Introspection & Assurance

Introspection means considering the state of our heart. It means considering our own sins, virtues, and frame of mind. We can tell something about who we are from the external manifestation of our inward condition, but the external is a much less perfect form of knowing ourselves.

Introspection is necessary for assurance of salvation. In order to know that we are saved, we must know that we have the characteristics of those who are saved. The Bible does not give us a list of the names of those who are saved and who are not saved. However, it does describe those who are saved as having certain characteristics; consequently, we can know that we are saved by knowing that we have those characteristics.

This is the clear teaching of our Confession. The Westminster Larger Catechism states that true believers “…may…by faith grounded upon the truth of God’s promises, and by the Spirit enabling them to discern in themselves those graces to which the promises of life are made, and bearing witness with their spirits that they are children of God, be infallibly assured that they are in the estate of grace, and shall persevere therein unto salvation” (emphasis mine, Q/A 80).

Likewise, the Canons of Dort teach in Head 1, Art. 12, “Assurance of this their eternal and unchangeable election to salvation is given to the chosen in due time, though by various stages and in differing measure. Such assurance comes not by inquisitive searching into the hidden and deep things of God, but by noticing within themselves, with spiritual joy and holy delight, the unmistakable fruits of election pointed out in God’s Word—such as a true faith in Christ, a childlike fear of God, a godly sorrow for their sins, a hunger and thirst after righteousness, and so on” (emphasis mine).

There are many who are not assured of our view of assurance. They ask, won’t it lead to despair? Can we really know ourselves? How can any human being have infallible assurance about what is not taught explicitly in God’s Word? I would like to try and give an answer to these questions.

1. Should we examine our own hearts?

Yes. The Apostle Paul teaches the Corinthians, “Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves” (2 Cor. 13:5). He also tells us that this is particularly necessary when partaking of the Lord’s Supper, “Let a man examine himself and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup” (11:28). We are also to be careful “lest there be in any of us an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God” (Heb. 3:12). To know this requires examination. The Apostle John tells us that he wrote his letter in order that those who believe in the name of the Son of God “may know that they have eternal life” (1 Jn. 5:13). He sets forth many different tests whereby we can know whether we merely say that we know God or whether we do in fact know God.

2. Can we test positively?

Many fear that if we start laying down tests of our conversion, then we will infallibly produce despair. This happens for two reasons. The true believer has many imperfections, and the true believer is humble about his own virtues. However, we must be careful not to deny God’s work. Many are concerned that we cannot know our hearts at all, following Jer. 17:9. However, we contend that we can know our hearts and can know that we are believers and thereby have the assurance that comes from this knowledge.

a. First, the call to examine ourselves would seem to be fruitless unless one could actually examine himself successfully. The verses we sighted above indicate that the Apostles clearly taught that such successful self-examination is possible.

b. Second, as our Confession points out, the Holy Spirit helps us in this. “The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (Rom. 8:16). We are sealed by the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption (Eph. 4:30). We have received the Spirit of God so that we “might know the things that have been freely given to us by God” (1 Cor. 2:12). This is no mere human work, but we have the divine aid of the Spirit of God.

c. The examples of the saints demonstrate that they were assured that they were saved and would be saved forever. “I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever,” says David (Ps. 23:6). “Nothing shall separate me from the love of Christ,” says Paul (Rom. 8:38-39). He also affirms elsewhere, “The Lord will deliver me from every evil work and preserve me for His heavenly kingdom” (2 Tim. 4:18).

d. The effects of assurance are also evident in believers such as confidence (Eph. 3:12), full assurance (Heb. 10:22), boasting (Rom. 5:2), unspeakable joy (1 Pet. 1:8), and joy that cannot be taken away (Jn. 16:22).

The Scripture teaches that the joy and delight that come from an infallible assurance of our salvation is possible and attainable. It is not without difficulty. Many have a false assurance. But this should not make us despair of having assurance. In fact, we should expect that we will attain unto that assurance by the ordinary use of the means that God has established.

3. How can our assurance be infallible, if God does not explicitly state that we are saved in His Word?

The short answer is that God does state it. But He states it implicitly, not explicitly. Those things that are implicit in the Word of God are also the Word of God.

For example, the Bible does not explicitly say that Wes White is a sinner. It says that all human beings (apart from Christ) are sinners. I must draw out the implicit conclusion. The major premise is “All humans are sinners.” The minor premise is “Wes White is a part of the human race.” The logical deduction is, “Wes White is a sinner.” This is no mere conjecture; it is an infallible certainty (which I can also verify by experience!).

Consider another example. Paul taught the Ephesian elders to watch over the flock committed to their care (Acts 20:28). This is not a specific command (as if the Ephesian elders and no others were to watch over their flock) but a general command given to specific elders. Now, I can draw the infallible conclusion that since I am an elder, I, Wes White, must watch over the flock committed to my care.

Now, let me apply this. All those who believe are elect and justified and will be glorified. Now, I believe; therefore, I am elect and will certainly be glorified. All those who love the brethren are begotten of God. I love the brethren; therefore, I am begotten of God and will never be lost. Even if some are mistaken about their faith or love, we have already seen that this does not mean that all are mistaken about their faith or love. We can know that we are true believers and, knowing that, we can infallibly conclude that we are elect and justified and will certainly persevere.

Conclusion

If we look for an assurance beyond the marks of God’s children that answer to the promises, we will not find it. The only assurance that the Bible gives is to those who repent and believe. Until we know that we are repentant and believers, we cannot know that we are saved. Moreover, it is our duty as believers not to rest with a mere hope that we are saved but to seek the certainty that God does provide in His Word by the power of the Holy Spirit. We must be even more diligent to make our calling and election sure (2 Pet. 1:10).

General Assembly 2009

Much of the initial work of the Assembly is done through the committees of commissioners who are nominated by the Presbytery to do the work of the Assembly and to oversee the work of our standing committees and agencies. This year I had the privilege of serving on the committee of commissioners for Ridge Haven, our conference center and campgrounds, near Brevard, NC. In God's good providence, I had the privilege of visiting Ridge Haven the week before. My wife, my two youngest children, and I enjoyed sightseeing and the beautiful and refreshing surroundings of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Teaching Elders in the PCA may receive two nights free at Ridge Haven. I would recommend especially to pastors that if you are in the area, you take the opportunity to visit Ridge Haven. It is a beautiful place, and it is a great encouragement to the people who live and work there to have visitors from other parts of the country.

We held our committee meeting on Tuesday morning. We took the full three hours scheduled to complete the work of the committee. I spent that afternoon helping with the minutes of the committee and visiting with old friends and new.

A Tuesday night worship always service begins the Assembly, and the previous year's Moderator always gives the first sermon. This year the sermon was from Paul Kooistra, the director of MTW. He gave a good sermon on 1 Cor. 1:26, emphasizing that each one of us is nothing in ourselves and that our only ground of boasting is in Christ.

One comment I would make is in light of the fact that all three speakers spoke about unity in the PCA. They were concerned about the disunity among us and urged patience and understanding. I certainly agree with those concerns. However, what I did not hear is that the ground of our unity is principally in our common confession about what we believe the Bible teaches about faith and life. The Westminster Confession is our statement about what we believe is important and what we need to stand on together. I did not hear any statement about how we need to hold fast to this Confession and exercise discipline when this is violated so that we may preserve the unity that we profess to have. When we allow a loose subscription and do not discipline when it is violated, then we disrupt the unity of the Church by establishing a different basis for unity than what we have agreed to.

On Wednesday morning, we always hear from the fraternal delegates and observers. I was especially pleased with the delegate from the RCUS. I wish we could have heard from the Korean delegates, but they were merely introduced. One highlight for me was hearing the delegate from the National Presbyterian Church of Brazil address the Assembly in Portuguese (with translation). It is exciting that we are now working with this body to advance the cause of Christ in Central and South America.

On Wedneday afternoon, we heard informational reports from our permanent committees and agencies. I went out for Supper that evening with my Grandparents who live in Florida. I do not see them very often, so it was a good opporutnity for me.

We returned for worship that evening. I was rather disappointed with the worship service. We were "led" by excellent performers, but most of the people were not singing or participating. We can go to a performance almost anywhere, but when do most of us have the opportunity to hear over a thousand people sing the praises of God in unison? It seems that particularly on this night a great opportunity was missed.

I also was disappointed by the preaching. I think the temptation for some preaching at GA is try to solve the problems of the PCA in a sermon. I wish they would just preach Christ from the Scriptures because Christ is truly the answer to the problems of the PCA (and everyone else). I remember at my first GA, Sinclair Ferguson preached on excellent sermon on Rom. 8. He simply preached of the love of God in Christ and applied to our hearts. In my humble opinion, this would be more edifying to the whole congregation.

On Thursday, we dealt with the committee reports. They flew by. Many people have complained about this. I would make two comments on this point. First, this emphasizes the importance of being involved in the committees. Second, I think we should have more time to look over the reports and consider them before we vote. TE Daniel Jarfster did emphasize this last point from the floor, and I was greatful for that.

I thought all the decisions from the Overtures Committee were good, and all their recommendations were adopted except for one. The most controversial was the question of whether or not to study the question of deaconesses. A study committee for that purpose was defeated by a narrow margin of 19 votes.

Let me make a few comments on the study committee. I think that there are some who do not see the true nature of the committee that was proposed. One of the questions that the committee was to study was the roles that women can fill in the Church according to Scripture. The motion was for the Moderator to appoint a study committee representing the diversity of views within the PCA. This would include those who held that there should be deaconesses. Almost certainly, then, there would be a minority report or minority letter suggesting that the Constitution should be changed to allow for this practice.

Now, what would be the harm in that? I think the speaker for the study committee put it well. He said (if I'm not mistaken), "We may need to change the Constitution, but we have to begin somewhere." If we had a floor vote to ask for a change in the Constitution to allow deaconesses, I'm sure the vote would be overhwhelmingly in the negative. So, if you want to have deaconesses, then you do need to start somewhere. I agree that a study committee is a good place to start. I just don't want to start. That's why I voted "no" to a study committee. I would urge my Brothers who do not want deaconesses to consider the points I have raised here and to vote against any future study committee, if they do not want to proceed toward deaconesses.

All in all, I enjoyed GA. It is always a great time of fellowship. It is truly the external bond of our unity. I'm thankful that we are blessed by God to have the freedom and ease with which to assemble like this. We have many issues in the PCA to deal with. We have many disagreements. Please pray for the PCA that we will maintain a unity based on the love of God, one another, and the truth.

Herman Witsius on Self-Denial

Herman Witsius (1636-1708) wrote a book in Dutch entitled The Practice of Christianity. It was originally written in Dutch and translated into French. This French translation is now available on Google Books. It is a simple and clear statement on how to live the Christian life. It also answers many of the common questions that people have about the Christian life. Here is a sample of Chapter 3, "On Self-Denial," pp. 40-49.

1. What is the first lesson that we must learn in the school of Jesus Christ? Jesus Christ Himself teaches us: “If anyone desires to follow Me, let Him deny himself.”

2. What does “self-denial” mean? Self-denial in general includes three things. First, we should not imagine ourselves to be worthy at all of the grace of God or salvation. Second, we should recognize our inability to do any spiritual good. Third, we should renounce our own wills and desires and submit them in all things to the will of God.

3. Must we consider ourselves as being completely unworthy of salvation? Yes. We should always recognize that God could have thrown us into hell from the very moment of our conception, since from that very moment we were by nature children of wrath on account of original sin. And since that time, we have committed many actual sins for which God could have cut the cord of our life and brought us into judgment. According to the law of God and the threats that are attached to it, whoever violates a single law even once merits the loss of eternal life. How much more have we merited it, since we have offended God a thousand times more?

4. Must we also consider ourselves completely unworthy of the grace of God? Just as we consider ourselves unworthy of salvation, we ought to think of ourselves as completely unworthy of the gifts and grace of God because we ruin and corrupt everything that goes through our hands. We are unworthy to hear the Gospel of peace because we defile the pure Word of God as soon as we receive it in our impure hearts. We are unworthy to live among Christians; on the contrary, we are worthy of being excluded from the society of Christians so that we would no longer scandalize any Christian by our evil actions and since we are not able to edify them by any good example. We should regard ourselves as unworthy of absolutely any physical blessing, even of a little piece of bread or a glass of cold water.

5. What should the condition of our hearts be in relationship to this unworthiness that we find in ourselves? It is not enough for us to have a simple knowledge of it and to speak of it with little interest as we would news from a far away country. Rather, it should powerfully penetrate our hearts, and we should feel a profound grief over it. When we look up into heaven, we should sigh that it is a place from which are banished by our own fault. We should consider hell to be a place that has opened its mouth wide in order to swallow us up. We should think of the devil as an enemy who desires us and powerfully pursues us from hell. All this should lead us to sigh, weep, cry, and lament without allowing any restoration of peace to our souls until we are assured by solid reasons that God has imputed to us the merit of Jesus Christ so that for the love of Christ and by His pure grace we can be esteemed worthy of eternal life.

6. But doesn’t this sort of talk lead man to despair? There is a despair that is good and praiseworthy. Good despair is a despair man has of himself and of his own ability to do anything leading in the direction of salvation. This is the despair that Jesus Christ produced by His Word and Spirit in the hearts of His disciples when they said: “Then, who can be saved?” Insofar as a man stops in himself, he finds nothing that is not worthy of condemnation and thus nothing that would not give place to a holy despair. But he must by this holy despair be pushed toward Jesus Christ so that, being found in Christ, he might never despair of the grace of God.

7. But can’t someone be overly distressed and worried about his own spiritual misery? We can distinguish people by their misery, distresses, and the greatness of their distress. Following these different categories, we can answer the question in different ways. Man can be considered either in his miserable natural estate and insofar as he is not yet actually reconciled with God through Jesus Christ, or he can be considered as already in grace and having received the redemption of Jesus Christ by faith.

One can also consider the misery of man either uniquely in itself, separated from the grace of God or in comparison with this grace.

One can also consider distress either as sorrow over sin or as a natural effect of reason or the understanding. It can also be considered as being found only in the rational soul of man or as a sadness that truly affects the soul and powerfully moves the emotions.

Finally, we can distinguish the greatness of the distress either in relation to violence or in relation to duration and continuation.

After having made these distinctions, I respond as follows.

A man who still remains in his misery and who is not yet reconciled with God through faith in Jesus Christ, when he sees his misery in itself and reflects on his own and all creature’s inability to deliver him, cannot be too distressed at his misery whether in the understanding or in the emotions. He should not stop the course of this distress, at least in the relationship to its direction, until he finds himself reconciled with God through Jesus Christ. The reason is that the misery of this man is as great as one could possibly conceive and (in its own manner) infinite. Thus, it is reasonable that his sadness might be proportional to the greatness of his misery.

But a man who is already in a state of grace can have too much of a feeling of his misery when he compares that misery with the grace of God and thinks that it could not or should not be taken away and says that his sins are too great to be pardoned (as Cain said). He can also be swallowed up by too much sadness and become demoralized in such away that the strength of the body and the soul collapse under the weight of it so that he becomes incapable by this of serving his God who wants not just to be served but to be served with joy. Finally, this distress can last too long when the believer looks too often and too long at his misery in order to be distressed by it and does not give enough attention to the goodness of God so that he might rejoice in it and be consoled by it.

8. Must we also recognize ourselves to be totally without strength for and incapable of any spiritual good? Yes, for when we consider ourselves in and of ourselves, we cannot do any good. We are not capable of ourselves of having any good thought. And whatever good works that we do when we are animated and strengthened by the Spirit of God, the glory for those works does not go to us but to God. And whenever the devil or our flesh want to use the occasion of these good works to hurl us into pride, we must always remember what the Apostle says, “Yet not I but the grace of God that is in me.”

9. But in doing that, don’t we humble ourselves too much in order to make all the more of the honor of God by a mere appearance of humility? We cannot humble ourselves too much in spiritual matters. And whatever humility there may be, we cannot fear that it will be too much for Jesus Christ. Can we put ourselves lower than nothing? However, that’s what the Apostle does to us. He says, “If anyone imagines himself to be something when he is nothing, such a man deludes himself.” We cannot take away from man an understanding and reason and a will accompanied with intelligence which loves or hates something in consequence of the judgment that the understanding pronounces on the subject. But there is nothing but the natural in that. We cannot deny that a man cannot by custom, education, or other considerations have in some way a morally good conduct and perform externally some of the duties of Religion without the special cooperation of the grace of God. But to do some spiritual good or perform external duties in a spiritual manner is what a man cannot do at all, and man cannot humble himself too much for this inability.

Eastern Vacation & GA 2009

I'm nearing the end of four weeks of travel. My wife, my five children, and I left almost four weeks ago from Spearfish. We travelled to Michigan and stayed there for a week. Then, we all went down to North Carolina to visit my parents. Last Thursday, we travelled back up to Michigan, and then I flew down to Orlando for GA.

I plan to write more about my trip and GA next week. For now, I would recommend you read Kevin Carroll's blog "Reformed and Loving It" on the sidebar for a good summary of what went on.

I have the privilege of preaching in one of our Churches in Sioux Falls on Sunday, and then I'm heading back to Speafish on Monday.

Increasing in Love

"But concerning brotherly love you have no need that I should write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another; and indeed you do so toward all the brethren who are in all Macedonia. But we urge you, brethren, that you increase more and more." 1 Thessalonians 4:9-10

I offer a few refelections on these beautiful verses.

1. While it is true that we do know by nature the duty to love, sin has so distorted the knowledge that we need to be re-taught what love is. We do not really know what God requires of us.

On the other hand, the issue is only partly one of knowledge. It is even more a matter of will. Our will is inclined to hate our neighbor. God teaches us how to love by illumnating our minds and powerfully inclining our wills as He teaches us through His Word.

2. What is love? Love is not a mere sentiment. It is not simply having nice thoughts about someone or lacking hateful thoughts. Love is an earnest desire for harmonious union and fellowship with others as well as a genuine interest in their welfare. We can see this in our Lord Jesus. He genuinely had compassion on us and amazingly desired harmonious union and fellowship with sinful beings. His love led Him to action by doing all that was necessary to bring that about.

3. When it is said that God taught the Thessalonians to love, we should not think that this means that they were the only Christians who were taught to love. This teaching was not unique to them. Rather, as the rest of the two letters to the Thessalonians indicate, Paul says this to them because it was particularly manifest that they were taught by God to love one another.

4. Notice the object of their love. They demonstrated their love to all those in Macedonia. They demonstrated that love to those who were near them. This is where our love should be manifested, in those who are near us, particularly in the Church of God that is near us. That is one good thing about having a Presbytery. It is an opportunity to demonstrate love to specific people. Of course, we should seek to show love to other Christians who are near us as well. However, our tendency will be to pick and choose those who are most like us and ignore those who are least like us.

5. Their love was not complete. Paul urged them to increase more and more. That is, he wanted them to stir up the desire within them and demonstrate it all the more by their actions.

6. This gives a glimpse of how we should view sanctification in general. God is the primary worker in sanctification. Our actions are effects of His working in us and the dispositions that He places within us. However, this should not lead to a passive attitude. We ought, on our part, to do what we can to stir up those holy virtues and exercise them, knowing that it is God who wills and works within us.

I think it is good for us to examine ourselves here. Do we truly have love for the brethren. Do we desire harmonious union and fellowship with them? Do we have a genuine interest in them? If you do not talk to them, pray for them, and visit with them; then how can you say that you have such love?

I know what someone will say here. I can't reach out to everybody. Then, reach out in love to those who are near you, "all the brethren in Macedonia."

What about the people in your city? Do you love them? Certainly we cannot have the type of harmonious fellowship with unbelievers that we have with believers. However, we should genuinely be concerned about their welfare, and we should desire their conversion so that the hindrance to our harmonious fellowship will be removed.

If you are a Christian, you are taught by God to love one another. Let us not rest in that. Let us pray, desire, and labor to increase all the more.

Classic Reformed Covenant Theology

When one hears the words "covenant theology" in a Reformed context, one generally thinks of infant baptism. After that, we hear nothing more of covenant theology. However, in classic Reformed theology, covenant theology provides a structure for the whole of God's dealings with mankind, both before and after the fall. I would like to give here a brief summary of classic Reformed covenant theology. I will not provide many citations, but I would encourage the reader (if anyone does read actually read this!) to look at the Westminster Confession as well as Reformed theologians such as Witsius, Brakel, Turretin, Watson, Ussher, and others for confirmation. I offer the following theses:

1. The term covenant does not mean relationship. Its meaning is contractual. That is, covenant is about new or strengthened obligations. Thus, the Israelites made a covenant with the Gibeonites that created new obligations between them. The term covenant can also have the sense of a testament or bequeathal, both in Hebrew and in Greek.

2. The first covenant that God made with man is a covenant of works. Man by his very nature owed God all love and obedience. No covenant was needed to create that obligation. However, God owed man nothing in return but bound Himsef by covenant to give life on the condition of the obedience that Adam already owed to God. In this covenant, God also arranged that Adam would represent the human race. Adam's obigations were also strengthened by Adam's assent to the covenant and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

3. Adam broke the covenant by sinning against God. Because of this sin, Adam died spiritually and became liable to the bondage of sin and all misery. At this point, the story would have ended apart from God's grace and mercy.

4. In the Garden of Eden, God announced another covenant, the covenant of grace. This covenant is made with a new covenant head, Jesus Christ, as the last Adam.

5. Because this covenant is ratified in Christ, the covnant of grace is dependent on Christ's obedience for its fulfillment and not ours. Christ fulfilled this obedience by becoming man, suffering the penalty of the law, and fulfilling the obigation of the broken covenant of works.

6. This covenant is made with Christ and with His elect as His seed. The covenant of grace offers salvation freely on the condition of faith in Christ. However, since no man is able to believe by nature, God also promises in this covenant to give regeneration and perseverance to His elect. Thus, in the covenant of grace all the conditions are also promised and guaranteed to all those who are in this covenant.

7. Thus, the covenant of grace has both its contractual side ("Believe, and you will be saved") and its bequeathal side ("I will put my fear in their hearts so that they will not depart from Me"). The covenant of grace is both an offer and a gifting of salvation to all those who are in the covenant. This latter side is generally called "the testamentary aspect of the covenant of grace." Some Reformed theologians based this testamentary aspect on a covenant of redemption between the Father and the Son distinct from the covenant of grace.

8. Non-elect children of believers and non-elect members of the visible Church cannot be said in the most proper sense of the word to be in the covenant of grace. To say that they are is only a loose and improper sense of the word. "Improper" here does not mean "false," it only means that it is true in only some respects. For example, Jesus called Herod a fox. He was using this term in a loose sense because Herod had some characteristics like that of a fox. He did not mean that Herod was literally the animal "fox." This follows the usage of the Bible "out of us but not of us" and "not all Israel who are of Israel."

9. Even though the covenant of works can never bring life to sinners, the works principle continues to be articulated throughout Scripture. The purpose for the revelation of this principle is to drive men to their need for Christ and the covenant of grace. All Reformed theologians agree that in some sense the works principle is restated at Sinai. However, there is disagreement as to whether the covenant at Sinai is a republication of the covenant of works itself, another covenant of works promsing now life in Canaan (Saumur), a political covenant that reflects the covenant of works, or the covenant of grace with a simultaneous restatement of the works principle subservient to the covenant of grace.

10. The covenant of grace is set forth to man in different ways in different eras. It culminates in its ratification on the cross and publication of the Gospel to all nations by the Apostles with the simple administration of that covenant provided for in the New Testament. However, in all ages, the covenant of grace is substantively the same and the only way in which anyone is ever saved in history.

11. The primary goal of Reformed covenant theology is to explain that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone. It does this by a clear explanation of the works principle so that all ways of gaining salvation by man's own efforts or obedience are shut and, on the other hand, showing that the only way of life is found in the covenant of grace secured by the perfect work of Jesus Christ for all His people.

Reading Reformed Church History

I have recently updated both my Google Reformed Theology Bibliography and my Reformed Church History Bibliography. As I was working on this, I thought how amazing it was that as far as I know (and I have looked), there is no good general history of the Reformed Churches in English. The best you can do is in the general histories of Protestantism and Church history.

What has happened is that each national group has written on the area of Protestantism most affecting them. For example, Émile Léonard in his General History of Protestantism, written originally in French, spends a huge portion of his book discussing the French Reformed. In our mind, this would be totally out of proportion to its importance in the total history of Protestantism. However, we do the same thing. When English people write, they emphasize Britain. When Americans write, they emphasize America. There are groups within each linguistic group that have studied extensively the history of the Reformed Churches who spoke their language. For example, there are tons of materials on Reformed Church history in the Netherlands, but they are mostly in Dutch! There is a four volume biography of the great theologian Voetius in Dutch but not one biography of him in English. There are two biographies in French on Francis Turretin but none in English.

However, if you want to get a good overview of Reformed Church history on the continent, there are books available for that purpose. Beginning with France, there are almost innumerable histories of the Huguenots. One of the best that I have scene is by Guillaume de Felice. The history of the "martyr's Church" is very moving.

Second, James Good is not great but he is good and better than nothing. I really enjoyed reading his Origin of the Reformed Churches of Germany. This book will help you understand the real differences between the Reformed Church and the Lutherans and show how Melanchthon was actually the friend of the Reformed Churches, in spite of his erroneous views on conversion. Good continues the story with his History of the Reformed Churches of Germany 1620-1890.

Third, you have the history of the Swiss Reformed Churches. Because of our connection with Geneva, it's easy to forget how important the German speaking Reformed Churches of Switzerland are and were to the Reformation on the continent. James Good has also written their story in his History of the Swiss Reformed Churches since the Reformation.

Moving then to the Netherlands, there is a good book by Maurice Hanson called The History of the Reformed Church in the Netherlands. As far as I can tell, it is not yet available online. I ordered from a bookstore that did reprints called Good Books, but I cannot find their web site. If anyone reading this blog knows how you can order books from them, please let me know.