Reformed Liturgy Series:

Introduction to Liturgy

Liturgy is derived from the Greek leitourgia, itself a combination of the words: people (laos) and work (ergon). We could render it, “work of the people,” or, “public service.” Basically, liturgy is the structure and flow of a public worship service.

Even the most casual nondenominational churches have a liturgy. While this series will focus on the the Reformed liturgy, it should be observed that all historic Christian churches have shared the same core elements since the earliest days. Justin Martyr (c. 100 - 165 A.D.) describes the church's liturgy as follows:

...After we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, [we] bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized person, and for all others in every place.... Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen.... [Then] those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine....

-- First Apology, Ch. 65

“We show ourselves to be Christians and theologians by our godly faith, holy living, and love of God and neighbors rather than be our subtle and sophistical argumentation.”

- David Chytraeus, Oratio de studio theologiae (Wittenberg, 1581). Quoted in Spener, Pia Desideria, pg. 112.

The modern phenomenon of celebrity preachers catapulted to fame via social media stardom is new only in the technological sense. From the early church on, many leaders rose to prominence through pastoring a large city, being unusually eloquent or influential, etc.

I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing, merely that de facto hierarchy is an inescapable reality.

The Prophecies Claimed by Charismatics Are Fraudulent on 3 Counts:

1) The prophecies are frequently given in a vague manner: e.g., "God has a great blessing for someone to whom the numbers 4 and 6 are significant." Nowhere in Scripture is prophecy given in these hazy terms, but rather the Word of God is forcefully and specifically brought to bear.

2) When specific prophecies are made, they always turn out false, an offense which not only disqualifies the so-called prophet but carries a divine death warrant (Deut. 18:20).

3) Leading people into false doctrine is a sure correlate to speaking false prophecies (Deut. 13:1-5). And of course, heresies of all types are rampant among these groups.

Does Acts 2:39 Support Infant Baptism?

For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.

Clearly prima facie, the answer is yes. The best baptist reply is an attempt to link this passage to Matt. 25:27 where the crowd condemning Jesus told Pilate, "His blood be on us and on our children!” They argue Peter's statement has specific reference to this episode and therefore cannot be interpreted as a covenantal norm. As a sidenote they also say that the text isn't covenantal at all because of the "all who are far off" line. This argument fails on 2 points.

1) The link to Matt. 25:27 raises the question of why the Jews would have pronounced a curse on themselves and their children. It's becuase they knew and believed that God's dealings with man are covenantal in nature, and that God's covenant is generational in nature. Peter's statement reinforces these covenantal assumptions.

2) The passage is just as much a link back to Gen. 17, the charter text of the Covenant of Grace. Note how closely the flow of vv. 12-13 mirrors the text:

He that is eight days old among you shall be circumcised; every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house, or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring,  both he that is born in your house and he that is bought with your money, shall be circumcised.

This is the positive vision:

Our people living in

Our place serving

Our covenant God.

Augustine Supported Paedocommunion:

They are infants, but they receive His sacraments. They are infants, but they share in His table, in order to have life in themselves.
-- Works, Vol. 5, Sermon 174:7

Neither salvation nor eternal life can be hoped for by any man without baptism and the Lord’s body and blood, it is vain to promise these blessings to infants without them. Moreover, if it be only sins that separate man from salvation and eternal life, there is nothing else in infants which these sacraments can be the means of removing, but the guilt of sin. . .
-- On the Forgiveness of Sins and the Baptism of Infants, Bk. I, ch. 33

Augustine uses paedocommunion as an apologetic against Pelagius, a British writer who had disciples across Christendom. Thus, the practice must have been universal.

The Wesminster Directory of Publick Worship Liturgy of Infant Baptism:

They are Christians, and federally holy before baptism...That the inward grace and virtue of baptism is not tied to that very moment of time wherein it is administered; and that the fruit and power thereof reacheth to the whole course of our life...

The revivalists of the 19th century invented the triad unbiblical ideas of:

(A) the "conversion experience" wherein one has a dramatic and emotional moment of deep emotional conviction of guilt, usually preceded by other difficulties and life problems as well. In this climactic moment, one consciously realizes and appropriates God as the solution to both the guilt problem and life problems. Of course, we see this occur at times in Scripture, but the problem is that this experience is presented as the only valid and legitimate manner of conversion.

(B) the "altar call" as a means of provoking the above, and

(C) the "testimony" as a means of sharing the above.

These practices, never instituted or even acknowledged in Scripture, have essentially become sacraments of the evangelical church. Frankly, Rome has a better basis for her sacramental additions than we do.

The History of Paedocommunion:

Several Ante-Nicene fathers strongly imply the practice, and by Augustine's day, the practice is explicitly universal. The Eastern Orthodox church still practices to this day.

The Western church did the same, with children receiving their first communion directly after baptism. Only by Romish superstition, denying both elements and requiring a Bishop's presence for confirmation (c. 1215), did it fade.

The proto-Reformed Hussites fought to recover this practice, but the Reformers themselves barely addressed the topic. When addressing the arguments from Anabaptists, Calvin strongly condemns it.

However, he concedes the practice is ancient and historical, and does not condemn Augustine and Cyprian for it. Neither did Luther condemn them though again he disaspproved of the practice.

Ante-Nicene Fathers on Infant Baptism:

Jesus came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age...
-- Irenaus, Against Heresies 2:22:4

Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them.
-- Hippolytus, The Apostolic Tradition 21:16

In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants.
-- Origen, Homilies on Leviticus 8:3

The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.
-- Origen, Commentaries on Romans 5:9

More here.

The [New Covenant] embodies the consummation of all the work of God for His people; it is the ocean into which all the rivers of history roll their waters from the beginning of the world.

-- Geerhardus Vos

The protestant reformation in Europe at its peak.
https://redd.it/1app5br
@r_mapporn

According to Paul, We Are So Back:

1 Corinthians 15:20-28

²⁰But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. ²¹For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. ²²For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. ²³But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. ²⁴Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. ²⁵For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. ²⁶The last enemy to be destroyed is death. ²⁷“For God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection under him,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. ²⁸When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.

Men are pioneers; women are glorifiers.

Men are conquerors; women are beautifiers.

Men are sacrifices; women are life-givers.

"Not surprisingly, amillennialism produces a retreating and crabbed outlook, a church in which men have no thought of victory but only of endless nit-picking about trifles. It produces a phariseeism of men who believe they are the elect in a world headed for hell, a select elite who must withdraw from the futility of the world around them. It produces what can be called an Orthodox Pharisees Church, wherein failure is a mark of election."
— God's Plan for Victory, R.J. Rushdoony

Have you ever known a 5 or 6 year old child of a Christian family who doesn't believe? No, they do. There's nothing wrong with that. We think there's something wrong with that, for a child to believe what his parents tell him. That's not wrong; that's God's way. God's way is for children to start out believing what their parents say.

-- James B. Jordan