Belgic Confession (1561), Heidelberg Catechism (1563) & the Canons of Dort (1619) Explanation This harmony differs from many of the others in that it begins with the Confession which recognizes its natural pedagogical and chronological priority over the Catechism and the Canons. . . . Continue reading →
Reformed Confessions
Notes on Belgic Confession Article 15
An earlier version of this essay was published as “The Belgic Confession- Article 15: Sin,” Christian Observer 173.24 (December, 1, 1995). rev. 29 January 2008 As we understand the gospel, a proper doctrine of sin is central to the gospel message. To . . . Continue reading →
Notes on a Possible Difficulty in Belgic Confession Article 14
Rev. 28 January 2008 [An earlier version of this essay was published in Christian Observer 173.23 (December 1, 1995): 23.] We believe that God created man out of the dust of the earth, and made and formed him after his own image . . . Continue reading →
Helvetic Consensus Formula (1675)
[Translated by Martin I. Klauber in Trinity Journal 11 (1990): 103–23. Used by permission of the translator.] Canon I: God, the Supreme Judge, not only took care to have his word, which is the “power of God unto salvation to every one . . . Continue reading →
Canons of Dort (1619)
Table of Contents Preface First Head of Doctrine: Divine Election and Reprobation Second Head of Doctrine: The Death of Christ and the Redemption of Man Thereby Third & Fourth Heads of Doctrine: The Corruption of Man, His Conversion to God, and the . . . Continue reading →
Heidelberg Catechism (1563)
Note: This edition of the catechism is based on the 1978 translation published by the Reformed Church in the United States and modified by the removal of archaic language and with minor revision of the translation according to the German and Latin . . . Continue reading →
Belgic Confession (1561)
Introduction The Belgic Confession is the confession of faith of the Dutch Reformed Churches. It was written originally, however, in French, in the French-speaking Lowlands by Guido (or Guy) deBres (1523–67) and edited by others between 1559–1561. He was a pastor who . . . Continue reading →
Consensus Tigurinus (1549)
Translated by Henry Beveridge Mutual Consent in Regard to the Sacraments Between the Ministers of the Church of Zurich and John Calvin, Minister of the Church of Geneva. Now published by those who framed it. Article 1. The Whole Spiritual Government of . . . Continue reading →
Confessing the Reformed Faith: Our Identity in Unity and Diversity
by Richard A. Muller Richard Muller is the P. J. Zondervan Professor of Historical Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan. This address was given by Professor Muller at a meeting of the North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council on November . . . Continue reading →
The Revision of Belgic Confession Article 36
Eugene Osterhaven called this “the most difficult and disputed” article in the confession.1 As will appear below, the desire to revise this article has existed in the Reformed churches in both the Netherlands and in the USA since the late 19th century . . . Continue reading →
A Historical, Theological, Pastoral, and Polemical Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism
Note 22 April 2008: What follows is very rough draft of the beginning of a commentary on the HC. This material may not be published, re-published or distributed without the express permission of the author. Introduction It is the great need of . . . Continue reading →
Why We Memorize the Catechism
This article was originally published in the Presbyterian Banner (August, 2003). Introduction Both children and parents in Reformed congregations often ask, “Why must we (or our children) memorize the catechism? If they must memorize anything at all, should they not memorize Holy . . . Continue reading →
A Synopsis of the Three Forms of Unity
Belgic Confession (1561), Heidelberg Catechism (1563) and the Canons of Dort (1619) Explanation This harmony differs from many of the others in that it begins with the Confession which recognizes its natural pedagogical and chronological priority over the Catechism and the Canons. . . . Continue reading →