Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. IX

Image: Erskine Memorial Kirk, Stirling

Thomas Boston's discovery of the Marrow of Modern Divinity had led to the spread of the Marrow's evangelical doctrine among the younger ministers of the Church of Scotland. While the Marrowmen were left in their own parishes, and no processes were begun to depose them, it soon became clear that their opponents were not going to leave them in peace. Every effort was made to keep the Marrowmen from being transferred to more important charges in the Church of Scotland, and Boston found he was "tied down in Ettrick." Young men going forward to licence who held the Marrow theology were refused licence to preach, and members of the Synod of Fife suspected of being Marrowmen were required to re-subscribe to the Confession of Faith, adding a new clause condemning the Marrow "in view of the recent decision of the Assembly."
"We became strangers to our brethren, and as aliens and saw that our mothers had borne us men of contention." Boston complained.

The break came in 1733, when the Marrowmen, led by the Erskine brothers, seceded from the Church of Scotland, forming the 'Associate Presbytery', better known as the Secession Church. The unity of the Church of Scotland was broken, not to be mended from that day to this.

And the Marrow of Modern Divinity has passed into legend, as one of the great classics of the Scottish Church, although it was written by an English Puritan.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. VIII

Picture: A scene in Boston's Ettrick parish.

The Marrowmen had presented their answers to the Assembly. But the Assembly refused to listen, instead the Marrowmen were cited to appear at the bar of the Assembly to be rebuked and admonished! But they were not to be intimidated. Stepping forward boldly, Mr. Kid of Queensferry, the bravest of the Marrowmen, laid on the table of the Assembly a protest against the acts of Assembly that had condemned the Marrow. The acts were, "Contrary to the Word of God and to the standards of the Church and our covenants." The Marrowmen declared that "it shall be lawful to us to profess, preach, and bear testimony unto the truths condemned by the said acts of Assembly, notwithstanding of the said acts of Assembly, notwithstanding of the said acts or whatsoever may follow thereupon."

It was a declaration of war. A breach in the Church of Scotland was threatened, but while the Assembly was willing to condemn a book and admonish a few ministers, they did not want to split the Church, and the Marrowmen were left to themselves in their parishes.
Boston went ahead and published, a few years later, his own edition of the Marrow, with notes (this is available from the Free Presbyterian Bookroom, just search for 'Marrow'). The book sold very well. The English Puritan book was adopted by Scottish Evangelicalism as their standard text.

Thomas Boston died in 1732, on 20th May, one of the latter-day Scots Worthies. But the doctrine of the Marrow lived on, and it was destined to disturb the Church of Scotland once and again. Boston's Memoirs are still in print, and the Marrow, in Boston's edition, has been republished in South Korea recently.

Next time (God willing) we shall see what happened to the Marrowmen after Boston's death.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. VII

VII: Is preaching the necessity of a holy life, in order to the obtaining of eternal happiness, of a dangerous consequence to the doctrine of free grace?
The Marrowmen carefully considered this query. "We cordially and sincerely own a holy life, or good works, necessary, as an acknowledgement of God's sovereignty, and in obedience to His command... For glorifying God before the world... As being the end of our election... As expressions of gratitude to our great benefactor... To testify our thanksgiving to our Lord Redeemer and Ransomer... for evidencing and confirming our faith..." and so on. That was how far they were from denying the necessity of good works. But at the same time they believed that it was extremely dangerous to speak of holiness without also speaking of salvation at the same time. That is to say that the Marrowmen preached Evangelical obedience, that the believer obeys out of thankfulness for salvation received.

VIII. Is the knowledge, belief, and persuasion, that Christ died for me, and that he is mine, and whatever he did and suffered, he did and suffered for me, the direct act of faith, whereby a sinner is united to Christ, interested in him, instated in God's covenant of grace? Or, is that knowledge a persuasion included in the very essence of that justifying act of faith?
The Marrowmen carefully stated that they believed this to be a true statement of the act of justifying faith. We believe the promises of the gospel, fixing on the Word as our warrant to believe.

IX. What is that act of faith by which a sinner appropriates Christ and his saving benefits to himself?
The Marrowmen just referred back to their answer to the previous query.

X. Whether the revelation of the divine will in the word, affording a warrant to offer Christ unto all, and a warrant to all to receive him, can be said to be the Father's making a deed of gift and grant of Christ unto all mankind? Is this grant to all mankind by sovereign grace? And whether it is absolute or conditional?
The Marrowmen explained that God offers Christ to everyone in the gospels. The free offer of the gospel is, they said, based upon the fact that Christ is offered to all in the Bible (John 3.16). They quote Rutherford: "reprobates have as fair warrant to believe as the elect have." The grant is made to lost mankind in general. Yet this is not to be confused with the doctrine that Christ died for all. But the gospel promises are made to men, not as elect, but as lost sinners.

XI. Is the division of the law, as explained and applied in the Marrow, to be justified, and which cannot be rejected without burying several gospel truths?
The tripartite division of the law, they replied, is certainly to be defended (that is, into the moral, civil and ceremonial law). Yet the Marrow's distinction of the law as the law of works and as the law of Christ (that is, as a covenant and as a rule of life for believers) is extremely important. Unless this distinction is made, believers may fall into either antinomianism or legalism.

XII. Is the hope of heaven and the fear of hell to be excluded from the motives of the believer's confidence? And if not, how can the Marrow be defended, that expressly excludes them, though it should allow of other motives?
So long as heaven is properly represented as "a state of endless felicity in the enjoyment of God in Christ", then of course desire of heaven is a motive of obedience. But a freedom from the fear of hell is, "one of the special branches of that glorious liberty wherewith Christ has made his people free." Fear of God is a worthy motive of obedience for believers, but not fear of hell.

So the Marrowmen replied to their critics, hoping that such an explanation would persuade the Assembly to withdraw their condemnation of the Marrow. Next time (God willing) we shall see what the Assembly said in reply.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. VI

The Marrowmen were examined by the committee on the following questions:

1. Whether are there any precepts in the gospel that were not actually given before the gospel was revealed?
The Marrowmen replied that there were no precepts, properly speaking, in the gospel. The gospel is grace, not law. It contains promises of mercy and salvation.

II. Is not the believer now bound, by the authority of the creator, to personal obedience to the moral law, though not in order to justification?
To which the Marrowmen heartily agreed.

III. Doth the annexing of a promise of life, and a threatening of death to a precept, make it a covenant of works?
Yes, they answered, as it relates to the law given to our first parents.

IV.If the moral law, antecedent to its recieving the form of a covenant of works, had a threatening of hell annexed?
The Marrowmen answered that the moral law never was in the world as a rule of life except in one of the two covenants, of works and of grace. Therefore this was a silly question. But sin, they affirmed, is always deserving of hell.

V. If it be peculiar to believers to be free of the commanding power of the law, as a covenant of works?
Yes, the Marrowmen replied.

VI. If a sinner, being justified, has all things at once that are necessary for salvation? And if personal holiness, and progress in holy obedience, is not necessary to a justified person's possession of glory, in case of his continuing in life after his justification?
The grounds of this question was a quotation from Luther contained in the Marrow, "For in Christ I have all things at once, neither need I anything more, that is necessary unto salvation." The Marrowmen agreed totally with this passage, but they added that personal holiness and progress in holy obedience will certainly be found in any true believer. Personal holiness and justification, they insisted, would always be found together, since, "grace is glory begun, and glory grace in perfection." Yet holiness and obedience are not conditions required to gaining glory. Holiness is a part of salvation.

We shall reserve the rest of the points for another post.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. V

Image: St. Giles Kirk, Edinburgh, as it was in Boston's day. The Assembly met in one of the Kirk's aisles.

The General Assembly's 'Committee for the Purity of Doctrine' condemned The Marrow of Modern Divinity on five counts, as teaching:
1. That assurance is of the nature of faith.
2. That the atonement of Christ is universal.
3. That holiness is not necessary to salvation.
4. That the fear of punishment and the hope of reward are not proper motives of a believer's obedience.
5. That the believer is not under the commanding power of the Law.

The Assembly accepted the overture, and the Marrow was condemned as a dangerous book. Thomas Boston was horrified. The Marrow was not just another book to him, it had come as a messager of God. What was more, it had been condemned for teaching what it did not teach, the 'support' that the Committee had found for their charges being passages wrenched out of their contexts. The Marrow did not teach that Assurance was of the nature of faith, although some quotations from Luther seemed to do so. It did not teach a universal atonement, only a universal Gospel call. The Marrow did teach that holiness was not a condition of salvation, and that the proper motive for a believer's obedience is love to Christ, and it did teach that the believer is not under the commanding power of the law, but is under grace, and the Law is a rule of life to him.
Boston sought redress for the unjustice at presbytery and synod, at last appealing to the General Assembly of 1721. He and the other 'Marrowmen' gave a Representation to the Assembly, hoping for action. But the Assembly was disturbed by the terrible illness of the King's commissioner, and the matter was again taken up by the committee. Boston and his friends were examined by the committee on a dozen questions.

Of which more next time (God willing)

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. IV

The Marrow of Modern Divinity had been republished in 1717, by James Hog, minister of Carnock. Thomas Boston rejoiced to see the book republished, but another man, Principal Hadow of St. Andrews University, entertained very different feelings. Hadow was a 'Neonomian', one who believed that Christ had died in order to establish a 'new law', with certain conditions that had to be fulfilled in order to come to Christ. What was more, he held a personal grudge against Hog from their student days in Holland. Hadow's 'Orthodoxy', as far as it went, was a cold, hard thing, and his doctrinal deviations and personal enmity against Hog led Hadow to preach violently against the Marrow as soon as it was published. Had he been just an ordinary minister in a parish charge, the effects would not have been so great. But he was principal of St. Andrews, and therefore one of the most senior men in the Church of Scotland. Hadow preached many violent sermons against the book, declaring that the author was 'an Independent barber', and that the work itself was antinomian. The matter was taken to the General Assembly, the highest court of the Church, and they set up 'The Committee for Purity of Doctrine' to look into the work.
The Committee examined various supporters of the Marrow (they were now termed the 'Marrowmen' on various points. In the Assembly of 1720 the Committee submitted an overture condemning the Marrow on five points.

Of which more (God willing) next time.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. III

Pictured: Ettrick Kirk, where Boston ministered for twenty-five years after he left Simprin in 1707. The tower is a 19th Century addition.

The Church of Scotland had regained her freedom at the Glorious Revolution of 1688. However plans had not been wanting to bring her into bondage once again. in 1714 one of the Divinity professors at Glasgow was accused of 'Socianianism, Arminianism and Jesuitism' and tried for heresy. He wriggled and escaped, partly due to the Assembly's unwillingness to try him. What was more worrying, however, was that some of the statements made in the Assembly's trial of the professor seemed to deny Evangelical truth and erred on the side of legalism. The Presbytery of Auchterarder, determined that no-one holding unevangelical views should hold office in the bounds of their presbytery, drew up a list of questions to be asked to candidates for ordination. One of these questions ran thus: "I believe it is not sound and orthodox to teach that we must forsake sin in order to our coming to Christ, and instating us in covenant with God."
The presbytery intended to guard against legalism. Taken out of context, however, their question might be seen as antinomian. When a student refused to sign this article and was refused license to preach, he complained to the Assembly, who roundly condemned the article as antinomian in 1717.
It was in that very year that James Hog of Carnock republished The Marrow of Modern Divinity. A veritable firestorm ensued.

Of which we shall tell (God willing) next time.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. II

In our last post we saw how Thomas Boston was so affected by a little book called The Marrow of Modern Divinity. A book with such a title written today would be a compendium of errors, but the book Boston found was published in 1646 (A second part was published in 1648, but Boston found only the first part at Simprin. The full text may be found here). The date tells us that what Boston had found was the marrow of Puritan divinity. The book gathered together the choicest passages out of authors such as Luther, Calvin, Perkins, Thomas Goodwin, Theodore Beza, Thomas Hooker, and a forest of the best British and continental theologians of the 16th and 17th centuries.
The author was one Edward Fisher, an English gentleman and a scholar of Brazenose College, Oxford. He presents the First Part (which is what we are interested in) as a conversation between four men, EVANGELISTA, a Minister of the Gospel. NOMIST, a Legalist. ANTINOMISTA, an Antinomian. NEOPHYTUS, a Young Christian. The subject of their conversation is the place of the Law in the Christian life, the Covenants, the Gospel, and conversion. One of the most enlightening and suprising portions of the book is the section on The Warrant to Believe on Christ. There Fisher presents a wonderfully free Gospel offer. Boston observes on this that, "from this deed of gift and grant [of Mark 16.15] it was that the ministerial offer was appointed to be made in the most extensive terms." Fisher wrote: "Go and tell every man without exception, that here is good news for him; Christ is dead for him; and if he will take him, and accept of his righteousness, he shall have him."
Fisher's concern in the book was to undermine both legalism and antinomianism, and present the full Gospel way of faith and salvation by grace. He had himself been oppressed by legalism for twelve years, labouring to justify himself by works and, when he discovered the true Christian teaching on Justification, he wrote his little book and published it so that all the world cound discover the same thing. His intentions were good, and his little book is as enlightening and arresting today as it was in 1646 and in 1700. Boston's Simprin parishoners were amazed at the change it effected in their young minister's preaching. No longer was it heavy, confused and unsure, it was full of life, power, and authority from the King of Kings.

But Thomas Boston was not to be left to preach this free Gospel unmolested. God willing our next post shall explain why not.

Free Grace AND a Free Gospel. I

I posted, a little while back, a quotation from Principal Macleod's book Scottish Theology on the subject of Hyper-Calvinism. Well, here at Free St. George's we do not believe in ducking issues. Principal Macleod was writing about the 'Marrow Controversy' of the early eighteenth century. Here I begin what will be (God willing), a series of posts on the 'Marrow Controversy.'

Young ministers in their first churches often find things difficult. Thomas Boston (1676-1732. Pictured) was ordained pastor of the Church of Scotland at Simprin, in the Scottish Borders in 1699. It was a tiny parish, and a tiny congregation (Boston called them his 'handful). A new manse was built for him, on a very humble scale, close to the Kirk building, and he began his work as a country pastor.
Boston often visited his 'handful', and, due to the paucity of his library, he studied the people as well as books. One day in 1700, while visiting an old soldier's cottage, Boston saw two little books above one of the windows. With the instincts of a minister with a small library, he took down the books, and to his joy they proved to be works of theology. One was a book by Saltmarsh, a hyper-Calvinist, the other a book entitled The Marrow of Modern Divinity. Boston had never heard of the book before. The old soldier let his young minister keep both books, for he himself saw that Boston needed to learn the way of the Gospel better. Boston found Saltmarsh quite unpleasant, but he drank in the Marrow, and it cleared up all his confusion on the covenant theology. It gave him boldness in evangelistic preaching, and soon the little Kirk was ringing with the free offer of the Gospel to sinners. It became Boston's favourite book, and it remained so.

In the next post, God willing, we shall consider what exactly the book that so excited and changed young Thomas Boston was.