Christians, separated as they are from one another across a variety of denominations and splinter groups, nevertheless generally agree that more unity would be a good thing. While we value the spiritual oneness we have in Christ irrespective of different labels and groupings, Scripture is clear that this spiritual oneness should be reflected in visible oneness. We have to concede that divisions in the church not only harm our gospel witness to the world, they also hinder everyone’s spiritual progress and, even worse, disregard God’s requirement that His people should be one. So why does disunity persist? In a recent publication, James Durham identifies eight things that act as temptations to excuse or justify our ongoing separation from our brothers and sisters. James Durham’s work on church divisions is newly available in a fresh edition from Reformation Heritage Books, The Scandal of Church Divisions: Healing the Wounds of Schism.

When people are tempted to perpetuate divisions, what are the various factors which might make the temptation stronger and harder to resist, especially for ministers and elders?

Zeal for God Masking the Desire for a Reputation

Once people are invested in a cause, and their own reputation is at stake for taking sides, then their heatedness and tenaciousness can express itself under other appearances, perhaps under cover of zeal for God’s honor, or respect for the reputation of the ministry and the ordinances. It may not seem to be any personal credit or respect that motivates them but zeal and respect for the Master, as is insinuated when the disciples sought to be avenged by fire from heaven on the place that would not receive Christ (Luke 9:54), and also when they forbade some to cast out devils, even in Christ’s name, because they thought it was not for Christ’s honor (Luke 9:49).

Firm Conviction of the Rightness of Their Cause

The temptation to persist in a division is often accompanied with great confidence about the justness and equity of their own side and about the unreasonableness of their adversaries. There may be in part some good ground for this, where the controversy is some doubtful, disputable thing. How great confidence both Job and his friends had in their debate! Both sides frequently express the desire that God would decide the matter (confident that God would take their side), when in reality God did not fully approve of either of them in either matter or manner. Sometimes also there may be a persuasion which one side finds very satisfying, when yet it is not from God. This was likely how it was on both sides in Galatia, even when they were biting and devouring one another (Gal. 5:8). For we often find in experience that once a disputable thing has been argued about over a period of time, it will become palpably clear and altogether necessary to those who have argued for it. Commitment to the cause bribes the light and perverts even the wisdom of the just. Hence we see that the longer someone argues for something, the more confident they become about it, because his own arguments secretly prevail more with himself than reasons proposed by any others to the contrary can.

Believing the Matter to Be Necessary and Important

There is a strength in the temptation to continue in a division when the matter under dispute is not only thought to be just but also necessary and of great importance.

Circumstantial truths are presented as necessary

A question over the most circumstantial truth (if we may speak so) can be regarded as necessary and a thing that cannot be quit. Even those on the side of the error will talk up the controversy as if it were a high point of Christianity. Among the early church fathers, those who maintained the millenarian opinion, and Christ’s personal reign, thought it a point of high concernment. Justin Martyr even said that anyone who thinks differently is no Christian. In later, popish writers, we see how strenuously they argue for the necessity of things like holy anointing oil. The apparent weightiness of such things gives people the impression that they are foundational points of Christianity.

Claims about the good of the church are inflated

If the dispute is over a matter of fact or a question of government, people think it is so important for the good of the church that they cannot back down without being accessory to the corruption and hurt of the church, or complicit in undermining the church’s authority. Hence the faults and consequences of the other side are so often exaggerated, and canons and constitutions are alleged to be broken, as we may see (among other instances) in the debate between Rome and Constantinople over who should have precedence before Antichrist was revealed, one claiming to have the support of an act of the Council of Nicea, the other an act of the Council of Chalcedon, and Rome claiming to have Saint Peter on their side, and the good of the universal church.

Faults on the other side are exaggerated

If it is a dispute about personalities, such as who is to be acknowledged bishop or minister, or who has been lawfully ordained or deposed, etc., then those on the other side are conceived to be notoriously heinous, and those on the side they support are believed to be incomparably gifted and eminent. No wonder, then, that they make their point so vehemently, because they believe that so much of the good or evil of the church depends on the admission of these men to office and the rejection of the others. This flows inadvertently from the former differences, because when one side are confident that they themselves are right on such an important point, they necessarily must think that those on the other side are wrong and unspiritual. The hotter the opposition grows, the more they think each other the more inexcusably obstinate.

By this they are also disposed to hear and receive reports and misinformation about their opponents. They end up honestly believing that they are outrageously wrong in every possible way, including in their motives and intentions. The differences that arose first between Luther and Karlstadt, and afterward between Luther and his followers on the one side, and Zwingli, Calvin, and others on the other side, fully demonstrate this. How little these beginnings were at first! And yet even the smallest differences were exaggerated, and the persons on either side were misrepresented, even before these differences came to the height which they did. We may observe also that making such mistakes about people and their actions, and the bitterness that follows, is most ordinarily discernible to be on the side where, in all conscience and fairness, there is least to be said in its defense.

Believing You Have Pure Motives

Add to these factors people’s conviction that their motives are honest and sincere. They are not aiming for any goal that is actually corrupt, nor do they entertain or approve any palpable dissimulation in their professions. But as they have some confidence of the rightness of their side, so they may regard it as a testimony to their sincerity of heart to maintain their cause. Great strength in the temptation to continue division lies here. For when you believe in your own sincerity and integrity, and, it may be, you have access to God, and liberty to pray, even in reference to such things, it is not easy to stop yourself in that way. And yet it cannot be thought but that among the instances of such divisions as we have given, people on both sides had an honest end and aim and did pray and had access in prayer. Indeed, there is no question but that many of them on both sides would go to heaven with such differences, for they continued zealous in their divisions, even to death. Nor should we find this strange, for the best know only in part and are liable to make mistakes, and their zeal and sincerity are squared according to their knowledge. It was such zeal (that is, not according to knowledge) that made Paul and others, with a kind of sincerity, persecute the church; therefore, proportionally, there may be zeal and sincerity in lesser things when there is ignorance of them.

Fear of Losing Face by Relenting

Committing yourself to taking sides strengthens the temptation to perpetuate the division, because by backing down afterward, it leaves you open to criticism for being so hasty to start with, and your ministry loses impact in other ways, and your followers, who possibly may be more tenacious and zealous than yourself, may be irritated and provoked. These things then look more damaging, even to the work of the gospel, than continuing divided. It is written of Luther that in discussion with Melanchthon and others toward the end of his life, he acknowledged to them that he had been too vehement and peremptory in his writings on the Lord’s Supper. When they urged him then to publish something to this effect, he replied that he was afraid to do so in case it would diminish the authority and weight of other controversies he had appeared in for God, so he declined to do it, although he did allow Melanchthon, after his death, to do about it as he thought fit.

Fear of Losing Credibility in Other Areas

Sometimes also, the temptation to continue in a division is strengthened by fear of bringing bad consequences on those who side with them. For example, if they make too many concessions in such and such particulars for union, they might make themselves and their cause odious to others who possibly had more respectful thoughts of them because of the stance they took in such things. Luther is said to have given this as a main reason why he kept up the difference over the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper and would not unite with Calvin and others over it. Calvin’s views were generally more hated than Luther’s theory of consubstantiation, and Luther was afraid that uniting would leave the princes and others more open to malice and hatred.

Looking at the Failings of the Other Side

It strengthens the temptation to continue a division when people do not look at the difference simply in itself but comparatively with respect to the principles and behavior of their opponents. By considering things that are displeasing in them and their way, they are made the more tenacious and brought to justify themselves the more. Hence it is in such divisions that the great stress of debates lies in aspersions and accusations, recriminations and counter-recriminations, as if the only vindicating argument was, “The other side are wrong in so many things about their behavior, therefore our way must be right,” or, “therefore we have good reason to divide from them.” Almost necessarily, such recriminations are used in debates where the matter is not of such momentousness and clarity, as in the debates we have mentioned between Jerome and Rufinus, where there was no dispute on either side but recriminations on both. The same thing can be seen in the accusations of the Donatists.

Expecting the Other Side to Concede First

In such differences also, each side is ready to think that the other should and will concede to them and will not risk division on so little a thing. Hence, many have been drawn on to division from small beginnings, which they would not have yielded to if they had known what the consequences would be, or if they had not expected that the other side would have yielded. When this expectation is not met, their commitment to their own side becomes stronger, and the division more irreconcilable. It was remarked of Victor that he would not have been so peremptory in the controversy about when to hold Easter, if he had not assumed that the other side would have yielded.

For a more extended discussion on the theme of church unity, a recommended resource is James Durham’s insightful and practical book, The Scandal of Church Divisions: Healing the Wounds of Schism, published by Reformation Heritage Books.

FURTHER READING

AUTHOR MENU

Homesickness is the distress caused by being away from home. When God brings people into His family, their home becomes heaven instead of earth, and they keep longing to get home. Instead of being a child of their time, beholden to the culture and values of this world, the believer can’t help showing by their tastes and mannerisms and colloquialisms that they belong somewhere else. Their thoughts turn frequently to their Father in heaven, their Elder Brother preparing their place there, and their Comforter preparing them for their place. As citizens of a better place, they walk and talk, eat, sleep and breathe heavenly. In the following updated extract, James Durham gives six characteristics of the lifestyle or “conversation” of those who are citizens of heaven.

I would like to show you how a Christian may be said to have (and should have) his “conversation” or “citizenship” in heaven.

Our heart is in heaven

First, in respect of the inward holy frame and divine set of his heart. The Christian should be heavenly in that. Free from those distempering passions that the people of this world are subjected to (even enslaved to and harried with), the Christian should not have his affections dragging along on the earth, nor his delights or desires taken up with things that are earthly. Instead he should be mortified to and weaned from all those things.

Unlike those who are on all occasions tossed up and down with their moods and with every wind of temptation, the Christian should be so calm, composed and sober, settled and fixed in a heavenly frame of spirit that words of reproach would not much trouble him, nor crosses and afflictions much disquiet him. He should have such composure and sedateness of spirit that he would be much above the levity and unstayedness that worldly people are under the power of, and he should endeavour to be purged from those impure mixtures of self-interests that reign in the worldly.

Our work is in heaven

Secondly, in respect of our work, as Christians we should and may have our “conversation” in heaven, when we are much in the exercise of those graces, and in the practice of those duties, that we will be occupied with in heaven.

We are to be much in love to God, taken up with delighting in Him.

We are to be much in communion with God, holily impatient when we don’t have Him, or have to live without His company.

We are to be much in the study and searching out of His perfections.

We are to be studying to have the heart fixed, as if it was a pillar in His house, and not to go out from Him.

We are to be much in admiring and adoring the free grace and love of God, and to be in a holy manner ravished with the contemplation of these.

We are to be much in the work of prayer, and much in the work of praise, saying, “Worthy is the Lamb to receive glory, honour, dominion, etc,” joining with the four beasts and four and twenty elders, saying, “Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty!”

We are to be much in prizing and valuing God, in setting out and commending Him.

We are to be in all duties willing and cheerful, doing God’s will cheerfully and with alacrity.

We are to be much in longing for the sabbath, to converse more closely with him, longing often for privacy and quiet opportunities to pour out our hearts before Him.

And we are to do all this with holy coveting to do it better, praying that his will may be done on earth, as it is done in heaven.

Our distinctive character is from heaven

Thirdly, believers may be said to have their “conversation” (and you are called to have yours) in heaven in respect of a heavenly walk, and as having a heavenly impression on all your lifestyle — to be walking as it were in heaven, and as if “Holiness to the Lord” were written on your foreheads.

This is a very comprehensive point, which includes things like the following.

(1) The heart is fixed in meditating on God and His law, on spiritual and heavenly things. There is a sublime and divine strain of mind, which does not debase itself to pursue vanities, but keeps in a close and constant pursuit after communion with God and conformity to Him. As David says, “When I awake I am still with thee” (Psalm 139), labouring to leave the heart and mind in heaven when you lie down, and seeking to find it there when you rise.

(2) Your affections, love, desires and delights are in heaven, or heavenly.

(3) Your words savour of heaven, “ministering grace to the hearers.” You endeavour to have your words weighty and grave when you are commending God and His grace.

(4) Your hearing of the Word, and your praying, carry much of a heavenly stamp and impression on them. You hear, as if God were speaking to you directly from heaven, and you pray, as if you were actually before His throne.

(5) In your everyday life, as in eating and drinking, and relaxing, and following your lawful callings and employments, even the most menial and laborious of them, you have a different end in view than the people of the world do, for you make your main end to glorify God. And your heavenly and divine way of going about these things is the kind of way that may be convicting, edifying and attractive to onlookers. You are not predominantly influenced by selfish whims, plans or interests, looking only, or mainly, to what may please or profit yourselves, but levelling all at the glory of God, and the edification and good of others, as well as your own.

Our business is in heaven

Fourthly, we may be said to have our “conversation” in heaven, when we have a holy commerce and trading (as it were) with heaven, the way a man may trade in France or Spain. To have converse in heaven is spiritually to trade there — to have faith and hope exercised in and about heaven, to send many prayers and desires to heaven, as so many empty vessels, and to be in the lively and longing expectation that they will return full and richly laden — and to make many visits to heaven.

It means to be busy in all these, neither seldom, nor transiently, and only by fits and starts, but frequently and with more persistence. Even if they should sometimes return either with seeming loss, or with very little gain, yet you keep up the trade and traffic, seeking to make up our loss by a new voyage there (for not everyone makes profit equally quickly).

Our residence is in heaven

Fifthly, we may be said to converse in heaven, by our abiding (as it were) in heaven. This is one of the highest steps of a heavenly “conversation.” How it is that a believer, while on earth, can abide in heaven?

1. By having your heart in heaven, where your treasure is. For, as the Lord says, “where a man’s treasure is, there his heart is.” The man, as it were, dwells there, and if at any time he moves away a little, he leaves the most of his stock there, and leaves his heart as an overseer. So, though the Christian is discoursing, buying, selling, eating, drinking, etc., yet in all these, his heart may and ought in some way to be in heaven.

2. By having your faith in heaven, and, as it were, never coming out of it.

3. By having your love in heaven, folding your two arms around the Lamb and Him that sits on the throne, holily reluctant to have them loosed from those sweet soul-solacing and soul-satisfying embraces.

4. By having your hope in heaven. This is “an anchor cast within the veil,” and makes the soul safe and sure amidst the greatest tempests of outward trouble, as a ship rides safely when she has cast anchor on firm ground, so that there is no fear she will drive.

When these four — the heart, faith, hope, and love — are in heaven, we may say that your best half is in heaven. Your tethering stake is loosed, and much of your tabernacle taken down, and in a good measure you are fit, ready and ripe for your dissolution and for heaven. In this sense you are called and obliged to “have your conversation in heaven.”

Our enjoyments are in heaven

Sixthly, a believer’s “conversation” is in heaven when his contentment, delight and satisfaction are in heaven — when all that you desire, all that you delight in, all that your soul feeds on, and all that you are comforted with, is in heaven. You don’t have a good day, or even a comfortable good hour, except what is given you from heaven.

This is not only to be abiding with God but to be delighting in God — having the peace of God that passes understanding guarding the heart, and His love shed abroad in it, and having all that sustains life coming from heaven. As it says in Colossians 3:3, “our life is hid with Christ in God.” The believer is affected with nothing, feeds on nothing, and is satisfied with nothing so much as with what comes from heaven. He wakes, he sleeps, he rests there.

This is to live in heaven, and to be heavenly in our conversation. This is what you are called and obliged to. As believers you are of different nature to others, and as believers you are called to a different, more divine frame of soul in your work and walk, in your thoughts and words, in your outward duties, and your inward graces, in your commerce and trading, in your contentment, delight, and satisfaction — to be heavenly in it all.

Why is it so difficult to be heavenly?

Does anyone here say, “This is a very hard task!”

I answer, first, Can it be hard to be in heaven? No, it’s the definition of easiness, for Christ’s yoke is easy and His burden is light, and to the extent that our conversation is in heaven, to that extent we have true spiritual rest and repose of soul. It is what we leave behind in the world that makes the difficulty to get our spirits hauled up to heaven, and to be kept there. The difficulty is here, but the more our heart and the mind are there, we have really the more ease.

Second, I ask, will you shift, deny or decline a duty, because it’s difficult and hard? Certainly it’s hard to corrupt nature, yet notwithstanding all the difficulty of it, the Apostle Paul with his fellows and followers managed it to a good degree, and we too may attain it through grace, according to our own capacity. Is not this the way to heaven which our Lord calls “strait,” and which “only few find”? And yet, if we would only give it a try in good earnest, we would find it to be not so very strait or unpassable as we imagine it to be. We would find it accompanied with such delight as would much sweeten any hardness in it, and we would get an insight into the heavenly mysteries, and a look at our names written in heaven and in the Lamb’s book of life, and we wouldn’t lack one hour’s feeding on and being solaced by these delights for all the delights of the men of this world. Since it’s only hard to corruption, it should be something we endeavour and pursue all the harder.

FURTHER READING

AUTHOR MENU

Although we should all be encouraging each other in the life of holiness, sometimes the Lord’s people are hindered and weakened by the sins and questionable behaviour of others. If things get very serious, we need to “mark and avoid” the people responsible, but plenty of incidents and activities do not justify this level of response. In his pastoral capacity James Durham was aware of believers who were so bothered by the problematic things in the lives of their fellow church members that they wondered whether it was even right to sit together with them at the Lord’s supper? Seeing that, at least in their perception, those individuals did not meet the criteria for participating in this ordinance, these believers were concerned that it would spoil or “pollute” the Lord’s supper — so much so, that perhaps they themselves should avoid taking communion with them. In the following updated extract, James Durham explains from multiple angles why this is the wrong conclusion. We can be too fastidious. (Note that in his discussion, the term “scandalous” does not mean “outrageous, shockingly immoral” but rather has the slightly technical sense of “causing some form of spiritual harm to other people, and/or bringing reproach on the name of Christ.”)

Does admitting scandalous persons to the Lord’s supper pollute the communion? Is it sinful to receive the Lord’s supper alongside such persons, or, are fellow communicants defiled by doing so? Let us, for answer, consider “pollution” distinctly, with reference to four different things.

The Lord’s supper itself

Firstly, there are two possible ways in which the sacraments could be polluted. The first is intrinsic, relating to the essence of the sacrament. By corrupting the institution of Christ, the sacrament could be turned into no sacrament (as it is in the Roman mass), or made into something hurtful (as when significant ceremonies, sinfully devised by men, are mixed and added, besides and contrary to Christ’s institution). The first everts the nature of the sacrament, so that it is henceforth not a sacrament at all any more. The second poisons it, so that it is impossible to receive the sacrament without actively partaking of that sin.

Another way of polluting the sacrament is extrinsic, relating to the circumstances, rather than the essence — how we make use of it, or when it is applied beyond Christ’s warrant (such as when it is administered to someone who Christ does not permit). In that case it is not a sacrament to that person, yet it remains a sacrament in itself. This is pollution in the sense of making the sacrament “profane,” or common, to us.

For example, when the word of promise is applied generally in a congregation, without distinguishing, in application, between “the precious and the vile,” this is a profaning of the Word (for the word of promise should not be made common any more than the sacrament) (see Ezekiel 22:26). Yet, even in that case, the Word does not cease to be God’s Word, although it is misused in this way.

As a pearl cast before a sow is puddled and abused, yet it still remains a pearl, so it is here in the Word and sacraments; they are misused when misapplied, yet they are still the ordinances of God. The temple was said to be profaned when it was made more common in its use than was allowed, yet it was still the temple of the Lord.

Admitting scandalous persons to the sacraments may in this sense be called polluting the sacraments, but the sacraments essentially in themselves are not affected.

Those who participate in the Lord’s supper

Secondly, we may consider “pollution” with reference to the persons who are admitted to the sacraments.

The sacraments may be polluted, (1) by grossly scandalous persons; (2) by hypocrites; (3) by believers not exercising their graces.

The sacrament is polluted both by and to all these, because, just as “to the pure all (lawful) things are pure,” so to the unclean and unbelieving, “nothing is pure, because their mind and conscience are defiled” (Titus 1:15). Thus their praying, sacrificing, hearing, ploughing, etc., is all unclean.

The same principle applies to believers. Although believers are in a good and clean state, yet they may be in an evil and unholy frame, and then it may be said that in some sense they pollute the Lord’s supper to themselves.

Those who are responsible for admitting people to the Lord’s supper

Thirdly, the church office-bearers are the ones who have the responsibility of admitting people to partake in the Lord’s supper. Although the sacrament is not profaned essentially, yet office-bearers may sin, and be guilty of profaning it, by opening the door wider than Christ has allowed, and not keeping the right boundaries. As ministers may sin in applying the promises and consolations of the covenant too widely, so they may sin in applying its seals (i.e., the sacraments) too widely.

Yet the church office-bearers would not be sinning in situations like the following.

1. When a scandal has not been made known to them. Office-bearers are not required to look on people as scandalous till their scandal has been exposed, which may mean that people who are in fact scandalous are admitted to the Lord’s table legitimately .

2. When scandals cannot be confirmed as such in a church court (though possibly they be true in themselves). Such persons may be admitted, even against the inclination and affection of the office-bearers, yet not against their conscience. It is a high censure in Christ’s house to refuse admittance to the Lord’s table, and His servants the office-bearers are not to act arbitrarily (for that would bring confusion with it) but by the rules they have been given, which includes, “not to receive an accusation, but under two or three witnesses.”

3. When by some circumstances it is not edifying, but rather hurtful, to the church, or to the persons concerned, to debar them from the Lord’s supper.

Those who sit at the Lord’s supper

Let us consider, finally, if this ordinance is polluted to those receive the Lord’s supper alongside those who are scandalous.

Suppose that some are sinfully admitted to the Lord’s supper by the office-bearers of the church. I say that it is not a pollution or sin to others to partake alongside them. The sacrament, as Christ’s ordinance, may be blessed notwithstanding to the non-scandalous communicants, just as when the Word is unwarrantably applied such a way that pearls are cast before swine, any tender souls who are present may warrantably take that misused word as God’s Word, and it may prove useful to them.

To confirm this truth, I offer the following reasons.

The first is, the Word and sacraments are of one nature, and are polluted, or made use of, in one and the same way. The only difference between them is that the one (the Word) is usually wronged doctrinally, the other (the sacraments) disciplinarily.

Secondly, when someone is admitted to the Lord’s supper unwarrantably, the sin of this does not belong to the communicants but to the minister. Therefore, it cannot wrong them, any more than, for example, lack of preparation in others who come.

Thirdly, the sin of someone else cannot loosen me from my obligation in a duty. Now, it is the duty of every one to examine themselves, and, equally, being prepared by suitable self-examination, to eat (1 Cor. 11:28). Now though the command requiring self-examination does not warrant office-bearers not to examine, yet it does warrant individual communicants to endeavour rightly to go about that duty themselves, and not to be much anxious what others do, as if other people’s behaviour was the ground of our approaching to the Lord’s table.

Fourthly, as it is notwithstanding a sacrament, so to neglect it is to neglect a sacrament.

Fifthly, if scandalous communicants did corrupt it to others, then a corrupt minister could never administer a sacrament. This would contradict the Lord’s way, for He has sometimes appointed such to dispense His mysteries both in the Old and New Testaments. If the corruption of the minister does not pollute the ordinance, much less will the scandal of any others.

Seventhly, it would be a great and inextricable snare to people’s consciences, if the fruit of our communicating depended not only on our own preparing of ourselves, but also on the ministers and our fellow communicants. If the fact that they were not prepared, or inadequately prepared, brought guilt on us, it would be impossible that we could ever receive the sacrament with a clear conscience.

How so?

Because (1) it is hard to think but that, when a communion is celebrated, there will be one or more who should not be admitted, and the admission of even one or two profanes the ordinance. In fact, if their defilement was ours, then, even if we thought them to be scandalous, we could not in faith communicate with them, lest the ordinance be defiled by us. But this cannot be.

(2) The presence of any hypocrite would defile it to us, for his hypocrisy would defile it to him, and he has no right before God to come. It would make no difference if we did not know that he was a hypocrite. For something is still sin when we don’t know it, and in any case, it is his hypocrisy, not our knowing his sin, that defiles the sacrament. Otherwise, the same sacrament might be God’s ordinance, participated warrantably by someone who did not know, and not by someone else, who did know! Which would be hard to explain.

(3) If even other believers themselves were spiritually out of sorts, it would pollute this ordinance to us, and incapacitate us to receive it, for we should keep as great a distance from the sins of believers as from the sins of others.

(4) For that matter, you could not communicate with yourself! You have corruption. You know your corruption, as well as you can know anyone else’s. So, it would pollute the ordinance to yourself, and bring guilt with it. Therefore, if someone else’s sin that you know about is capable of polluting the ordinance, your own sin would pollute it much more.

You couldn’t argue that your corruption matters less because it is weakened by grace, because it is still corruption, and certainly some corruption in ourselves will weigh more than complete corruption in someone else, especially considering that our own sin necessarily pollutes all our holy things.

Nor could you argue that your corruption matters less because it’s impossible to be freed from it while in this life. That’s because, in this life, a mixture of good and bad in the visible church (hence at the Lord’s supper), is as certain as a mixture of grace and corruption in a believer. If our own corruption, which involves us in sin in the manner of our doing duties, does not loosen us from a commanded duty, much less does sin in others. We are no less prohibited to have communion with sin and corruption in ourselves than in others, and also we are commanded as effectually to purge our own heart as the church.

FURTHER READING

AUTHOR MENU

What can Christianity offer? In the last few years, an increasing number of younger people, especially young men, are turning to church in a trend some are calling the ‘quiet revival.’ For the age groups labelled Gen Z and Millennials, atheism is not such a cool or edgy option as openness to religion, including Christianity. There is a feeling that life is unsatisfactory, and whereas in the past few decades it would have felt silly to turn to God for help, people here and there are increasingly trying Christianity to see whether God can help with the emptiness and inexplicable miserableness they are experiencing. But can our churches compete with everything else on offer from other religions, alternative forms of spirituality and secularist scams which counterfeit true happiness? In the following updated extract, James Durham acknowledges the spiritual bankruptcy in human experience and the gnawing thirst for something more and better than what we have. Identifying sin as the root problem, Durham presents salvation from sin through Jesus Christ as what will comprehensively meet our need. If the free forgiveness of sins is on offer, will there be any takers?

God the Father and God the Son have made a good and grace-filled bargain, which is wholly mercy, and they bring it to market and put it on sale on exceedingly easy terms, suited to bankrupt sinners. It is set out in Isaiah 55:1–3: “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David.”

The offer

May we briefly and in a few words sum up what is in this bargain?

1. All things that contribute to peace with God, and remove the quarrel between God and the sinner.

2. All things that relate to or are needful for life and godliness (2 Peter 1:4).

3. All things that belong to the comfort and consolation of believers (“strong consolation,” it is called in Hebrews 6:18). There is no need so great, but there is a supply for it here, no situation so sad, but there is a comfort for it here, when you flee to Christ for refuge.

4. All that is needful for the joy and complete happiness of those who heartily accept it.

If God and Christ, grace and mercy are in it, is anything missing? May I not very confidently ask you, is it not a good bargain? If the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, grace, heaven and glory are a good bargain, then this is most certainly a wonderfully good, matchless, and unique bargain.

Is not this gospel, which brings all these great things to the market, good news? Take heed then that you do not receive this grace in vain. These wares are worthy of all possible acceptance and welcome — do not leave them there unbought!

The buyers

You would have readily thought that such goods would be restricted to mighty monarchs, great statesmen, learned philosophers, or holy prophets and apostles. Yet the grace of God ordinarily comes in a lower way. The proclamation is to “every one that thirsts, and he that hath no money.”

Is there anyone who lacks what will make them happy, which they would love to have? Is there anyone who needs to make their peace with God? Is anyone unclear or unsure whether Jesus belongs to them? Is anyone wrestling with a body of death, and groaning under it? Does anyone long to have their sin pardoned and subdued? Does anyone want grace, heaven and glory?

And is there anyone who has nothing to give in exchange for all of these, or any of them, and who has spent many years of labour in vain trying to come by them?

It’s to you, even to you, that all these rich wares and rare commodities are in a special manner offered, in this market of free grace that has been announced!

This call and offer comes to you irrespective of what kind of sinner you are. Maybe you are senseless and complacent? To you the gospel says, “How long, ye fools, will ye love simplicity? And how long will ye sleep, O sluggards?” (Proverbs 1:22 and 6:9). This offer is made to those who “have no bread,” and have been “bestowing their labour on that which satisfies not,” gorging themselves with the world, or wrapping themselves up in the groundless conceit of their own righteousness. “How long will ye spend your labour for that which is not bread?”

Or, maybe, you are in some way bothered by your sin, feeling guilty and convicted, with something stinging or fiery in your conscience, and consumed with apprehension about the wrath and terrors of God? To you the offer is, “Ho, every one that thirsts, come!” and we bid you earnestly to come. If you say, “My conviction has no edge to it, it is not deep enough for me to be included in this invitation,” we answer, “Let him that hath no money come.” If you have completely given up all hope of making your peace with God by your own prayers and other performances, and have in that respect utterly renounced your own righteousness, and so “have no money, no price,” then, even though you may not be pricked at the heart under the sense of sin and deserved wrath as you think you ought, yet come, please come!

Or maybe you have accepted the facts about your sin and lostness, and are in some measure, though only faintly (at least to your own perception) stirring towards Christ, and are longing to get to Him? Up you get, for to you the offer most kindly says, “Hear, and your souls shall live! Eat and be satisfied!”

These wares are not brought out and laid before you, only for you to quibble about the price, but mainly so that you would buy them, eat them and feed on them. The gospel does not so much offer to a bargain with you, as it offers you the benefit of a bargain already made, i.e., with Christ.

The terms

The terms on which all these goods are offered for sale turn out to suit the buyer wondrously well. “Come,” says the Lord, “buy without money and without price! Hear and your soul shall live, and I will make an everlasting covenant with you.” Speaking with reverence, there is not a wallet opened or a penny paid in this bargain. A very great, very costly and dear price has been paid, but it was paid by Christ. When Christ came to buy these mercies for His people, the market was very high and the prices were up. But when believers come by the covenant of grace, the prices have fallen wonderfully low. What cost Him dear is to be had by them gratis, completely freely — for nothing!

The first term is “Come.” People leave their present standing place and posture, and move towards the marketplace.

The second term is “Buy.” A price is put on the wares, you value it, and you transact to make it yours.

The third term is “Hear, incline your ear,” i.e., to God and His Word. Believe it and receive it, “and your souls shall live.”

The fourth term is, “I will make an everlasting covenant with you.” There is a commitment by covenant to be the Lord’s, after hearing His Word, shaking hands and concluding the bargain.

And it is all without you offering money or price, money or money’s worth, without offering or giving anything, small or large, in compensation.

The advertising

How does the gospel put all this to the market. Where it comes, those who are called must either take the bargain, or be at fault.

First, it proclaims the market to all around. There are these things on offer, at this price — the rarest and richest commodities, and at the cheapest rates you ever heard of.

Second, it not only proclaims, but invites, and doubles the invitation to come.

Third, it not only invites, but drives the invitation home in such a way that people must either pay the price (so to speak — as there is in effect no price!) and buy, or refuse the bargain. If they won’t make the effort to come into the shop, as it were, it brings out the wares and lays them out in the market-place, and (as it were) stands in the street calling, “Come, buy! Come and enter the covenant freely!” It makes a frank offer, by earnest and persuasive inviting, and by the easy conditions it proposes for the bargain. The gospel stands effectively with arms stretched out, ready to receive all comers entirely freely, whatever their poverty, lack, and needs be. It asks nothing more but that we willingly take what He offers to put in our hand. “The righteousness of faith saith not, Who shall ascend to heaven, or who shall descend to the depth?” There is nothing now to be suffered, nor to be purchased by any more suffering, “but the word is near thee, in thy heart and in thy mouth” (Romans 10:6–8) It places the wares on our very doorstep (as it were), so that we have no more to do, but to stoop down and pick it up. We only have to say the word heartily, and it is a bargain.

FURTHER READING

AUTHOR MENU

As the special day approaches, every care is taken that every detail is sorted. You check yourself frequently in the mirror and you want honest answers from trusted friends. James Durham thinks that for the believer, going to meet the Lord Jesus in the ordinance of the Lord’s supper should involve the same kind of careful inspection and attention to how you are looking and behaving. In the following updated excerpt Durham outlines how the Lord’s supper is such a special ordinance, and reminds us of the necessity of searching and checking ourselves ahead of participating.

A major, very comprehensive and indispensably necessary duty is called for from all who would worthily partake of the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper, and that is self-examination.

The apostle has perceived many faults and failings in the Corinthians, and much unsuitableness as to their participating in the Lord’s Supper. So he announces that in future anyone who wants to come to the Lord’s Table rightly must “examine themselves, and so eat.”

At the same time, knowing well that this is a difficult exercise, and that there is naturally a great deal of averseness to it in people’s hearts, he underlines his exhortation with this reason, “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself.” There is a most unique and gracious presence of the Lord Christ in the sacrament of His supper, and therefore the person who does not go about it rightly puts a great disrespect on Him, and indeed even vilifies Him who is present in this way in that ordinance.

What do the words mean?

I begin by explaining the meaning of words in the verse.

To “eat and drink unworthily” is to eat and drink unsuitably or unbecomingly. When the apostle wishes the Roman Christians to receive Phebe “as becometh” and “is suitable” to saints, in the original language he uses the word “worthily.” Here we have the opposite of that, by which we understand something that is unsuitable and unbecoming to such a manifestation of the love of Christ in giving Himself to and for his people.

“Judgment” or “damnation” here includes three things. (1.) It may refer to a temporal judgment, as in v.30–31, “many among you are sickly and weak, and many sleep.” (2.) It may refer to eternal judgement, as “damnation” is often taken in Scripture. (3.) It may refer to spiritual judgements; for though a believer is not capable of being punished with eternal judgement, yet by unworthy communicating he may draw on himself temporal strokes and spiritual judgements. He may wear out the life of grace, and bring himself under blasting and withering. Unbelievers draw on themselves not only those judgments, but eternal damnation, and that with a higher degree of aggravation.

A person is said to eat and drink this “to himself.” Likewise, in the previous verse each one is commanded to “examine himself.” The apostle seems to aim at two things. (1.) To have each individual stirred up to his particular duty, from thinking of his particular hazard — his own soul. (2.) To show that the judgement is restricted according to the sin. If a man examines himself, then, even if others neglect to do so, the judgment shall not overtake him. But if he does not examine himself, whoever else may escape judgement, he shall not. In this way it is an encouragement to each one to go about the duty of self-examination, as well as a motive of terror, for Corinth was so corrupted with many abuses that one person could not amend it all. “Well,” says the apostle, “let a man examine himself, and so he shall escape the hazard.”

Why is the Lord’s supper special?

There is a special eminence, excellence, dignity and worth in the ordinance of the Lord’s supper. It is of a unique, solemn nature. In the context of its institution, every circumstance speaks out a solemnity, for it was instituted “the same night in which he was betrayed.” Also, Christ is very jealous about the ordinance, very zealous that it should not be abused.

All the ordinances of the Lord are excellent (for if all His works are excellent, then much more the gospel ordinances are a step above them). Yet the ordinance of the Lord’s supper seems to be dignified with an eminence and excellence above them all.

Special love

They all set out love, yet this sets out love in an eminent degree, for it sets forth the Lord’s death, where the most eminent degree of His love shines. In fact, this ordinance sets out His actual dying, and so sets out His love in its liveliest colours, and as its great masterpiece.

Special benefits

All the ordinances communicate excellent benefits, and as to the matter of it, the Lord’s supper communicates nothing different than there is in the Word and baptism. Yet, looking at the words, “Take, eat, this is my body,” they hold out Christ Jesus not so much giving any particular gift, but as actually conferring Himself in His death and suffering. This makes it in some way excellent beyond others.

Special clarity

As to the manner of it, our Lord Jesus gives Himself not only in the clearest view, but also in a clear glance of heaven on earth (to put it like that) — Jesus Christ and His people mixing and being familiar together. He not only condescends to keep company with them, but to be their food and refreshment. He not only gives the Word to their faith, but Himself to their sense. Hence it is not only called “the communion,” but “the communion of the body and blood of Christ,” and “the table of the Lord.”

How should we approach the Lord’s supper?

See how much we are obliged to Christ Jesus. What more could He have given than Himself? What could He have invented that would confirm and warm the hearts of His people more than this, such a lively representation and commemoration of His blessed body?

We should strive to be in a solemn, divine, heavenly frame for such a solemn, divine, heavenly activity as this is, and thoroughly examine ourselves to see that all things are in good order, like a bride who is going to be married tomorrow, who will be trying on her wedding clothes and seeing that all things are right.

Ready to meet Christ

Aim to come to the Lord’s table in the same way as you would desire to be if Christ were coming personally and visibly to marry you tomorrow. If only this was a bridal or marriage evening to us all! Consider what frame we would wish to be in if we were to meet Him, and shake hands with Him personally and visibly, and pursue that for the Lord’s supper.

Ready to meet God

Think how you would desire to be if you were going to give up the ghost tonight. Then all earthly things would be insignificant and of little worth to us, especially if our eternal peace and happiness were depending on the outcome. That night would be spent writing our will and adjusting our accounts with God, and putting things to a point between Him and us.

Ready to face the judgment

Think how you would desire to be if the day of judgment was tomorrow. How humble you would want to be! How abstracted from the things of the present world! How much you would strive to be confirmed in the love of God if the voice of the archangel and the last trumpet were sounding, and all were shortly to meet before the tribunal of Christ! Aim to be in that frame tonight, ahead of the Lord’s supper tomorrow.

Ready for worship

If it is a heavenly and divine activity, you should be in a heavenly and divine frame. Your heart should be abstracted from the world, and from your carnal delights. Your heart should be in heaven, and conversing with God. What a pitch your communion with God should be raised to — in taking hold of and meditating on Him, and in considering and admiring the sufferings of Christ and the love they came from, and in tasting that He is good, and even delighting and solacing yourself in His love! That is what the Lord allows His people to do when they go about this activity humbly and reverently.

Why do people participate unworthily?

Although the Lord’s Supper is a most uniquely solemn ordinance, and to be participated in solemnly, yet oftentimes men and women partake most unworthily, and abuse it.

There is a singular and unique tendency to go wrong in this duty and ordinance. Someone may pray well, and the same with various other duties, yet in this ordinance they may fall under the guilt of communicating unworthily.

The reasons for this may be these.

1. The more solemn the duty is, and the greater concurrence of duties there are in it, the greater difficulty there is in going about it. A soul cannot be right in participating in the Lord’s supper unless it is right in a number of other duties and graces, such as prayer, faith, love, and repentance. The word, “let a man examine himself,” includes a complication of duties and graces. There needs to be a good state and a good frame, and graces in some vigour, and every duty suitable and proportionate to the nature of the action and of the day. If it is a great and difficult work to behave rightly on an ordinary Sabbath, or in prayer, or meditation, or other duties any day, what a difficult work must it needs be to have all these rightly yoked together?

2. The nature of the thing itself calls for duties in a high degree of spirituality. If any ordinance or duty calls for a spiritual frame it is participating in the Lord’s supper. It requires that the exercise of the judgement be most clear, that faith be most distinct, that meditation be most divine, etc. And the more spiritual the duty is, there is certainly the more aptness in us, through our corruption, to go wrong in it.

3. In men and women naturally and ordinarily, there is only very little effort and endeavour to know and grasp aright the nature of this ordinance. There is in most a great ignorance of the ways and means of the gospel, but generally there is a greater ignorance, darkness and blindness as to the right partaking of this ordinance compared to most others, either through the difficulty of it, or through our laziness that means we are not more painstaking about it. So that if you were to ask many of us, even those of us who may have been affected by the gospel, “What is communion? And what is the right way of partaking of it?” you would find only a very little distinctness of understanding. Many are content to live without clarity about it. This makes people incapable of going about it aright.

4. People are reluctant to bestir themselves in the work of preparation for the Lord’s supper. Some self-examination is requisite for every duty, but a more solemn self-examination is enjoined in reference to this one, and how very reluctant we are to do it! And seeing self-examination is as the doorway and entrance to this duty, is it any wonder that most persons communicate unworthily? Seeing the exercise of self-searching is so much slighted, and so very difficult to the majority, and to many, through their own fault, impossible?

FURTHER READING

AUTHOR MENU

Moral failure in high-profile ministers is exceptionally ruinous to the good they may have previously done in their ministry and can be devastatingly destabilising to the faith of those who had benefited from their work. It underlines how essential it is for ministers to be genuinely holy and actually godly from the heart outwards. Personal holiness is a gospel issue since it affects the conviction with which the gospel is declared and also its credibility if the messenger fails to live up to the message. The souls of many are at stake. The conduct of a negligent minister has eternal consequences (1 Tim. 4:16). Ministers are engaged in the most important, and most holy, work there is. In an essay on the qualifications of a minister, James Durham mentions learning, gifts, and grace. Most of the essay is devoted to grace as a qualification. His definition of grace includes not only saving grace but also godliness. The following extract from Durham’s essay has recently been republished in a book titled, Preventing Ministry Failure. It provides seven ways in which holiness is necessary for ministers.

Holiness in the ministry is necessary by precept, for holiness is a qualification alongside things like ability to “convince gainsayers” in the list in Titus 1:8–9.

Holiness in a minister is also useful and necessary in many respects as a means to an end.

Holiness is necessary for the minister himself

He cannot be confident in his calling, or in a sense of being approved of God in this calling, without being holy. Though he may be called by the church, yet if he is not holy he cannot act as someone who has been called by God, and so he will inevitably be greatly incapacitated.

Holiness is necessary for the work of the ministry

It is in the nature of the ministry that it requires communion with God and standing in His counsel (Jer. 23:18, 22). Without this, it may be accounted a stealing of His Word without acknowledging of Himself (v. 30). Although it is necessary in any calling to have communion with God and stand in His counsel, yet the nature of the ministry makes these things uniquely necessary for this work.

Holiness is necessary for boldness in the work of the ministry

Without holiness, there cannot be boldness in the message, especially where difficulties occur.

Holiness is necessary when it comes to the application of truths, especially to the spiritually weary

It comes more naturally to a holy minister to take up the spiritual cases of others and apply a gracious remedy to them, and sympathize with them, by bringing to others the same consolation with which they have been comforted themselves (2 Cor. 1:4). This is, after all, one of the main ways by which God fits His ministers experimentally for their work. Even Christ, the head of the church, was in some senses qualified in this way. This is why Luther said that these three things are requisite in a minister, not only meditatio and oratio (meditation and prayer) but also tentatio (temptation). Anyone who lacks this holiness is certainly exceeding defective.

Holiness is necessary for genuine fruitfulness

The Lord often blesses holy ministers with great fruit yet gives only little fruit to ministers who may be very gifted but have less personal holiness. We can see from Paul’s example that hearers profit not simply from good preaching but in answer to a minister’s prayers joined with his preaching. But what can the unrenewed minister do here? Can he weep between the porch and the altar and plead with the Lord for His people (Joel 2:17)? Can he strive without ceasing in prayer to God for them? If there is no grace in his heart, he will be incapable of having success in his ministry.

Holiness is necessary if a minister is to have much credibility

It is requisite that a minister is “of good report,” even to those “which are without” (1 Tim. 3:7). Otherwise, his word will not have much weight. But what will gain a good report without holiness? Hypocrisy is usually not very convincing, neither does it continue over time, but holiness adorns the gospel even in people’s ordinary callings, and much more in a minister, who is a city set on a hill and cannot be hid (Matt. 5:14).

Holiness is necessary for the church to seek

Holiness is a qualification that a congregation is right to look for when they choose someone to call as their pastor and when a presbytery is considering whether to ordain someone into the ministry. This is clear:

1. From the many directions that are given to ministers concerning this one thing in the epistles of Paul to Timothy and Titus and the fact that congregations and presbyteries are expressly limited in their proceeding to this, that he be holy (1 Tim. 3:2, etc.; Titus 1:8). This holiness is not only described negatively (he must be “blameless…not given to wine,” etc., vv. 6, 7) but also positively, that he must have a good name, be sober, just, and holy.
2. Even a deacon is to be examined as to these qualifications (1 Tim. 3:10), which presupposes that a minister is much more to be examined. Only then let him use the office, if he be found (that is, after examination) to be blameless. The qualification of holiness is as much to be verified as the others.
3. Novices (that is, those who are only recently brought in to the faith) are excluded from the office of a minister, either because they are not yet able to bear it or because it is not yet well known how they might turn out. Those who should be ordained as ministers should have a well-established profession.
4. The instruction in 1 Timothy 5:22, “Lay hands suddenly on no man,” and so on, confirms that congregations and presbyteries should choose ministers carefully. The risk is not only that the man does not have gifts but that through lack of spiritual sensitivity or maturity he will put his gifts to a bad use. In all the epistles, when Paul is recommending ministers, he always gives some evidence of their sanctification and in this way lets us know how truly weighty this qualification of holiness is when men are to be commended for the ministry and recommended in the ministry.

Since it is such a great trust to be entrusted with the oracles of God and with the souls of people, can someone be thought fit to endeavor to save the souls of others if he makes no conscience of taking heed to his own? This is the apostle’s reasoning, “If a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?” (1 Tim. 3:2–5). This is proposed by way of a question to show the unanswerableness of that reasoning by which he presses observing the former qualifications. And certainly, these two are not put together without weighty reasons: “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to the flock” and “unto the doctrine” (Acts 20:28; 1 Tim. 4:16). It shows that he who cares not for the one will never natively and naturally care for the other. The words that follow should especially be considered, “for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.” This intimates that carelessness in his own walk may not only mar his own salvation but also the salvation of his hearers, seeing these two ordinarily go together. Can people dispense with this so as to have only a form of ordinances, not caring whether their ministers have fruit amongst them or not? Or not caring that the profit should be to many or few? Much cannot be expected (whatever God may do sovereignly) from a man that does not stand in God’s counsel (Jer. 23:22) and therefore does not turn many from their iniquity. Neither can any expect that the Lord will approve that one should be made a steward in His house and an under-father to His children who cannot with any charitable grounds be accounted a child himself. And what confidence can there be that a man not esteemed to be gracious shall either conduct himself in a Christian way in the outward form of religion or keep soundness in the faith? And will those who endanger so much by giving such great responsibility who are not worthy of any such trust not be an accessory to these evils?

Ministers should therefore be very careful about this. Holiness should be carefully prioritized in the instruments which we hope the Lord will use, in proportion as we expect the Lord to set before them an open door (Rev. 3:8) and grant them success in their ministry.

The book, Preventing Ministry Failure, is published by Reformation Heritage Books. It contains material from both James Durham and James Guthrie. 

FURTHER READING

AUTHOR MENU