In 1664 a third act was passed banning religious gatherings of more than five people over the age of 16, apart from the family members, unless using Church of England rites. Penalties for breaking this law were very strict. A first offence merited three months in prison or a £5 fine. A second offence saw the penalty doubled, a third would meet with transportation to America for seven years or a fine of £100. 

Five Mile Act 

In 1665 a particularly cruel law was passed. Known as the five mile act, this act forbade the ejected from living within five miles of their former place of abode. The idea was to try and cut them off from their former congregations, who usually remained loyal. It is this act that now drove ministers into obscure and isolated places and that necessitated long, secret journeys in order to circumvent the law. This is when secret meetings began to take place and when tricks such as having the minister preach in one room while the congregation listened in another began to come in. The act expired on 1 March, 1669. Along with Clarendon's fall in 1667 this meant some relief for the dissenters. It was short lived, however, as in July 1669, prompted by Parliament, Charles made a proclamation urging magistrates to continue to use the outstanding laws against nonconformists. 

The Second Conventicle Act 

In 1670 a second conventicle act was passed. Famously described by Andrew Marvell as ‘the quintessence of arbitrary malice’, it reduced penalties for ordinary worshippers but fines for preachers and the owners of places where conventicles were found went up to £20 for a first offence, £40 for a second. The idea of distraint was also introduced, the seizure of a person’s property in order to obtain payment. If the minister could not pay, wealthier members of the congregation could lawfully be plundered. 

Indulgences and waves of persecution 

In 1672 and 1683 Charles then James decreed indulgences but, unsupported in Parliament by law, these did not last and the pattern of persecution continued in most places. The Broadmead Baptists wrote of some eight waves of persecution altogether and it is clear that, as is often the case to this day, persecution did come in waves. Typically again, it varied in form and intensity, from minor harassment to mass imprisonment. Various factors were involved such as one's willingness to adapt to the situation and the attitude of local magistrates. 

Matthews suggests that 12.4% of the ejected men, some 215 altogether, were imprisoned between 1662 and the death of Charles II in 1685. Most were in for short periods but others were in prison for lengthy terms. Some seven ministers actually died in prison. 

Providence 

There was a Bible taught confidence among dissenters that their sufferings were working for them “a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory”. When Joseph Oddy was taunted by a Cambridge wit with the doggerel lines 

Good day, Mr Oddy, 

Pray how fares your body; 

Methinks you look damnably thin? 

He shot back with 

That sir's your mistake, 

'Tis for righteousness' sake; 

Damnation's the fruit of your sin. 

Dissenters were not slow to see in various providences God's hand encouraging them and dealing with their persecutors. What else could one make of the Great Plague, the Great Fire of London and the war with the Dutch, too, for that matter? “Nonconformist writings abound” says Michael Watts “in stories of disasters which befell individual persecutors”. 

Positively, Philip Henry, father of Matthew, observed in old age that though many of the ejected were brought very low, had many mouths to feed, were greatly harassed by persecution and their friends were generally poor and unable to support them, yet, in all his acquaintance, he never knew, nor could remember to have heard of any nonconformist minister being in prison for debt. 

Toleration 

Relief from direct persecution finally came for the nonconformists with the Toleration Act of 1689, when King William and Queen Mary came to the throne. In that year Particular Baptists finally felt free to publish their confession of faith, of course, the work having been completed back in 1677. Nonconformists continued to be treated as second class citizens, even then, being practically barred from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, for example, until as late as 1828. At least the worst of the persecution was over.

Self-examination 

Lloyd-Jones says of the men we have been considering that 

above all, they have left us this noble, glorious, wonderful example of holy living, patient endurance in suffering, and loyalty to the Word of God and its message, even at the cost of being “fools for Christ's sake” and being regarded as “the offscourings of all things”. 

A consideration of these men and the stand that they took should, at the very least, stir us to holiness, patience when we suffer and a strong commitment to being ruled by God's Word. 

Their example calls upon us to examine ourselves and to see where we stand. What is the state of the church? What about my own part in it? How can we expect God to bless us if we are not willing to ask ourselves serious questions about such things?

This article first appeared in Reformation Today and can be seen here.