A Second Open Letter to Thomas Ascol and Earnest C. Reisiger ,
Editors of The Foundation Journal.
Dear Brethren,
I trust that my last letter was received safely in the spirit I sent it and that my heart reached your heart through my words, clumsy as they were. I am unused to this kind of correspondence and need to mould and manage my words so that they are honouring to God. …
Posts Tagged Second Helvetic Confession
Henry Bullinger
Sep 15
… such as Jewel, Grindal and Cox called Bullinger the pillar of the Church of England and a Second Elijah. His major doctrinal works in Swiss-German were eagerly translated into English by such as Miles Coverdale and Bullinger’s Latin works went into hundreds of editions. The Genevan Council insisted that whenever Calvin’s works were printed, they should be accompanied by Bullinger’s on the same themes so as to preserve a good balance. When Beza took over the Church at Geneva, the …
Henry Bullinger (1504-1575)
Aug 17
… to wait until the late 40s, Germany the late 50s and Geneva the 60s.
The Second Helvitic Confession
Bullinger’s best known work is undoubtedly his Second Helvetic Confession. Elector Friedrich III of the Palatine had left the Lutheran Church and approached Bullinger as the leading Continental Reformer to draw up a creed showing that the Reformed faith was the true, apostolic belief. Bullinger sent him his own confession of faith which was accepted …
Where Olyott Got It Wrong
Mar 10
… the Antitrinitarianism prevalent in much modern ‘Reformed’ preaching. Happily, Bullinger’s Second Helvetic Confession has become the Reformed Standard concerning the Word of God. Nevertheless, any perusal of Luther’s massive works on the Word of God and especially the context from which Olyott has cut his pseudo-quote, would show that Olyott’s own doctrine of the Word is not only far inferior to Bullinger’s but also Luther’s. It comes nearer the three Bs (Bultmann, Barth and …
… outworking in the people of their times.
Chapter Three deals with the First London Confession or 1644 The Articles receive a brief comment but we are not told what part Kiffin and his brethren played in their authorship. Haykin sees the confession as a defence against General Baptist views and accusations of political rebellion. He then examines early Baptists associations but though the three Ks played an important role in this work, and they are the stars of Haykin’s book, …
… and strenuously to maintain’, Affirmation II denies that they are putting forward ‘a new Confession’ but merely stating ‘truth presently being undermined in our churches’. These undermined truths are, however, not stated. Nevertheless, the compilers are left ‘wondering’ if their critics ‘have taken the time carefully to read the Affirmation’. Obviously, they have not taken the time to check Affirmation themselves. Their reluctance to be fair here is understandable as …
… and strenuously to maintain’, Affirmation II denies that they are putting forward ‘a new Confession’ but merely stating ‘truth presently being undermined in our churches’. These undermined truths are, however, not stated. Nevertheless, the compilers are left ‘wondering’ if their critics ‘have taken the time carefully to read the Affirmation’. Obviously, they have not taken the time to check Affirmation themselves. Their reluctance to be fair here is understandable as …
… and strenuously to maintain’, Affirmation II denies that they are putting forward ‘a new Confession’ but merely stating ‘truth presently being undermined in our churches’. These undermined truths are, however, not stated. Nevertheless, the compilers are left ‘wondering’ if their critics ‘have taken the time carefully to read the Affirmation’. Obviously, they have not taken the time to check Affirmation themselves. Their reluctance to be fair here is understandable as …
… and strenuously to maintain’, Affirmation II denies that they are putting forward ‘a new Confession’ but merely stating ‘truth presently being undermined in our churches’. These undermined truths are, however, not stated. Nevertheless, the compilers are left ‘wondering’ if their critics ‘have taken the time carefully to read the Affirmation’. Obviously, they have not taken the time to check Affirmation themselves. Their reluctance to be fair here is understandable as …
… and strenuously to maintain’, Affirmation II denies that they are putting forward ‘a new Confession’ but merely stating ‘truth presently being undermined in our churches’. These undermined truths are, however, not stated. Nevertheless, the compilers are left ‘wondering’ if their critics ‘have taken the time carefully to read the Affirmation’. Obviously, they have not taken the time to check Affirmation themselves. Their reluctance to be fair here is understandable as …
