5295[Covenanted Reformation] Re: American Presbyterianism
- Sep 3, 2002Thank you for the explanation.
"They felt that this settlement
established Presbyterianism not on a scriptural but on an Erastian
basis and that the covenants had been ignored."
In that sense, in what ways was the settlement church in
Scotland "Erastian", and in what ways did it contrast with scriptural
grounding. (I mean aside from their neglect of the existing
As far as America goes, I think the early Presbyterians would have
preferred an establishment of religion according to sound doctrine
and church government, but did not hope for it. They realized this
had no chance of happening in America, where Presbyterians were a
minority even in their stronghold (Pennsylvania). So they went for
the next best thing--prevention of established error and protection
--- In covenantedreformationclub@y..., "Wayne Whitmer"
> Dan of Bethel Park, hope this helps explain Erastianism.born at Baden, studied theology at Basel, and later medicine,
> Erastianism takes its name from Thomas Erastus (1524 - 83), who was
becoming professor of medicine at Heidelberg. He was a friend of Beza
and Bullinger and was a Zwinglian.
>presbytery. Erastus emphasized strongly the right of the state to
> A controversy arose in Heidelberg over the powers of the
intervene in ecclesiastical matters. He held that the church has no
scriptural authority to excommunicate any of its members. As God has
entrusted to the civil magistrate (i.e., the state) the sum total of
the visible government, the church in a Christian country has no
power of repression distinct from the state. To have two visible
authorities in a country would be absurd. The church can merely warn
or censure offenders. Punitive action belongs to the civil magistrate
alone. The church has no right to withhold the sacraments from
>Figgis calls it "the theory that religion is the creature of the
> In practice, the term "Erastianism" is somewhat what elastic.
state." Generally it signifies that the state is supreme in
ecclesiastical causes, but Erastus dealt only with the disciplinary
powers of the church. When the Roman emperors became Christian, the
relations of civil and ecclesiastical rulers became a real problem.
It became universally accepted until modern times that the state
could punish heretics or put them to death.
>(1643) when outstanding men like Selden and Whitelocke advocated the
> The name Erastian emerged in England in the Westminister Assembly
supremacy of the state over the church. The assembly rejected this
view and decided that church and state have their separate but
coordinate spheres, each supreme in its own province but bound to
cooperate with one another for the glory of God.
> Wayne Whitmer
> Pittsburgh, PA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: fraasrd
> To: covenantedreformationclub@y...
> Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:33 PM
> Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: American Presbyterianism
> Hey Wayne,
> What is an "Erastian" establishment of Presbyterianism?
> Dan of Bethel Park
> --- In covenantedreformationclub@y..., "Wayne Whitmer"
> <Wayne.Whitmer@a...> wrote:
> > I didn't realize until stumbling on this page
> > That basically the first Presbyterian denomination to arrive in
> America was called the Reformed Presbytery and had as it's
> > Reformed Presbytery:
> > These were the first Covenanters to come to America from
> and Northern Ireland. They were Reformed Presbyterians. Thesepeople
> had suffered greatly during the "killing times" under James II,in
> defense of Presbyterianism. They held to the continuingobligations
> of both the Scottish National Covenant of 1638 and the SolemnLeague
> and Covenant of 1643. They had refused to accept the "revolutionsettlement
> settlement" in 1690 that established Presbyterianism in Scotland
> after the Glorious Revolution of 1688. They felt that this
> established Presbyterianism not on a scriptural but on anErastian
> basis and that the covenants had been ignored.this
> > As found when reading the above link, the Reformed Presbytery
> joined the Associate Presbytery and thus gave up the Covenanter
> Testimony of the National and SLC. And if you read down through
> laundry list it seems as if all American Presbyteriandenominations
> are an erosion of the establishmentarianism principle in favor ofobligation of
> supporting the constitution and government of the United States.
> Their formation in many respects had much to do about politics.
> > So with that all said, to me the choice of what Presbyterian
> denomination/church to choose comes down to
> the "Establishmentarianism" principle and the perpetual
> the National Covenant and the SLC. If the binding element ofthese
> covenants can be proved to be in error for me as a US Citizenthen I
> would want to avoid the RPNA or any other church or denom whichbinding
> unneccessarily binds my conscience with that which is no longer
> binding. OTOH, if I come to embrace the National and SLC as
> on me as a US Citizen and my posterity and that it should be aTerm
> of Communion, then I have no choice but to become a member of theService.
> RPNA or another group which upholds these Covenants as Terms of
> > It's as simple as that.
> > Wayne Whitmer
> > http://waynewhitmer.blogspot.com
> > Pittsburgh, PA
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
- << Previous post in topic