He came from a humble but Godly home, one of 11 children, whose father 3 times a day went into his prayer closet and prayed aloud and the children knew and witnessed how their father walked with God.

He writes in his autobiography:

Though everything else in religion were by some unthinkable catastrophe to be swept out of memory, were blotted from my understanding, my soul would wander back to those early scenes, and shut itself up once again in that Sanctuary Closet, and, hearing still the echoes of those cries to God, would hurl back all doubt with the victorious appeal, "He walked with God, why may not I?" (p.8)

How much my father's prayers at this time impressed me I can never explain, nor could any stranger understand. When, on his knees and all of us kneeling around him in Family Worship, he poured out his whole soul with tears for the conversion of the Heathen world to the service of Jesus, and for every personal and domestic need, we all felt as if in the presence of the living Savior, and learned to know and love him as our Divine friend. (p. 21)

He describes a very moving scene in his autobiography, when he was leaving home to go to Glasgow and start at divinity school, to become a city missionary when in his early twenties. It was a forty mile walk to the train station from his home,, and forty years later he was to write of their parting:

My dear father walked with me the first six miles of the way. His counsels and tears and heavenly conversation on that parting journey are fresh in my heart as if it had been but yesterday; and tears are on my cheeks as freely now as then, whenever memory steals me away to the scene. For the last half mile or so we walked on together in almost unbroken silence – my father, as was often his custom, carrying hat in hand, while his long flowing yellow hair (then yellow, but in later years white as snow) streamed like a girl's down his shoulders. His lips kept moving in silent prayers for me; and his tears fell fast when our eyes met each other in looks for which all speech was vain! We halted on reaching the appointed parting place; he grasped my hand firmly for a minute in silence, and then solemnly and affectionately said: "God bless you, my son! Your father's God prosper you, and keep you from all evil!"

Unable to say more, his lips kept moving in silent prayer; in tears we embraced, and parted. I ran off as fast as I could; and, when about to turn a corner in the road where he would lose sight of me, I looked back and saw him still standing with head uncovered where I had left him – gazing after me. Waving my hat in adieu, I rounded the corner and out of sight in an instant. But my heart was too full and sore to carry me further, so I darted into the side of the road and wept for a time. Then, rising up cautiously, I climbed the dike to see if he yet stood where I had left him; and just at that moment I caught a glimpse of him climbing the dyke and looking out for me! He did not see me, and after he gazed eagerly in my direction for a while, he got down, set his face toward home, and began to return – his head still uncovered, and his heart, I felt sure, still rising in prayers for me. I watched through blinding tears, till his form faded from my gaze; and then, hastening on my way, vowed deeply and oft, by the help of God, to live and act so as never to grieve or dishonor such a father and mother as he had given me. (pp. 25-26)

When he was criticized a few years later for making the decision to go overseas to the New Hebrides and leave a very successful and fruitful ministry behind him, it was a word of his parents that helped him keep his resolve despite the  criticism and opposition to is decision that he faced:

Heretofore we feared to bias you, but now we must tell you why we praise God for the decision to which you have been led. Your father's heart was set upon being a Minister, but other claims forced him to give it up. When you were given to them, your father and mother laid you upon the altar, their first-born, to be consecrated, if God saw fit, as a Missionary of the Cross; and it has been their constant prayer that you might be prepared, qualified, and led to this very decision; and we pray with all our heart that the Lord may accept your offering, long spare you, and give you many souls from the Heathen World for your hire. (p. 57)

John G Paton, his courage, his fortitude and love of his Saviour was obviously a product of his heavenly Father, but he was also very much a product of his earthly father, and shows what can be be the fruit of raising children in a home where God is the centre and the children see the witness of the Saviour as they watch their parents walk closely with God day after day, week after week, year after year.

All the above are excerpts are from this book which is three volumes in one, and goes up until about ten years before his death.

I was in prison.
O breath of Heavenly air
Blown by the winds of Heaven,
Let come what may,
Our hearts will not despair.
Though will not stay away
From any prison
When friend of Thine is there.

I was in prison.
So Thou art with them there.
The door that opened to them, unaware
Of Thy great presence, opened unto Thee,
whom no man can gainsay.
The warders never knew,
Nor had they eyes to see
Whose feet passed through,
The door that day.
—Amy Carmichael Based on the text Matthe 25:36

Of course, John Bunyan knew prison up close and personal. Yet without his suffering there, when he descirbed being parted fron his blind daughter, Mary, like the skin being ripped from is bones, would we ever have had such great works from his as Pilgrim's Progress and the others he wrote?  He could have easily gained himself freedom, by refusing to preach and recanting, that was all it would have taken on his part, the word all here is not small, because  Christ was his life his   Saviour, and it would have been the ultimate betrayal  to him to do so.

As he spoke here on the subject of ingratitude:

He that forgets his friend is ungrateful to him; but he that forgets his Saviour is unmerciful to himself.
—John Bunyan

"I will stay in prison till the moss grows on my eye lids rather than disobey God."
— John Bunya

Let dissolution come when it will, it can do the Christian no harm, for it will be but a passage out of a prison into a palace; out of a sea of troubles into a haven of rest; out of a crowd if enemies to an innumerable company of true, loving, and faithful friends; out of shame, reproach, and contempt, into exceeding great and eternal glory.
—John Bunyan

However, folks who read this website, know of my love and admiration for the puritans. As for them it was not just a matter of standing on principles, and then going home to put their feet up in comfort and safety and security for their families. Their livings, their homes, and often their lives were in danger and often taken for the stand they took. Standing on principles is all very well for us today, when we can do so from so much safety and lack of danger or cost. But these men, women and often their children paid the cost too, put their money where their mouths were, and often paid with their blood. They were, imo, the epitome of my favourite mantra of practicing as they preached, no matter the cost, as no cost was too high, for their precious Lord, and His precious truth.

I have come across some Anglicans, who seem for some reason I don't understand, to want re institute the common book of prayer in Anglican worship. This is beyond my understanding, when that book was produced, (and used by God effectively for its purposes at the time) because the ministers in the pulpit at the time, were so ignorant of doctrines and what the Bible teaches, they were not capable of preaching or leading sermons in truth. But that was the only reason, and worship should be from the heart, not some pre-formed words by rote.

Some say the puritans went too far, because they were so against popery. And in some ways this has some validity, at least when seen through the lens of history from our generations from today. But I hope to demonstrate from the life of John Knox in the coming days, that in their own days, the age they lived in, it was very necessary for their own safety to do so.

The essence of puritan worship was: that the Word of God is the sufficient basis for Divine Worship, and the apostolic simplicity was its precedent for that. (Any Calvinist will say they agree with Sola Scriptura–doesn't the afore-mentioned exactly sum up Sola Scriptura–that what God has not ordained, cannot be Divine worship, and what God has not ordained, is extra Biblical and not actually practicing Sola-Scriptura. Is Scripture sufficient or not? One cannot have it both ways, to say yes, I adhere to Sola Scriptura, and then say that the Bible is not sufficient for the modes and manner in which we worship God. We either Worship God via Sola-Scriptura and hear and do God's will, or we perform will-worship. The puritan also believed that to bring into the Worship service man made innovations denied the doctrine of Original sin.

Unscriptural worship is false worship since it imports human traditions. Similarly, the simplicity of the worship as shown by the discarding of vestments and all unedifying and popish ceremonial, is based upon the simplicity of the Worship of the Apostolic church. [Horton Davies]

The Genevan service book as used by the English puritans evidence suggest it was first used in puritan England in 1567. There were two puritan parties, one stricter than the other.

But the Annals of Strype records both puritan parties were in existence then:

"The refusers of the orders of the church (who by this time were commonly called puritans) were grown now into two factions. The one was of a more quiet, and peaceable demeanour; who indeed would not use the habits, nor subscribe to the ceremonies enjoined; as kneeling at the Sacrament, the Cross in Baptism, the ring in marriage,; but held to the communion of the church and willingly and devoutly joined with the common prayers. But, another sort there was, that disliked the whole constitution of the Church lately reformed; charging upon it many gross remainders of popery; and that it was still full of corruptions not to be borne with, and Anti-Christian; and especially the habits the clergy were enjoined to use in their ministration and conversation. Insomuch that these latter separated themselves into private assemblies, meeting together not in churches, but in private houses, where they had minister of their prayer, they used a Book of prayers framed at Geneva, for the congregation of English exiles lately sojourning there. Which book had been overseen and allowed by Calvin and the rest of his divines there, and indeed was for the most part taken out of the Genevan form."

Grindal, Bishop of London, stated that the displacing of good preachers was the cuase of their private assemblies, and he wrote:

"and then were we troubled and commanded to your courts from day to day, for not coming to our parish churches:–then we bethought us what were best to do; and we remembered that there was a congregation of us in this city in Queen Mary's days; and a congregation at Geneva, which used a book and order of preaching, ministering of the Sacraments and discipline, and most agreeable to the word of God; which book is allowed by that godly and well-learned man, Master Calvin, and the preachers there; which book and order we now hold. And if you can reprove this book, or anything that we hold, by the Word of God, will yield to you and do open penance at Paul's Cross; if not we will stand to it by the grace of God."

In 1571 Strype recorded:

[the puritans] "did still in their own or other churches, or in private houses, read prayers different from the established office of Common Prayer: using the Genevan Form or mangling the English book, and preached without licences."

Purity in worship was important to the puritans; and by that, they meant Divine Worship; that no Worship was acceptable to God, unless it was instituted by Him and the form came straight from the pages of Scripture. If you are a Calvinist and reading this, and yet disagree with it, may I respectfully enquire how you can say you do hold to Sola Scriptura, when if disagreeing with this, Scripture Alone is evidently not enough even though pages and pages are filled by God on the matter of how He is to be worshipped. Is Scripture sufficient for every rule of faith and practice or not?

Neo-puritans today, those who truly hold to the same values and desire for purity in worship as those puritans of 16th century England, often get a  bad press today still, just as did the puritans of old; though the cost is nowhere near as severe of course. But even from within the Reformed camp, neo-puritans and our desire for returning to the old paths and aspiring to purify the church in modes of worship, are viewed negatively and often hostilely, and often unfairly branded "legalistic."  Obedience to doing God's will is not legalistic, its simply a desire to please and glorify God, which should be the desire of all believers in any sphere of life.

That's not to say that there are not today a form of legalistic branches of believers who advocate the same things.  Just like every group of people in life, there will be extremists in every camp,  and those groups, IMO, along with those who profess to be puritans while knowing  little to nothing about puritanism do the cause more harm to those who may differ with us than those of us  who are not in either of the aforementioned groups.

Today,  just as much ignorance seems to abound about neo-puritans as there remains about the puritans of old.   I have known more than one person in the online world who aligns themselves with the puritans yet disagree with them on almost everything  so had no claim to the name  and to even claim it was an affront to the heritage and  bound up in as much ignorance as their lack of knowledge about  the puritans,ẃho they were and what they stood for and believed was also.

I want to make a quote from the preface of the Waldegrave Prayer book from the times of Tudor England, during the reign of Elizabeth I.

"We, therefore, not as the greatest clerks of all, but as the least able of many, do present unto you, which desire the increase of God's glory, and the pure simplicity of His Word, a form and order of a Reformed Church limited within the compass of God's Word, which our Saviour hath left unto us only sufficient to govern all our actions by; so that whatsoever is added to His Word by man's device, seem it never so good, holy or beautiful, yet before our God which is jealous and cannot admit any companion or counsellor, it is evil, wicked and abominable.

We…. desire you in his name, with judgement to read our doings, trying them only by the touchstone of His Word: that either if they be found faulty, they may be rejected, or else if they be profitable, God may be glorified, his church edified, and the malicious confounded. Farewell, dear brethren, and let us pray to our loving God, that he would be merciful unto us, restore his holy Word, comfort and strengthen his children, and finally confound Satan, Antichrist, and all His enemies.

-I don't think any true neo-puritan of today, would beseech those who attack and malign us any differently to those words above in the Waldegrave prayer book. Let Scripture be the touchstone.

On descending from the scaffold, he drew from his ear the sponge soaked with his blood, and holding it up to the people exclaimed: "Bless by my God whose counted me worthy and His mighty power has enabled me to suffer anything for his sake; and as I have now lost some of my blood, so I am ready and willing to spill every drop that is in my veins for this cause which I now have suffered, which is maintaining the honour or God and the Truth of my King against popish usurpations. Let God be glorified and let the King, live forever." [The testimony of Dr Bastwick on descending the scaffold after having his ears removed for upholding the Truth]

Many Presbyterians during the puritan era fell into two groups. Princpled Presbyterians, and pragmatic presbyterians. The principled ones lived out their profession. The pragmatic ones were presbyterians in name only or for some gain to them by being so in other words for their own ends, not for man's chief end of glorifying God and enjoying Him forever. They could just as easily have belonged to any other denomination and perhaps been truer to their professsion.  It struck me much the same is true today, even though we are never called to suffer in the way of the above for defending and not compromising the Truth, at least not in our western world. But I have and do know those who go under the label of Presbyterians yet are very far away from others who are also presbyterians, the ones who live out their profession and not just in name only. Those are the ones who don't entirely subscribe to the WCF and its Standards, while trying to maintain to others that they do and are Calvin's type of Calvinists. Calvin's Calvinism went way and beyong the acronym T.U.L.I.P and sadly a large part of the Reformed church sees that acronym as representing Calvinism, when it falls far short of the mark of doing so in its entirety. But if they do hold to the Westminster Standards, the Presbyterian creed, its some modified, modernized version with crucial bits altered or missing from it. Or they may never have even studied the shorter catechsim at a very basic level in its entirety, when claiming to have been Presbyterians for several years. I'm a presbyterian in name only, by that I don't mean I'm pragmatic. But, having never set foot in a Presby church I can only be one in name only. But, I believe I hold to the Traditional Presbyterianism, that holds to the entire WCF and its standards, and are not pragmatic in declaring myself one, even though often failing in many, many other ways just like everyone else. Its always the pragmatists who muddy the waters by giving some other standards. Some lower standard, which makes man pull back from attaining to higher as the lower standard can be quite comfortable thank you very much. Maybe a general lack of heart being in it which an only lead to lack of diligence.
I do not believe in the carnal Christian thing, as its a total oxymoron. I believe any Christian may fall for a time, and God will either draw them back to Himself or not. But a carnal Christian who is that by nature day in day out, habitually I do not believe exists. One is either carnal that way in life habitually or one is a Christian and sets one mind on things above, while in this world, but you cannot be both in my opinoin at least not in the way I am meaning. Though we will all struggle and fight our flesh against being earthly minded. But that is not the same thing as how one often hears the term carnal christian used to refer to someone habitually and constantly, you really couldn't tell the difference between them and an unbeliever.
Its those who will sell their faith to gain something of the world, by compromising it and in doing so dishonour God to the highest degree. Dr Bastwick, and many others like him who suffered what we can't imagine, knew what it was to stand strong in the most adverse of circumstances. When doing so put their lives on the line and they would surely suffer in some terrible, horrible way. When that is the lengths they went to to defend and uphold Biblical Christiainity, what right do we have to take the same titles as them such as Presbyterians,, when often we are willing to sell our birthright and heritage for a very small price and very small thrill and gain in the world?

Don't say you are either a Calvinist, or a Presbyterian, unless your profession is carried through by actions and in livng it out. To do so, does nothing but sully the name, and also dishonour and sully Christ's Name too since as Spurgeon said "Calvinism is the gospel and nothing else".  Better to wear ones profession under a veil and be a closet one, than to declare it to the world and show yourself not to be, or so inconsistent you are an oxymoron and a confusion to folk   As by doing so, it sullies both the Reformed Heritage and Birthright,  and its obviously not something you are willing to cherish or protect, no more than you are willing to  stand up for Christ when the rubber hits the road in very many ways. The one will be a consequence of the other without a doubt.

Everyone sins of course we do. But it also becomes quite easy to spot the pragmatists from the Principled, as its always a particular kind of sin or some half baked, luke-warm calvinist, that rests more in historical Reformed facts, than it ever does faith and the gospel. Calvin was a great man, but he was still only a man. Too often he can be used like our own Reformed Pope, instead of going to the source which we should, that of the Word of God, we consult Calvin first, and maybe only Calvin. If we consult Calvin or anyone else, then please let us do so with an open Bible on our lap to see that what Calvin or others wrote and taught, are the same as the Lord Jesus, and the Word of God, or we are not only pragmatists but idolators. Calvin is who we will be following if we do not do this, rather than Christ.
Calvin would be horrified at such a thought. He really would. And he would disown and disassaciate himself from anyone who did the above, anyone who knows anything him and his life knows that to be true, so what right does anyone who does do, have claim to the title of Calvinist?

John Knox after the Elizabethan settlement wrote:

Yet, if we (whose sufferance and persecutions are certain signs of sound doctrine)_ hold fast together, it is most certain that the enemies shall have less power; offences shall sooner be taken away; and religion best proceed and flourish.

For what can the Papist wish more than that we should dissent from one another; and instead of preaching Jesus Christ and profitable doctrine, to contend one against another, either for superfluous ceremonies, or other like trifles; from the which, God of his mercy hath delivered us.
—John Knox

In Other words Knox was saying don't sweat the small stuff; if something is not an essential to the faith it is not worth contention and strife.  And that the Church united is far more powerful than divided.  Amen Rev. Knox!

I trust in no good works that ever I did, but only in the death of Christ. I do not doubt but through Him to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. But

imagine not that I speak against good works, for they are to be done, and verily they that do them not shall never enter into the kingdom of Heaven.

Cited from "Last words of saints and sinners" by Herbert Lockyer

Let nothing cause thy heart to fail;   
Launch out thy boat; hoist up thy sail,
Put from the shore,
And be sure thou shalt attain
Unto the porte that shall remain
For ever more.

Rogers was born in my neck of the woods, Birmingham.

Jeremiah Whittaker wrote this:

Joseph said to his brethren, “You did intend me hurt, but God did intend me good.” So it may be said concerning all ungodly, wicked men; they do intend evil against the Church and people of God, but God intends His people’s good, and, in conclusion, effects it. JEREMIAH WHITAKER

I can sure attest to that. Joseph was buried down a well by his brothers, and I have been buried alive, with no human contact almost completely whilst strapped to a sick bed, by my brethren, by those who should have behaved much, much differently, just as in the case of Joseph.

But the Reformed faith is in crises in my opinion; it is imploding upon itself, by schism and division, that should not exist and given Christ's priestly prayer of John 17 it must wrench at his heart strings, for the disunity that exists among us. Broken or shattered relationship, often times not just of the brethren but blood ties, are broken, and folks are cast out and cut off, no forgiveness or reconciliation. Everyone doing their own thing to survive in what they consider the Biblical status quo, when the casting off and cutting off of the brethren is unbiblical to the core and sinful, in the extreme, unless in the case of excommunication and Church Discipline.

Luke12:53 Christ is not talking about His church, but those both within the covenant and those outside of it. How many will go to Public or Corporate worship today, having cut off someone or cast someone out  and so  going against what Christ says in Mark 11:25, making nil and void their worship because they have not approached it in the way our Lord tells us to.  Christ says he will have mercy and not sacrifice. How many more within the Reformed faith are going to be sacrificed because those within it lack mercy, compassion or charity towards the brethren?  Very Christ like traits, and to lack those things, even if only towards specific individuals, than it makes an oxymoron of our profession. Christ also speaks about not doing good to o nly those who we love, as the Pharisees to do that.  The love of the brethren should be universal, without any exceptions, if they are still upstanding citizens of the covenant and are still cherished by many others within the church, then  not one  other person has any God given right, to think them not fit for fellowship.

The church of Christ should not  be an excusive club, open to only a select few who we deem suitable,  or we are taking on oursleves the place of God.  Yet, that is often how it comes off,  if you don't sing the right tune or dance the right steps,  as you are somehow not good enough for that exclusive club, so you are cut off and cast out, and how that must make Christ yearn for his flock.

The fear of the Lord means doing His will, not our own wants, or desires. (Prov 1:7) God hates for brother to be turned against brother, he hates it just as much as he hates liars. He doesn't hate the lying, he hates the liars, and say they have no part in the kingdom of heaven. Yet, people are deceiving each other, perhaps to get out of an awkward situation, but t hey certainly do not deal honestly with each other and with integrity. And the Bible says GOD HATES it. And this in the Name of Christ and fulfilling His will? self deceit is the biggest soul killer of all, fed to us by the Father of lies, Satan himself.

Fear of the Lord means walking in His ways, and doing His will and being obedient. Yet so many shattered, fractured, relationship exist within the reformed faith, it is just plain wrong. Reconciliation and forgiveness a lot of the time doesn't even seem to be part of the equation. Bitterness and unforgiveness and the hurt that causes us when we harbour unforgiveness towards the people who have hurt us, seems to rule.If people we no longer see or speak to who wronged us are still causing us hurt and pain by their actions it is because of unforgiveness and bitterness towards them, the  problem is no longer theirs but ours. I know this from up close and personal experience.  The great test of faith, is if we can forgive, even when we have been horrendously wronged.  If the person in question is still a source of grief and pain to us, chances are we are harbouring unforgiveness and bitterness towards them.  If we are Christians, we will let it go and move on, and forgive them from the heart, AND pray for reconcilation with them.

The Reformed faith has a reputation of being a faith that study and it go hand in hand. If ignorance and Calvinism meet, one of them has to leave the field. But, knowledge, learning, study, and all the rest of it, will not do anyone, ourselves or others, or God's kingdom one iota of good, unless it is lived out in a practical way. The puritans were experimental Calvinists, they lived out their beliefs, they didn't merely have knowledge that wasn't lived out or only very partially. Of course they were not perfect, they were fallen men just like we are; yet, the division amongst themselves, the devouring of each other, did not exist the way it is does today among the Reformed faith. It's anti biblical to the core. The Bible says that we know those who love God, by if they also love the brethren. And by that the bible certainly didn't mean, love only those brethren who please us, or follow us, or think the same things as we do or believe exactly the same things. It means the brethren, the visible church, period. No exceptions, apart from in the case of Church discipline.

The internet can be a wonderful too, yet there are too many internet Calvinist's IMO. They can talk the talk well in the online world, yet go a little deeper into acquaintance with them, you see just how much is talk as opposed to practical living it out, by embracing the brethren, all of them, without his cutting off and casting out and division and schism that is so rife.

God blesses His people, those within the Covenant community, and one thing he blesses them for is to be at peace with all men; and for those who are not, to seek reconciliation and reparation of fractured relationship and forgiveness from the heart to and from those who have hurt us or we them.

The peace with God, that Psalm 29 so speaks of, part of that comes from being at peace with His people also.

Every believer, inside the reformed faith or not, will not agree about every single thing; but in the Name of Christ, and in the Name of charity, and compassion, we should bear with one another, rather than afflicting them by casting them out or cutting them off and having no more to do with them, because they do not sing the same tune that we do. They may beat a slightly different drum. So what! Did not the disciples have differences of opinions, and try to outdo each other in different ways, to who was closest to Christ? Yet the disciples remained brothers, and brethren, and knew it was their Master's will and desire that they always would do.

Of course, there are more unregenerate people within the church of Christ than regenerate, and one cannot help but wonder if this goes some way to explaining it. that it is the tares who are cutting up and dividing God's church, and the wheat that are left to carry the burden of it and suffer. Christ tells us to expect perecution for what we believe, but he sure wasn't talking about from each other, but from the world! It is both ludicrous, sinful, shicsmatic in the extreme, and far outside of Biblical Christianity, Christ centred Christiaity, or Calvin's Calvinism as anything can be.

The internet Calvinists, like to debate this subject or that subject; to address all the different cults or false faiths that are out there and to tell them how wrong and erroneous they are, and it is this crazy Calvinist's humble, yet strongly convicted opinion that until we get our own house in order, we have not one shred of credibility or even right to tell others how they are erring, and it is hypocritical in the extreme to even try to.

Of course this does not apply to all of the Reformed church, and the faithful, those who are ot part of the great division and schism that seem so widespread I am thankful for. God will bless HIs church, He loves to bless HIs people, but when schism and division is so much on the menu and so much being perpetrated those involved can expect the opposite of blessing but affliction, adversity and loss to ensure from it. Or if it doesn't, then maybe its because they really are not God's children the one's that remain free to coninue in in this way without any calling back from the hand of God. It doesn;'t matter what the issue is, or the doctrine, or anything else, there is no excuse to be casting out, cutting off the brethren in any way, shape or form, never, unless the party is also under church discipleine. If they are part of the church in good standing with many folks, then no one, no one, has the right to put assunder what God has joined together, such as the brethren. To do so will bring things crashing down around our ears, in a way we may not have even considered. A divided kingdom cannot stand, and this goes no less for God's kingdom than for Satan's. Of course Christ is Lord of HIs church and He will deliver her in due time, but it would be nice if those who say they hold to the true religion, i.e. Calvinism were working with God, rather than against Him.

I have been cut off and cast out in the extreme, so that my lot has become the great weight of suffering it now is, so I have passionate feelings about this. I have had plenty of folk within the Reformed faith tell me if in their neck of the woods, it would have been different, it would not h ave happened.  Yet, I fail to see how, when it is happening to people in their own neck of the woods,  by them behaving litle differently in essence to how folks did in my  neck of the woods did towards me.  It is the differnece between talk, and doing.  Talk is easy, Christ desires us to be more than vain babblers however, by us putting our money wehere our mouth is and following that through in our lives and actions, and in the practical living it out.

The problem is at endemic proportions, I hear of new cases almost every day. May the Lord perserve us from such a uncharitable, ungodly, haughty spirit.

Today we have Bible memorization programmes, and the technology to help them stick, such as this one by John Piper's  ministry So, what excuse do we have. And also, God makes it quite clear, that ignorance is not an excuse for sin. And I myself have long believed, that ignorance is often a choice.

A New England Antinomian  was heard to utter:

I had rather hear such a one that speaks from mere notion of the Spirit, without any study at all, than any of your learned scholars, although he maybe fuller of Scripture.

Which would also seem to confirm my theory that often, ignorance is a choice.

According to a biography on John Bruen, Robert Pasfield who was an illiterate servant of Bruen's was:

"a man utterly unlearned, being unable to read a sentence or write a sylablle. Yet he was so well acquainted with the history of the Bible, and the sum and substance of every book and chapter, that hardly could any ask him where such a sayinkg or sentence were, but he would with very little ado tell them in what book, and what chapter they might find it."

We all have to start somewhere. You can't expect a two year old Christian to have the vast stores of understanding and knowledge  that a 15 year old on will have. But if after, considerable time has passed, and  medical reasons notwithstanding, that could cause it,   the person remains ignorant as many a new born babe, then, I think that person should do some soul searching to ask why it is so.

Lord perseve us from ignorance, and from choosing the worldly pelasures to the dteriment of spiritual concerns. Give us grace to perservere, even when we don't see  progress, but trust that your grace is sufficient, in this matter, as much as it is, in any other. In Jesus, Name. Amen.

This seems like it maybe an appropriate post to start off my series of "Reformed or Deformed" which at the moment I am trying to organize in my mind to set down on paper in an organized way.

Patriots have toiled, and in their country’s cause
Bled nobly; and their deeds, as they deserve,
Receive proud recompense… .
But fairer wreaths are due, tho’ never paid,
To those who, posted at the shrine of truth,
Have fallen in her defense… .
. . . Their blood is shed,
In confirmation of the noblest claim,
Our claim to feed upon immortal truth,
To walk with God, to be divinely free,
To soar, and to anticipate the skies.
Yet few remember them!…
. . . With their names
No bard embalms and sanctifies his song;
And history, so warm on meaner themes,
Is cold on this. She execrates indeed
The tyranny that doom’d them to the fire,
But gives the glorious sufferers little praise.
—William Cowper's "The Task"

Amazing grace! (how sweet the sound)
That sav’d a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
Was blind, but now I see.

’Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears reliev’d;
How precious did that grace appear,
The hour I first believ’d!

Thro’ many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
’Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promis’d good to me,
His word my hope secures;
He will my shield and portion be,
As long as life endures.

Yes, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease;
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, who call’d me here below,
Will be forever mine.

A small anecdote on John Newton, give his former slave trading, is that when William Wilberforce, who was to become the great abolitionist, first entered politics, it was as a dare and a joke. He lived the high life for several years, and did not take his occupation seriously at all. However, after he had a thorough conversion, several years into his political life, he started questioning if politics was where God wanted him to be and was his calling.  And the irony is, and a wonderful ironic providence of God, that to get counsel on this matter, of if he should stay in politics or not, he went to John Newton's house in London, and Newton told him emphatically yes he should stay. If not for the former slave trader giving that counsel,  perhaps Wilberforce would never  have become the great abolitionist.

The epitaph on John Newton's gravestone says:

JOHN NEWTON, Clerk [preacher]
Once an infidel and libertine
A servant of slaves in Africa,
Was, by the rich mercy
of our Lord and Saviour
JESUS CHRIST,
restored, pardoned and
appointed to preach
the Gospel which he had
long laboured to destroy.
He ministered,
Near sixteen years in Olney, in Bucks,
And twenty eight years in this Church.

Written by John Newton, it is engraved on a marble plaque in St Mary, Woolnoth, UK.

a short but memorable story which the graphier of that town (though of a different religion) reported to more ears than ours. When the last inquisition tyrannized in those parts, and helped to spend the faggots of Ardenne, one of the rst, a confident confessor, being led far to his stake, sung psalms along the way, in a heavenly courage and victorious triumph. The cruel officer, envying his last mirth, and grieving to see him merrier than his tormenters, commanded him silence. He sings still, and desirous to improve his last breath to the best. The view of his approaching glory bred his joy; his joy breaks forth into a cheerful confession. The enraged sherriff causes his tongue to be cut off near the roots. Bloody wretch! It had been good music to have heard his shrieks; but to hear his music was torment. The poor martyr dies in silence, rests in peace. Not many months after, our butcherly officer hath a son born with his tongue hanging down upon his chin, like a deer after a long chase, which never could be gathered up within the bounds of his lips. O the Divine hand, full of justice, full of revenge. —Joseph Hall

Joseph Hall's account of a similar scenario that he witnessed:

a short but memorable story which the graphier of that town (though of a different religion) reported to more ears than ours. When the last inquisition tyrannized in those parts, and helped to spend the faggots of Ardenne, one of the rst, a confident confessor, being led far to his stake, sung psalms along the way, in a heavenly courage and victorious triumph. The cruel officer, envying his last mirth, and grieving to see him merrier than his tormenters, commanded him silence. He sings still, and desirous to improve his last breath to the best. The view of his approaching glory bred his joy; his joy breaks forth into a cheerful confession. The enraged sherriff causes his tongue to be cut off near the roots. Bloody wretch! It had been good music to have heard his shrieks; but to hear his music was torment. The poor martyr dies in silence, rests in peace. Not many months after, our butcherly officer hath a son born with his tongue hanging down upon his chin, like a deer after a long chase, which never could be gathered up within the bounds of his lips. O the Divine  hand, full of justice, full of revenge.
—Joseph Hall

But since I have had little to say, and didn't want to go another day without having something for the reader, thought I would make three book recommendations, which are not puritan, but are definitely reformed.
There is much it seems to me, ignorance amongst the reformed community, (some of it at least) about what Calvin taught and thought exactly about the insitute of marriage and family. Calvin was very much a man of his times, and to read him in one place it seems like he contradicts himself in others; however, Calvin was no chauvinist, the woman was made equal and the heart of the home in Calvin's Geneva. Same as the divorce laws we currently have,, originated from Calvin's Geneva. Before that time, women were not seen as equal to the men in the home, they were treated often as slaves or children, or definitely as inferiors, and Calvin and his time in Geneva changed this, and we are still reaping the benefits of this today.
Yes, Calvin does seem to contradict himself on some subjects, but he wrote and lived so long ago, that we only have the translated works of Calvin, (for English speaking folk) and language and use of it, has changed since his time, and some of what is translated is likely very far from what Calvin originally intended, hence we are left with what often appears contradictions.
But two books on this subject I would reccommend are:

Sex, Marriage, and Family in John Calvin's Geneva.

Family Reformation: The Legacy of Sola Scriptura in Calvin's Geneva by Scott T. Brown

And

The third book, if you are an iconoclast though written by a papist it is a very good book to read on this subject by Carlos Eires called
The War against Idols. Which starts pre reformation and goes up to Calvin's time, and how idols in the Worship of God were seen by the Church.

They say that behind every great man, is a woman, and I can think of 3 great characters in Christian history that to a certain extent that was true. Though that is not to detract from their own skills and gifts, but the women they loved and married, made very difficult times easier.

John Calvin was to write of Idlette DuBurre at her death: "I have been bereaved of the best companion of my life, of one who, had it been so ordered, would not only have been the willing sharer of my indigence, but even of my death. During her life she was the faithful helper of my ministry."

The second I can think of is Sarah Edwards, wife of Jonathan. They truly did have an uncommon union. A good book to read on that would be "Marriage to a Difficult man" if you can get past and dismiss the psyche references to when Sarah Edwards was brought low, and the pointing to Jonathan becoming almost her psychiatrist, get past that and yet see the relationship and true love and devotion that there was between them. In these days of so many marriages failing, its truly heart-warming.

And now I come to Richard and Margaret Baxter. She was around 20 years his junior, and though she had been in love with him for some time, he seemed to deny his feelings, because he beleived a preacher was best, single and celibate, that way he could give all of himself to his flock. It was not the popish nonsense about priests remaining single and celibate, merely for how a family may detract and distract from the calling of the ministry. But one thing about all the women named in this post, is they were all able help-meets to their husbands in their ministries.

Sarah Edwards kept the house running like clockwork. Took care of the children, and made sure her husband could have all the time he needed for his study and writing etc. Any burden from the home, was not part of his daily routine, though that's not to say he neglected his children, just that his wife created a perfect domicile to fit around her husbands rather unusual needs and desires as far as time and not being disturbed so that he could pursue his ministry unabated. And what a legacy both he and Sarah have left behind them. As what we think of as the works of Jonathan Edwards, was made possible in many ways, by the loyalty, devotion, care, love, and running the home around her husbands needs, so that he could have the output he did, which otherwise just would not have happened.

Calvin never seemed bothered about marrying, until he was in Geneva. He felt he had the gift of contincy, and it was Bucer and Farel and perhaps one or two others who first tried to get him used to the idea of thinking about taking a wife. There are many of the calvin biographies that deal with this, and one in particular that deals with it at more length than some others is Williston Walkers' biography of John Calvin.
Yet when Calvin came together with Idlette, it was a true love story, and almost love at first sight. When reading or hearing of the tender relationship that existed between she and her husband, one gets to see a completely different side to Calvin than we are used to, or is generally represented. He outlived her by 15 years, yet every single day of those 15 years, he felt her loss deeply. It is commonly told that they had one child that died in infancy, but it was actually three or four. And it was the grief of this that apparently contributed to her early death.

But now on to Richard and Margaret Baxter. I am again quoting from the Marcus Loane book, Makers of puritan history, writing on a very difficult and persecuted time period for the Baxters during the reign of Charles II.

Mrs Baxter at length arranged to let the chapels in Oxenden Street and Swallow street so that constant preaching could be maintained…. But on August 24, 1682, 'just that day twenty year' since the Act of Uniformity, he preached for the last time at New Street and took leave of his public preaching 'in a thankful congregation.' Not long after, his books, his goods, even the bed on which he lay, were seized and sold, and his illness alone saved him from gao at a time when most of his friends were in prison. He was driven into months of pain and hiding such as he had never known, and compared with which, prison itself would have been a palace to him. At length, late in 1684, and again in January 1685, a fresh warrant was signed for his arrest, and six men stood outside the door of his study all night and kept him from both food and sleep. They brought him, 'scarce able to stand,' before the court, and bound him by a four hundred pound bond. In December 1684, and again in January, 1685, he was forced in all his pain and weakness to come before the courts again, although he had to be carried because he was too ill to stand. A month later, Charles II died, and the reign of the Merry Monarch was at an end.
Romance and marriage, however, were to throw a mantle of consolation over his life which no man ever needed or valued more. Baxter had learned to know and love his wife while she was still greatly given to fear, and he may not have been prepared for the bright change which now transformed her state of mind. But she was no ordinary woman, and she was to become a wife in a thousand. She was timid and reserved by nature gentle and refined in spirit, yet she was to display a quiet courage in the face of adversity which was without its peer among women of the Restoration. John Howe rightly observed that by her marriage with Baxter, she 'gave proof of the real greatness of her spirit'. Her old melancholy vanished and she found her soul in the loss of self. 'Counsel did something to it, and contentment something, and being taken up with our household affairs did somewhat. All her natural gaity seemed to escape as if from a prison and poured out in pure and selfless service. All the generous affections of which her heart was the centre found an outlet and filled each hour of the day with glad and holy consecration. She stepped out with him to face the dark times at hand, and she never lost her heart or hope through all the years of trial which then ensued. Her tastes and haits, her plans and pleasures, were all cast in beautiful harmony with those of her husband, and their wedded life was one long summer day of mutual love and devotion. "These near nineteen years," he wrote, "I know not that we ever had any breach in the point of love… save only that she somewhat grudged that I had persuaded her for my quietness to surrender so much of her estate to a disabling her from helping others so much as she earnestly desired."
There was not one selfish wish in her love for him, and his daily routine of toil and study was cheered and relieved by true domestic happiness. Powicke observes that there was in her, a charm for others which was lacking in him, and he himself frankly declared that her "winning conversation" drew their hearts to goodness ina way that sermons never could do. Baxter indeed, went much further in his testimony into her insight. "Except in cases that required learning and skill in theological difficulties, she was better at resolving a case of conscience than most divines that I ever knew in my life…Insomuch, that in late years, I confess that I was used to put all but save secret cases to her…and she would give me a more exact resolution than I could do."
She was at his side in sickness and fatigue; he was in her heart in sorrow and slander. Her cheerfulness brightened hsi hours of melancholy, and her gentleness softened his moods of asperity; her fortitude strengthened his hand in resolution, and her sympathy quicked his heart in benevolence. She shared his lot, now in danger, now in hiding, and was never so bright a companion to him as in prison.
But the intensity of her spirit was not without its price, for, "she… proved her sincerity by her costliest obedience" Perhaps the cost was the dearer because it was so quiet and so controlled, Baxter declared that the knife was too keen and cut the sheath. Hers was a mind keyed up to a higher level than is the case with most people; it was like the treble strings of a lute which have been strained to the utmost: "Sweet but in continual danger." On 14th of June, 1681, on the twelfth day of a delirious illness she passed away, leaving a void in his heart which nothing could fill. It was her love alone which had made the dark world bright in his eyes, and the memory of her gentleness was to shine on his path as he followed to "the door of eternity."

He could not recall her love for him without letting us see his love for her. The stern restraint, the austere severity of his single-minded pursuit of a heavenly character, is offset by this disclosure of his own most tender feelings as a man like unto ourselves. The lofty grandeur of Puritan abstraction from the world is seen in a more attractive light when we have felt the throb of his love and grief behind his self-complaint: "For though she oft said that before she married me she expected more sourness and unsuitableness than she found, yet I am sure that she found less zeal, holiness and strictness she expected." Baxter's love for her had grown like "a flower in the garden of the spirit", and his only regret was that he had proved less worthy than she deserved. "My dear wife did look for more good in me than she found, especially lately in my weakness and decay. We are all like pictures that must not be looked upon too near. They that come near us, find more faults and badness in us than others at a distance know." So he fancied, but what would have been her answer if she had lived to draw his portrait, as hehad drawn hers?

The book link above is to where the citation on Richard Baxters marriage is from.  And here are the books I recommend to read of the realtionship of Jonathan and Sarah Edwards:

And the Biography on John Cavin that I have read at least that deals most fully with his marriage and married life:

On  a sermon preached on December 25, 1551, his 20th sermon on Micah,  on  Micah: 5:7-14 Calvin preached:

Now, I see here today more people than I am accustomed to having at
the sermon. Why is that? It is Christmas Day. And who told you
this? You poor beasts. That is a fitting euphemism for all of you
who have come here today to honor Noel. Did you think you would be
honoring God? Consider what sort of obedience to God your coming
displays. In your mind, you are celebrating a holiday for God, or
turning today into one. But so much for that. In truth, as you have
often been admonished, it is good to set aside one day out of the year
in which we are reminded of all the good that has occurred because of
Christ's birth in the world, and in which we hear the story of his
birth retold, which will be done on Sunday. But if you think that
Jesus Christ was born today, you are as crazed as wild beasts. For
when you elevate one day alone for the purpose of worshipping God, you
have just turned it into an idol. True, you insist that you have done
so for the honor of God, but it is more for the honor of the Devil.

Let us consider what our Lord has to say on the matter. Was it not
Saul's intention to worship God when he spared Agag, the king of the
Amalakites, along with the best spoils and cattle? He says as much:
"I want to worship God." Saul's tongue was full of devotion and good
intention. But what was the response he received? "You soothsayer!
You heretic! You apostate! You claim to be honoring God, but God
rejects and disowns all that you have done" [1 Samuel 15:8,9].
Consequently, the same is true of our actions. For no day is superior
to another. It matters not whether we recall our Lord's nativity on a
Wednesday, Thursday, or some other day. But when we insist on
establishing a service of worship based on our whim, we blaspheme God,
and create an idol, though we have done it all in the name of God.
And when you worship God in the idleness of a holiday spirit, that is
a heavey sin to bear, and one which attracts others about it, until we
reach the height of iniquity. Therefore, let us pay attention to what
Micah is saying here [Micah 5:7-14], that God must not only strip away
things that are bad themselves, but must also eliminate anything that
might foster superstition. Once we have understood that, we will no
longer find it strange that Noel is not being observed today, but that
on Sunday we will celebrate the Lord's Supper and recite the story of
the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ. But to all those who barely
know Jesus Christ, or that we must be subject to him, and that God
removes all those impediments that prevent us from coming to him,
these folks, I say, will at best grit their teeth. They came here in
anticipation of celebrating a wrong intention, but will leave with it
wholly unfulfilled.

The Westminster Confession of faith, chapter XXI says thus:

I. The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all; is good, and doeth good unto all; and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served with all the hearth, and with all the soul, and with all the might. But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture.

The Directory for The Public Worship of God, also penned by the Westminster Divines, says thus:

THERE is no day commanded in scripture to be kept holy under the gospel but the Lord's day, which is the Christian Sabbath.

Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days, having no warrant in the word of God, are not to be continued.

Nevertheless, it is lawful and necessary, upon special emergent occasions, to separate a day or days for publick fasting or thanksgiving, as the several eminent and extraordinary dispensations of God's providence shall administer cause and opportunity to his people.

As no place is capable of any holiness, under pretence of whatsoever dedication or consecration; so neither is it subject to such pollution by any superstition formerly used, and now laid aside, as may render it unlawful or inconvenient for Christians to meet together therein for the publick worship of God. And therefore we hold it requisite, that the places of publick assembling for worship among us should be continued and employed to that use.

The Reformation was built and stood on the principles of Sola Scriptura. By Scripture Alone. The Regulative Principle also stands on the same principle. Can any Presbyterian, who denies or rejects the teachings of our Reformed fore-fathers, and instead opts for celebrating the Christ mass and Easter, expressly rejected by our Reformed fore-fathers,  and even more importantly has no warrant from the word of God, in truth say they are reformed? Because I humbly suggest they cannot. There is far more to Calvinism than T.U.L.I.P. Calvin's Calvinism, is not met by the majority of the Reformed churches today, they say they are following Calvin while practicing entirely opposing things to what man himself did.
There is a huge difference in my opinion, in people who are open to the truth, but may not have arrived at a full understanding of this yet,  to those who just utterly reject this principle, on no Biblical grounds whatsoever. Scripture is either sufficient or is it not? And if Sola Scriptura is what the Reformation was built upon, why would Reformed people now want to add to Scripture? The argument is commonly used that God never forbade it. It's something I don't have the health to go into at this point in time, but, He never commanded it. And in other places in Scripture one can only draw the conclusion by sure and necessary consequence it is an abomination in his site, and an unacceptable sacrifice.

Is any Presbyterian who may read this, willing to argue against Sola Scriptura?  And if not, if also partaking of man made festival days, we are expressly denying the sufficiency of Scripture while proclaiming with our lips by Scripture alone.  As I have said a thousand times,  Actions speak much louder than words.

The reason I am posting this letter today, is because in my own circumstances in life, which can be very like a prison as Richard Sibbes noted:

It were a thousand times better for many persons to be cast on a bed of sickness and to be God's prisoners, than so scandalously to abuse the health that they have had continued so long. —Richard Sibbes

…this letter of Calvin's spoke to me:

GENEVA, 4th September 1558.

MONSEIGNEUR, — I trust that having read the present letter, inasmuch as it will furnish you with a proof of the extent of the interest I take in your salvation, you will not feel offended that I have written it to you. I would not have delayed so long in discharging this duty, had I had as easy access to you as I have on the present occasion. I shall not make any longer excuses, being convinced that the reverence in which you hold my Master, will cause you to find good whatever you shall see proceeding from him, and laid before you in his name. Neither shall I employ any long exhortations to confirm you in patience, because I am of opinion, nay, I have heard, that our heavenly Father has so fortified you by the power of his Spirit, that I have occasion rather to give him praise for his kindness than to urge you to greater efforts. And in fact here it is that true greatness of mind should make itself manifest; viz., in overcoming all our passions, in order not only to gain the victory over them, but to offer a true sacrifice of obedience to God. Now, it is not enough to show ourselves valiant, and not to faint or lose heart in adversity, unless we keep this in view, to submit ourselves entirely to the will of God, and acquiesce in it peaceably.
But since he has already bestowed on you such constancy, I have no occasion, as I have said, to exhort you to it. Only I pray you to let me call your attention to one thing more, which is, that God in sending you this affliction has intended to set you apart, as it were, that you might listen to him more attentively. For you know but too well how difficult a thing it
is, in the midst of worldly honors, riches, and power to lend to him an attentive ear, because these things draw our attention too much in different directions, and as it were absorb us, unless he make use of such means as the present of bringing under his wings those whom he has chosen for his own. Not that dignities, high place, and temporal blessings are
incompatible with the fear of God, seeing that even in proportion as he exalts men he gives them an opportunity of drawing still closer to him, and of feeling a stronger impulse to honor and serve him; but I believe you have experienced that those who stand highest in worldly rank, are so occupied and as it were held captive by it, that it is with much ado they find leisure to set about in good earnest the principal study, which is that of doing homage to God, dedicating themselves fully to him, and aspiring after the heavenly life. Wherefore, Monseigneur, I entreat you, inasmuch as God has afforded you this opportunity of making progress in his school as if he wished to whisper secretly in your ear, to give good heed so as to savor better than ever, to feel the real worth of his doctrine, how precious and desirable it ought to seem to us, and to devote your leisure to the reading of his holy word, that you may derive instruction therefrom and become more deeply rooted in faith, so as thereby to be fortified for the rest of your life to struggle against all temptations.
You know what corruption’s every where prevail, so much the more should the children of God be ever on their guard not to mingle in them, lest they share in their pollution. True it is that in our days every thing will be tolerated rather than the resolution to honor God in purity, so that you cannot render him faithful service without being forced to endure many murmurs and threats. But for that reason the honor of God should claim from you so peculiar a privilege that every thing else ought to be held vile in comparison, and his favor certainly deserves to merit the preference over that of all his creatures. We have one great advantage, that if we are weak, he has promised to supply of his power what is a wanting
in us, as indeed our real arms are in every thing to fly to him for refuge, entreating him to be our strength. For the rest, Monseigneur, though the glory of God, and the things appertaining to his reign should always hold the first place in our esteem, trust likewise in the promise of our Lord Jesus Christ that the rest shall be added thereto. Thus doubt not, in giving yourself up to the service of God, but that you shall feel his blessing in every thing, and that he will prove to you what care he takes of his children to bestow on them what is fitting even for this transitory life, just as on the other hand there is no true prosperity without his grace, and even when those who withdraw from him fancy they have gained every
thing, they feel in the end that their success has been converted into misfortune. But as these things are not easily admitted by human reason, you have need to exercise yourself by reading, as I fancy you do, and are resolved to continue doing. Whereupon, Monseigneur, having humbly commended me to your indulgent favor, I supplicate our heavenly Father to have you in his holy keeping, to direct you by his Spirit, to fortify you in all virtue, and deliver you speedily, so that we may have wherewithal to give him thanks.

Farewell, best and truest brother. If God wills that you remain the survivor, live mindful of our union, which has been useful to the Church of God, so that its fruit abides for us in heaven. I am unwilling that you weary yourself for my sake, for I draw breath with difficulty, and constantly await its failing me. It is enough that I live and die unto Christ, who is gain to those who are His in life and in death. Again farewell [to you] together with the brethren.

And these were the last personal written words of the man who has exerted the greatest influence on the world in the last 1000 years.  The last letter, was to William Farel. The man who had so humbly stood aside and got Calvin in Geneva against the younger man's will, but Farel knew that Calvin was better disposed for the job at hand than he himself was. The church of God was their priority, not personal greatness, the way Farel stood aside demonstrates that.

Shortly after, if not before, the publication of his great work, in March, 1536, Calvin, in company with Louis du Tillet, crossed the Alps to Italy, the classical soil of the literary and artistic Renaissance. He hoped to aid the cause of the religious Renaissance. He went to Italy as an evangelist, not as a monk, like Luther, who learned at Rome a practical lesson of the working of the papacy.

He spent a few months in Ferrara at the brilliant court of the Duchess Renée or Renata (1511–1575), the second daughter of Louis XII., of France, and made a deep and permanent impression on her. She had probably heard of him through Queen Marguerite and invited him to a visit. She was a small and deformed, but noble, pious, and highly accomplished lady, like her friends, Queen Marguerite and Vittoria Colonna. She gathered around her the brightest wits of the Renaissance, from Italy and France, but she sympathized still more with the spirit of the Reformation, and was fairly captivated by Calvin. She chose him as the guide of her conscience, and consulted him hereafter as a spiritual father as long as he lived.462462 Beza (xxi. 123): "Illam [Ferrariensem Ducissam]in vero pietatis studio confirmavit, ut eum postea vivum semper dilexerit, ac nunc quoque superstes gratae in defunctum memoriae specimen edat luculentum." Colladon (53) speaks likewise of the high esteem in which the Duchess, then still living, held Calvin before and after his death. Bolsec in his libel (Ch. v. 30), mentions the visit to Ferrara, but suggests a mercenary, motive. "Calvin," he says, "s’en alla vers Allemaigne et Itallie: cherchant son adventure, et passa par la ville de Ferrare, ou il receut quelque aumone de Madame la Duchesse." He discharged this duty with the frankness and fidelity of a Christian pastor. Nothing can be more manly and honorable than his letters to her. Guizot affirms, from competent knowledge, that "the great Catholic bishops, who in the seventeenth century directed the consciences of the mightiest men in France, did not fulfil the difficult task with more Christian firmness, intelligent justice and knowledge of the world than Calvin displayed in his intercourse with the Duchess of Ferrara."463463 St. Louis and Calvin, p. 207. He adds: "And the duchess was not the only, person towards whom he fulfilled this duty of a Christian pastor. His correspondence shows that he exercised a similar influence, in a spirit equally lofty and judicious, over the consciences of many Protestants."

Renan wonders that such a stern moralist should have exercised a lasting influence over such a lady, and attributes it to the force of conviction. But the bond of union was deeper. She recognized in Calvin the man who could satisfy her spiritual nature and give her strength and comfort to fight the battle of life, to face the danger of the Inquisition, to suffer imprisonment, and after the death of her husband and her return to France (1559) openly to confess and to maintain the evangelical faith under most trying circumstances when her own son-in-law, the Duke of Guise, carried on a war of extermination against the Reformation. She continued to correspond with Calvin very freely, and his last letter in French, twenty-three days before his death, was directed to her. She was in Paris during the dreadful massacre of St. Bartholomew, and succeeded in saving the lives of some prominent Huguenots.464464 See the correspondence in the Letters by Bonnet, and in the Strassburg-Braunschweig edition. On Renée and her relation to Calvin see Henry, I. 159, 450-454; III. Beilage 142-153; in his smaller work, 62-69; 478-483; Stähelin, I. 94-108; Sophia W. Weitzel, Renée of France, Duchess of Ferrara, New York, 1883; and Theod. Schott, in Herzog2, XII. 693-701.

Threatened by the Inquisition which then began its work of crushing out both the Renaissance and the Reformation, as two kindred serpents, Calvin bent his way, probably through Aosta (the birthplace of Anselm of Canterbury) and over the Great St. Bernard, to Switzerland.

An uncertain tradition connects with this journey a persecution and flight of Calvin in the valley of Aosta, which was commemorated five years later (1541) by a memorial cross with the inscription "Calvini Fuga."465465 In the city of Aosta, near the Croix-de-Ville, stands a column eight feet high, surmounted by a cross of stone, with the following inscription:
Hanc
Calvini Fuga
erexit
Anno MDXLI
Religionis Constantia
Reparavit
Anno MDCCXLI.
The inscription was renewed again in 1841, with the following addition (according to Merle d’Aubigné, who saw it himself, vol. V. 531):
Civium Munificentia
Renovavit Et Adornavit.
Anno MDCCCXLI.
"Religionis constantia" must refer to the Roman faith which drove Calvin and his heresy away. Dr. Merle d’Aubigné accepts Calvin’s flight on the ground of this monumental testimony as a historical fact, but the silence of Calvin, Beza, and Colladon throws doubt on it. See J. Bonnet, Calvin au Val d’Aosta, 1861; A. Rilliet, Lettre àMr. Merle d’Aubignésur deux points obscure de la vie de Calvin, 1864; Stähelin, I. 110; Kampschulte, I. 280 (note); La France Prof., III. 520; Thomas M’Crie, The Early Years of Calvin pp. 95 and 104.
Fontana: Documenti del archivio vaticano e dell’ Estenso circa soggiorno di Calvino a Ferrara, 1885. Comba in "Rivista christiana," 1885; Sandovini in Rivista stor. italiana," 1887.

At Basel he parted from Du Tillet and paid a last visit to his native town to make a final settlement of family affairs.466466 This visit to Noyon is mentioned by Beza in the Latin Vita, who adds that he then brought his only surviving brother Antoine, with him to Geneva (XXI. 125). Colladon (58) agrees, and informs us that Calvin left Du Tillet at Basel, who from there went to Neuchâtel. In his French Life of C., Beza omits the journey to France: "A son retour d’Italie … il passa àla bonne heure par ceste ville de Genève."

Then he left France, with his younger brother Antoine and his sister Marie, forever, hoping to settle down in Basel or Strassburg and to lead there the quiet life of a scholar and author. Owing to the disturbances of war between Charles V. and Francis I., which closed the direct route through Lorraine, he had to take a circuitous journey through Geneva.

The above is from Phillip Schaff's history of the Christian Church. But there are some additions I want to make about this great French Hugeonot heroine. Calvin's friendship had sowed such strength in her, that when she returned to France, after all her friends had been exiled out of Italy, and she was given an ultimatum to either convert to Rome or leave the country, she went back to her homeland for the first time in 30 years. Her castle became a refuge for French Hugeonot refugees. The castle was often rioted against by the Duke of Guise, a bigotted roman catholic and her son-in-law. The castle became known as the "Hotel of the Lord." At one time at the castle she had 300 refugees at her table.
The Roman Church was of course incensed by her favour and mercy to the protestants. Her Son in law, the Duke of guise threatened that if she did not leave, that he would send his army to destroy the castle and all the preachers within it. When the Army general sent by the Duke of Guise to carry out his threat, accompanied by six company of soldiers, made the ultimatum to leave or else. This frail, prematurely aged woman, replied: "Malacorn, consider well what you do, for no man in the kingdom has a right to command me but the King. If you advance, I will put myself into the breach, and see whether you will have the audacity to kill a King's daughter, whose death, heaven and earth will avenge on you, and your seed even to the children of the cradle."

The General and his six company of soldiers, faced by this frail, woman, played the coward, and stepped down. God was with her. Another great heroine of the REformation.  Calvin's last three French letters by the way, were addressed to this woman.

(BORN 1479; DIED 1555.)

AMONG the victims immolated in Spain, in the Netherlands, and elsewhere, by the fanaticism of Charles the Fifth and his subordinates, there was one, the most illustrious of all, whose history had been long hidden by a mysterious veil. This was his mother, Queen Joanna, the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella. The veil has been partly lifted in our days by the discovery of some documents in the archives of Simancas. Although the information is not yet complete, and perhaps may never be so, it is nevertheless possible now to get some glimpses of the mysterious drama which darkened the life of this unfortunate princess. Few histories are more astonishing than the history of this woman, whom we see by some tragic destiny connected with three executioners — her father, her husband, and her son. These three men, king Ferdinand, the archduke Philip, and the emperor Charles the Fifth, whom she never ceased to love, and whom God had given her for protectors, deprived her of her kingdoms, cast her into prison, and had the strappado inflicted on her.’ f193a To complete their infamy, they circulated a report that she was mad. She displayed remarkable intelligence, and in this respect she would have taken high rank among princes, far above her father and her husband, if not above her son. The latter derived from her, certainly not from his father, his great abilities. Some celebrated physicians having been summoned by the Comuneros to inquire whether the alleged madness existed, and having interrogated the officers and servants who were about her, cardinal — afterwards Pope — Adrian, one of her gaolers, gave the emperor an account of the inquiry in these words: ‘Almost all the officers and servants of the queen assert that she has been oppressed and forcibly detained in this castle for fourteen years, under pretense of madness, while in fact she has always been as sound in mind and as rational as at the time of her marriage.’ f194 The desire to possess themselves of the supreme power incited these three unworthy princes to deprive Joanna and to keep her in shameful captivity.

It was to her, and not to her father Ferdinand, that the kingdom of Castile belonged after the death of Isabella. It was to her, and not to her husband Philip, nor afterwards to her son Charles, that the Spains, Naples, Sicily, and other dominions belonged. She was deprived of all by these traitorous princes, and received in exchange a narrow prison.

Joanna, the daughter of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile, was born in 1479, and was brought up in Spain under the care of her mother.

Although it was not in those days the custom of the court, as it was in the time of Philip II, to attend the auto-de-fe, the whipping and the torture of heretics, these exploits of fanaticism done to the honor of Jesus Christ and his holy mother were nevertheless at this epoch the favorite subject of conversation of that devout court. The prison, the whip, the real and the stake, were the commonplaces of their intercourse. The compassionate heart, the sound understanding, and all the good instincts of the young girl rebelled against these excesses of the Roman faith and it was soon discovered that there was in her mind an opposition to the favorite notions of her mother, and a deep feeling against these punishments. It was a great grief to Isabella to see her own daughter wantonly ruining herself; for was it not her eyes ruin to doubt of the holiness of the proceedings of the Inquisition? She, therefore attempted to stifle the first germs of disobedience, She did not shrink from extreme measures to bring Joanna to a better mind. The marquis of Denia, chief gaoler of the unhappy prisoner, wrote to Charles the Fifth, on January 26, 1522, as follows: ‘If your Majesty would employ torture against her, it would be in many respects rendering service to God and at the same time doing a good work towards the queen herself. This course is necessary with persons of her disposition; and the queen, your grandmother punished and treated in this way her daughter the queen, our sovereign lady.’

When Joanna had attained the age of seventeen her father and mother began to think about a marriage alliance for her; and it is easy to understand that she was eager to accept the hand of the archduke of Burgundy, one of the handsomest knights of his age. The prince was to conduct her to the Netherlands, of which he had been sovereign since 1482, and thus he would withdraw her from the teaching of her mother.

Joanna’s readiness was very natural under the circumstances.

Soon after her arrival in the Netherlands it was observed that feelings to which the cruelty of the Inquisition had given birth in her noble heart were developing themselves — indignation against the persecutors, and love for the persecuted. It is known that in these parts were to be found some of the Vaudois, the Lollards, and the Brethren of the Common Life, all alike inspired with a true religious spirit. The fresh information which Joanna now received strengthened her previous impressions of hostility to Roman superstition. The Catholic Isabella, alarmed at the reports which reached her, sent to Brussels the sub-prior of Santa Cruz, Thomas de Matienzo, to see what the facts were, and to arrest the evil. The princess, who tenderly loved her mother, was cast down on hearing of her displeasure, and tears started to her eyes. But her resolution did not give way. The sub-prior took all possible pains to draw from Joanna some answer to the questions which Isabella had charged him to ask. He was very coldly received; and on Assumption Day, when two of the confessors of the princess presented themselves for the purpose of receiving her confession, she declined their services in the very presence of her mother’s envoy. Her former tutor, Friar Andrew, who felt much anxiety for the soul of his pupil, entreated he to dismiss certain Parisian theologians, who seem to have been more enlightened than the majority of the priests, but whom Friar Andrew called drunkards. At the same time he begged the princess to supply their place by taking for her confessor a good Spanish monk. But all his entreaties were fruitless. Nothing could overcome the repugnance which she felt towards the Roman religion. On several occasions she refused its rites, but she did not advance nor take any active steps. Her strength was passive only.

On February 24, 1500, Joanna gave birth to a son, who was to become the emperor Charles the Fifth. Conspicuous amongst the magnificent presents offered to the young prince was the gift of the ecclesiastics of Flanders, who laid before him the New Testament, splendidly bound, and bearing the inscription in letters of gold — Search the Scriptures.

Isabella was deeply distressed to see her daughter thus drifting away from Spanish orthodoxy. It was not a complete rebellion; Joanna did not openly profess all the doctrines called in Spain heretical. But the queen had ordered hundreds of her subjects to be burnt for slighter opposition than that of the princess. Would Isabella’s devotion to the Virgin go so far as to sacrifice to it her daughter? Even had she desired it, it would not have been easy; for Joanna as the wife of a foreign prince, was emancipated from her mother’s control. Besides, it must well be believed that Isabella would not have committed such a crime. Still, the question arises, would she allow a heretic to ascend the throne of Castile?

Would she expose the Inquisition, an institution so dear to her, to the risk of being suppressed by the princess who was to succeed her? Never. Her whole being revoked against such a thought. The priestly party rejoiced to see these scruples of the queen, and endeavored to increase them. King Ferdinand himself, Joanna’s father, but not a tender-hearted father, felt that it was for his own interest to embitter more and more the feeling of her mother.

As early as 1502 Isabella’s plan was formed. She would keep the heretic Joanna from the throne which belonged to her after her own death. On the meeting of the Cortes, at Toledo, in 1502, and at Madrid and Alcala de Henares, in 1503, the queen caused to be laid before them a project of law by virtue of which the government of Castile should belong after her death to Ferdinand, in case of Joanna’s absence, or of her unwillingness or inability personally to exercise the rights which belonged to her. This resolution was voted by the Cortes, and was inserted by Isabella in her will, in which she set forth the conditions which she had at first laid down.

The pope confirmed the arrangement. Thus was Joanna to be set aside from succession to the throne which belonged to her on account of her opposition to the Inquisition and to other Roman practices. But Isabella took care not to state this, because she perceived that such an avowal would be dangerous. The priesthood and the holy office were almost universally detested, and, therefore, it, was necessary to avoid asserting that they were the cause of the exclusion of Joanna, for this would have rallied to her cause the majority of the nation. Some pretext must, however, be found. It should be reported that she was mad. This is nothing but the truth. thought the priests. Is it possible that anyone not mad would reject Rome and her decrees, and put in their place some other senseless doctrines?

In 1504 Isabella died. Ferdinand publicly announced to the people, assembled in front of the palace of Medina del Campo, that although the crown belonged to his daughter he should continue to govern during his lifetime. Joanna and Philip, her husband, were still in the Netherlands. It appeared that Joanna bore with meekness this robbery of the crown by her father; but it was otherwise with her husband. Philip energetically protested against this act of spoliation. ‘Ferdinand,’ he said, ‘has put into circulation a false report of the madness of his daughter and other absurdities of the like kind solely with a view to furnish himself with a pretext for seizing her crown.’ It has generally been stated that it was Philip’s mother who had caused the madness of his widow. But this report, it is evident, was already in circulation at a time when she had, without contradiction, the full possession of her reason. We have seen from what source the report came, and the interest which her father had in causing it to be believed.

In 1506 Philip, accompanied by Joanna, arrived in Spain for the purpose of assuming himself the power which his father-in-law had usurped. The majority of the people soon declared themselves on the side of Joanna; and Ferdinand, in a fit of anger was on the point of encountering his son-in-law with capa y spada, intending to plunge his sword into his bosom. But he observed ere long that a party was forming, and was becoming more and more numerous, at the head of which was the constable of Castile, whose object was to set aside both Philip and Ferdinand, and to place the legitimate queen on the throne. Ferdinand was perplexed, finding that he had two rivals, his son-in-law and his daughter. It was clear to him that Joanna, as Infanta and lawful heiress, would easily win all the hearts of the people, and that Philip, as a foreigner and usurper, would find it hard to gain acceptance. He resolved, therefore, to unite with Philip against his own daughter. He gave him an appointment to meet him at Villafafila, on June 26 (1506). The king determined to assume an appearance of amiability. He took with him only a small number of attendants, dressed himself plainly, mounted an ass, and thus arrived in the presence of his son-in-law with the air of a gallant country gentleman, an amiable smile upon his lips, and saying that he came ‘with love in his heart and peace in his hands.’ Philip received him attended by a considerable number of grandees of the Netherlands and of Spain, besides a large body of men-at- arms. Philip himself, who was surnamed the Handsome, was in the pride of his youth and strength. Ferdinand having dismounted from his ass and saluted his son-in-law, begged him to follow him alone into the church. All the members of their suite were forbidden to accompany the two princes, and guards were stationed at the entrance to prevent anyone from penetrating into the church. There, at the foot of the altar, these two traitorous men were about to conspire to ruin, the spoliation, and we might saw the death of their innocent victim, daughter of one of them and wife of the other. The interview began. The sentinels were able occasionally to catch glimpses of the two princes, and even to hear their voices, but they could not understand what they said. Ferdinand spoke much and with animation; Philip made only short answers and at times seemed to be embarrassed. The father-in-law pointed out to his son-in-law that Joanna was on the point of being placed on the throne by the people, and that both of them would thus be deprived of it; that they ought to exclude her, and that they would assign as their motive that she was incapacitated for reigning by reason of ‘here malady,’ which propriety did not permit them to name. It is evident that the reference was to the alleged madness. Whether Philip, who lived with Joanna, and knew her real state, had also protested against this false accusation, gave way at once, we cannot tell. However this may be, Ferdinand, who for a long time had not seen his daughter, succeeded in persuading his son-in-law to adopt this pretext. It likewise appears that there was already some talk about imprisoning the queen. While Ferdinand thus sacrificed his daughter, he felt no scruple about deceiving his son-in-law. An agreement was concluded between the two conspirators that the government of Castile should belong to Philip; and in the instrument signed the same day it was alleged that Joanna refused to accept it herself. Meanwhile the courtiers were awaiting the two princes; and the guards having reported the visible animation and eloquence of the father-in-law, it was expected that he would come away triumphant. Great, therefore, was the astonishment when it became known that he had yielded everything to his son-in-law.

Thus the story of the madness of Joanna, first invented in the interest of Rome, was confirmed by her father, by her husband, and afterwards by her son Charles the Fifth, in their own interest, and with a view to despoil her of the crown of Spain, of Naples, Sicily, and her other dominions.

But what is to be thought of Ferdinand’s concession? It was a mere piece of acting. His ass, his modest suite, his plain unarmed arrival, had been nothing but a comedy, the object of which was to put him in a position to allege that he had fallen into the hands of his son-in-law, and that the latter had compelled him to sign the agreement. He immediately prepared a secret protest, in which he declared that Joanna was kept prisoner by Philip on false pretenses, and that he considered it his duty to deliver her and to place her on the throne. He then set out for Naples, delegating as his representative with Philip his well-beloved Master Louis Ferrer, who enjoyed his entire confidence, desiring him to look after his interests. He had hardly set out when, after an illness of three or four days, Philip died.

The current rumor was that he had been poisoned. Some persons declared that they knew he had received a dose of poison in his food (bocado.) But the scandal of a trial was dreaded, and the matter was hushed up. The guilty Ferdinand remained master of the situation. Joanna had been placed in confinement by her husband immediately after the interview of Villafafila, After the death of Philip, Ferrer took possession of her. Several princes, particularly Henry VII of England, aspired to the hand of this widow, heiress of several kingdoms; but Ferdinand hastened to write in all directions that to ‘his great vexation’ his daughter could not possibly think of a second marriage. This gradually gave wider currency to the fable of her madness.

The queen was then at Burgos, and it was determined to remove her thence to Tordesillas, where they intended to keep her in confinement. Philip had died at Burgos, and his body was to be transferred to Granada, to be there interred in the sepulchre of the kings. This involved a journey from the north to the middle of Spain, and Tordesillas lay on the road. The scheme was to have the queen set out at the same time as the body of her husband.

One and the same escort would thus serve for both. It has been supposed that there might be financial reasons for this arrangement. In our days, it has been said, no one would ever think of such economy. But at that time the want of money was incessantly obtruding itself, and people might be well pleased to save a thousand scudos. This conjecture is admissible, but there were other reasons. The journey was made slowly. On two or three occasions the queen was removed from one place to another by night. But it is of little moment whether the journey from Burgos to Tordesillas was made by night or by day. In any case it was a strange spectacle, the grand funeral car, with its dismal but splendid accompaniments, and after these the carriages of the captive queen, about whom the most extraordinary reports were already in circulation. It been stated that the death of Philip had cost Joanna the loss of her reason; it has been said that had so much affection for her husband that she to have his body always near her, as if it were still living; that she was jealous even of her husband, and would not allow her women approach his corpse? f198a It was rumored at the time that the queen, watching for the moment of his return to life, refused to be separated from the lifeless; and this very journey was referred to as an proof of her madness. But these allegations are belied by facts. As the tomb at Granada as not yet ready, the body of Philip remained for years in the convent of St. Clara at Tordesillas and the queen did not once go to see it nor did she even express a wish to do so.

She used to of Philip as any faithful wife would speak of her deceased husband. Her excessive tenderness for Philip, who had behaved infamously towards her, her resolution never to be separated from his corpse — these are fables of modern history, invented by those were determined to deprive her of her rights to thrust themselves into her place.

Joanna arrived at Tordesillas under the guardianship of Ferrer, the man who, it was believed, had poisoned her husband. The palace was a plain house, situated in a barren country; the climate was scorching in summer and very severe in winter. Joanna was confined here in a narrow chamber, without windows, and lighted only by a candle; she was not allowed to walk, even for a few minutes, in a corridor which looked out upon the river. She was thus refused a liberty accorded even to murderers. She was there, without money, attended by two female keepers, and unable to communicate with the outer world.

The mother of Charles V continued to show in the prison of Tordesillas her dislike to the Roman ceremonies. She refused to hear mass; and the main business of her keepers was to get her to attend it. The cruel marquis of Denia, count of Lerma, who succeeded Ferrer, endeavored to compel the queer to practices which she abhorred. ‘There is not a day passes,’ he wrote, ‘on which we are not taken up with the affair of the mass.’ f198b At length the queen consented to attend mass, at the end of the corridor either from fear of the scourge, the pain of which she knew, or perhaps in order not to sunder herself from the religion of Spain, of which she constantly hoped to be acknowledged as queen. But when they brought her the pax, the paten which the priest offers to great persons to kiss, she refused it, and commanded it to be presented to the Infanta her daughter, whom they had not yet taken away from her.

At Christmas 1521 matins were being sung in the chapel which had been fitted up at the end of the corridor. The Infanta alone was present.

Suddenly Joanna appeared, wretchedly attired for a queen. She did not attend the mass herself, and even wished to prevent her daughter from attending it. She interrupted the service, ordered with a voice that reechoed from the walls that the altar should be taken away and everything else that was used in the religious ceremonies, and then laying hold of her daughter she dragged her away from the place. Nothing could at this time bend her; she resolutely refused to attend mass or any other Catholic services. In vain did the marquis of Denia entreat her to conform to the Roman practices; she would not hear of such a thing. ‘In truth,’ wrote the marquis to Charles V, ‘if your majesty would apply the torture (premia), it would be doing service to God and to her highness.’ f199 The mother of Charles V was plunged into the deepest melancholy by the treatment to which she was subjected. Her days were a constant succession of sorrows. Her passage through life was from one suffering to another. All her desire was to get out of that horrible prison; and in striving to attain this object she displayed much good sense, earnestness, and perseverance. She begged the marquis of Denia to allow her to quit Tordesillas, at least for a time. She wished to go to Valladolid. She alleged as a reason the bad air she breathed and the acute sufferings it caused her.

Her health required a change of air, and she must at least undertake a journey. Her deep feeling moved her barbarous gaoler himself. For a moment pity touched that heart of stone. ‘Her language is so touching,’ wrote Denia to the emperor, ‘that it becomes difficult for the marchioness and myself to withstand her appeals. It is impossible for me to let anyone go near her, for not a man in the world could resist her persuasion. Her complaints awaken in me deep compassion, and her utterances might move stones.’ This is not how Denia would have written to Charles if he had been speaking of a mad woman. Moreover he requested him to destroy his letters. At times she remained silent; and we know that the grief which does not utter itself is only the more fatal to the sufferer. At other times her distress broke forth. One day (April 1525) she contrived to find access to the corridor and filled it with her sighs and moanings, shedding the while floods of tears. Denia gave orders immediately that she should be taken into her narrow chamber, so that she might not be heard. At the same time he wrote to Charles V: ‘I have always thought that in her highness’s state of indisposition, nothing would do her more good than the rack; and after this that some good and loyal servant of your majesty should speak to her. It is necessary to see whether she will not make any progress in the things which your majesty desires.’ By these things he means confession, the mass, and other Roman rites.

In 1530, despairing of seeing the queen confess, ‘I cannot believe,’ he wrote, ‘that so fortunate a thing can happen. However I will use all needful endeavors.’

The officers of Charles V, and the monks who had incessantly labored for the conversion of Joanna to Romanism, multiplied their efforts as her death approached. She withstood their pressing entreaties to receive the rites, the symbols of the papacy, and people heard the cries which she uttered while they put her to torture. She would have neither confession nor extreme unction.

Had Joanna become acquainted with the Reformation and the writings of the Reformers, and with the doctrines which they professed? This has been doubted; but it seems improbable that she should have been ignorant of them. Joanna was a Lutheran, says one of the learned writers who have devoted most attention to this subject. This statement is perhaps too definite. But the evangelical doctrines were penetrating everywhere; and they must have reached the prison of Joanna. It has been asserted that Luther at this time had more numerous adherents in Spain than in Germany itself. The keepers of the prison perhaps prevented evangelical works from reaching the queen. There is, however, a light which no hand of man can intercept. The theologian de Soto celebrated for his acquirements, as well as for his piety, came to her on the morning of her death; and he appears to have thought her a Christian, but not a Roman Catholic. He said: ‘Blessed be the Lord, her highness told me things which have consoled me.’ Here is the Christian. He adds: ‘Nevertheless, she is not disposed to the sacrament of the Eucharist.’ Here is the enlightened woman who rejects the rites of Rome. ‘She committed her soul to God,’ said the princess Joanna, granddaughter of the queen, ‘and gave thanks to Him that at length He delivered her from all her sorrows.’ Her last words were: ‘Jesus Christ crucified, be with me .’ She breathed her last on April 12, 1555, between five and six o’clock in the morning.

Thus died the mother of Charles V at the age of seventy-six years. She had been at various times kept in prison by her husband, Philip of Austria; for ten years by her father, Ferdinand the Catholic; and for thirty-nine years by her son, the emperor Charles V. She is a unique example of the greatest misfortunes, and her dark destiny surpasses all the stories of ancient times. The heiress of so many famous kingdoms, treated as the most wretched of women, was in her last year strictly confined in her dungeon, and lay in the midst of filth which was never removed. Covered as she was with tumors, in anguish and solitude, can we wonder that strange and terrifying images were sometimes produced in her brain by her isolation, melancholy, and fear? But while she was the victim of the gloomiest fanaticism ever met with in the world, she was consoled in the midst of all these horrors, as her latest words prove, by her God and Father in heaven.

The time has come for posterity to render to her memory the compassion and the honor which are her due.

1 Peter 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

I will close this blog post with a prayer of George Wishart, whose surely was as his name suggests, wise of heart.

‘O Thou Savior of the World, have mercy upon me! Father of
Heaven, I commend my spirit into Thy holy hands.’ Then he
turned to the people and said: ‘I beseech you, Christian Brethren
and Sisters, be not offended at the Word of God, for the affliction
and torments which ye see prepared for me. But I exhort you, love
the Word of God and suffer patiently, and with a comfortable
heart, for the Word’s sake, which is your undoubted salvation and
everlasting comfort. Moreover, I pray you, show my brethren and
sisters, which have heard me oft, that they cease not to learn the
Word of God which I taught unto them, for no persecutions in this
world, which lasteth not. Show them that my doctrine was no
wives’ fables, after the constitutions made by men. If I had taught
men’s doctrine, I had gotten greater thanks by men. But for the
true Evangel, which was given to me by the Grace of God, I suffer
this day by men, not sorrowfully, but with a glad heart and mind.
For this cause I was sent, that I should suffer this fire for Christ’s
sake. Consider and behold my visage. Ye shall not see me change
my color! This grim fire I fear not: and so I pray you to do, if any
persecution come unto you for the Word’s sake; and not to fear
them that slay the body, and afterward have no power to slay the
soul. Some have said I taught that the soul of man should sleep
until the Last Day; but I know surely that my soul shall sup with
my Savior this night, ere it be six hours, for whom I suffer this.’

Its lamentable when one things of the great history we have here; how the martyrs ashes spread the truth abroad, and carried the torch and candle for reform. But we know that God will deliver his church, in his own season; that even now he could be raising  up men who have the hearts of those fearless nobles of long ago, who was willing to foresake all for Christ's cause and seal it with their blood, and that in the meanwhiole, the very scattered remanant remains, and  knows that as lamentable as it maybe,  We have a God whose in complete control. I do believe it will be by judgement that the church is delivered, because we seem to have made comfort and the everything for easy andn quickness the idol of our age, and in doing so, we have put ourselves too comfortable too often, to want to be a bit discomfitted in continuing the work of bringing the Kingdom in.  My only wonder, is the patience and long-suffeirng that God has  showed in bearing with us this long but, one day, as the book of Ezekiel  keeps saying about the Judgments that have come upon the land.  They will know, that I am God. Because God is glorified as much by his judgments when he shows his strong arm, as he is by his mercy.

Great was the Scarcity of preachers about England at this time, in the large and populous town of Northampton there was not one, nor had been for a Considerable time, though the people applied to the Bishop of the diocess by most humble application for the bread of life. In the County of Cornwall there were one hundred and forty clergymen, not one of which was  capable of preaching a sermon, and most of them were pluralists and non-residents, Even the city of London was in a lamentable case, as appears by their petition  to the parliament which met the winter In which are these words:
"-May it please you therefore for the tender mercies of God, to understand the woeful estate of many thousands of souls dwelling in deep darkness, and
in the Shadow of death, in this famous and populous city of London: a place, in respect of others, accounted as the Morning star, or rather as the
Sun in its brightness, because of the Gospel, supposed to shine gloriously and abundantly in The same; but being near looked into, will be found Sorely
eclipsed and darkened through the  dim cloud of unlearned ministers, whereof there be no small number. There are in this city a great number of-churches, but, the one half of them  at least are utterly unfurnished of preaching ministers, and are pestered with candlesticks net of gold, but of
clay, unworthy to have the  Lord's light Set in them, with . watchmen that have no eyes, nd Clouds that have no water ;–        in the other half, partly by  Means of non-residents, which are very many ; partly through the poverty of many meanly qualified there is scarcely the tenth man
that makes conscience to wait  upon his charge, Whereby the ord's Sabbath is often times wholly neglected, and for the most part miserably mangled;
ignorance Increaseth, and wickedness comes upon us like an armed man-As sheep therefore going astray I we humbly  on our knees beseech this          honourable assembly, in the   bowels and blood of Jesus  Christ, to become humble suitors to her Majesty, that we may have guides ; as hungry men
bound to abide by our empty  rackstaves, we do beg of you to be means, That the bread of life may be brought home  to us ; that the sower may come
into the fallow ground ; that the pipes of water may be brought nto our assemblies ; That there may be food and Refreshing for us, our poor wives, and forton children: So shall the Lord have his due honour; you shall discharge good duty to her majesty; many languishing Souls shall be comforted
atheism and heresy banished; her majesty have more faithful subjects ;  and you move hearty prayers for your prosperity in this life, and full happiness in the life to come through Jesus Christ, our alone Saviour Amen
—Daniel Neal, History of the Puritans, Volume One

'I began to remember how men who love to live obscurely and in the Shadow are brought forth to light, to the view and talking of the world; how men that love Soliloquies and Contemplations are brought upon debates and controversies, and generally how men are brought to act the things which they never dreamed of before…: the words of the prophet, Jeremiah come to my remembrance, "0 LORD, I Know that the way of man is not in himself; It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."

Very much in the manner of Calvin, he had intended a life of quiet retirement, studying in the quiet place of Leuchars. But God had other plans for this great man of God, just as Calvin's plans for himself of quiet retirment were also dashed. I don't know about you, but i had planned for my life anything other than it is. If anyone had toldl me even 15 years ago, I would come to the straits I have and live out the rest of my days, alone in such chronic ill-health I'd have busted a gut laughing. Yet, the best laid plans of mice and men. If you're life has gone completely other to your dreams or hopes or plans, just as mne has, then we can see this is a common theme throughout history with Christians God raised up for a particularl purpose. John Knox is another one, he had no plans to be a preacher, and tried to resist the call just as Calvin did when Farrel threatened him with a curse. But Henderson, Calvin, Knox and others, all lived out their lives, in total opposition to the way they had aspired to, yet all lived and died to the glory of God and were greatly used by him. The below is a quote from Marcus Loane's book, "Maker's of puritan history," describing the last days of Henderson, after he had been mightily used by God in the Covenanter wars of Scotland.

Henderson's health broke down in the midst of this*crises; it was the end result of the mental anxiety and severe fatigue which he had borne over the years. His health had been precarious ever since 1641 when he had sought release from his public duties; it had quickly become worse since 1645 when illness and melancholy had much reduced his strength. His great plan for uniform government of the church in the three kingdoms had failed, and the last and "hardest passage" in his life's work was to end in disappointment. These things preyed on his mind and increased his weakness.

On 7th August Ballie wrote from London to say that "Mr.. Henderson is dying most of heartbreak at Newcastle." The rapid progress of complex ailments forced him to give up the controversy with Charles, and he sailed from Newcastle to Leith. On 11 August he arrived in Edinburgh, and two days later, Ballie wrote to him in farewell: "His Spirit strengthen and comfort and encourage you to the end.. I rest in my hearty love and reverence toward you."

He had known that his work was done when he sailed for Scotland, but weariness and depression now passed away as clouds before the sun. He had returned as from exile, although it was to die, and he was cheered at the very sight of his home country. His friends found him very frail and reduced in strength, but he was full of joy at the prospect of a better landing and a brighter welcome on the shore of Heaven. "I am near the end of my race, hasting home," he told Sir. James Stewart, "and there was never a school-boy more desirous to have the play than I am to have leave of this world." John Livingstone paid him several visits, and found him in great peace of mind. It was 19th August, 1646 and he was no more than sixty three years old when he was seized with the last bout of fever. Sir. James Stewart and one other friend were standing at the foot of his bed when he opened his eyes and glanced upward: his eyes sparkled like diamonds as if he saw the Son of man at the right hand of God. It was with that shining look of wonder in his eyes that he died, mercifully taken from the evils at hand.

Puritan History Maker's Marcus Loane

As i have said before, in by-gone ages, when the life of faith for the majority was the whole of life and not just while sat in a church pew on Sunday morning, people met on the hills of Scotland, at risk of their lives, to hold their conventicles, which were highly illegal, but the risk of life and limb, or that of their dearest loves ones could not stop them gathering on the hill-sides of Scotland, to worship the God they loved, and gave their all too, in life and often in death as many were martyred. Nowadays, I have known several cases just personally, where going or attending the public assembly of the saints is burdensome and if a reasonable excuse can be found, even though it would not be reasonable in God's eyes, people will find their excuse to have a get out clause and be in irregular attendance.

In the sixth council of Trull of 680 whose work was completed in 692 at Constantinople to complete the disciplinary work started at the original doomed synod meeting of 680 they stated: "Whosoever was 3 days together from church, without urgent necessity was to be excommunicated." If that kind of discipline, which I'm sure sounds quite austere to some was in place today, the churches would have much fewer members because of the any old excuse to not attend that is so often rife among professing Christians. Now before this austerity is condemned, please note the words, "without urgent necessity" which of course the logical conclusion to that is providential hindrances, things beyond our control, which should make it a reasonable assertion for churches today.

Richard Baxter in his "Reformed Pastor" has a lot to say on the subject of church discipline or lack of it, and how it could be costing souls, as well as turning the world further away from having anything to do with us, or be willing to hear us, because we do not practice as we preach by church discipline being wanting.

I desire not to spur on any one to an unseasonable performance of this great duty. But will it never be a fit season? Would you forbear sermons and sacraments so many years on presence of unreasonableness? Will you have a better season for it when you are dead? How many are dead already, before they ever did anything in this important work, though they were long preparing for it! I know some have more discouragements and hindrances than others; but what discouragements and hindrances can excuse us from such a duty? Besides the reasons which we have already stated, let these few be seriously considered:

(1) How sad a sign do we make it to be in preaching to our people, to live in the willful and continued omission of any known duty! And shall we do so year after year, nay, all our days? If excuses will take off the danger of this sign, what man will not find them as well as you?

(2) We plainly manifest laziness and sloth, if not unfaithfulness in the work of Christ. I speak from experience. It was laziness that kept me so long from this duty, and pleaded hard against it. It is indeed a troublesome and painful work, and such as calls for some self–denial, because it will bring upon us the displeasure of the wicked. But dare we prefer our carnal ease and quietness, or the love and peace of wicked men, before our service to Christ our Master? Can slothful servants expect a good reward? Remember, brethren, that we of this county have thus promised before God, in the second article of our agreement: ‘We agree and resolve, by God’s help, that so far as God doth make known our duty to US, we will faithfully endeavour to discharge it, and will not desist through any fears or losses in our estates, or the frowns and displeasure of men, or any the like carnal inducements whatsoever.’ I pray you study this promise, and compare your performance with it. And do not think that you were ensnared by thus engaging; for God’s law hath laid an obligation on you to the very same duty, before your engagement did it. Here is nothing but what others are bound to, as well as you.

(3) The neglect of discipline hath a strong tendency to delude immortal souls, by making those think they are Christians that are not, while they are permitted to live with the character of such, and are not separated from the rest by God’s ordinance. Also, it may make the scandalous think their sin a tolerable thing, which is so tolerated by the pastors of the church.

(4) We corrupt Christianity itself in the eyes of the world, and do our part to make them believe that Christ is no more for holiness than Satan, or that the Christian religion exacteth holiness no more than the false religions of the world. For if the holy and unholy are all permitted to be sheep of the same fold, without any means being used to separate them, we defame the Redeemer, as if he were guilty of it, and as if this were the nature of his precepts.

(5) We keep up separation by permitting the worst to be uncensured in our churches, so that many honest Christians think they are obliged to withdraw from us. I have spoken with some members of the separated churches, who were moderate men, and have argued with them against separation. They have assured me that they were of the Presbyterian judgment, or had nothing to say against it, but they joined themselves to other churches from pure necessity, thinking that discipline, being an ordinance of Christ, must be used by all that can. Therefore, they durst no longer live without it when they might have it; and they could find no Presbyterian churches that executed discipline, as they wrote for it. And they told me that they separated only pro tempore, till the Presbyterians will use discipline, and then they will willingly return to them again. I confess I was sorry that such persons had any such occasion to withdraw from us. It is not keeping offenders from the sacrament that will excuse us from the further exercise of discipline, while they are members of our churches.

(6) We do much to bring the wrath of God upon ourselves and our congregations, and so to blast the fruit of our labours. If the angel of the church of Thyatira was reproved for suffering seducers in the church (Rev. 2:20), we may be reproved, on the same ground, for suffering open, scandalous, impenitent sinners.

And what are the hindrances that now keep the ministers of England from the execution of that discipline, for which they have so much contended? The great reason, as far as I can learn, is, ‘The difficulty of the work, and the trouble or suffering that we are like to incur by it. We cannot publicly reprehend one sinner, but he will storm at it, and bear us a deadly malice. We can prevail with very few to make a public profession of true repentance. If we proceed to excommunicate them, they will be raging mad against us. If we should deal as God requireth us, with all the obstinate sinners in the parish, there would be no living among them. We should be so hated of all, that, as our lives would be uncomfortable, so our labours would become unprofitable; for men would not hear us when they are possessed with a hatred of us. Therefore duty ceaseth to be duty to us, because the hurt that would follow would be greater than the good.’

Earlier in the same chapter, Baxter wrote:

All Christians value God’s ordinances, and think them not vain things; and, therefore, are unwilling to live without them. Discipline is not a needless thing to the Church: if you will not make a difference between the precious and the vile, by discipline, people will do it by separation. If you will keep many scores or hundreds in your churches that are notoriously ignorant and utterly destitute of religion, and never publicly (nor, perhaps, privately) reprove them, nor call them to repentance, nor cast them out, you need not marvel if some timorous souls should run out of your churches, as from a ruinous edifice, which they fear is ready to fall upon their heads. Consider, I pray you, if you should act in the same manner with them as to the sacrament as you do as to discipline, and should only show them the bread and wine, and never let them taste of these memorials of their Redeemer’s love. Could you expect that the name of a sacrament would satisfy them, or that they would like your communion? Why should you then think that they will be satisfied with the empty sound of the word church–government?

Sadly the lack of this God-given institution and one of the marks of a true church, is in part most likely why we have many ignorant people who have been in church membership and sat in the pews a very long time; a church that has as much of a foot in the world or perhaps more firmly rooted in the world, than it does in heaven, an unsanctified church, and part of the decay and lamentable state of the church today, can in my honest opinion be traced back directly to large parts of the church, neglecting and doing away with this vital part of the life and practice of the true church of Christ. The faithful ministers of Christ, are still administering church discipline as it was given to by God, but the ones that do not, should return to the ways of old and start to implement it.

Almighty, eternal God, what a contemptible thing this world is! Yet how it causes men to gape and stare at it! How small and slight is the trust of men in God. How frail and sensitive is the flesh of men, and the devil so powerful and active through his apostles and the ‘wise’ of the world! How soon men become disheartened and hurry on, running the common cause, the broad way to hell, where the godless belong! Their gazes fixed on what is splendid and powerful, great, and mighty! If I too were to turn my eyes to such things, I would be undone! The verdict would already have been passed against me, and the bell that is to toll my doom would already have been cast.

O God, O God, O Thou my God, my God, help me against the reason and wisdom of all the world! Do this! Thou must do it, Thou alone, for this cause is not mine, but Thine! For myself, I have no business here with these great lords of the world! Indeed, I too desire to enjoy days of peace and quiet and to be undisturbed. But Thine, O Lord, is this cause, and it is righteous and of eternal importance! Stand by me, Thou faithful eternal God. I rely on no man! Futile and vain is all; lame and halting all that is carnal and smacks of the flesh. God, O God, dost Thou not hear me, my God? Art Thou dead? Nay, Thou canst not die! Thou art merely hiding Thyself. Hast Thou chosen me for this task? I ask Thee!

I am sure Thou hast. Were so, let it be, then. Thy will be done. For never in my life did I intend to oppose such great lords. Never had I resolved to do this! O God, stand by me in the Name of Thy dear Son, Jesus Christ, Who shall be my protector and defender, yea, my mighty fortress, through the might and the strengthening of Thy Holy Spirit. Lord, where tarriest Thou? O Thou my God, where art Thou? Come, O come! I am ready to lay down my life for this cause, meek as a lamb, for the cause is righteous and it is Thine. I will not separate myself from Thee forever. Be that decision made, in Thy Name!

The world must leave my conscience unconquered even though it were full of devils and though my body, the work and creation of Thy hands, should be utterly ruined! But Thy Word and Spirit are a good compensation to me, and after all, only the body is concerned. The soul is Thine, and belongs to Thee, and willingly it will remain eternally. Amen. God help me. Amen.

Returning next day, Luther made a bold speech, and owned his writings which were called heretical, and this bold speech was repeated in Latin for Charles V, by Luther. But they still asked of him to recant. And finally, after such eloquence as a few minutes previously, to Eck and then in Latin to Charles V the holy roman emperor he put it simply, and plainly, so that no one could doubt that he meant what he said.

He was demaned of to answer candidly and without horns, did he repudiate the errors which his books contained. And Luther's famous reply, which gives me goosebumps, was as below.

Since your Majesty and your Lordship's desire a simple replyI will answer, without horns and without teeth. Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason, I do not accept the authority of the Popes and counsils for they have frequently erred and contradicted themselves. My conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot, I will not, recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me, Amen.

That is the great heritage of all Reformed Christians; let us also vow in word and by deed, to not squander our heritage and that our consciences be bound by the Word of God, and no other will ever do. Let us not drop the baton that Luther handed down to us, but let us run with it!

Happy Reformation Day!

But I loved this  included in John Foxes Acts and monumuments, its referred to as a fable, but I'm not sure how to interpret that, originally written I believe by Clement.

Hear a fable, and yet not a fable, but a true report which was told
us of John the apostle, and has been ever since kept in our
remembrance. After the death of the tyrant, when John was
returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos, he was requested to
resort to the places bordering near unto him, partly to constitute
bishops, partly to dispose the causes and matters of the church,
partly to ordain to the clerical office such as the Holy Ghost
should elect. Whereupon, when he was come to a certain city not
far off, (the name of which also some do mention) f927 and had
comforted the brethren as usual, he beheld a young man robust in
body, and of a beautiful countenance, and of a fervent mind, when,
looking earnestly at the newly-appointed bishop: “I most solemnly
commend this man (saith he) to thee, in presence here of Christ and
of the church.”
When the bishop had received of him this charge, and had promised
his faithful diligence therein, again the second time John spake unto
him, and charged him with like manner and contestation as before.
This done, John returned again to Ephesus. The bishop, receiving
the young man commended and committed to his charge, brought
him home, kept him, and nourished him, and at length also did
illuminate, that is, baptized him; and after that, he gradually relaxed
his care and oversight of him, trusting that he had given him the
best safeguard possible in putting the Lord’s seal upon him. The
young man thus having his liberty more, it chanced that certain of
his old companions and acquaintances, being idle, dissolute, and
hardened in wickedness, did join in company with him, who first
invited him to sumptuous and riotous banquets; then enticed him
to go forth with them in the night to rob and steal; after that he was
allured by them unto greater mischief and wickedness. Wherein, by
custom of time, and by little and little, he becoming more expert,
and being of a good wit, and a stout courage, like unto a wild or
unbroken horse, leaving the right way and running at large without
bridle, was carried headlong to the profundity of all misorder and
outrage. And thus, being past all hope of grace, utterly forgetting
and rejecting the wholesome doctrine of salvation which he had
learned before, he began to set his mind upon no small matters.
And forasmuch as he was entered so far in the way of perdition, he
cared not how much further he proceeded in the same. And so,
associating unto him a band of companions and fellow thieves, he
took upon himself to be as head and captain among them, in
committing all kind of murder and felony.
In the mean time it chanced that of necessity John was sent for to
those quarters again, and came. The causes being decided and his
business ended for the which he came, by the way meeting with the
bishop afore specified, he requireth of him the pledge, which, in the
presence of Christ and of the congregation then present, he left in
his hands to keep. The bishop, something amazed at the words of
John, supposing he had meant them of some money committed to
his custody, which he had not received (and yet durst not mistrust
John, nor contrary his words), could not tell what to answer. Then
John, perceiving his perplexity, and uttering his meaning more
plainly: “The young man,” saith he, “and the soul of our brother
committed to your custody, I do require.” Then the bishop, with a
loud voice sorrowing and weeping, said, “He is dead.” To whom
John said, “How, and by what death?” The other said, “He is dead
to God, for he became an evil and abandoned man, and at length a
robber. And now he doth frequent the mountain instead of the
church, with a company of villains and thieves, like unto himself.”
Here the apostle rent his garments, and, with a great lamentation,
said, “A fine keeper of his brother’s soul I left here! get me a horse,
and let me have a guide with me:” which being done, his horse and
man procured, he hasted from the church as much as he could, and
coming to the place, was taken of thieves that lay on the watch.
But he, neither flying nor refusing, said, “I came hither for the
purpose: lead me,” said he, “to your captain.” So he being brought,
the captain all armed fiercely began to look upon him; and eftsoons
coming to the knowledge of him, was stricken with confusion and
shame, and began to fly. But the old man followed him as much as
he might, forgetting his age, and crying, “My son, why dost thou
fly from thy father? an armed man from one naked, a young man
from an old man? Have pity on me, my son, and fear not, for there
is yet hope of salvation. I will make answer for thee unto Christ; I
will die for thee, if need be; as Christ hath died for us, I will give
my life for thee; believe me, Christ hath sent me.” He, hearing these
things, first, as in a maze, stood still, and therewith his courage was
abated. After that he had cast down his weapons, by and by he
trembled, yea, and wept bitterly; and, coming to the old man,
embraced him, and spake unto him with weeping (as well as he
could), being even then baptized afresh with tears, only his right
hand being hid and covered. Then the apostle, after that he had
promised and firmly ascertained him that he should obtain
remission of our Savior, and also prayed, falling down upon his
knees, and kissing his murderous right hand (which for shame he
durst not show before) as now purged through repentance, he
brought him back to the church. And when he had prayed for him
with continual prayer and daily fastings, and had comforted and
confirmed his mind with many sentences, he left him not (as the
author reporteth) before he had restored him to the church again;
and made him a great example of sincere penitence and proof of
regeneration, and a trophy of the future  resurrection.
—John Foxe, "Acts and Monuments" Volume 1

But what one doesn't hear of often at least, is that their were women, separate from the circle of Reformer's themselves who played pivotal roles in the furtherance and continuance of the Protestant Reformation.

Calvin carried on quite voluminous correspondence with many French noble-women. Remnants of his letters to at least 18 French noble-women are still in existence, but it is not out of place to expect there were more besides.

One of them was with the King of France's Sister, Margeurite Queen of Navarre. Her brother the King was a staunch papist and persecutor of the protestants, and yet his sister, while supporting and defending the Refomation and Reformers, remained his confidante and counsellor to his dying day.
The famous speech that Nicholas Cop gave, that is believed to have been penned by John Calvin was in defense of of a play of Margeurite's which had been delivered at the university that had strong Protestant sympathies call the Mirror of a sinful soul. And it was after this speech delivered by Cop, and Calvin's name being associated with it, that Calvin was forced to flee, because the work of Margeurite's had been condemned by the Sorbonne.

Margeurite would perhaps be best described as a Biblical humanist. All the noble-women that Calvin carried on lengthy correspondence with, were all learned women and well-capable of theological debate. He didn't see them as inferior because they were women, as is often reported of the Reformers.

Erasmus, which, whatever one's personal opinion of him and the way he ended his days, one cannot ever say anything other but that he had a brilliant mind. Erasmus himself said this of Queen Margeurite:

For a long time I've observed all the many excellent gifts that God bestowed upon you. Prudence worthy of a philosopher; chastity, moderation piety, amazing strength of soul and contempt for all the vanity of this world. Who could keep from admiring a great King's sister with such qualities so rare.

It was largely by letters that the Reformation spread, and Calvin's correspondence with the Queen of Navarre was no exception. All the women that Calvin wrote with, could take part in intense theological debate, could read the Bible, sing hymns and argue tirelessly with their superiors and mentors about the "new doctrines" which were sweeping in. Of course the doctrines were not new, but as old as the Bible itself, but it appeared that way to those of that era.

The Protestant Reformation gave women a new standing.They were valued and uplifted just as the men were. The doctrines of the Sanctity of marriage and the Priesthood of all believers gave rise in part to this.
Many of these women were married to staunch papists, and yet they raised godly children who took on the doctrines of the Reformers. They exerted far more influence in the home than their often poor husbands, most likely by their example of piety, where many of the husbands of the homes were debauched.

King Francis, of France, Margeurite's brother, and was the King who Calvin addressed his epistle dedicatory to in the Institutes of Christian religion, despite the differences of faith between his sister and himself loved his sister dearly, as she did him.
Margeurite and Anne Boelyn were close friends and it is said both were converted to the Protestant faith at the same time while attending the same meeting. They were also similar in temperament. King Henry VIII himself at one time had expressed interest in courting Margeurite and considering her as a future Queen.

Margeruite came to be known as the Mother of the French Reformation, for all her assistance to refugees and help to those who fought the cause. She used her wealth to assist and hide and save the lives of many refugees.
The Mirror of the sinful soul, which has first brought her to the attention of Calvin was translated into English by Anne Boelyn's 12 year old daughter. The future Queen Elizaebeth I of England.

When her brother, King Francis died, it is said the light went out of her life, and she took the loss hardest of all and went into deep mourning, barely speaking to a soul for 40 days and never going out in public. Given their differences, and how her brother had often come to her aid to defend her and had come under criticism for doing so, just the same as she had remained faithful to him, despite their differences, really seems to show how in some cases, blood really can be thicker than water or that where real familial love and affection exists, nothing will drive a wedge to divide and split it.
During her own final illness, the last few days of her life, she lost the ability to speak. After three days of not uttering a word, she suddenly said, "Jesus, Jesus, Jesus," and the great queen went to be with the Lord she had faithfully and not without danger served for most of her life.

Calvin was no less slandered in life, than he is in death, and you can see from the excerpt of this letter he wrote to the Queen of Navarre, even in disagreement,  just what high esteem he held her in:

CALVIN VINDICATES HIMSELF FROM THE CHARGE OF
HAVING INTENDED TO ATTACK HER IN HIS BOOK AGAINST
THE LIBERTINES.

FROM GENEVA, this 28th April 1545.
MADAME, — I have received a letter from a man of this town, written, as he said, by your command, by which I understand that you are very ill-pleased with me because of a certain book by me composed, the which I have intituled Against the Libertines. f484 I am sorry to have saddened you, except in so far as it was for your welfare; for such sadness, as saith St. Paul, is so profitable that we have no occasion to repent having caused it.
But I do not know, Madame, wherefore or how this book has been able to make you so angry. The man who has written to me alleges as the reason, that it is forasmuch as it is composed against you and your servants. So far as you are concerned, it has not been my intention to touch your honor, nor to lessen the reverence which all the faithful ought to bear you.
I mean in addition to the reverence which we all owe to you, because of the royal majesty in which our Lord has exalted you, the house whence you are descended, and all the excellence that is in you, as regards the world. For those who are acquainted with me are well aware, that I am neither so barbarous nor so inhuman, as to despise, nor to go about to bring into contempt the principalities, the worldly nobility, and what belongs to human policy. Besides, I know the gifts which our Lord has put on you, and how he has engaged you in his service, and has employed you for the advancement of his kingdom, which affords reason enough for
honoring you, and holding your honor in estimation. Likewise, Madame, I pray you do not allow yourself to be persuaded by those who excite you against me, seeking neither your advantage nor my damage, but rather to estrange you from that good-will and affection which you bear to the Church of God, and to discourage you from the service of our Lord Jesus, and of his members, which you have rendered to this hour. As regards your servants, I do not think that you value your household so highly as
to reckon it more precious than that of our Lord Jesus, of which one member is called a devil, yea, forsooth, a servant who had been seated at his Master’s table, and appointed to so honorable a condition as to be ambassador of the Son of God. But although I have not been so inconsiderate as to name your household, rather, indeed, concealing that those of whom I have to speak are any way attached to you, I have spoken in truth, and as before God. It remains for you to consider whether I have taken pleasure in casting reproach upon them, or whether I have been constrained by great and just occasion, yea, even of necessity, to tax them in this way. Now, Madame, if you have been well informed of the whole, I think so well of you, that not only you will excuse what I have
done, but you will reckon my simplicity worthy of praise.
I see a sect the most execrable and pernicious that ever was in the world. I see that it does much harm, and is like a fire kindled for the general desolation and destruction, or as a contagious disease to infect the whole earth, unless some remedy is applied. Since, then, our Lord has called me to that office, my conscience constrains me to resist it so far as it is possible for me. And, more than that, with strong and earnest entreaties, I am seriously importuned by the poor believers, who see with concern the Netherlands of the Emperor altogether corrupted, that as soon as possible, and without delay, I put my hand to the work. Nevertheless, even after
such requests, I have put off a whole year, to see whether the malady would be lulled asleep by silence. If any one should allege that, I could well, indeed, write against the wicked doctrine, letting the individuals alone, I have my more than reasonable excuse; it is that, considering what ruin Messieur Antony Pocquet has spread in the country of Artois and of Hainault, according to the relation of the brethren who have come hither expressly on that account, having heard the same repeated here; and considering that Quintin pretends no other object than to draw the poor simple souls to that more than brutal sect, and not so much by the report
of others as having heard with my ears, understanding that they are always very bitter in opposing the doctrine of holiness, to draw poor souls into perdition, to beget in the world a despising of God, judge, Madame, whether it would have been lawful for me to dissemble? A dog barks and stands at bay if he sees any one assault his master. I should be indeed remiss, if, seeing the truth of God thus attacked, I should remain dumb, without giving one note of warning, I am quite persuaded that it is not your mind, that in order to favor you I must betray the Evangel which God has committed to me. Wherefore I do beseech you, Madame, not to be offended, if, being constrained by the duty of my office, under penalty of incurring the offense of God, I have not spared your servants, without, however, addressing yourself.

It is sad to see the things that are out there today, which fit into our desire and quest for comfort and anything we gain to be had with the least effort possible. The 100 minute Bible would be a good example

An abridged version of Calvin's the institutes of the Christian Religion would be another good one:

It has 271 pages as opposed to one of the more popular unabridged versions on sale today of 2 hardback volumes of 1,600 odd of the John T. Mcneil's Ford Lewis Battle edition.

One can make a case, that if one is dealing with babes in Christ, the 271 page would be a good start for them, without overwhelming them. Or even if you are trying to get someone of false faiths or false religions to pick up as a first copy. But it doesn't stop there. Research shows and statistics prove, that the greatest majority of evangelical Protestant Christians today, including many among the Reformed Faith have not read Calvin's institutes in their entirety, and even more concerning is that this includes many reformed pastors.

Yet, if one had to make a list of the 10 most important books to ever be in the world, The Bible should take first place, and Calvin's institutes unabridged should also be on the short-list. Many people who claim to be Calvinist's know very little about what Calvin taught. So their claim is a vain one, one I think at times, has a lot to do with pride, because being a Calvinist is sometimes worn like a badge of honour, and a sense of grandiose. Yet these men and women who claim to be Calvinist's and do not know what Calvin taught, often betray and shame the Reformed faith–not intentionally–but through ignorance. Ignorance very often is a choice.

We all have to make choices every day. One of them being how we will spend our time, once the daily grind of occupational work, and family business is out of the way. Playing computer games, watching garbage on the TV that will not be spiritually helpful and could be quite harmful in the long run by what we are filling our senses with; Now I am not against recreation at all. I want to make that clear. Everyone needs time to wind down, and have some enjoyment, or leisure, but not to the detriment of one's own soul by indulging in it excessively. Despite popular opinion and folk-lore, the puritans were not against recreation, enjoyment, mirth, or dancing or merry making in general. Oliver Cromwell at his daughter's wedding is said to have danced till 3 am. But one thing the puritans were big on, is temperance. All things in moderation, and that the main business of all professing believers of faith should be that of eternity.

As Solomon wisely said. There is a time for everything. [Eccles 1]

When any one who has professed faith through their lives, comes to being on their death bed, you often hear of the things they regret about their lives. One never hears though, that they regretted the time they spent on eternal matters, or making their salvation sure. One often hears quite the reverse.- a regret that they wasted so much time.

I have not read the entirety of the Institutes just yet though I have the greater part, but I aim to soon rectify that, and say it to my shame. If you can say the same thing, then I exhort you to also set aside some time, and read it and study it. The institutes is not just a cold book of Theological doctrine; it has over 7000 references to Scripture in it, it is also a tool along side the Bible that will help us all grow in our love for God and our external consequences of that by growing in piety and righteous living. You cannot read them, with a right heart, and remain unchanged or unmoved.

John T. McNeil in the unabridged version above, in his introduction describes it as being one of a "short-list of books that have notably affected the course of history." Who would not want to read such a book, when written by John Calvin if a Calvinist? He adds that it has: "moulded the beliefs and behaviour of generations of mankind." Elsewhere he said: that it is "admired as an incomparable exposition of Scriptural truth and a bulwark of evangelical faith."
It teaches us of "Christian doctrine and social duty."

The original edition which only had six chapters in it, and was the size of average paperback today was titled: "The institute of the Christian Religion containing almost the whole sum of piety and whatever is necessary to know in Doctrine and Salvation. A work well worth reading by all persons zealous for piety and lately published. A preface to the most Christian King of France in which this book is presented to him as a confession of faith. Author John Calvin, of Noyon Basel.

(Some of the length of original titles of these old books are hysterical by our standards today.)

The King referred to, was a stanch papist and opposer and persecutor of the Protestant faith. And even after the said King's death in future editions, Calvin still included the original preface written to him in it.
A few short months previously to the Institutes first publication, King Francis of France had tried to ban all printing, but his attempt to do so failed. God was determined that Calvin's magnus opus would be published, just as he has always kept his own Word from being destroyed. Don't we have a duty to our own souls, to the heritage that we come from, and a duty to God, to read and study this fine master-piece. Not to gain knowledge and learning for it's own sake, but so that we will also experience the natural consequence of doing so, of understanding the life of faith better, be more useful in the kingdom, and learn to do our duties as Christian to grow in understanding of the Scriptures and to have more piety and righteous living in our lives because we have read this book.

Six months after publishing the first edition, Calvin began his work in Geneva. The second edition when published had grown from the original six chapters to now seventeen chapters. And in this second edition he quoted the patristic father's extensively such as Augustine and Origen and others. In this second edition Calvin stated that he saw it as a textbook to be used in the "preparation of candidates in theology for the reading of the divine Word."
Wouldn't that describe you and I, as are we not all of the priesthood of believers?

An ignorant Christian, particularly ignorant Calvinist's are a liability and dangerous to the cause of true religion. To the Biblical doctrine that is contained within the doctrine simply known as Calvinism.

Many people will say they need nothing more than the Word of God to know what to believe. They have the holy Spirit, so they will sit at home with their Bible, studying it, without any outside works to help them understand it. No confessions of faith, commentaries or other books written by godly men. Yet what an arrogant attitude this is. Calvin made reference to Augustine around 400 times in his final edition of the Institutes, which grew each time it was published in his life time, till it now stands at the size we know it now. Calvin didn't think he was above being taught by the learned men who had gone before him. And yet it was B.B. Warfield who described Calvin as the "theologian of the Holy Spirit."

Calvin didn't get his vast wealth of Biblical understanding, by taking short-cuts to everything that the Christian needs to be armed in life for the Spiritual warfare we face daily and the duties we must perform. He got it by years and years of hard laborious study and labour. Even when too ill to work, and was ordered to rest, and told to rest by his friends and associations. He answered with the words: "What, would you have the Lord come, and find me idle"

Yes, recreation and enjoyment and leisure has it's place. The Christian life however, has no right to have other things above in priority the work of eternity. Whether it is working out our own salvation with fear and trembling, or trying to help others along the way.
He would find abhorrent the 100 minute Bible or abridged version of his Institutes.

There is no place in God's kingdom for people ignorant of the doctrines of the Bible or the way of life for Christian living. Ignorance very often is a choice. If we have been Christians for many years, and have never read the Institutes, that has been a choice. If we have been Calvinist's many years and know little of what Calvin taught about almost anything, then that is also is a choice. AND if we have been a Christian many years, and know little of what the Bible teaches in truth, and even less live it out as experimental religion, that is also a choice in many instances. Christ's kingdom has no place for sloth.

So let us set our eyes on eternity, and head heavenwards, and not indulge and be firmly grounded in the world as we make our pilgrimage through it to a better place. Let us be like Abraham, strangers in a foreign land, and let us not be carried about and tossed in the wind by many strange doctrines. (Heb 13:9). God gave us this treasure, (His Word) entrusted it to us to keep it. Let us not betray that trust; and let us not feel safe and presumptuous without a sure foundation for that assurance and presumption as many seem to do. Those men who were for many years, some of the best known teachers of Calvinism, have betrayed the faith they professed to love by the federal vision heresy. Yet who would have that? None of us is beyond being deceived.

Let us not profess the true religion and build our houses on the sand. Let us be like the text of Hebrews 11 where almost each line starts with "by faith." And if called to suffer for the truth of God, we shall be prepared and ready to. Whereas now, many of those who think they would stand strong, while not well taught in the ways of faith, and have no excuse or reason not to be, suffering would soon show how they spoke in presumption, because words are easy for anyone. But when in comfortable times, and we are not even prepared to deny ourselves one day a week, to give it to the Lord; not set aside some time each day to put down our toys and recreations, and to pick up God' Word or study tools, then their proclamations really show how vain they are. Because the life of the Christian, and especially the suffering Christian is all about self-denial. And if we do not do that in the small things, when we are so comfortable it would be easy for us to do so, then it is vanity to think we would do it if ever called to it without comfort and in great need, because we have professed faith.

The statistics show that around 15% of the visible church is made up of true believers. It is not our job to find out which is which, and in fact Paul speaks against doing so in Romans. (Rom 10) But if God sends us plagues or famine, he may just sift out the tares from the wheat. And don't think it can't happen in our days because it can. God will deliver his True church, and one of those ways will be to build her up so that it is not so weak and so full of false professors as it is now. And let's be armed and ready for when that happens, by our faith having a sure foundation and being grounded in the Rock. But that wont' happen by choosing the life of comfort and ease and not denying our own pleasures to pick up the Word of God or other tools to help us better understand it, and so become better Christians.

Let's set our eyes on eternity, and keep them there; and not take them off, until we have reached the Christian's true Home. Let's set out to heavenwards, and let the world and all that glitters in it, not be the thing that robs us of eternity by our being more dazzled by the world we can see that glitters, rather than the hope of things invisible (Heb 11:27) that are yet to come, yet would make this glittering world, look like a bottomless pit.

I hope to get a series of posts out this week, on Reformation history, and how we can apply that to our lives today. This is the first.

The Mission of the church:

A creed  should be  adhered to out of the God given commandment to guard  the word which has been entrusted to the church.

Deut 26:17  (jesus will be ashamed of us if we don’t confess Him)

Matt 16:15  Jesus asked: "But who do you say that I am?"

Thou shalt confess with thy mouth and  in your heart know that  Jesus is Lord.

The standards or creeds of the church  are Subordinate to the Scriptures, and  not binding on us,  only in so far as,  and no further than, they are  a faithful  summary of the word of God.  They help us  understand and apply the Scriptures they derive from,  but are subordinate to,  and are dependant on the Bible.
1st Objection:

"We have no creed but life, and no law but love."
2nd Objection:

"Its nothing but a paper pope." (Wrong!)

The standards are always open to interpretation  of if they agree with the word of God.
3rd Objection:

"Human creeds add to the Word of God."  (wrong!)

They are simple declarations of  Biblical truths.  And not adding to anything  in the Word of God.  No more than a sermon or commentary would be.
4th Objection:

"When you impose  creeds on a church you restrict the  liberty of the church to believe what they believe."  (wrong!)

We are not at liberty to believe what we want to believe.   Otherwise we  are at liberty to  take in and believe every new heresy that gets churned out.

If the creeds are a faithful representation of the Word of God,  then they are not  restricting  liberty,  they are protecting that liberty.
Question:

What doctrine does it teach?

Answer:

Calvinism,  Reformed Faith,  covenant Theology.
Calvinism =  Biblical Doctrine.   He didn’t invent the doctrines of Calvinism,  but he unearthed the true Biblical  truths and true theology of the Bible,  which was buried for a 1,000 years,  under the tryranny and apostasy  of  Catholicism.     It was given his name, because of his writings,  but anyone who calls themselves a Calvinist is not declaring they are following John Calvin,  they are declaring they are following the Biblical truths of the Bible,  which was bought to the forefront and  unearthed  for the first time since the early church  by John Calvin.  If you accept Calvinism,  you accept the Word of God.

Question:

What do we  mean by Calvinism or Reformed Faith.

Answer:

Either terms is Christianity in its purest expression.   A Calvinist is someone who is God intoxicated. Calvinism is pure, True Religion,  and Religion in its purest form,  It means utter dependance on God. Its not an icy cold intellectualism.  It affects the mind and the heart and  every aspect of man’s being.

"In proportion as our own religious life flows in a deep and broad stream,  in that proportion will we find spiritual delight  in the Westminster Confession of Fath.”  (J.A. Wylie)

And again:

Was the Confession of Augsburg to come in the room of the Bible to the Protestants? Far from it. Let us not mistake the end for which it was framed, and the place it was intended to occupy. The Confession did not create the faith; it simply confessed it. The doctrines it contained were in the Confession because they were first of all in the Bible. A terrestrial chart has authority and is to be followed only when for ever island and continent marked on it there is a corresponding island and continent on the surface of the globe; a manual of botany has authority only when for every term on its page there is a living flower or tree in the actual landscape; and a map of the heavens is true only for ever star named in it there is an actual star shining in the sky. So of the Augsburg Confession, and all Confessions, they are true, and of authority, and safe guides only when every statement they contain has its corresponding doctrine in the Scriptures. Their authority is not in themselves, but in the Word of God. Therefore they do not fetter the conscience, or tyrranize over it, except when perverted; they but guard its liberty, by shielding the understanding from the usurpation of error, and leaving the conscience free [J.A. Wylie]

And as Benajamin B. Warfield, very ably put it:

The Calvinist is the man who has seen God, and who, having seen God in His glory, is filled on the one hand with a sense of his own unworthiness to stand in God's sight as a creature, and much more as a sinner, and on the other hand, with adoring wonder that nevertheless this God is a God who receives sinners. He who believes in God without reserve and is determined that God shall be God to him in all his thinking, feeling and willing – in the entire compass of his life activities, intellectual, moral and spiritual – throughout all his individual social and religious relations, is, by force of that strictest of all logic which presides over the outworking of principles into thought and life, by the very necessity of the case, a Calvinist.The Calvinist is the man who sees God behind all phenomena,and in all that occurs recognizes the hand of God, working out His will; who makes the attitude of the soul to God in prayer the permanent attitude in all its life activities; and who casts himself on the grace of God alone, excluding every trace of dependence on self from the whole work of his salvation.

Do you see God?