105
105. Of the fifth petition QUESTION 105. What do we pray for in the fifth petition?
ANSWER:In the fifth petition, which is, “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors,” we pray, That God, for Christ’s sake, would freely pardon all our sins; which we are the rather encouraged to ask, because, by his grace, we are enabled, from the heart, to forgive others.
-----
Q. 1. Why is this petition connected with the former, by the copulative conjunction and?
A. To teach us, that we can have no outward comfort with God’s blessing, unless our sins are pardoned, and our persons accepted in Christ, 1 Corinthians 3:22-23.
Q. 2. What are we to understand by debts in this petition?
A. By debts we are to understand our sins, whether original or actual, of omission or commission, Luke 11:4.
Q. 3. Why are these called debts?
A. Because of the debt of punishment we owe to the justice of God, on account of them, Romans 6:23 - “The wages of sin is death.”
Q. 4. Can we pay any part of this debt to the justice of God?
A. No; “neither we, nor any other creature, can make the least satisfaction for it, Psalms 130:3;” 1 or pay the least farthing of it, Matthew 18:25.
1 Larger Catechism, Quest. 194.
Q. 5. What other debt are we naturally owing, besides the debt of punishment as transgressors?
A. We likewise owe a debt of obedience to the law as a covenant; in which we are also utterly insolvent; “being unto every good work reprobate,” Titus 1:16.
Q. 6. What are we to pray for with reference to our sins or debts?
A.That God, for Christ’s sake, would freely pardon them all.
Q. 7. Whose prerogative is it to pardon?
A. It is God’s only, Micah 7:18.
Q. 8. From what spring or fountain in God does pardon flow?
A. From his own gracious nature, Psalms 86:5, and sovereign will, Exodus 33:19.
Q. 9. What is it for God to pardon?
A. It is to “acquit us both from the guilt and punishment of sin, Romans 3:26.” 2
2 Ibid.
Q. 10. For whose sake does he pardon?
A. Only for Christ’s sake.
Q. 11. What is it for God to pardon for Christ’s sake?
A. It is to vent his pardoning grace “through the obedience and satisfaction of Christ, apprehended and applied by faith, Romans 3:25.” 3
3 Larger Catechism, Quest. 194.
Q. 12. Could God pardon sin, without any respect to the obedience and satisfaction of Christ?
A. No; because justice behoved to be satisfied; for, “without shedding of blood is no remission,” Hebrews 9:22.
Q. 13. What is the extent of pardoning grace?
A. It extends to all our sins,Psalms 103:3.
Q. 14. In what manner should we expect that God will pardon all our sins?
A. We should expect that he will do it freely, for his own name’s sake, Psalms 25:11.
Q. 15. How can God be said to pardon our sins freely, when he does it on account of the surety-righteousness imputed to us?
A. God’s accepting of Christ as our Surety, and his fulfilling all righteousness in our room, were both of them acts of rich, free, and sovereign grace, Psalms 89:19; Luke 12:50. Though the pardon of our sins be of debt to Christ, yet it is free to us, Ephesians 1:7.
Q. 16. When a believer prays for the forgiveness of his daily sins, does he pray for a new and formal pardon of them?
A. Whatever may be the believer’s practice as to this matter, at some times, through the prevalence of darkness and unbelief; yet it is certain, that the pardon of sin, in justification, is one perfect act, completed at once, and never needs to be repeated, Micah 7:19 - “Thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea.”
Q. 17. If daily sins are already forgiven in justification, in so far as the not imputing of them is secured in it; why is the believer here directed to pray for the pardon of them?
A. As the evidences of pardon may be frequently eclipsed, and fatherly displeasure incurred, by our daily failings; it is therefore our duty to pray, that God’s fatherly displeasure may be removed, and the joy of his salvation restored, by his “giving us daily more and more assurance of forgiveness, Psalms 51:8-10, Psalms 51:12.” 4
4 Larger Catechism, Quest. 194.
Q. 18. Upon what ground may we be encouraged to ask and expect from God, the intimation of the pardon of our daily sins and failings?
A.Because, by his grace, we are enabled, from the heart, to forgive others.
Q. 19. What is it we are to forgive others?
A. Personal injuries; or injuries as committed against ourselves, Matthew 18:15.
Q. 20. Have personal injuries an offence done to God in them?
A. They certainly have; and it is our duty to pray that God would forgive it, Psalms 35:13.
Q. 21. In what manner should we forgive personal injuries?
A. We should do it from the heart.
Q. 22. What is it to forgive our fellow-creatures from the heart?
A. It is not only to lay aside all resentment against them; but to wish and do them all offices of kindness that lie in our power, as if they had never done us any injury, Matthew 5:44.
Q. 23. Have we naturally such a disposition in us?
A. No; God enables us to do it by his grace.
Q. 24. To what are we naturally inclined, with reference to personal injuries?
A. We are naturally inclined to harbour hatred and malice in our hearts on account of them, and to revenge them if we can; as was the case with Esau against his brother Jacob, Genesis 27:41.
Q. 25. What should excite us to the duty of forgiving personal injuries?
A. The examples of this disposition recorded in scripture for our imitation; such as, the example of Joseph, Genesis 50:17, Genesis 50:21; of Stephen, Acts 7:60; and of our Lord himself, Luke 23:34.
Q. 26. Can it ever be dishonourable to forgive a personal injury?
A. No; it is a man’s glory to pass over a transgression, Proverbs 19:11.
Q. 27. Can forgiving the person infer an approbation of his crime?
A. No; we may forgive the person, and yet charge his sin close home upon his conscience, as Joseph did to his brethren, Genesis 45:4, and Genesis 50:20.
Q. 28. What if forgiveness imbolden the offender in the like injuries for the future?
A. The fear of this should not be an excuse for omitting the present duty of forgiving; because we should leave events to the Lord.
Q. 29. When we say, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors;” do we mean to state a comparison between our forgiving others, and God’s forgiving us?
A. No; there is an infinite disproportion between the one and the other; the injuries our fellow-creatures do us are but few and small, in comparison of the innumerable and aggravated crimes we are guilty of against God, Matthew 18:1-35 verses 24th and 28th [Matthew 18:24, Matthew 18:28] compared.
Q. 30. Can we consistently with the scope of this petition, make our forgiveness of others, the ground and reason of God’s forgiving us?
A. No; for this would be to put our forgiveness of others in the room of Christ’s righteousness, on the account of which alone it is that God forgives us.
Q. 31. What then, is the true meaning of these words as we forgive our debtors?
A. The meaning is, that we take encouragement to hope, that God will forgive us the sins of our daily walk, from this evidence, or “testimony in ourselves, that we, from the heart, forgive others their offences, Matthew 6:14-15, - ‘If ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your trespasses.’“ 5
5 Larger Catechism, Quest. 194.
Q. 32. What may we learn from the verses just now quoted, for illustrating the meaning of this petition?
A. We may learn this from them, as the meaning of it, that our forgiving others, may be an evidence of God’s forgiving us: and that our being of an implacable and unrelenting disposition towards our fellow creatures, who have injured us, is a sad sign, that our own sins are not forgiven us of God, Matthew 18:35.
÷106. Of the sixth petition QUESTION 106. What do we pray for in the sixth petition?
ANSWER:In the sixth petition, (which is, And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil,) we pray, That God would either keep us from being tempted to sin, or support and deliver us when we are tempted.
-----
Q. 1. What does this petition necessarily suppose?
A. It supposes, “that the most wise, righteous, and gracious God, for divers holy and just ends, may so order things, that we may be assaulted, foiled, and, for a time, led captive by temptations, 2 Chronicles 32:31.” 1
1 Larger Catechism, Quest. 195.
Q. 2. How many ways may God be said to lead a person into temptation, and yet not be the author of sin?
A. Two ways, objectively and permissively.
Q. 3. How may he be said to lead into temptation objectively?
A. When his providential dispensations, which, in themselves, are holy, just, and good, do offer, or lay before us occasions for sin.
Q. 4. May these occasions be called incitements or motives to sin?
A. No; only our corrupt hearts abuse or pervert them to this end; thus, David was envious when he “saw the prosperity of the wicked,” Psalms 73:3.
Q. 5. When may God be said to lead his people into temptation permissively?
A. When he suffers them to be assaulted by the tempter, and, at the same time, withholds those aids of grace, which would prevent their compliance with the temptation, as in the case of David’s numbering the people, 2 Samuel 24:1, compared with 1 Chronicles 21:1.
Q. 6. What is the evil from which we pray to be delivered, and the temptations we pray against in this petition?
A. The evil of sin, and temptations to sin.
Q. 7. What is it to be tempted to sin?
A. It is to be strongly solicited, instigated, and enticed to it, Proverbs 7:16-24.
Q. 8. Can God be the author or efficient of such instigations and allurements?
A. By no means; “For God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man,” James 1:13.
Q. 9. Why then does he permit them to take place?
A. That he may direct and over-rule them to the purposes of his own glory; as in the instance of Peter, Luke 22:31, Luke 22:32 - “The Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.”
Q. 10. From whence do all temptations to sin spring, or take their rise?
A. All of them flow from “Satan, 1 Chronicles 21:1; the world, Luke 21:34; and the flesh, which are ready powerfully to draw us aside and insnare us, James 1:14.” 2
2 Larger Catechism, Quest. 195.
Q. 11. Are we liable to be drawn aside and insnared by enemies, after we are in a state of grace?
A. Yes; “even after the pardon of our sins, by reason of our corruption, Galatians 5:17, weakness, and want of watchfulness, Matthew 26:41, we are both subject to be tempted, and forward to expose ourselves unto temptations, ver. 69-72 [Matthew 26:69-72].” 3
3 Ibid.
Q. 12. Are we able to resist temptations when assaulted with them?
A. No; we are, “of ourselves, unable and unwilling to resist them, to recover out of them, and to improve them, Romans 7:23, Romans 7:24.”4
4 Ibid.
Q. 13. How is Satan denominated in scripture, with reference to temptations?
A. He is called, by way of eminence, THE TEMPTER, Matthew 4:3.
Q. 14. Why is he so called?
A. Because of his strong and violent instigation and solicitation to sin, Acts 5:8.
Q. 15. When did he begin this trade of tempting?
A. He began it in Paradise, Genesis 3:1, Genesis 3:4, Genesis 3:5; and has been making his assaults upon all ranks of mankind ever since, 1 Peter 5:8.
Q. 16. Can Satan force and compel the will to yield to his temptations?
A. No; otherwise all his temptations would be irresistible.
Q. 17. How do you know that they are not irresistible?
A. Because the saints are exhorted to resist them, James 4:7; and have actually been enabled, by grace, to do it, 2 Corinthians 12:8-9.
Q. 18. How many are the ways by which Satan manages his temptations?
A. Two ways chiefly, either in a way of SUBTLETY, using wiles and devices; hence called “that old serpent which deceiveth the whole world,” Revelation 20:2, compared with chap. 12:9 [Revelation 12:9]; or in a way of FURIOUS ASSAULT, throwing his “fiery darts,” Ephesians 6:16. In both which respects he is called, in the Greek tongue, APOLLYON; that is, a destroyer, Revelation 9:11.
Q. 19. Why called a destroyer?
A. Because he aims at nothing less than the eternal ruin and destruction of all mankind, 1 Peter 5:8 - “Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about seeking whom he may devour.”
Q. 20. What are some of those chief wiles and stratagems in which he displays his SUBTLETY?
A. He makes choice of the most advantageous seasons for tempting; he employs the fittest instruments for carrying on his designs; and sometimes gilds over the foulest sins with the fairest names.
Q. 21. What are these advantageous seasons for tempting, of which Satan makes choice?
A. When a person is under sore affliction and distress, Job 2:9; when the object is present that will enforce the temptation, 2 Samuel 11:2, 2 Samuel 11:4; and after some remarkable manifestation of divine love, 2 Corinthians 12:2, 2 Corinthians 12:7.
Q. 22. Who are the instruments he employs for carrying on his temptations?
A. Men of the greatest power and policy, 1 Kings 12:26-30; and sometimes men of reputed piety and godliness; thus he employed the old prophet to seduce the man of God with a lie, 1 Kings 13:18.
Q. 23. What are these fair names, under which Satan wants to make the vilest sins pass among men?
A. He allures to covetousness, under the name of frugality, Ecclesiastes 4:8; to profuseness, under the specious title of generosity, chap. 5:13, 14 [Ecclesiastes 5:13-14]; he tempts to drunkenness, under the disguise of good fellowship, Proverbs 23:29-30; and to neutrality and indifference in religion, under the colour of a prudent and peaceable spirit, Acts 18:14-15, Acts 18:17.
Q. 24. What are those temptations, which Satan endeavours to throw in upon the soul, in the way of FURIOUS ASSAULTS?
A. They are his temptations to blasphemous and atheistical thoughts.
Q. 25. What is his plot by injecting these horrid suggestions?
A. Either to beget unbecoming thoughts of God, or to disturb, vex, and distract the Christian.
Q. 26. Does he ever gain his design, in begetting unbecoming thoughts of God, in the minds of any of God’s children?
A. Yes; as would appear by their speaking sometimes very unadvisedly with their lips, Psalms 77:8, Psalms 77:9 - “Is his mercy clean gone for ever? doth his promise fail for evermore? hath God forgotten to be gracious?”
Q. 27. Are the saints suffered to continue long in such sentiments?
A. No; for as such words are far from their stated judgment; and only flow from their lips in the hour of temptation; so the Lord, by his grace, will soon make them change their speech, as in the words immediately following: “And I said, this is mine infirmity; but I will remember the years of the right hand of the Most High,” Psalms 77:10.
Q. 28. Do blasphemous and atheistical thoughts ever take their rise in our own hearts?
A. Frequently they do; as our Lord testifies, Matthew 15:19 - “Out of the HEART proceed - blasphemies.”
Q. 29. When may we charge ourselves with such thoughts, as arising in our hearts?
A. When we make no resistance, but give way to them; contrary to the command of God: “Resist the devil, and he will flee from you,” James 4:7.
Q. 30. Can the saints of God distinguish between blasphemous and atheistical thoughts, suggested by Satan, and those that arise in their own hearts?
A. Yes, they can, in some measure; otherwise they would frequently be deprived of the comfortable use of those consolations that are allowed them in the word.
Q. 31. How may they know the one from the other?
A. If they are violent and sudden, coming in like a flash of lightning upon the mind, Matthew 16:22, Matthew 16:23; if their souls tremble at such thoughts, and oppose them with the utmost abhorrence, Psalms 73:15; and if nothing is more grievous than to be assaulted with them, ver. 21, 22 [Psalms 73:21-22]; then they may conclude, that they are rather to be charged on Satan than themselves.
Q. 32. What are the extremes, to which Satan labours to drive sinners by his temptations?
A. Either to presumption or despair.
Q. 33. What is PRESUMPTION?
A. It is a confident hope of the favour of God, and of obtaining eternal life, without any sufficient foundation to support it, like the foolish virgins, Matthew 25:11-12.
Q. 34. What is Satan’s conduct with reference to presumption?
A. He does all he can to foster and cherish it, and is sure to give it no disturbance, Luke 11:21 - “When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.”
Q. 35. What is DESPAIR?
A. It is the melancholy apprehension of a person’s case as being quite hopeless, and of there being no help for him in God, Jeremiah 2:25.
Q. 36. By what artifices does Satan labour to drive persons to this deplorable extreme?
A. By suggesting that their sins are too many, and too heinously aggravated to be pardoned; that the time of forgiveness is past; or that they have been guilty of the sin against the Holy Ghost.
Q. 37. Is it possible that our sins can be more numerous and more heinously aggravated, than that they can be pardoned?
A. No; because no bounds or limits can be set to the infinite mercy of God, as vented through the meritorious obedience and satisfaction of Jesus; “for, he will abundantly pardon,” (margin, “he will multiply to pardon,” Isaiah 55:7); and he declares, that though our “sins be as scarlet, or red like crimson, they shall be white as snow, and as wool,” Isaiah 1:18.
Q. 38. Can any be certain in this life, that the time of forgiveness is past as to them, or that their day of grace is over?
A. No; because while the gospel continues to be published to them, it is their unquestionable duty to believe the report made in it, concerning salvation for them in Christ, without diving into the secret counsels of God, 1 John 5:11 - “This is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life; and this life is in his Son.”
Q. 39. How may a person know if he is not guilty of the sin against the Holy Ghost?
A. If he is deeply concerned and perplexed about this matter, and has an habitual desire after salvation by grace, he may be verily assured he is not guilty of this: for “they that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick,” Matthew 9:12.
Q. . What is the second spring of our temptations above mentioned?
A. The WORLD, Mark 4:19.
Q. 41. What are the things of the world which give rise to temptations?
A. Both the good things and the bad things of it.
Q. 42. What are the good things of the world, which may prove a snare and occasion to sin?
A. The profits, pleasures, and preferments of the world, when trusted to, and rested in, Matthew 13:22.
Q. 43. For what should we pray, in order to be delivered from such temptations?
A. That God would incline our hearts unto his “testimonies and not to covetousness,” Psalms 119:36, and that he would set our “affections on things above, not on things on the earth,” Colossians 3:2.
Q. 44. What are the evil things of this world, which may prove temptations?
A. The outward troubles and afflictions we meet with in it, John 16:33 - “In the world ye shall have tribulation.”
Q. 45. Is God the author of all outward afflictions?
A. Yes; Amos 3:6 - “Shall there be evil in a city and the Lord hath not done it?” Though men may indeed have an instrumental and sinful hand in their own troubles and distresses; Jeremiah 2:17 - “Hast thou not procured this unto thyself, in that thou hast forsaken the Lord thy God?”
Q. 46. When do afflictions prove temptations?
A. When we either “despise the chastening of the Lord,” or “faint when we are rebuked of him,” Hebrews 12:5.
Q. 47. For what should we pray when visited with afflictions?
A. That when the Lord is pleased to chasten us, it may be “for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness,” Hebrews 12:10.
Q. 48. What is the third spring or fountain of our temptations?
A. The FLESH, Galatians 5:17.
Q. 49. What is meant by the flesh?
A. Our corrupt and depraved nature, Romans 8:8 - “They that are in the flesh cannot please God.”
Q. 50. How is the flesh, or corrupt nature, the spring of temptation?
A. As it entices to it, James 1:14, and is the inlet to temptations from Satan and the world, Jeremiah 17:9.
Q. 51. How should we pray against such temptations as have their rise from corrupt nature?
A. That God would not only restrain the pernicious tendency of our natural dispositions, Psalms 19:13, but likewise fortify our souls, by the powerful influence of his grace, against all these evils, to which we are naturally addicted, Ephesians 3:16.
Q. 52 May we pray absolutely against temptations?
A. No; but we may put an alternative into God’s hand with reference to them.
Q. 53. What alternative may be put into God’s hand with reference to temptations?
A. That he would either keep us from being tempted to sin, or support and deliver us when we are tempted.
Q. 54. What do we mean, when we pray, that God would keep us from being tempted to sin?
A. We mean by it, that, since the event of a temptation, with respect to us, is so dangerous and uncertain, if God has not some gracious ends to answer by it, he would rather be pleased, by his providence, to prevent the temptation, than suffer us to fall into it, Psalms 19:13.
Q. 55. What do we mean, when we pray, that God would support and deliver us when we are tempted?
A. We thus express our desire, “that, if tempted, we may, by his Spirit, be powerfully enabled to stand in the hour of temptation, Ephesians 3:16; or, if fallen, raised again and recovered out of it, Psalms 51:12, and have a sanctified use and improvement thereof, 1 Peter 5:8.” 5
5 Larger Catechism, Quest. 195.
Q. 56. How does the Lord enable his people to stand in the hour of temptation?
A. By making his grace sufficient for them, and perfecting his strength in their weakness, 2 Corinthians 12:9.
Q. 57. How does he raise and recover them out of temptation, when fallen into it?
A. By discovering the corrupt and natural bias of their heart toward the temptation; humbling them on account of it, and the offence done to God by their compliance; and by quickening their faith, to draw virtue from the righteousness of the Surety, for a fresh intimation of pardon, Psalms 51:4-5, Psalms 51:7.
Q. 58. When have they a sanctified use and improvement of temptations?
A. When they are made more circumspect, watchful, and dependent on Christ for the future, as being sensible of their inability to resist the least temptation without him; for he has said, “Without me ye can do nothing,” John 15:5.
Q. 59. What should be our habitual scope, and general end, in offering up this petition, “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil?”
A. Our aim and end in it, should be, “that our sanctification and salvation may be perfected, 2 Corinthians 13:9; Satan trodden under our feet, Romans 16:20; and we fully freed from sin, temptation; and all evil for ever, 1 Thessalonians 5:23.” 6
6 Larger Catechism, Quest. 195.
÷107. Of the conclusion of the Lord¼ÇÖs prayer QUESTION 107. What doth the conclusion of the Lord’s Prayer teach us?
ANSWER:The conclusion of the Lord’s Prayer, which is, “For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen,” teacheth us to take our encouragement in prayer from God only, and in our prayers to praise him, ascribing kingdom, power, and glory to him. And, in testimony of our desire and assurance to be heard, we say, AMEN.
-----
Q. 1. What does the particle for, which ushers in the conclusion of the Lord’s prayer, teach us?
A. It “teacheth us to enforce our petitions with arguments, Romans 15:30.” 1
1 Larger Catechism, Quest. 196.
Q. 2. From Whence are these arguments to be taken?
A. “Not from any worthiness in ourselves, or in any other creature, but from God, Daniel 9:19.” 2
2 Ibid.
Q. 3. What argument, for instance, may we fetch from God, to enforce our petitions?
A. That “mercy and truth have met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other,” Psalms 85:10.
Q. 4. What force is there in this argument?
A. A very great force, namely, that all the perfections and excellencies of the divine nature, harmoniously agree in conferring all promised blessings upon sinners of mankind, on account of the meritorious obedience, and satisfaction of Christ imputed to them, 1 Corinthians 3:22, 1 Corinthians 3:23 - “All things are yours, and ye are Christ’s.”
Q. 5. For what end should we use arguments with God in prayer?
A. Not to prevail with him to grant what he does not see fit for us; but to quicken our own faith, and encourage our hope, to expect the good things of the promise which we want, in his own time and way, Daniel 9:18.
Q. 6. Why should we essay in our prayers to praise him?
A. Because “praise glorifies God,” Psalms 50:23, and engages him to hear our prayers, Psalms 67:5-6.
Q. 7. What way should we praise him in our prayers?
A. By ascribing kingdom, power, and glory to him.
Q. 8. What is meant by kingdom, power, and glory?
A. “Eternal sovereignty, omnipotency, and glorious excellency,” as appertaining “to God alone,” 1 Chronicles 29:10-14. 3 3Larger Catechism, Quest. 196.
Q. 9. What kingdom do we ascribe to God as his?
A. The kingdom of nature, as God Creator; and the kingdom of grace, as God Redeemer.
Q. 10. What encouragement may we take in prayer, from the kingdoms both of nature and grace being his?
A. That we shall want nothing that is good for us, either as we are his creatures, Psalms 145:16, or his children, Matthew 7:11.
Q. 11. Why do we ascribe power to God, as well as kingdom?
A. Because, without power, his sovereignty could not be maintained, or his kingdom managed, Psalms 66:3, Psalms 66:7.
Q. 12. What encouragement may we take in prayer, from the power being his?
A. That no difficulty whatever shall hinder the accomplishment of the promise, Romans 4:21.
Q. 13. What do we mean by ascribing glory to him?
A. We thus acknowledge, that he is possessed of all those excellencies, which render him glorious in the eyes of men and angels; and that the praise and honour of every thing that is great and excellent, or has a tendency to raise our esteem and admiration, is due to him; Psalms 78:4.
Q. 14. What encouragement may we take in prayer, from the glory being his?
A. That the accomplishment of his glorious purposes, and performance of his gracious promises, will bring in a revenue of glory and praise to him, Psalms 45:17.
Q. 15. How long will the kingdom, power, and glory be his?
A.For ever, without intermission through eternity. Exodus 15:18.
Q. 16. What is the difference, in this respect, between God and all earthly kings and potentates whatsoever?
A. Their kingdom, power, and glory, are only of a short duration, Psalms 82:6-7; whereas the God with whom we have to do changes not, but is ever the same, James 1:17.
Q. 17. Why do we say Amen in our prayers?
A. We should do it in testimony of our desire, and assurance to be heard.
Q. 18. How may we know we say Amen in testimony of our desire?
A. When “by faith we are imboldened to plead with God, that he would - fulfil our requests, 2 Chronicles 20:6, 2 Chronicles 20:11.” 4
4 Larger Catechism, Quest. 196.
Q. 19. What does the word signify, when we say it in testimony of our desire?
A. In this view it properly signifies, so be it, or so let it be.
Q. 20. When do we say Amen in testimony of our assurance to be heard?
A. When “by faith we are imboldened - quietly to rely upon him that he will fulfil our requests, 2 Chronicles 14:11.” 5
5 Ibid.
Q. 21. What does the word signify, when we say it in testimony of our assurance to be heard?
A. In this sense it denotes, so it is; or, so it shall be.
Q. 22. In which of these views is the word, Amen, to be understood in the conclusion of this prayer?
A. It is to be understood as signifying both; namely, as including a testimony of our desire, and likewise an assurance of being heard.
Q. 23. How does this appear?
A. Because there cannot be a desire of any promised blessing in faith, but there must be some measure of assurance that it will be granted in God’s time and order, Psalms 10:17. THE END ÷108. Historical notes HISTORICAL NOTES
Notes are from the, CYCLOPEDIA of BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL and ECCLESIASTICAL LITERATURE, 12 vols. (New York: Harper & Bros., 1894) by James Strong & John McClintock - As published by Ages Software on CD-ROM in 2000
Fisher, James
One of the four leaders of the secession from the Established Church of Scotland, and professor of divinity to the Associate (Burgher) Synod, was born at Bar, Scotland, January 23, 1697. He commenced his curriculum in Glasgow in 1712, and closed it in St. Andrews in 1716; and then entered the Divinity Hall in the University of Edinburgh, where he continued six sessions. He was licensed to preach in 1722, and for some time supplied pulpits within the bounds of the presbytery. His first parish was at Glenisla, Forfarshire, and in 1725 he removed to Kinclaven. In 1732 he took an active part in denouncing the encroachments of the British legislature on the ecclesiastical liberties of Scotland, before the General Assembly, which soon resulted in his being suspended from the ministry. Mr. Fisher, with his other dissenting brethren, shortly afterwards constituted themselves into a presbytery, and with their respective congregations thus formed The Associate Presbytery. After various fruitless endeavors on the part of the General Assembly to induce Mr. Fisher to return to the Established Church, he, in 1741, was ejected from the church and manse of Kilclaven, whence he removed to Glasgow in response to a unanimous call from a newly organized Church holding his views, which he served continuously for over thirty years. He died September 28, 1775. Mr. Fisher was somewhat under the middle size, well proportioned, had a lively, affectionate, cheerful countenance, easy and alert in all his movements, was neat in dress, and orderly and punctual in all his affairs, an habitual early riser, and a conscientious, diligent student. His published works are, The Inestimable Value of Divine Truth, (Edinb. 1739): - Christ Jesus the Lord, Considered as the Inexhaustible Matter of Gospel Preaching (ibid. 1741): - The Character of a Faithful Minister of Christ (ibid. 1752): - The Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained by Way of
QUESTION and Answer (Glasgow, 1753, part 1, 8vo; part 2, 1760): - Christ the Sole and Wonderful Doer in the Work of Man’s Redemption (ibid. 1755), and a few reviews. See Memorials of Alexander Moncrieff and James Fisher, in the United Presbyterian Fathers, 1849, page 9; Fasti Eccles. Scotianae, 2:802.
Erskine, Ebenezer An eminent and pious Scotch divine, founder of the “Secession Church.” He was born in the prison of the Bass Rock, June 22, 1680, and educated at the University of Edinburgh. He acted for some time as tutor and chaplain in the family of the earl of Rothes, and became a licentiate in divinity in 1702. In 1703 he was chosen minister of Portmoak, in the shire of Kinross, and became a very popular preacher. He accepted a charge in Stirling in 1731. “Mr. Erskine’s first difference with his colleagues of the Church of Scotland was in his support of the principles of ‘the Marrow of Modern Divinity,’ a subject of great contention during the early part of the 18th century. He was one of several clergymen who, in connection with this subject, were ‘rebuked and admonished’ by the General Assembly. The ‘secession of the body, headed by Mr. Erskine, was occasioned by the operation of the act of queen Anne’s reign restoring lay patronage in the Church of Scotland, and, though not in all respects technically the same, it was virtually on the same ground as the late secession of ‘The Free Church.’ The presbytery of Kinross, led by Erskine’s brother Ralph, had refused to induct a presentee forced on an objecting congregation by the law of patronage. In 1732, the General Assembly enjoined the presbytery to receive the presentee. At the same time they passed an act of Assembly regulating inductions, which, as it tended to enforce the law of patronage, was offensive to Mr. Erskine, and he preached against it. After some discussion, the General Assembly decided that he should be ‘rebuked and admonished,’ confirming a decision of the inferior ecclesiastical courts. Against this decision Mr. Erskine entered a ‘protest,’ in which he was joined by several of his brethren. He was afterwards suspended from his functions. The Assembly subsequently endeavored to smooth the way for his restoration, but he declined to take advantage of it, and he and his friends, including his brother Ralph, formally seceded in 1736. When the Secession was divided into the two sects of Burghers and anti- Burghers, Mr. Erskine and his brother were of the Burgher party. He died on the 2d of June, 1756. The Secession Church, reunited by the junction of the Burghers and antiBurghers in 1820, remained a distinct body till 1847, when a union being effected with the Relief Synod (a body which arose from Mr. Gillespie’s secession from the Established Church of Scotland in 1752), the aggregate body assumed the name of the United Presbyterian Church” (English Cyclopedia). Erskine bore a very high reputation as a scholar. His writings are collected in The whole Works of Ebenezer Erskine, consisting of sermons and discourses on the most important and interesting subjects (Lond. 1799, 3 volumes, 8vo). See Hetherington, Church of Scotland, 2:297 sq.
Erskine, John, D.D An eminent Scotch divine, was born in Edinburgh, June 2, 1721, and was educated at the University of Edinburgh. His father (author of the Institutes of the Laws of Scotland) wished him to devote himself to law, but finally yielded to his son’s desire that he should study theology. At twenty he published an essay on The Law of Nature sufficiently propagated to the Heathen World, aiming to show that the ignorance and unbelief of the heathen is not due to want of evidence (Romans 1:29). In 1743 he was licensed to preach by the presbytery of Dunblane, and in 1744 he became minister of Kirkintillock. In 1748, Mr. Erskine, and other evangelical clergymen of the Established Church, invited Whitefield into their pulpits. An animated discussion took place, in which Mr. Erskine triumphantly defended himself. Such a course required courage at a time when the character and doctrines of Whitefield, as well as his openair preaching, were looked upon by many with suspicion or dislike. In the following year Mr. Erskine published An Essay intended to promote the more frequent dispensation of the Lord’s Supper. In 1753 he was translated to Culross, and in 1758 to New Greyfriars’ church, Edinburgh. Here he prepared his Theological Dissertations (Lond. 1765, 12mo), including the two essays above mentioned: one on the Covenant of Sinai, one on Saving Faith, and one on the Apostolic Churches. He also edited a new edition of Hervey’s Theron and Aspasio, with a preface against John Wesley, written with some bitterness, which gave rise to some letters between Erskine and Wesley, in which the latter appears to decided advantage (Wesley, Works, N. York ed. 6:125 sq., 744). In 1769 he published anonymously a pamphlet under the title ‘‘Shall I go to war with my American brethren?” to expose the impolicy of such a contest. On the outbreak of hostilities he republished it with his name, following it up with another, entitled Reflections on the Rise, Progress, and probable Consequences of the present Contentions with the Colonies, in which he urged the duty of the mother country resorting to conciliatory measures. In 1776 he issued a third pamphlet, under the title The Equity and Wisdom of the Government in the Measures that have occasioned the American Revolt tried by the sacred Oracles. On this subject Erskine was one of the few clear-sighted men of the time in Great Britain. When nearly sixty he studied Dutch and German in order to read the Continental divines; the fruit of these studies appeared in Sketches and Hints of Church History and theological Controcersy, translated or abridged from foreign Writers (Edinburgh; 1790-97, 2 volumes, 12mo). He died January 19, 1803. After his death appeared his Discourses (Edinburgh, 1818, 2 vols. 12mo). - Jamieson, Religious Biography, page 139; Jones, Christian Biography, page 191; Wellwood, Life of Erskine.
Erskine, Ralph
Brother of Ebenezer, was born at Monilaws, Northumberland. March 18, 1685, and was educated at the University of Edinburgh. In 1711 he became minister at Dunfermline. In 1734 he joined his brother and others in their secession from the Church. He died November 6, 1752. He was a preacher of great popular abilities, devotional and zealous. His writings are collected under the title Sermons and other practical Works, consisting of above 150 sermons, besides his poetical pieces, to which is prefixed an account of the author’s life and writings (Falkirk, 10 volumes, 8vo, 1794-96). - Darling, Cyclop. Bibliographica, 1:1063.
Cameron, Richard
Founder of the “Cameronians” or “Covenanters,” was born at Falkland, in the county of Fife. He first acquired notice by his bold opposition to the measures of Charles II for enforcing the Episcopal form of worship on the Scottish people. The measures adopted by the government roused the people, and among those who gave fullest expression to the popular sentiments was Richard Cameron. He belonged to the extreme party, who held by the perpetually binding obligations of the Solemn League and Covenant, which were set aside at the restoration of Charles II. Along with some others, he strenuously resisted the measures that reinstated, the Episcopal Church in Scotland, and that proscribed the meetings for public worship of unauthorized religious bodies. Contrary to law, he persistedin preaching in the fields, and became obnoxious to government, to which, indeed, he finally assumed an attitude of defiance. Not only were his doctrines obnoxious to the government, but many of his brethren of the clergy dreaded his zeal, which they considered extreme, and at a meeting held in Edinburgh in 1677 they formally reproved him. He retired to Holland, but soon returned; and on the 22d of June, 1680, in company with about twenty other persons, he entered the town of Sanquhar in Dumfriesshire, and at the marketcross proclaimed that Charles Stuart had, by his perjuries, his tyrannical government, and his usurpation, forfeited all right and title to the crown. The party kept together in arms for a month; but on the 20th of July, while lying at Airdsmoss in Kyle, they were surprised by a large body of horse and foot, and in the skirmish which followed Cameron was killed, and his followers were dispersed or taken prisoners. A neat monument has been recently placed on the spot where Cameron fell, replacing an old and plainer structure. - English Cyclopcedia; Chambers’ Encyclopcedia; Hetherington, Hist. of Church of Scotland, 2:106 sq.; Biog. Presbyteriana (Edinb. 1835, vol. 1).
Presbyterian Church in Scotland A history of the Presbyterian Church in Scotland would be, in effect, a history of that country; for since its establishment by the Reformation its political and religious history have flowed on in one and the same channel. Christianity was planted in Scotland about the beginning of the 3rd century; and it is claimed that the early churches, particularly those of the ancient Culldees, were non-prelatical. Under the vigorous missions of Palladius and Augustine they were, however, reduced to conformity with the rule of Rome, and so remained until the period of the Reformation. At that time the corruption of the hierarchy, its encroachments on the civil power, and its greedy appropriation of the right of patronage to benefices, had created a wide-spread dissatisfaction, and prepared the way for the favorable reception of the principles of the Reformation. For twenty years persecution followed, and many were burned at the stake, among whom were Patrick Hamilton and George Wishart. The first general and public movement leading to the organization of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland was the drawing-up of a common bond or covenant, known as “The First Covenant,” and subscribed at Edinburgh, Dec. 3, 1557, by several of the most powerful of the Scotch nobility and a large number of lesser barons and influential country gentlemen, known subsequently (on account of their frequent use of the word congregation to designate those for whom they professed to act) as lords of the congregation. The signing of the covenant was followed by a proclamation from the queen regent forbidding any one to preach or administer the sacrament without the authority of the bishop. At length, however, the party of the Reformers triumphed, and in the year 1560 (Aug. 17-24) the Parliament abolished the Roman Catholic worship, adopted a confession of faith agreeing with the confessions of the Reformed churches on the Continent, appointed ministers of the Protestant religion in eight principal towns, and assigned the remaining portions of the country to five other ministers as superintendents who were to take temporary charge of the interests of religion in their several districts. On Dec. 20, 1560, the first General Assembly of the Church of Scotland was constituted in Edinburgh, consisting of six ministers and thirty-four laymen. Up to this period, the Scottish Reformers had followed, as their rule of worship and doctrine, the Book of Common Order used by the English Church at Geneva. In April, 1560, however, the Privy Council appointed a committee of five persons, including Knox, “to commit to writing their judgments touching the reformation of religion.” This First Book of Discipline, setting forth a polity adapted to the existing condition of affairs, though adopted by the Church, was rejected by the nobles, who wished to appropriate to themselves the patrimony of the old Church. In 1581 the Second Book of Discipline, drawing its system directly from the Scriptures, was adopted by the Assembly, and this-confirmed in 1592 by King James, along with the Westminster documents-is still in force. Nothing but the undaunted perseverance of those two eminent men, John Knox and Andrew Melville, succeeded at last in procuring the complete recognition of the Calvinistic faith and the Presbyterian form of government as the established religion of Scotland, which was finally and formally effected by act of Parliament and with the consent of king James (I of England and VI of Scotland) in the year 1592. The duplicity of the king, however, soon became apparent, for within a few years he intrigued to bring about the establishment of Episcopacy, and to assimilate the two national churches of Scotland and England. In this he was followed by his successors, Charles I, Charles II, and James II. The resistance of the people, the bloody persecutions that ensued, the civil turmoil, and the subsequent downfall of the Stuart dynasty, are matters of history. From 1660 to 1688, the Church was in the wilderness, scourged by such men as Claverhouse (q.v.) and Dalziel (q.v.), but leaving the record of many noble martyrdoms-as given in the story of the Scots Worthies and the Cloud of Witnesses.
Under William and Mary, Presbyterianism again became ascendant. In 1690 an “Act of Settlement” was passed, prelacy was abolished, and the Westminster Confession recognized as the creed of the Church. But the settlement of the Church on this basis was objected to by a small body of earnest men, the “Reformed Presbyterians,” who had already distinguished themselves in zeal for the “Covenants” as securities alike for the freedom of the Church and the Christianity of the State, and who now felt unable either to enter into the Church or to give their unqualified adherence to the constitution of the State. Many of the more earnest descendants of the Covenanters (q.v.) protested against the reception of such men into the Church, and, finding their protest in vain, withdrew, and organized the Reformed Presbyterian Church. (See below.) Though this secession took place in 1681, the churches were not finally organized into a presbytery till 1743. Upon the union of the two kingdoms in 1707, Presbyterianism obtained every guarantee that could be desired. Since that time it has continued to be the established religion of Scotland, as much as Episcopacy is that of England. The only confession of faith legally established before the Revolution of 1688 was that which is published in the History of the Reformation in Scotland, attributed to John Knox. It consists of twenty-five articles, and was the confession of the Episcopal as well as of the Presbyterian Church. The Parliament, however, during the Commonwealth, adopted the Westminster Confession. At the Revolution this confession was declared to be the standard of the national faith; and it was ordained by the same acts of Parliament which settled Presbyterian Church government in Scotland, “that no person be admitted or continued hereafter to be a minister or preacher within this Church unless he subscribe the [that is, this] confession of faith, declaring the same to be the confession of his faith.” By the act of union in 1707 the same is required of all professors, principals, regents, masters, and others bearing office. The Westminster Confession of Faith, then, and what are called the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, contain the publicly recognized doctrines of this Church; and it is well known that these formularies are an embodiment of the Calvinistic faith. No liturgy or public form of prayer is used in the Church of Scotland, the minister’s only guide being the Directory for the Public Worship of God. The administration of the Lord’s Supper, as a general thing observed four times a year, is conducted with simple forms, but is accompanied, usually preceded and followed, by special religious services, consisting of prayers and exhortations. A metrical version of the Psalms on the basis of that of Rous (died 1659) is used, and supplementary hymns have recently been introduced. The provision which has been made by the law of Scotland for the support of the clergy of the Established Church consists of a stipend, a small glebe of land, and a manse (parsonage house) and office houses. By an act of Parliament passed in 1810, £10,000 per annum were granted for augmenting the smaller parish stipends in Scotland. By this act the lowest stipend assigned to a minister of the establishment is £150 sterling, with a small sum, generally £8 6s. 8d., for communion elements. Patronage, in part abrogated at the Revolution, was restored in 1712 by act of Parliament. Scottish independence rebelled at this, the people claiming the right to elect their own clergy, or at least to exercise a veto over the appointment of an unsatisfactory one; and the controversy which ensued led to secession, which was ushered in first by indifference, and was helped on by the renewal of the old interest. From that time a worldly spirit crept into the Church; men of talents, but lax in principle, obtained possession of influential positions; the leaven of moderatism-ridiculed in Dr. Witherspoon’s Characteristics- set extensively to work; and in the course of time Arminian, Pelagian, and even Socinian tenets were propagated, with little attempt at concealment. The result was the secession of several important bodies from the Church. The first who formally withdrew were the Covenanters, or Cameronians, who objected to the interference of the state authorities in Church affairs, and to the Erastian principle involved in the existing establishment, as inconsistent with the covenant to which the Church had sworn. A few faithful men, led by Ebenezer Erskine, endeavored to breast the tide; but, being deposed by the commission of the Assembly, who were Moderates, they seceded in 1733, and formed themselves into a distinct body, called the Associated Presbytery, more commonly known as Seceders. They became known as the Secession Church. This secession proved a severe blow, and shook the establishment to its foundations. Another secession arose in 1760, and from it was formed the Presbyterians of Relief, better known as “The Relief Synod.” These bodies have since been united, and constitute the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland. Those who remained in the Established Church were divided in opinion on the subject of lay patronage. The sentiment against it continued to grow because of the indifference of the clergy. For a while moderatism held the upper hand, but its reign was dreary. Under the dominant influence of principal Robertson, whose studies were more devoted to elegant literature than to the Holy Scriptures, the preaching of tie Gospel was superseded by moral essays, and Dr. Blair’s cold and polished sermons were regarded as models of the highest excellence. This state of things continued till near the close of the 18th century, when Christians in Scotland began to share in that general reviving of evangelical principles which then pervaded Great Britain. A positive reaction set in, and gradually new life began to animate the frozen limbs of the Established Church. The evangelical party took heart, and constantly increased in strength. Dr. Andrew Thomson, Dr. Chalmers, and others came upon the stage of action, and under their vigorous lead a new era was inaugurated. The Assembly entered with zeal into the subject of foreign missions, while it multiplied churches to supply the need at home. The burden of patronage was felt to be a great hindrance to the progress of vital piety and active effort, and the autonomy or independent jurisdiction of the Church became a topic of earnest debate. In 1834 the General Assembly passed the celebrated “Veto Act,” giving to the Church courts the power of rejecting a presentee if judged by them unfit. This act was set aside by the civil court, and subsequently, on appeal, by the House of Lords, in the Auchterarder case, in 1839. The Assembly yielded so far as the temporalities were concerned, but at the same time unequivocally maintained the principle of nonintrusion as one that could not be given up consistently with the doctrine of the headship and sovereignty of Christ. The Strathlbogie case next occurred, bringing the civil and ecclesiastical courts into direct collision, which ended at last in the Disruption of 1843, under the lead of Chalmers, Cunningham, Welsh, Candlish, and Dunlop; 470 members signed an “Act of Separation and Deed of Demission,” and the Free Church of Scotland was organized. Soon after the separation of 1843 an act of Parliament was passed, called “Lord Aberdeen’s Act,” to define the rights of congregations and presbyteries in the calling and settlement of ministers. But in 1874 this was suspended by another act, whereby patronage was abolished, and the right of electing ministers was vested in the people. Government still reserves, however, the appointment of theological professors. The Free Church carried off about one half the communicants of the Established Church, and became a rival communion in most of the parishes of Scotland. The three denominations-the Established Presbyterian Church, the United Presbyterian Church, and the Free Church (in which the Reformed Presbyterian Church merged in 1876) -constitute the chief Presbyterian churches of Scotland at the present time.
Solemn League and Covenant
There were several covenants drawn up in Scotland having regard to the maintenance of the Reformed or Presbyterian religion in that country. The First Covenant was subscribed in Edinburgh Dec. 3, 1557, the mass of signers being known as the Congregation, and the nobility and leading subscribers as the Lords of the Congregation (q.v.). They petitioned the government for liberty of worship. Being met with dissimulation and treachery, a Second Covenant was signed at Perth, May 31, 1559, wherein the subscribers bound themselves to mutual assistance in defense of their religious rights. The appeal was made to arms, and the aid of queen Elizabeth of England was called in to counteract the French troops invited by the Papal party. On the death of the queen-mother in 1560, the French troops were withdrawn, and Parliament, being left at liberty, ordained the Presbyterian as the Established Church of Scotland. In 1638 the National Covenant was subscribed over all Scotland with great enthusiasm. This was not only a repetition of the former covenants, but contained, moreover, a solemn protest against prelacy. The Solemn League and Covenant was a compact entered into in 1643 between England and Scotland, binding the united kingdoms to mutual aid in the extirpation of popery and prelacy, and the preservation of true religion and liberty in the realm. It was drawn up by Alexander Henderson, approved by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland Aug. 17, ratified by the Convention of Estates, and accepted and subscribed Sept. 25 by the English Parliament and the Westminster Assembly (q.v.). In 1645 it was again ratified by the Scottish General Assembly, together with the Directory for Worship framed by the Westminster Assembly. Although Charles I would not approve of it, Charles II engaged by oath to observe it, a promise which he broke upon the first opportunity. The Scottish Parliament of 1661, in the interest of the king, established the royal supremacy, annulled the Solemn League and Covenant, and absolved the lieges from its obligations. The “Covenants” have a place in the volume which comprehends the Westminster Confession of Faith (Scottish edition), but for what reason it is difficult to say, for the Church of Scotland does not make adherence to them obligatory on either clerical or lay members. Certain Scottish and Irish dissenters, however, still profess attachment to the covenants, and on particular occasions renew their subscription to them. - Hetherington, Hist. of Church of Scotland; McCrie, Sketches of Ch. Hist.; Rudloff, Geschichte der Reformation in Schottland (Berlin, 1853, 2 vols.).
Covenanters The name given primarily to that body of Presbyterians in Scotland who objected to the Revolution settlement in Church and State, and desired to see in full force that kind of civil and ecclesiastical polity that prevailed in Scotland from 1638 to 1649. “According to the Solemn League and Covenant, ratified by the Parliaments of England and Scotland, and also by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster in 1643, Presbyterianism was to be maintained in the kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and popery, prelacy, superstition, heresy, schism, etc., were to be extirpated. The ‘Covenanters’ in Scotland contended, as is well known, under much suffering, for this species of Presbyterian supremacy throughout the reigns of Charles II and James VII (II). As a measure of pacification at the Revolution, Presbytery was established in Scotland by act of Parliament, 1690; but it was of a modified kind. Substantially the Church was rendered a creature of the State, more particularly as regards the calling of General Assemblies; and prelacy was not only confirmed in England and Ireland, but there was a general toleration of heresy - i.e. dissent. In sentiment, if not in form, therefore, this party repudiated the government of William III and his successors, and still maintained the perpetually binding obligations of the Covenants. The Covenanters acted under strong convictions, and only desired to carry out to a legitimate issue principles which have always been found in the Presbyterian Church of Scotland; but which, for prudential considerations, had been long practically in abeyance. In short, it is in the standards of the Covenanters that we have to look for a ‘true embodiment of the tenets held by the great body of English and Scotch Presbyterians of 1643. Others gave in to the Revolution settlement, and afterwards found cause to secede. The Covenanters never gave in, and, of course, never seceded. Although thus, in point of fact, an elder sister of the existing Church of Scotland and all its secessions, the Cameronian body did not assume a regular form till after the Revolution; and it was with some difficulty, amidst the general contentment of the nation, that it organized a communion with ordained ministers. The steadfastness of members was put to a severe trial by the defection of their ministers, and for a time the people were as sheep without a shepherd. At length, after their faith and patience had been tried for sixteen years, they were joined by the Reverend John M’Millan, from the Established Church, in 1706. In a short time afterwards the communion was joined by the Reverend John M’Neil, a licentiate of the Established Church. As a means of confirming the faith of members of the body, and of giving a public testimony of their principles, it was resolved to renew the Covenants; and this solemnity took place at Auchensach, near Douglas, in Lanarkshire, in 1712. The subsequent accession of the Reverend Mr. Nairne enabled the Covenanters to constitute a presbytery at Braehead, in the parish of Carnwath, on the 1st of August, 1743, under the appellation of the Reformed Presbytery. Other preachers afterwards attached themselves to the sect; which continued to flourish obscurely in the west of Scotland and north of Ireland. For their history and tenets we refer to the Testimony of the Reformed Presbyterian Church (Glasgow, John Keith, 1842). Holding strictly to the Covenants, and in theory rejecting the Revolution settlement, the political position of the Covenanters is very peculiar, as they refuse to recognize any laws or institutions which they conceive to be inimical to those of the kingdom of Christ” (Chambers, Encyclopaedia, s.v. Cameronians). The Reformed Presbyterians regard themselves as the modern representatives of the Covenanters. See History of the Covenanters (2 vols. 18mo, Philad. Presb. Board)