Tuesday, March 25, 2025

Lord's Days 36 & 37

Link to catechism questions - LD 36 

Link to catechism questions - LD 37

Lord's Day Questions with proof texts

Link to audio recording of LD 36

Link to audio recording of LD 37

Summary (NotebookLM) 

This section of the commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism explores the third commandment concerning the proper use of God's name, prohibiting profanity, false oaths, and irreverent speech. It emphasizes the need to use God's name with fear and reverence in worship, confession, and daily life. The text further examines the concept of lawful and unlawful swearing, outlining when oaths are permissible (such as when required by authorities or for maintaining truth) and when they are forbidden (like swearing by creatures or in trivial matters). Additionally, it addresses objections and arguments related to these principles, particularly concerning the invocation of saints and the binding nature of oaths.

Chapter content:

Introduction:

This briefing document provides a detailed review of the main themes, important ideas, and facts presented in the provided excerpts from the commentary on Lord's Days 36 and 37 of the Heidelberg Catechism. Lord's Day 36 focuses on the third commandment ("You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain"), its requirements, prohibitions, and the positive duties it implies. Lord's Day 37 delves into the doctrine of oaths, clarifying when and by whom it is lawful to swear, the nature of lawful and unlawful oaths, and the obligation to keep them. The analysis includes direct quotes from the sources to illustrate key points.

Lord's Day 36: The Third Commandment

Main Theme: Reverent Use of God's Name

The central theme of Lord's Day 36 is the necessity of using the name of God with fear and reverence, ensuring it is confessed, worshipped, and glorified in all aspects of life. The commentary emphasizes that this commandment governs not just verbal pronouncements but also our silence and actions.

Key Ideas and Facts:

  • Prohibition: The third commandment prohibits profaning or abusing God's name through:

  • Cursing

  • False swearing

  • Unnecessary oaths

  • Light or trifling use

  • Reproachful use (blasphemy, sorcery)

  • Silence or connivance in others' profanation.

  • Quote: "That we must not by cursing, or by false swearing, nor yet by unnecessary oaths, profane or abuse the name of God; nor even by our silence and connivance be partakers of these horrible sins in others..." (Question 99, LD36.txt)

  • Definition of God's Name: The "name of God" encompasses:

  • God's attributes (Gen. 32:29; Ex. 3:15; 15:3)

  • God himself (Ps. 5:11; 116:13; 7:17; Deut. 16:2; 1 Kings 5:5)

  • God's will or commandment (Deut. 18:19; 1 Sam. 17:45)

  • The worship of God (Micah 4:5; Acts 21:13).

  • Quote: "The name of God signifies in the Scriptures, 1. The attributes of God... 2. It signifies God himself... 3. It signifies the will or commandment of God... 4: It signifies the worship of God, confidence, prayer, praising and professing God." (EXPOSITION, LD36.txt)

  • Affirmative Requirement: The commandment positively enjoins the reverent, solemn, religious, and honorable use of God's name in all words and works.

  • Quote: "This negative precept has an affirmative included in it; for in prohibiting the wrong use of the name of God, it at the same time enjoins upon us that use which is lawful and honorable..." (EXPOSITION, LD36.txt)

  • Grievousness of Profanation: Profaning God's name is considered a most grievous sin that provokes God's wrath, even against those who do not actively hinder it. Historically, it was punishable by death (Lev. 24:15, 16).

  • Quote: "Yes truly: for no sin is greater, or more provoking to God than the profaning of His name; wherefore He even commanded it to be punished with death." (Answer 100, LD36.txt)

  • Virtues Related to the Third Commandment: The commentary outlines several virtues encompassed by the lawful and honorable use of God's name:

  • Propagation of True Doctrine: Instructing others privately about God's essence, will, and works (Deut. 4:9; 11:19; 1 Thess. 5:11; Luke 22:32; Col. 3:16). Neglecting this duty or corrupting doctrine is opposed to this virtue.

  • Praising and Glorifying God: Acknowledging and admiring God's attributes and works publicly and privately (Ps. 22:22; 8:1; 69:84). Contempt, neglect, and blasphemy oppose this. Cursing motivated by hatred and revenge is also condemned.

  • Confession of Truth: Declaring the truth known from Scripture (Rom. 10:10, 11; 1 Pet. 3:15). Denial or dissembling the truth, abuse of Christian liberty leading to scandal, and untimely confessions are opposed.

  • Gratitude: Acknowledging God's benefits with thankfulness and obedience (Col. 3:17; 1 Thes. 5:18; Ps. 107:1). Ingratitude, undervaluing God's gifts, and neglecting their proper use are contrary.

  • Zeal for God's Glory: Ardent love for God and sorrow for reproach against Him, with attempts to vindicate His honor (Num. 25:11; 1 Kings 19:10). Timidity and erring, false zeal are opposed.

  • Calling Upon the Name of the Lord (Invocation): Asking God for good things He has commanded us to ask (Ps. 105:1; Matt. 7:7; 1 John 5:14). Neglect of prayer, unlawful invocation (idolatrous, contrary to God's will, mere lip service), and the Roman Catholic practice of invoking saints are addressed at length.

  • Lawful or Religious Swearing: Affirming truth by calling God as a witness and acknowledging His judgment against falsehood (Heb. 6:16). Refusing lawful oaths, perjury, idolatrous oaths, oaths about unlawful things, and rash oaths are prohibited.

  • Critique of Invocation of Saints: A significant portion of Lord's Day 36's commentary refutes the Roman Catholic practice of invoking saints. It argues that:

  • Invocation is a form of worship due to God alone, as He alone is omniscient, omnipresent, and able to hear and answer prayers.

  • The distinction between "latreia" (adoration) and "douleia" (veneration) is not biblically sound.

  • God does not communicate His unique attributes (like knowing hearts) to the saints.

  • Miracles performed through saints were by God's power, not their own.

  • Biblical examples of knowledge or intercession by individuals do not establish a general rule for all departed saints.

  • Allegories and parables (like the rich man and Lazarus) cannot establish doctrine.

  • Christ is the sole mediator of redemption and intercession. Invoking saints detracts from His honor.

  • The fact that saints might pray for us does not necessitate that we should pray to them.

Lord's Day 37: The Doctrine of the Oath

Main Theme: Lawful and Reverent Swearing

Lord's Day 37 elaborates on the seventh virtue mentioned under the third commandment: lawful or religious swearing. It defines oaths, clarifies when they are permissible, and addresses the obligation to keep them.

Key Ideas and Facts:

  • Definition of an Oath: A solemn calling upon God, the knower of hearts, to bear witness to the truth of an affirmation and to punish falsehood.

  • Quote: "An oath, properly speaking, is a calling upon God, as the one who knows the heart, that he will bear witness to the truth, and punish me if I swear falsely." (EXPOSITION, LD37.txt)

  • By Whom to Swear: Oaths should be made by the name of the true God alone (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), as He alone possesses the necessary attributes (omniscience, power to punish). Swearing by saints or creatures is considered idolatrous.

  • Quote: "We must swear by the name of the true God alone; 1. Because God has commanded that we swear by him alone, as he alone is to be feared and worshipped." (EXPOSITION, LD37.txt)

  • Lawfulness of Oaths for Christians: It is lawful for Christians to swear reverently by God's name when:

  • Required by the magistrate.

  • Necessary to maintain and promote fidelity and truth.

  • For the glory of God and our neighbor's good.

  • Quote: "Yes; when the magistrate requires it, or it may be needful otherwise to maintain and promote fidelity and truth, to the glory of God and our neighbor’s good..." (Answer 101, LD37.txt)

  • Refutation of Anabaptist View: The commentary refutes the Anabaptist belief that New Testament Christians are prohibited from swearing, arguing that Christ came to fulfill the law, moral worship (including lawful oaths) is perpetual, and Christ and the apostles themselves used forms of swearing.

  • Quote: "Christ says, ‘I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.’ (Matt. 5:17) This, now, was spoken with reference to the moral law, to which the oath had respect. Hence, Christ has not prohibited those who live under the New Testament to swear religiously, when necessity demands it." (EXPOSITION, LD37.txt)

  • Interpretation of Matthew 5:34-37 and James 5:12: These passages forbidding swearing "at all" are interpreted as prohibitions against rash, unnecessary, and indirect oaths (swearing by heaven, earth, etc.), rather than all forms of religious swearing.

  • Quote: "But that these declarations do not forbid all oaths, but only such as are rash and unnecessary, is evident both from a comparison of other passages of the Old and New Testaments, and especially from the design of Christ..." (EXPOSITION, LD37.txt)

  • Lawful vs. Unlawful Oaths:Lawful oaths concern things true, certainly known, lawful, possible, weighty, necessary, useful, and for God's glory and neighbor's good.

  • Unlawful oaths concern things false, uncertain, unlawful, impossible, or light and trifling.

  • Obligation to Keep Oaths: Lawful oaths concerning proper subjects must be kept. Unlawful oaths (concerning unlawful things, made by error or against conscience) should not be kept but retracted with repentance.

  • Quote: "Oaths which have been properly made concerning things lawful, true, certain, weighty and possible, should necessarily be kept." (EXPOSITION, LD37.txt)

  • Oaths Extorted by Torture: Such oaths are to be kept if they concern lawful things and meet the criteria for proper oaths, even if disadvantageous. However, one should not feel bound to keep evidently wrong extorted oaths and should rather suffer death than swear to evil.

Conclusion:

Lord's Days 36 and 37 of the Heidelberg Catechism commentary provide a comprehensive understanding of the third commandment and the doctrine of oaths from a Reformed theological perspective. The emphasis is on the reverent and truthful use of God's name in all aspects of life, including speech, actions, and worship. The commentary carefully distinguishes between lawful and unlawful uses of God's name and provides detailed arguments against the Roman Catholic practice of invoking saints. Regarding oaths, it establishes guidelines for when and by whom it is lawful to swear, the nature of proper oaths, and the binding obligation to uphold those oaths that are made truthfully and for righteous purposes. The detailed engagement with potential objections, particularly from Anabaptists and Roman Catholics, highlights the rigorous theological reasoning employed in this exposition.


What foundational understandings about God and humanity are established within Lord's Day 36?

Lord’s Day 36 establishes several foundational understandings about God and humanity.

Regarding God, the source reveals the following:

  • God's holiness and majesty demand that His name be used with fear and reverence. Any rash, inconsiderate, or abusive use of His name is prohibited.

  • God's name is not merely a label but signifies His attributes, God himself, His will or commandment (both true and feigned), and the worship, confidence, prayer, praise, and profession of God. Examples from Scripture illustrate these meanings.

  • God is the ultimate end for which humanity was created, and praising and glorifying Him is the chief and ultimate purpose of human existence. Humanity's greatest good and enjoyment lie in glorifying God.

  • God demands strict obedience regarding His name, as its violation is particularly displeasing to Him and will be severely punished. Profaning God's name is considered a greater sin that provokes His wrath more than others, even deserving of death.

  • God is the source of truth, and He desires it to be upheld. Taking a lawful oath calls upon God as the one who knows the heart and as a witness to the truth, who will punish those who swear falsely.

Regarding humanity, Lord's Day 36 establishes these key understandings:

  • Humanity's actions, both internal and external, should be directed towards God's worship. The first and second commandments frame the mind and heart, while the third and fourth govern external members and actions.

  • Humanity has a responsibility to use God's name lawfully and honorably. This includes reverently, solemnly, religiously, and honorably using His name and speaking of Him and His works in a manner befitting His divine majesty.

  • Humanity must actively work to prevent the profaning of God's name by not cursing, falsely swearing, or taking unnecessary oaths. Even silence and connivance in these sins make individuals partakers in them. People should hinder and forbid such profaning as much as they can, as God's wrath is kindled against those who do not.

  • Humanity's duty extends to propagating true doctrine concerning God's essence, will, and works, not just in public teaching (mentioned in the fourth commandment) but also privately, contributing to the true knowledge and worship of God. This includes instructing children and others.

  • Humanity is called to praise and glorify God by acknowledging His divine attributes and works with approbation and admiration, declaring love and reverence to Him so that He may be exalted and our subjection made manifest.

  • Humanity must confess the truth known about God from Scripture to glorify Him and advance the salvation of others.

  • Humanity owes gratitude to God for the benefits received and should acknowledge this by thinking and speaking of His goodness with genuine love and appreciation.

  • Humanity should have zeal for God's glory, being deeply concerned about any reproach cast upon Him and striving to vindicate His honor. This involves preventing the dishonoring of God's name when possible.

  • Humanity is encouraged to call upon the name of the Lord by asking the true God for good things according to His will, stemming from a sense of need, a desire for divine bounty, true conversion, and faith in God's promises through the mediator.

In sum, Lord's Day 36 lays the groundwork for understanding God as supremely holy, demanding reverence in the use of His name, and being the ultimate purpose of human existence. It also establishes humanity's responsibility to actively honor God through their words and actions, including proper use of His name, propagation of truth, praise, confession, gratitude, zeal, and prayer.


How does the text define a lawful oath?

The text defines a lawful oath as a calling upon God, as the one who knows the heart, that He will bear witness to the truth, and punish me if I swear falsely. This definition is taken from the form of swearing used by the Apostle Paul.

Further details from the sources elaborate on the nature of a lawful oath:

  • By whom to swear: A lawful oath must be made by the name of the true God alone, including Christ and the Holy Spirit, as they are also God and know all things. Swearing by saints or any other creature is unlawful. This is because an oath ascribes to the one by whom it is taken attributes like knowledge of hearts, omniscience, and omnipresence, which belong to God alone. Furthermore, we commit the execution of punishment to the one by whom we swear, attributing to them the power to maintain truth and punish perjury, a power possessed only by God.

  • Occasions for lawful swearing: It is lawful to swear reverently by the name of God when the magistrate requires it, or when it may be needful otherwise to maintain and promote fidelity and truth, to the glory of God and our neighbor’s good. Such an oath is grounded in God's Word and was rightly used by saints in both the Old and New Testaments.

  • Subject matter of lawful oaths: Lawful oaths are made concerning things that are true, certainly known, lawful, possible, weighty, necessary, useful, and worthy of such a confirmation, or concerning things that require confirmation for the glory of God and the safety of our neighbor.

  • Obligation to keep lawful oaths: Oaths that have been properly made concerning things lawful, true, certain, weighty, and possible should necessarily be kept.

In contrast, unlawful oaths are those plainly opposed to the word of God and made in reference to things that are false, uncertain, unlawful, impossible, or light and trifling.

In our previous conversation about Lord's Day 36, it was established that God is the source of truth and that taking a lawful oath calls upon Him as a witness to the truth [Our Conversation History]. Lord's Day 36 also highlights the importance of using God's name with reverence and avoiding rash or false oaths. This aligns with Lord's Day 37's detailed explanation of what constitutes a lawful oath.


What constitutes a profane use of God's name?

According to the sources, a profane use of God's name constitutes any use that lacks fear and reverence, abuses His holy name, or fails to glorify Him. Lord's Day 36 elaborates on this by stating that we must not profane or abuse the name of God by cursing, or by false swearing, nor yet by unnecessary oaths. Furthermore, it specifies that even by our silence and connivance, we must not be partakers of these horrible sins in others.

The exposition in Lord's Day 36 provides a more detailed understanding of what constitutes a profane use:

  • It first prohibits a rash and inconsiderate use of the name of God. This includes every abuse of the name of God, in whatever false, vain, or trifling thing, which tends to cast a reproach upon God, or which does not at least have respect to his glory.

  • Using the name of the Lord lightly, as in ordinary talk and conversation, contrary to "yea, yea; nay, nay," is considered a rash use.

  • Using the name of the Lord falsely, such as in unlawful oaths and perjury, is a form of profanation.

  • Using the name of the Lord reproachfully, as in cursing, blasphemy, and sorcery (where the works of the devil are disguised under the name of God), is a clear instance of profaning His name.

  • Making any mention of the name of God that would not be honorable to Him is prohibited.

Lord's Day 37 further clarifies that taking oaths by "the saints" or by any other creature is also a profane use of God's name. This is because a lawful oath is a calling upon God as the only searcher of hearts to bear witness to the truth and punish false swearing, an honor due to no creature. Swearing by creatures implicitly ascribes divine attributes to them.

In our previous conversation, we established that God's holiness and majesty demand that His name be used with fear and reverence [Our Conversation History]. Any use that deviates from this reverence and honor, as outlined in the sources, would constitute a profane use of God's name. The gravity of this sin is emphasized, with the text stating that no sin is greater or more provoking to God than the profaning of His name, even to the point where He commanded it to be punished with death.


Briefly outline the virtues related to God's name.

The text outlines several virtues related to the proper use of God's name, emphasizing that it should be used with fear and reverence. These virtues stand in contrast to the profaning of God's name through cursing, false swearing, and unnecessary oaths.

Here is a brief outline of these virtues:

  • Reverent and Honorable Use: Using the name of God reverently, solemnly, religiously, and honorably in our conversation, ensuring that any mention of God or His works aligns with His divine majesty. This means avoiding the light, false, or reproachful use of His name.

  • Propagation of True Doctrine: Sharing and teaching the true doctrine respecting the essence, will, and works of God within one's sphere, contributing to the true knowledge and worship of God, including instructing others privately. This is opposed to neglecting to instruct others or corrupting religious doctrine.

  • Praising and Glorifying God: Acknowledging God's divine attributes and works with approbation and admiration, declaring our love and reverence to Him publicly and privately, so that He may be exalted. This contrasts with contempt or neglect of God's praise.

  • Confession of the Truth: Declaring what we know with certainty from the holy Scriptures about God and His will, driven by a sense of duty to glorify Him and advance the salvation of others. This is the opposite of denying or dissembling the truth when it should be confessed.

  • Gratitude: Acknowledging and confessing the great benefits we have received from God, understanding our obligation in light of these blessings, and cheerfully and heartily yielding obedience to Him. This is opposed to ingratitude or a lack of proper appreciation for God's gifts.

  • Zeal for the Glory of God: Possessing an ardent love for God and sorrow for any reproach cast upon Him, with an active effort to remove such reproach and vindicate His honor. This stands against timidity or a lack of concern for God's glory.

  • Calling Upon the Name of the Lord (Invocation): Asking the true God for those good things which He has commanded us to ask, stemming from a sense of need, faith in His promises through the mediator, and true conversion. This is contrasted with neglecting prayer or engaging in unlawful invocation.

  • Lawful or Religious Swearing: Taking an oath reverently by the name of God when required by a magistrate or when necessary to maintain fidelity and truth for God's glory and our neighbor's good. This involves calling upon God as a witness to the truth, who knows the heart and will punish false swearing.

These virtues collectively define the appropriate and respectful engagement with God's holy name, aligning with the requirements of the third commandment as explained in the sources. As we discussed previously, Lord's Day 36 emphasizes that God's holiness demands such reverence in the use of His name [Our Conversation History].


Under what conditions is swearing by God's name permissible?

According to the text, swearing reverently by the name of God is permissible under specific conditions. Lord’s Day 37, Question 101 explicitly asks, "But may we swear reverently by the name of God?" and answers, "Yes; when the magistrate requires it, or it may be needful otherwise to maintain and promote fidelity and truth, to the glory of God and our neighbor’s good; for such an oath is grounded in God’s Word, and therefore was rightly used by the saints in the Old and New Testaments".

The exposition in Lord's Day 37 further elaborates on these conditions:

  • When the magistrate requires it: If a civil authority legally mandates an oath, it is permissible to swear by God's name.

  • When it may be needful otherwise to maintain and promote fidelity and truth: In situations beyond legal requirements, if an oath is necessary to uphold faithfulness and truth, it is lawful. This necessity should be related to the glory of God and our neighbor’s good. The purpose of such an oath is to serve as a bond of truth between men and a testimony that God is the author and defender of truth. It can also be a means to put an end to all strife in matters of confirmation.

  • Grounding in God's Word and example of saints: Such permissible oaths are grounded in God’s Word and find precedent in the actions of saints in the Old and New Testaments. The text provides examples of Christ and Paul using forms of affirmation akin to swearing.

It is crucial to note that the permissibility of swearing by God's name is contrasted with the prohibition of rash and unnecessary oaths, as highlighted in Lord's Day 36 and further explained in the context of Christ's teachings in Matthew 5:34-37 and James 5:12. These passages, according to the exposition, do not forbid all oaths but only those that are rash and unnecessary, including indirect oaths by creatures where the name of God is implicitly understood.

Our previous conversations have established that a lawful oath is a calling upon God as the one who knows the heart to bear witness to the truth and punish false swearing [Our Conversation History, 55]. This definition underscores the solemnity of such an act and reinforces that it should only be undertaken when necessary for upholding truth and fidelity, as outlined in Lord's Day 37. The virtues related to God's name, which we briefly outlined, such as reverent use, truthfulness, and zeal for God's glory, also inform the context in which swearing by His name can be permissible [Our Conversation History].


What are examples of opposing true confession of God?

Based on the text, there are several examples of what opposes the true confession of God, primarily outlined in Lord’s Day 36 under the section addressing the "Confession of the Truth Known Concerning God". These oppositions include:

  • A denial of the truth, or an unwillingness to declare what one knows concerning religion due to fear of hatred, the cross, or reproach. This denial can manifest in two ways:

    • Entire apostasy from true religion, which involves casting away the profession of the truth with a determined intention to oppose God, without any grief or repentance. The text notes that this can be the sin against the Holy Spirit if done after the truth has been certainly known.

    • Particular denial of the truth, committed by those with weak faith due to error (without willful intent) or fear of the cross, but where an inclination to God and sorrow for the denial remain, along with a purpose to return to the truth. Even the regenerate and elect can be guilty of this, as seen in Peter's denial of Christ.

  • Dissembling or keeping back the truth, when the glory of God and the salvation of our neighbor require a confession of it. This is particularly harmful when our silence seems to confirm false views about God, His Word, or the church, or when it leaves unknown things that God wants known for the vindication of His glory. It can also lead to the suspicion that we approve of the actions of the wicked. The example of the parents of the man born blind and the chief rulers who wouldn't confess Christ for fear of the Jews are given as illustrations.

  • An abuse of Christian liberty, or giving offense in indifferent matters, which happens when our use of such things confirms the adversaries of God in their error, alienates them from true religion, or provokes them to imitation with an evil conscience.

  • All scandals and offenses in morals, such as when those who profess the true religion lead shameful and offensive lives, denying in their actions what they claim in words. This brings reproach upon the church and leads to the blasphemy of God's name by unbelievers. The text quotes Titus 1:16 and Romans 2:24 to support this point.

  • An untimely or unseasonable confession of the truth, which stirs up the enemies of religion to condemn or revile the truth, or to act with bitterness and cruelty against the godly, without advancing God's glory or anyone's salvation, and without any necessary demand for such a confession at that time and under those circumstances. Christ's instruction not to give what is holy to dogs or cast pearls before swine is cited as an example. The Apostle Paul's guidance on rejecting heretics after admonition is also mentioned. This is contrasted with the necessary readiness to give a reason for the hope within us with meekness and fear to those who ask for the purpose of learning.

These examples from the text illustrate various ways in which individuals can fail to truly confess God, ranging from outright denial to more subtle forms of withholding or misrepresenting the truth through words and actions. As we discussed in our previous conversation, the virtues related to God's name emphasize the importance of truthful and honorable representation of God [Our Conversation History]. These opposing actions directly contradict those virtues.


When are unlawfully made oaths not binding?

According to the text, unlawfully made oaths are not binding. Lord’s Day 37 addresses this question in the section "5. SHOULD ALL OATHS BE KEPT?". The text explicitly states: "The case, however, is different as it respects oaths which have been made unlawfully, either concerning things unlawful, or by error, or by infirmity or against the conscience. These are not to be kept; but retracted and amended by repentance and by not persisting in an evil purpose, and so adding sin to sin".

Here's a breakdown of the conditions under which unlawfully made oaths are not binding, as detailed in the text:

  • Oaths concerning things unlawful: If an oath requires someone to do something that is against God's law, it should not be kept. The text explains that making such an oath calls upon God to approve what He has forbidden, leading to a contradiction. Keeping such an oath would mean persisting in a sinful act.

  • Oaths made by error: If an oath was taken based on a misunderstanding or a mistake about the facts, it is considered unlawfully made and is not binding.

  • Oaths made by infirmity or against the conscience: Oaths taken due to weakness or that violate one's moral convictions are also considered not binding and should be retracted. The text mentions oaths extorted by fear or infirmity against conscience fall into this category.

  • Oaths regarding things impossible: Swearing to do something that is impossible to achieve renders the oath unlawful and not binding.

The text emphasizes that keeping an unlawful oath can lead to further sin. As an example, it mentions Herod, who put John the Baptist to death under the pretext of keeping his oath, illustrating the sinfulness of upholding a wicked promise. Similarly, the vows of Monks to idolatrous practices or an unholy single life are cited as examples of oaths that should not be kept.

In contrast, the text clarifies that oaths properly made concerning things lawful, true, certain, weighty, and possible should necessarily be kept. Even lawful oaths that are extorted (unless they concern unlawful things) should generally be kept, although under extreme duress, such as a robber demanding secrecy for one's life, making and keeping such an oath might be considered the lesser of two evils.

Therefore, based on the source, unlawfully made oaths, particularly those concerning sinful actions, taken in error, against one's conscience, or regarding impossible things, are not binding and should be retracted. This aligns with the broader principle of using God's name with reverence and truth, which we discussed previously in relation to the third commandment and the virtues associated with God's name [Our Conversation History].


How does the text define calling upon God?

The text defines calling upon the name of the Lord as asking of the true God those good things which He has commanded us to ask at His hands. This act proceeds from a sense of want on our part and a desire to share in the divine bounty. It commences with true conversion to God and faith in the divine promises, for the mediator’s sake.

The text identifies "Calling Upon the Name of the Lord" as the sixth virtue comprehended in the third commandment. This act is also referred to as invocation.

Further details about what is involved in lawfully calling upon God are provided:

  • It involves asking for good things that God has commanded us to ask for.

  • It stems from a sense of need and a desire for God's generosity.

  • It begins with true conversion and faith in God's promises through the mediator.

The text also outlines what is opposed to lawful invocation:

  • A neglect of calling upon the name of the Lord, which the Scriptures represent and condemn as the fountain of all ungodliness.

  • All unlawful calling upon God, which occurs when any condition necessary for acceptable prayer is missing. This includes:

    • Idolatrous invocation, directed to imaginary deities or creatures, or restricting God's presence and answers to prayer to specific places or things without divine command or promise. The text specifically mentions the prayers of Heathen, Turks, Jews (who imagine another god), and Papists (who pray to angels and departed saints) as examples of idolatrous invocation because they attribute honor due to God alone to creatures.

    • Asking for things contrary to God's will and law.

    • Mere lip service, or prayers consisting only of words or bodily motions without heartfelt feelings, genuine desire for God's blessing, true repentance, assurance of being heard, subjection of the will to God, reference to divine promises, confidence in Christ, or acknowledgment of unworthiness. The text cites Matthew 6:7 regarding vain repetitions and Psalm 66:18 and James 1:7 regarding unanswered prayers due to a lack of true faith and repentance.

As we discussed previously, the third commandment concerns the proper use of God's holy name, requiring fear and reverence so that He may be rightly confessed and worshipped. Calling upon God is a significant aspect of this worship, and the text emphasizes that it should be directed to the true God alone and in accordance with His will.


What are some things opposed to truth confession?

Based on the text from "LD36.txt" and our previous conversation, there are several things opposed to the true confession of God. These are primarily outlined in the commentary on Lord’s Day 36, under the section addressing the "Confession of the Truth Known Concerning God" [Me].

Here are some of the key oppositions to the true confession of God detailed in the sources:

  • A denial of the truth. This involves an unwillingness to declare what one knows about religion due to fear of negative consequences like hatred or reproach. The text distinguishes between:

    • Entire apostasy from true religion, which is a complete rejection of the known truth with the intent to oppose God, lacking remorse or repentance. This can even be the sin against the Holy Spirit if committed after certain knowledge of the truth.

    • Particular denial of the truth, which occurs due to weak faith, error (without willful intention), or fear, but where some inclination towards God and sorrow for the denial remain. Even believers can fall into this, as exemplified by Peter's denial of Christ.

  • Dissembling or keeping back the truth. This happens when the glory of God and the salvation of our neighbor require a confession, but we remain silent. This can inadvertently confirm false beliefs about God, His Word, or the church, or conceal truths that God wants to be known. It can also lead others to suspect our approval of wicked actions. The text cites the example of the parents of the man born blind and the chief rulers who feared confessing Christ.

  • An abuse of Christian liberty. This involves causing offense in matters of indifference, leading adversaries of God to remain in error, become alienated from true religion, or be provoked to sinful imitation.

  • All scandals and offenses in morals. When those who profess true religion live shamefully and offensively, their actions contradict their words, bringing reproach upon the church and causing unbelievers to blaspheme God's name. The text quotes Titus 1:16 and Romans 2:24 to support this.

  • An untimely or unseasonable confession of the truth. This occurs when we declare the truth in a way that stirs up enemies to condemn or revile it, or to act cruelly against the godly, without furthering God's glory or anyone's salvation, and when the circumstances do not necessitate such a confession. Christ's warning against giving holy things to dogs and casting pearls before swine is relevant here. The text also mentions Paul's instruction to reject heretics after warnings. However, this is contrasted with the constant readiness to give a reason for our hope with meekness and fear to those who genuinely inquire.

These examples from the text illustrate various ways in which the true confession of God can be opposed, ranging from outright denial to more subtle failures in speech and conduct [Me]. As we discussed, the third commandment emphasizes the reverent use of God's name, which includes truthfully representing Him in our words and actions. These opposing actions directly violate this commandment and the associated virtues [Me].


Thursday, March 20, 2025

Lord's Day 35

Link to catechism questions 

Lord's Day Questions with proof texts

Link to audio recording of LD 35

Summary (NotebookLM)  

Lord's Day 35 of Ursinus' commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism discusses extensively the second commandment, focusing on God's requirement that He be worshipped only as prescribed in His Word and forbidding the creation or veneration of religious images. The source argues against any form of will-worship or superstition, including the use of images to represent or worship God or creatures, asserting that such practices constitute idolatry. It differentiates between divine, civil, and ecclesiastical ordinances, clarifying that only God has the authority to institute true forms of worship. Finally, the text analyzes the exhortation attached to the second commandment, highlighting God's attributes of being our God, mighty, jealous, and one who visits iniquity and shows mercy according to obedience.


Chapter Contents:

Lord's Day 35 of the Heidelberg Catechism focuses on the Second Commandment: "That we in no wise make any image of God, nor worship Him in any other way than He has commanded in His Word." This document analyzes the main themes and arguments presented in the accompanying exposition and commentary. The central themes revolve around the prohibition of making images of God and worshipping Him in ways not prescribed in Scripture, the condemnation of will-worship and superstition, the distinction between lawful and unlawful uses of images of creatures, and the rationale for removing images from Christian churches. The text also delves into the nature and authority of human precepts in relation to divine worship and concludes with an explanation of the exhortation attached to the Second Commandment, emphasizing God's jealousy, justice, and mercy.

Main Themes and Important Ideas:

1. Prohibition of Images of God and Unprescribed Worship:

  • The core of the Second Commandment is the prohibition against creating any representation of God and against worshipping Him in any manner not explicitly commanded in His Word.

  • Quote: "That we in no wise make any image of God, nor worship Him in any other way than He has commanded in His Word." (Question 96, A.)

  • The commandment aims to ensure that God is worshipped under a "proper form" pleasing to Him, not according to human imagination or invention.

  • Quote: "The end, or design of this commandment is, that the true God... be worshipped under a proper form, or with such worship as it is right and proper that intelligent creatures should pay unto him―such as is pleasing to him, and not with such worship as that which is according to the imagination and device of man..." (Exposition)

  • This includes not only physical images but also any form of "will-worship" or superstition, which involves worshipping God through practices not prescribed by Him.

  • Quote: "This commandment forbids, on the other hand, every form of will-worship, or such as is false, requiring that we neither regard or worship images and creatures for God, nor represent the true God by any image or figure, nor worship him at or by images, or with any other kind of worship which he himself has not prescribed." (Exposition)

  • The text argues that worshipping God in unprescribed ways implies imagining a different God, a "figment of their own brain."

  • Quote: "Hence, those who sin against the second commandment, sin also against the first; because, those who worship God otherwise than he will be worshipped, imagine another God, one differently affected from what the true God is; and in this way they do not worship God, but a figment of their own brain, which they persuade themselves is affected in this manner." (Exposition)

2. Condemnation of Will-Worship and Superstition:

  • Will-worship, or superstition, is defined as corrupting the worship of God by adding human inventions to divine commandments.

  • Quote: "The other species of idolatry is more properly condemned in the second commandment, and is termed superstition, because it adds to the commandments of God the inventions of men. Those are called superstitious who corrupt the worship of God by their own inventions." (Exposition)

  • Several biblical passages are cited to support the condemnation of will-worship, emphasizing the importance of following God's commands over human traditions in matters of worship.

  • Quotes: "But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Matt. 15:9); "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men..." (Col. 2:8); "...which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will-worship..." (Col. 2:23)

3. Distinction Between Idolatry Forms:

  • The text distinguishes between two principal kinds of idolatry:

  • Worshipping a false god instead of or besides the true God (more directly addressed by the First Commandment).

  • Worshipping the true God in a false or unprescribed manner (the focus of the Second Commandment).

  • Quote: "The first commandment forbids one form of idolatry, as when another God is worshipped; the second forbids another species of idolatry, as when the true God is worshipped differently from what He ought to be." (Exposition, Answer to Objection)

4. Lawful and Unlawful Uses of Images of Creatures:

  • The commandment does not absolutely forbid the making or having of all images. Arts like painting and sculpture are seen as God-given gifts.

  • Quote: "...this commandment does not absolutely forbid us to make, or to have images, likenesses and statues, because the art of painting, sculpture, casting and embroidery, is reckoned among the gifts of God which are good and profitable to human life..." (Exposition, Question 97)

  • The prohibition focuses on the abuse of images, specifically making or using them to represent or worship God or creatures with divine honor.

  • Quote: "The law does not, therefore, forbid the use of images, but their abuse, which takes place when images and pictures are made either for the purpose of representing or worshiping God, or creatures." (Exposition, Question 97)

  • Images of creatures can be lawful if kept away from churches, without the appearance of idolatry or superstition, and serve a political (historical, symbolic) or ornamental purpose (e.g., lions on Solomon's throne, Caesar's image on coins).

  • Quote: "Those images of creatures, however, may be lawful which are made and kept away from the churches, which are without danger and appearance of idolatry, superstition, or offence, and which are for some political benefit, such as is historical or sym-bolical, or for some becoming ornament." (Exposition, Question 97)

5. Rejection of Images in Christian Churches:

  • The text strongly argues against tolerating images of God or saints in Christian churches, regardless of whether they are actively worshipped.

  • Quote: "We must, however, maintain the opposite, which is, that images and likenesses of God, or of the saints, are not to be tolerated in Christian churches, but abolished and removed from the sight of men, whether they be worshipped, or not." (Exposition, Question 98)

  • Several reasons are given for this stance:

  • It contradicts God's express command.

  • Images have historically been the cause of idolatry (especially in the "Papal Church").

  • God commanded the removal of idols.

  • It is necessary for a clear confession against idolatry.

  • Pious kings in Scripture were commended for destroying idols.

  • To avoid offense, superstition, and idolatry, especially among the ignorant.

  • To prevent enemies of the church from being further alienated and blaspheming the truth.

  • Historically, images have led God's people astray.

6. Human Precepts and Ecclesiastical Traditions:

  • The text distinguishes four classes of human commandments:

  • Divine precepts communicated by humans in God's name. Obedience to these is worship.

  • Civil ordinances necessary for observing the moral precepts of the second table. Obedience is worship in its relation to God's moral command.

  • Ecclesiastical or ceremonial ordinances concerning the first table (time, place, form of worship). These do not inherently constitute worship nor bind conscience, except to avoid offense.

  • Human enactments opposed to God's commands. These must be disobeyed.

  • The authority of ecclesiastical traditions is carefully limited. They should be observed for order and to avoid offense, not as if they were divinely necessary or binding on conscience in the same way as civil laws (which have God's authority delegated to magistrates).

  • Quote: "...he has given no such authority to the church, or to her ministers, but requires merely that their laws and ordinances be observed according to the rule of charity: that is, with a desire of avoiding offence, and not as if there were any necessity in the case, as though the conscience were bound thereby." (Exposition, Answer to Objection, Question 98)

7. Exhortation and God's Attributes:

  • The exhortation attached to the Second Commandment ("For I the Lord your God am a jealous God...") highlights five attributes of God to motivate obedience:

  • Our God: Emphasizes the ingratitude of disobedience to our creator and benefactor.

  • A mighty God: Stresses His power to punish the wicked and reward the obedient, demanding fear and worship.

  • A jealous God: Underscores His intense defense of His honor and displeasure with those who turn from Him or corrupt His worship.

  • Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children...: Reveals the greatness of His wrath against persistent disobedience across generations.

  • Showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My commandments: Magnifies His mercy and invites obedience through the promise of salvation for those who love and obey Him.

8. Rejection of Arguments for Images as "Books for the People":

  • The argument that images serve as books for the unlearned is refuted.

  • Quote: "No; for we must not pretend to be wiser than God, who will have his people taught not by dumb idols, but by the lively preaching of his word." (Answer to Question 98, A.)

  • The text asserts that God ordained preaching as the means of teaching His people, not "dumb idols" which are seen as "teachers of lies."

  • Quote: "What profiteth the graven image that the maker thereof has graven it; the molten image and a teacher of lies?" (Hab. 2:18, cited in Exposition, Question 98)

  • Faith comes by hearing the Word of God, not by viewing images.

Conclusion:

Lord's Day 35 provides a comprehensive theological argument against the making and worshipping of images of God, as well as any form of worship not explicitly commanded in Scripture. It carefully distinguishes between the prohibition of representing God and the limited lawful use of images of creatures. The text strongly advocates for the removal of religious images from Christian churches to prevent idolatry, superstition, and offense. It underscores the supreme authority of God's Word in matters of worship and emphasizes the importance of obedience motivated by His attributes of justice, jealousy for His honor, and abundant mercy. The commentary firmly rejects the notion that human traditions can supersede or add to God's prescribed forms of worship.


How does the commentary define the acceptable and unacceptable forms of worship?

This source defines acceptable worship as that which is commanded by God in His Word and performed in faith, with the assurance that both the person and the work are pleasing to God through the mediator, and with the intention of glorifying God. To worship God truly is to worship Him in the manner He has prescribed in His Word. This encompasses every internal or external work commanded by God, done in faith. Obedience to divine precepts, proposed by men as ministers and messengers of God, is also considered the worship of God because these are not human but divine commands.

The source identifies several unacceptable forms of worship:

  • Idolatry: This is defined as a false or superstitious worship of God.

    • Gross and palpable idolatry involves worshipping a false god or giving worship due to the true God alone to some other thing or object. This is particularly forbidden in the first and partly in the third commandments.

    • Subtle and refined idolatry (superstition or will-worship) occurs when the true God is supposedly worshipped, but the kind of worship paid is false because it is not prescribed by divine law but consists of human inventions added to God's commandments. Those who corrupt the worship of God with their own inventions are called superstitious. This form of idolatry is specifically condemned in the second commandment. Examples of will-worship mentioned include traditions of men, rudiments of the world, and commandments and doctrines of men concerning meat, drink, etc..

    • Worshipping images and creatures for God.

    • Representing the true God by any image or figure.

    • Worshipping God at or by images. The source argues that when God condemns worshipping Him at or by images, He also condemns all other forms of false worship that grow from this root.

    • Imagining a different worship of God from what He has prescribed is likened to imagining another will of God and thus another God, making those who do so guilty of idolatry.

  • Hypocrisy: This involves putting on the appearance of true piety and worship by performing external works commanded by God without true faith, conversion, or inward obedience.

  • Profanity: This includes a voluntary renunciation and contempt of all religion and the worship of God, both internal and external, or some parts of it.

  • Will-worship (not instituted by God but by men): All kinds of worship not instituted by God but by men, as well as those which contain the same reason why they should be prohibited, are forbidden in the second commandment. This includes prescribing and performing things as worship of God, or supposing God is honored by performing them and dishonored by neglecting them, even if those things are indifferent in themselves (neither commanded nor prohibited by God).

The source emphasizes that God alone has the authority to prescribe how He should be worshipped. Any deviation from His commands, including the addition of human inventions or the use of images to represent or worship Him, is considered unacceptable and a violation of the second commandment.


How are divine and human precepts distinguished here?

The source distinguishes between divine precepts and several categories of human precepts based on their origin, authority, the nature of obedience they require, and whether they constitute worship of God.

Divine Precepts:

  • Origin and Authority: Divine precepts originate from God Himself. Men propose these precepts for observance not in their own name but by the authority of God, acting as ministers and messengers. This includes the doctrine revealed from heaven (preached by ministers), parental instruction based on God's law, teachings by teachers, and the Decalogue made known by magistrates.

  • Nature of Obedience: Obedience to these commandments is considered and called the worship of God. This is because they are not human but divine precepts, and obedience is necessary even without human endorsement and even if all creatures commanded the contrary.

Human Precepts:

The source outlines four classes of things concerning which humans give commandments:

  1. Divine Precepts Proposed by Men: As mentioned above, men can convey divine precepts, but they act as messengers, not authors. Obedience to these is worship.

  2. Civil Ordinances Prescribed by Men:

    • These include arrangements necessary and useful for securing the observance of the moral precepts of the second table (commandments concerning our neighbor). Examples include laws made by magistrates, parents, teachers, and masters.

    • Obedience to these ordinances is considered worship of God insofar as it respects the general moral command from God to obey authority, but not in the specifics of the action or its circumstances.

    • These ordinances bind the conscience and must be complied with unless doing so would lead to public scandal.

    • Actions commanded by the magistrate (like bearing arms) do not inherently constitute worship but become so accidentally due to the general divine command to obey magistrates.

  3. Ecclesiastical or Ceremonial Ordinances Prescribed by Men:

    • These involve determining circumstances necessary or useful for maintaining the moral precepts of the first table (commandments concerning God). Examples include the time, place, form, and order of sermons, prayers, church readings, fasts, and the election of ministers.

    • The general aspect of these laws, if correctly and profitably made, is considered moral and thus the worship of God.

    • However, the specific ceremonies themselves do not constitute the worship of God and do not inherently bind men's consciences. Their observance is necessary only when neglecting them would cause offense.

    • Individuals have the liberty to omit or do these things differently without offending God, provided it's not done out of contempt, wantonness, ambition, or a desire to offend others. The primary concern for the church in establishing these ordinances should be order and avoiding offense, not asserting authority.

  4. Human Enactments in Opposition to the Commands of God:

    • God forbids compliance with these, regardless of whether they come from civil authorities or the church. The principle is that "we ought to obey God rather than men".

In summary, the key distinctions lie in the origin and authority of the precepts. Divine precepts come directly from God, and obedience to them is worship. Human precepts, on the other hand, originate from human authorities. Obedience to civil and ecclesiastical ordinances is related to the worship of God in a more indirect way, tied to the divine command to respect authority or to maintain order and avoid offense in matters related to worship. Human enactments that contradict God's commands are to be disobeyed. The source is particularly concerned with preventing human inventions from being added to or replacing divinely instituted worship.


What constitutes true worship of God?

Drawing on the sources, true worship of God is fundamentally defined as that which God Himself has commanded in His Word and is performed in the manner He has prescribed. This encompasses several key aspects:

  • Divinely Commanded: True worship consists of every internal or external work commanded by God. It is not based on human imagination or invention but on what God has revealed. The design of the second commandment is that God be worshipped under a proper form, according to what is pleasing to Him, "and not with such worship as that which is according to the imagination and device of man".

  • Performed in Faith: Acceptable worship is done in faith, which rests fully assured that both the person and the work please God for the mediator’s sake. This faith, according to the response to Objection 5, is linked to God's Word.

  • For God's Glory: True worship is performed with the design that we may glorify God thereby.

  • Obedience to Divine Precepts: Obedience to divine precepts, even when proposed by men acting as God's ministers and messengers, is considered worship because these precepts originate from God, not humans.

  • Staying Within Prescribed Bounds: True worship involves sacredly and conscientiously keeping ourselves within the bounds which God has prescribed and not adding anything to or corrupting divinely instituted worship.

In contrast to true worship, the sources extensively detail what constitutes false or unacceptable worship:

  • Will-worship (Superstition): This is when individuals imagine they are worshipping or honoring God by performing any work not prescribed by divine law but are human inventions added to God's commandments. This is condemned throughout Scripture.

  • Idolatry: This is a false or superstitious worship of God. It includes:

    • Worshipping a false god or giving the worship due to the true God to another object.

    • Worshipping the true God in a manner different from what He has commanded, often involving images. The source argues that even if one intends to worship the true God through an image or in a way not prescribed, it constitutes idolatry because it imagines a God different from the one revealed in Scripture.

    • Worshipping images and creatures for God or representing God by any image or figure.

  • Hypocrisy: Performing external acts of worship without true inward faith and obedience.

  • Profanity: Renouncing and showing contempt for all or parts of the prescribed worship of God.

The source emphasizes that God alone has the authority to institute how He is to be worshipped. Any form of worship not explicitly commanded by Him, especially those involving human inventions or the use of images to represent Him, is considered a violation of the second commandment and is not true worship.


What are the four classes of human commandments discussed?

The source discusses four classes of things concerning which men give commandment. These are distinguished by their relationship to divine precepts and whether obedience to them constitutes worship of God.

  1. Divine precepts, which God desires that men should propose unto themselves for their observance, not, however, in their own name, but by the authority of God himself, as being the ministers and messengers, and not the authors of these precepts.

    • This includes ministers preaching the doctrine revealed from heaven, parents teaching their children God's law, teachers instructing pupils, and magistrates making known the precepts of the Decalogue.

    • Obedience to these commandments is, and is called the worship of God, because they are not human, but divine precepts.

  2. Civil ordinances prescribed by men, which include the arrangement, or fixing of those circumstances which are necessary and useful for securing the observance of the moral precepts of the second table.

    • These are positive laws from magistrates, parents, teachers, masters, and others in authority.

    • Obedience is the worship of God in as far as it has respect to the general, which is moral and commanded by God, and includes obedience to the magistrate and others in authority. However, the specific details of these ordinances are not, in themselves, the worship of God.

    • These ordinances bind the conscience and cannot be disregarded without offense to God. Actions commanded or prohibited by the magistrate (like bearing arms) become related to divine worship because of the general command to obey authorities.

  3. Ecclesiastical or ceremonial ordinances, prescribed by men, which include the determinations of circumstances necessary or useful for the maintenance of the moral precepts of the first table.

    • Examples include the time, place, form, and order of sermons, prayers, reading in church, fasts, and the election of ministers.

    • The general aspect of these laws, if made correctly and profitably, is considered moral and therefore the worship of God.

    • However, the specific ceremonies themselves do not constitute the worship of God, do not inherently bind consciences, and their observance is necessary only to avoid offense. Individuals have liberty in these matters as long as it does not lead to contempt, wantonness, ambition, contention, novelty, or offense to the weak. The church should ensure these ordinances are observed for the sake of order and avoiding offense, not out of regard for the church's authority alone.

  4. Human enactments which are in opposition to the commands of God.

    • God forbids us to comply with these, whether they are enjoined by civil magistrates or by the church. The guiding principle is, "We ought to obey God rather than men".


What distinguishes divine precepts from civil ordinances?

Based on the sources and our conversation history, divine precepts and civil ordinances are distinguished primarily by their origin, authority, and the nature of obedience they entail, especially in relation to the worship of God.

Divine Precepts:

  • Origin and Authority: Divine precepts originate directly from God Himself. Men who propose these precepts, such as ministers, parents, teachers, and magistrates (when teaching the Decalogue), do so not in their own name but by God's authority, acting as ministers and messengers. They are not the authors of these precepts.

  • Nature of Obedience: Obedience to divine precepts is considered and called the worship of God. This is because they are not human but divine commands, and obedience is necessary regardless of human endorsement, even if all creatures commanded the contrary.

Civil Ordinances:

  • Origin and Authority: Civil ordinances are prescribed by men, specifically those in civil authority such as magistrates, as well as parents, teachers, and masters. These ordinances involve the arrangement of circumstances necessary and useful for securing the observance of the moral precepts of the second table of the Decalogue (those concerning our neighbor).

  • Nature of Obedience: Obedience to civil ordinances is considered worship of God insofar as it respects the general, moral command from God to obey those in authority. The source states that obedience to the magistrate and others in authority is part of this general moral command. However, the specific details of the civil ordinance or the circumstances connected with it do not, in themselves, constitute the worship of God. They are not actions that would necessarily be performed due to a direct command from God if the magistrate had not issued the ordinance.

  • Binding of Conscience: Civil ordinances bind the conscience, meaning they must be complied with and cannot be disregarded without offense to God, even if done without public scandal. This binding arises from the general divine command to obey legitimate authority.

  • Accidental Relation to Worship: Actions commanded by civil authorities (like bearing arms) do not inherently constitute worship. They become related to divine worship "by accident, on account of the command of the magistrate". The underlying principle being violated by disobedience is the general divine command to obey the magistrate.

In summary, the key distinction lies in the source of authority: divine precepts come directly from God, and obedience to them is intrinsically an act of worship. Civil ordinances originate from human authorities, and obedience to them is considered worship in a more indirect sense, stemming from the divine command to respect and obey those authorities within their legitimate sphere. The specifics of civil ordinances are not divine worship in themselves but become connected to it through this broader principle of obedience.


Why does the text argue against images in churches?

The text provides several reasons for arguing against the toleration of images and pictures in Christian churches. These arguments are primarily based on interpretations of the second commandment and concerns about idolatry and proper worship. Here are the key reasons presented:

  • It is contrary to the express command of God. The commandment states, "You shall not make unto yourself any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing that is," etc.. Since God prohibits the making of images to represent Him or to be worshipped at, the text argues that He would also not permit images made by others to be tolerated or retained in churches.

  • Images have been the occasion and means of horrible idolatry in the Papal Church. The historical use of images has led to what the text considers idolatrous practices.

  • God expressly commanded that idols should be removed, along with every corruption of true doctrine and worship, to demonstrate His displeasure against idolatry. Citations are given to Exodus 33:24, 34:13, and Numbers 33:52.

  • The removal of images is necessary for our confession of sincere worship and hatred of idolatry, which should be evident not just in words but also in outward actions and signs. Deuteronomy 7:5 and 1 John 5:21 are cited in this context.

  • The Scriptures commend pious kings like Asa, Jehu, Hezekiah, and Josiah for destroying images and idols that had been set up. Examples from 1 Kings 15:13, 2 Kings 10:30, 18:4, and 23:24 are mentioned.

  • Removing images helps in avoiding offense and preventing superstition and idolatry, protecting the church and its members from the dangers that led past generations astray.

  • The presence of images, which resembles idolatry, can drive enemies of the church further from the truth and lead them to reproach it. Judges 2:3 is quoted to support this point. The text specifically mentions that Jews are offended by seeing statues and images in Christian churches, leading them to hate Christianity more.

  • Images have never resulted in any good for those who have had them. The history of the Jewish people is cited as evidence, showing they were frequently seduced by idols. Leviticus 26:30 and Judges 2:3 are referenced to illustrate the punishments associated with idolatry.

Furthermore, the text refutes the idea that pictures can be tolerated in churches as "books for the people":

  • God will have His people taught not by dumb idols, but by the lively preaching of His word. It is argued that God's chosen method of instruction is through the spoken word, not inanimate images.

  • The prophets describe graven and molten images as "teachers of lies" and state that "the idols have spoken vanity", citing Habakkuk 2:18 and Zechariah 10:2. Images cannot truly represent God and thus convey falsehoods about Him.

  • While images might teach the unlearned, faith comes from hearing the word of God, not from seeing images.

The text also addresses the example of Solomon placing images in the temple:

  • The images in the temple (cherubim, lions, oxen, palm trees) were ordered by the special command of God, which is different from images set up in churches without such a specific command.

  • The nature of those images was such that they could not easily lead to superstitious practices, unlike images of God and the saints which have historically caused idolatry.

  • The images in the temple served as types of spiritual things, a purpose that is now fulfilled in Christ.

Finally, the argument that images are not worshipped in Reformed churches is countered by stating that God forbids not only the worship of images but also their making and possession, as they are a constant occasion for superstition and idolatry, especially among the ignorant, and they cause offense to those outside the church.