An Introduction to Lent

Calvin Institute of Christian Worship ^ | 2004 | The Worship Sourcebook

[Maeve]

No, dearie, they were not Calvinist and are clearly not Calvinist. They may have been Zwinglian, and they were at least in the school of Martin Bucer in some ways -- but Calvinist they were not.

The form of confession in question was drafted by an Anglo-Catholic in the Church of England which makes it even more of a WoW! than at first glance.

[Campion]

How could I have ever thought that entering into 40 days of metanoia and "renewal of my mind" (St. Paul) and seeing "my sins are ever before me" (Psalms) and "can you not watch one hour with Me"? (Jesus) and "fast and pray that you enter not into temptation" --how could I have ever thought that such a practice would be of any help to me? Why, it would be like trying to buy my way or work my way into grace. It would be like thinking I could save myself. How very Catholic that was and how very unBiblical!

Amen, brother! Why, every time I hear, "Remember, man, you are dust and unto dust you shall return" my first thoughts are about how absolutely righteous I am, how completely that righteousness is my own doing, and how much God owes me for being such a good boy and going to church on Ash Wednesday.

And then, my chest swelling with pride in my own self-sufficiency, I kneel down and hear the priest say "Behold, the Lamb of God, happy are we who are called to his supper" and I say, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed." And all I can think of is what a big favor I'm doing God by being there!

</sarcasm> for the humor-deprived

[Titanites]

Looking at their site, it looks like they are CRC - and we know what direction they are heading at a rapid pace.

Maybe you can show us the direction in the chart illustrated in post #16. Surely it can't be any worse than that.

[wmfights]

I'm not too hard on the Puritans,...

I probably should have put a ;-) after my post. I really don't disagree. I think you are offering a solid objective opinion. :-)

[PAR35]

The chart is actually backward, one reason that it is confusing. Most timeline charts flow from left to right.

But the CRC (Christian Reformed Church) isn't on the chart. The chart deals primarily with those who came out of the Church of Scotland. It includes some who have strayed pretty far from the reformed faith (Cumberland Presbyterians, near the bottom) as well as those who have remained relatively true (ARP, or Associate Reformed, for example.) In fact, if you moved the PCA and the RPCUS above the PCSUA, and flipped them, you probably would have a pretty good picture of more pure to less pure from top to bottom.

I just looked again - the list doesn't even show the Evangelical Presbyterian Church. It would fall between the PCA and the PCUSA on orthodoxy.

Getting back to the CRC, United Reformed, Reformed Church US, etc; you are talking about churches that flowed from the Dutch Reformed tradition, which differs from the Scottish tradition, and has its own set of confessions = and its own family tree.

[Titanites]

which differs from the Scottish tradition, and has its own set of confessions = and its own family tree.

Surely their "family tree" isn't the same kind of quagmire as Presbyterianism's - which looks like a clump of sagebrush or a city map of downtown Houston.

[Titanites]

The chart is actually backward, one reason that it is confusing. Most timeline charts flow from left to right.

You could flip this chart horizontally and I don't believe it would eliminate much, if any, of the confusion.

[AnalogReigns]

"No, dearie, they were not Calvinist and are clearly not Calvinist."

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Cranmer, Ridley and Hooker did indeed have many Calvinist beliefs and the (1928 and earlier versions) Book of Common Prayer, and most certainly the 39 Articles are Calvinistical even if not TR ("Totally Reformed"). I stand by that assertion.

This I suspect is one big reason there are so many splinter groups of Presbyterians and Reformed....as no one is Calvinist enough (and Calvin himself was not Calvinist enough for some Puritans).

[Maeve]

This I suspect is one big reason there are so many splinter groups of Presbyterians and Reformed....as no one is Calvinist enough (and Calvin himself was not Calvinist enough for some Puritans).

You are absolutely correct. But I still insist that if you see echoes of Geneva in those Anglican gentlemen and texts, you are really seeing more of Zwingli ... and Martin Bucer.