“The Infallible Fruits of Election” (The Canons of Dort and Assurance)

The overarching concern of the Canons of Dort is not just a doctrinal or theological one, but a decidedly pastoral and experiential one as well. And that is demonstrated in the fact that a common theme throughout the First Head of Doctrine (i.e. unconditional election) is that of assurance.

In many ways the doctrines of Arminianism undermine assurance, and so the Canons here show how a right understanding of the biblical doctrine of election actually serves to establish and strengthen the assurance of believers.

Article 11

“And as God Himself is most wise, unchangeable, omniscient and omnipotent, so the election made by Him can neither be interrupted nor changed, recalled or annulled; neither can the elect be cast away, nor their number diminished.”

Arminianism teaches a conditional election from start to finish. Not only does it wrongly teach that God’s election of sinners to salvation is based on foreseen faith at the beginning, but it also holds that one can abandon the faith and lose his or her salvation in the end, rendering God’s decree of election in a sense temporary. Article 11 here clearly refutes that error.

Contrary to the errors of Arminianism, the Canons remind us that God is “most wise, unchangeable, omniscient and omnipotent,” so that the idea that His decree could change or be in need of revision is blasphemous. Nothing can change God’s gracious decree of election from all eternity, and so “neither can the elect be cast away, nor their number diminished.”

In his book, Saving the Reformation: The Pastoral Theology of the Canons of Dort, Robert Godfrey writes:

“Election reflects the very character of God. As God is immutable, so His purpose in election is immutable. Nothing can interfere with God’s implementing his decree of election. In particular, the specific number of the elect cannot be reduced. This conviction is foundational to the doctrine of God and to predestination as well as to the teaching on assurance found throughout the canons.” (p.93)

So the biblical doctrine of election, properly understood, is a matter of utmost importance, as it has to do not just with assurance of salvation, but even with our doctrine of God. Because God is immutable, so is His decree and purpose in election. And that should be a rather encouraging truth for believers.

Article 12

“The elect in due time, though in various degrees and in different measures, attain the assurance of this their eternal and unchangeable election, not by inquisitively prying into the secret and deep things of God, but by observing in themselves, with a spiritual joy and holy pleasure, the infallible fruits of election pointed out in the Word of God — such as a true faith in Christ, filial fear, a godly sorrow for sin, a hungering and thirsting after righteousness, etc.”

Here in Article 12 we are taught the right way to understand the relationship between election and assurance. Believers are not to try to attain the assurance of their election by “inquisitively prying into the secret and deep things of God,” which is impossible for us to do. (See Deuteronomy 29:29.) Rather, we are to seek to observe in ourselves “the infallible fruits of election pointed out in the Word of God — such as a true faith in Christ, filial fear, a godly sorrow for sin, a hungering and thirsting after righteousness, etc.”

In other words, how do you know if you are one of God’s elect? You look to your true faith in Christ, repentance, desire to grow in holiness, etc. as the “infallible fruits” or evidence of God’s election. In this way we are to ‘make our calling and election sure’ (2 Peter 1:10). How often do sincere believers lack a sense of assurance because we look to the wrong things as evidence of our salvation?

Election is known by its fruits. And the “infallible” or unmistakable fruits of election consist not in some secret, hidden knowledge of God’s decree, nor in some kind of ecstatic spiritual experience, but rather in simple and sincere faith in Christ, repentance, etc. And so if you want to know whether or not you are one of God’s elect, the thing to ask is simply, “Am I a believer in Christ? Have I sincerely turned from sin and turned to Christ by faith?”

And notice that Article 12 points out that the elect attain the assurance of their eternal and unchangeable election “in due time, though in various degrees and in different measures.” Assurance is not just automatic and may take some time, and it may come “in varying degrees” rather than in completeness or perfection.

Article 13

“The sense and certainty of this election afford to the children of God additional matter for daily humiliation before Him, for adoring the depth of His mercies, for cleansing themselves, and rendering grateful returns of ardent love to Him, who first manifested so great love towards them. The consideration of this doctrine of election is so far from encouraging remissness in the observance of the divine commands or from sinking men in carnal security, that these, in the just judgment of God, are the usual effects of rash presumption or of idle and wanton trifling with the grace of election in those who refuse to walk in the ways of the elect.”

Some who oppose the doctrine of election seem to confuse assurance with presumption, fearing that assurance would lead to loose living. But here we see the difference between assurance and presumption.

True faith and assurance lead to humility, adoration of God’s mercy and grace, and to seeking to grow in holiness and love for God because of His great love for us in Christ. It is sinful presumption (and not assurance) that rather leads to “remissness in the observance of the divine commands” and a neglect of holiness in the fear of God. And such as are remiss in these things will necessarily be lacking in any genuine assurance of salvation, as long as those “infallible fruits” of election are lacking or absent in their lives.

Election as “The Fountain of Every Saving Good” (Canons of Dort 1.9.)

In Articles 1-7 of the First Head of Doctrine (Unconditional Election), we saw in some detail where Arminians and Calvinists both agree (Articles 1-4) and where their respective views begin to diverge (i.e. the source of saving faith in Christ, God’s eternal decree, and the definition of election – Articles 5-7), we now proceed to a brief examination of Articles 8-10.

In Articles 8-10 we get to the heart of the matter regarding the doctrine of unconditional election. For here we are plainly taught that God’s decree of election unto salvation in Christ is the same in both the Old and New Testaments (Article 8); that it was not based upon “foreseen faith” or anything else in us (Article 9); and that the sole cause of God’s gracious purposes in election is merely “the good pleasure of God” (Article 10).

Article 8

“There are not various decrees of election, but one and the same decree respecting all those who shall be saved, both under the Old and New Testament; since the Scripture declares the good pleasure, purpose and counsel of the divine will to be one, according to which He hath chosen us from eternity, both to grace and glory, to salvation and the way of salvation, which He hath ordained that we should walk therein.”

Here the argument is from the immutability of God as well as the unity of God’s decree. God does not change, and His purpose in election and salvation has not changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament. Later in the section of this Head of doctrine detailing the rejection of errors, the Synod notes that they “reject the error of those who teach” that “there are various kinds of election of God unto eternal life . . . .” (Rejection 2)

As to the unity of God’s decree, Ephesians 1:11 tells us, “In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.” (ESV) The counsel of God’s will is singular or simple (i.e. one, unified), even as God Himself is One. Paul there does not speak of God’s purposes (i.e. plural), but rather of His “purpose” (i.e. singular).

That God’s decree of election is one and the same in both the Old and New Testament is clearly evident because in teaching and establishing the doctrine of divine election in the New Testament, Paul explicitly points us back to the Old Testament. In fact, he does so throughout Romans chapter 9, using Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as examples of God’s saving purpose in election. For example:

“And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” (Romans 9:10–13, ESV, Italics added)

God chose to save Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And Paul explicitly teaches us the Jacob was chosen by God before he was even born or “had done anything good or bad – in order that God’s purpose in election might continue” (or stand – KJV). And so God’s decree of election has not changed from the Old Testament to the New Testament.

Article 9

“This election was not founded upon foreseen faith, and the obedience of faith, holiness, or any other good quality or disposition in man, as the prerequisite, cause or condition on which it depended; but men are chosen to faith and to the obedience of faith, holiness, etc.; therefore election is the fountain of every saving good, from which proceeds faith, holiness, and the other gifts of salvation, and finally eternal life itself, as its fruits and effects, according to that of the apostle: “He hath chosen us [not because we were but] that we should be holy, and without blame, before Him in love” (Eph. 1:4).”

Here we see the Canons beginning to explicitly address the heart of the Arminians’ error regarding election. Arminianism views God’s election as being in some ways conditional. That is, it holds that God’s election unto salvation was based on something that He foresaw in those whom He would choose, such as faith, obedience, holiness, etc. This makes something inherent in us the very basis for our election.

Contrary to this unbiblical idea, the Canons here affirm that God’s election of sinners unto salvation was in no way based or conditioned upon something foreseen in them, but rather that we are chosen unto those things. God’s gracious decree of election is rather the cause of such things as faith, holiness, etc. That is why the Canons speak of God’s decree of election as “the fountain of every saving good” in us. In his book, Saving the Reformation, W. Robert Godfrey puts it this way:

“Election does not flow from faith or holiness, but rather, faith and holiness flow from election.” (p.92)

And so we are not chosen by God because we will one day believe, but rather because we are chosen by God unto salvation before the foundation of the world, we will therefore believe, repent, and walk in holiness, etc. All of those gifts and graces flow from God’s gracious decree of election, not vice-versa. And this is clearly taught in Ephesians 1:4, where Paul tells us that God chose us in Christ, not because we already were or would be holy and without blame before Him, but rather so “that we should be holy, and without blame, before Him in love” (italics added).

Article 10

“The good pleasure of God is the sole cause of this gracious election, which doth not consist herein, that out of all possible qualities and actions of men God has chosen some as a condition of salvation; but that He was pleased out of the common mass of sinners to adopt some certain persons as a peculiar people to Himself, as it is written, “For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil,” etc., it was said (namely to Rebecca): “The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated” (Rom. 9:11-13). “And as many as were ordained to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48).”

Article 10 teaches us that the mere “good pleasure of God” is the “sole cause” of God’s decree of election. The sole cause of election is in God Himself, and so all of the glory for our salvation, from beginning to end, belongs to Him alone.

The Arminian view basically teaches that God chose the conditions of salvation (faith, repentance, holiness, etc.) ahead of time, rather than choosing the individual sinners themselves unto salvation. Contrary to that, the Canons here teach and affirm that God “was pleased out of the common mass of sinners to adopt some certain persons as a peculiar people to Himself.”

Once again the Canons point us to Romans 9:11-13 (i.e. God’s choice of Jacob over Esau). Here we are also pointed to Acts 13:48, which tells us, “And as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” This verse does not teach us that they were ordained to eternal life because they believed (i.e. the Arminian view), but rather that the very reason that they believed and were saved is precisely because they had been previously “ordained to eternal life.”

Unconditional Election (Canons of Dort – First Head of Doctrine)

This first head of doctrine expounded and defended in the Canons of Dort is Divine predestination (or unconditional election). The Canons break down the biblical teaching on this heading or subject into 18 articles (basically sub-points), followed by 9 points of explicit rejection of errors which were (and in some cases still are) taught by those who hold to Arminianism. Rather than trying to deal with all 27 points in one study, we will simply highlight some of the more significant aspects of the Canons’ teaching over the span of a number of posts.

The first four (4) articles state truths of Scripture that are basic to any right understanding of the gospel, things which both Calvinists and Arminians would more or less equally affirm. These are summarized as follows:

1. All men have sinned in Adam and are deserving of eternal condemnation and wrath for our sins. (See Romans 3:23; 6:23.) 2. God’s love for lost sinners was manifested in Him sending His only-begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him might not perish but have everlasting life. (See John 3:16; 1 John 4:9.) 3. In order that sinners may come to a saving faith in Christ, God has willed that messengers of the gospel be sent out to preach. (See Mark 16:15; Romans 10:14-15.) 4. The wrath of God abides upon those who do not believe in Christ, but to all who believe are assuredly delivered by Him from the wrath to come, and have the gift of eternal life. (See John 3:16-18; 36.)

Article 5

“The cause or guilt of this unbelief, as well as of all other sins, is no wise in God, but in man himself; whereas faith in Jesus Christ and salvation through Him is the free gift of God, as it is written: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). “For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him,” etc. (Phil. 1:29).”

Article 5 is where the real differences between Calvinism and Arminianism begin to be made clear. For Calvinism (unlike Arminianism) affirms the Scriptural teaching that the ultimate cause of unbelief, sin, and guilt is not to be found in God (as if He were the Author of Sin), but rather “in man himself.” But in contrast to that, “faith in Jesus Christ and salvation through Him is the gift of God.” In establishing this from Scripture, the Canons point us to Ephesians 2:8 and Philippians 1:29.

• “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8, ESV)

• “For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake,” (Philippians 1:29, ESV)

In the former text, Paul teaches us that our being saved by grace and through faith is not our own doing, but is the gift of God. That is, not only our salvation itself, but even our faith in Christ unto salvation is not our own doing, but is the gift of God. Likewise in Philippians 1:29 Paul (in passing, no less – he makes no attempt to try to argue the point) tells us that it has been “granted” to us to believe in Christ.

Here we see the most basic difference between those who remain lost in their sins and those who are saved by the grace of God. If you are a believer in Christ, the only thing that distinguishes you from someone else who rejects Christ is the sovereign grace and mercy of God alone. In this way, all of the glory for our salvation is ascribed to God alone.

In the Arminian (i.e. free-will) view, at some point the real difference is to be found in the sinner himself. For Arminianism teaches that God elects the sinner unto salvation on the basis of “foreseen faith” (rather than electing the sinner unto saving faith – see Article 9 and Rejection of Error 5).

Article 6

“That some receive the gift of faith from God and others do not receive it proceeds from God’s eternal decree, for “known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world” (Acts 15:18). “Who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will” (Eph. 1:11). According to which decree, He graciously softens the hearts of the elect, however obstinate, and inclines them to believe, while He leaves the non-elect in His just judgment to their own wickedness and obduracy. And herein is especially displayed the profound, the merciful, and at the same time the righteous discrimination between men, equally involved in ruin; or that decree of election and reprobation revealed in the Word of God, which though men of perverse, impure and unstable minds wrest to their own destruction, yet to holy and pious souls affords unspeakable consolation.”

In his book, Grace Defined & Defended, Kevin DeYoung writes,

“After explaining the what of judgment, gospel, and grace, Dort now brings us to the why. We can all see that some people believe in Christ and others do not. But why? What is the ultimate reason that some exercise faith, while others remain in unbelief? There are really only two possible answers: God or man.” (p.34) 

Here the writers of the Canons affirm the biblical teaching regarding the sovereignty of God over all things, which then necessarily includes such things as election and reprobation (sometimes referred to as double-predestination). All of these things are part of the sovereign decree of God from all eternity.

Notice that the doctrine of unconditional election, rightly understood by “pious souls affords unspeakable consolation.” There is a great source of comfort and assurance for sincere believers in the doctrine of God’s sovereign grace in election. (And it could be said that Arminianism is actually contrary and even destructive to that comfort.) And so this is not just some cold academic issue, but a deeply theological and even pastoral one!

Article 7

“Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He hath out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen, from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect, and the foundation of salvation.

“This elect number, though by nature neither better nor more deserving than others, but with them involved in one common misery, God hath decreed to give to Christ, to be saved by Him, and effectually to call and draw them to His communion by His Word and Spirit, to bestow upon them true faith, justification and sanctification; and having powerfully preserved them in the fellowship of His Son, finally, to glorify them for the demonstration of His mercy and for the praise of His glorious grace, as it is written: “According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, wherein He hath made us accepted in the beloved” (Eph. 1:4–6). And elsewhere: “Whom He did predestinate, them He also called: and whom He called, them He also justified: and whom He justified them He also glorified” (Rom. 8:30).”

Here in the first paragraph of Article 7 we finally come to what amounts to a simple definition of the doctrine of election. It is “the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He hath out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen, from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect, and the foundation of salvation.” In other words, before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4), and by His sheer grace and good pleasure of His will alone, God chose to save “a certain number of persons” in Christ. And that decree of election unto salvation is unchangeable. All of those and only those whom He has chosen to save will, in fact, be saved.

And not only has God chosen us in Christ for salvation (Ephesians 1:4), but He has also chosen both the means and the manner by which He saves us – drawing us irresistibly to faith in Christ by His Word and Spirit. And moreover, He has not just chosen to draw us to faith in Christ by His effectual calling, but has also then predestined us to justification, sanctification, and glorification as well (i.e. Romans 8:30). As Paul says in Philippians 1:6, “And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” (ESV) God finishes what He starts in us because He chose to do all of this for our salvation from all eternity by the mere good pleasure of His will, “to the praise of his glorious grace” (Ephesians 1:6).

A Brief Introduction to the Canons of Dort

The Background of the Canons of Dort

The Canons of Dort is a theological consensus document (or form of unity). The word “canon” here means a rule or a standard. And so the Canons of Dort are basically standards of doctrine.

The Canons were formulated by the members of the Synod of Dort, which was essentially the General Assembly of the Reformed church in the Netherlands. (There were also a good number of international delegates at the Synod as well.) It convened in the city of Dordrecht (often shortened simply to Dort), from which both the Synod and the Canons derive their respective names. This synod lasted from November 1618 to May 1619.

The circumstance which necessitated the calling of this Synod was a theological controversy involving the teachings and influence of Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609). His teachings on a number of things represented a clear departure from the Reformed faith, especially with regard to the sovereignty of God in salvation. For example, his peculiar teaching on the doctrine of election was such that God was said to have chosen to save sinners on the basis of foreseen faith, rather than simply on the basis of the free grace and good pleasure of God.

Sometime after his death, his followers (sometimes referred to as Arminians or Remonstrants) sought to avoid ecclesiastical discipline for their views from the Reformed Church in the Netherlands, and so they appealed to the civil government (the States General) for help. It is probably hard for many people in the church today to imagine such involvement between the church and state, but this has been much more common throughout the history of the church than it is in many places today.

They presented their views in summary form in a document called the “Five Articles of Remonstrance.” (A “remonstrance” is simply a protest or denunciation of some kind.) These five articles were in many ways the polar opposite of what we often refer to as the 5 points of Calvinism. The Five Heads (or chief points) of Doctrine of the Canons of Dort are the Synod’s response to and refutation of the teachings of the Arminians as articulated in the 5 Articles of Remonstrance. And so in an odd way you could say that we would not have the 5 points of Calvinism (at least not articulated as such) if it were not for the Arminians’ Articles of Remonstrance. As J.I. Packer notes in his Introductory Essay to John Owen’s book, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ:

” . . .it should be observed that the “five points of Calvinism,” so-called, are simply the Calvinistic answer to a five-point manifesto (the Remonstrance) put out by certain “Belgic semi-Pelagians” [Owen’s words] in the early seventeenth century.” (p.3)

It should be noted that while we may speak of the so-called “5 Points of Calvinism,” those points are not a summary of the teachings of John Calvin, nor did Calvin himself ever articulate them in this way (i.e. as a system of 5 points). They do, of course, accurately represent his teachings concerning divine sovereignty in our salvation.

The Canons of Dort is not a Confession of Faith in the sense that it does not give us a full summary of all of the main points of doctrine inherent in the Christian Faith. For that, you would instead need to look to Reformed consensus documents like the Belgic Confession or the Westminster Confession of Faith. Instead, what the Canons are is a robust statement and defense of the main points of biblical teaching regarding the sovereign grace of God in the salvation of sinners.

Dr. Cornelis P. Venema writes,

“On the basis of its deliberations, the Synod of Dort judged the five articles of the Remonstrants to be contrary to the Word of God and the confession of the Reformed churches. Against the Arminian teachings of election based on foreseen faith, human depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace, the Canons set forth the Reformed teachings of unconditional election, limited atonement, total depravity, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints.” (But for the Grace of God: An Exposition of the Canons of Dort, p.13)

We may find it a bit strange that the Reformed church as a whole would respond in such a robust manner to the rising influence of Arminianism within her ranks, especially given that in many ways Arminianism seems to be the predominant view among American evangelicals today. (Calvinism would certainly seem to be in the minority in evangelicalism these days.) But when you consider what was (and is) at stake, both pastorally (re. the comfort and assurance of believers regarding the security of their salvation from beginning to end) as well as doxologically (i.e. that all of the glory for our salvation goes to God alone), it becomes quickly apparent why the work of this Synod was so vitally important, and remains just as relevant to the peace and purity of the church today, some 400 years after they were first written.

Outline of the Canons of Dort

The Five Heads of Doctrine are as follows:

1. Of Divine Predestination

2. Of the Death of Christ and the Redemption of Men Thereby

3. Of the Corruption of Man

4. Of the Conversion of Man to God, and the Manner Thereof

5. Of the Perseverance of the Saints

Incidentally, the third and fourth Heads of Doctrine are actually combined or treated together as a unit. You may also notice that these points of doctrine are not in the order commonly associated with the 5 points of Calvinism as expressed in the acronym,TULIP. (TULIP = Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints) That is simply because the Five Heads of Doctrine contained in the Canons correspond point by point, in the same order as the 5 Articles of Remonstrance for which they were written as a response and refutation.

In the Canons each of the 5 Heads of Doctrine is divided further into numerous points or articles which expound the true doctrine at length, followed by various points in which the errors of Arminianism are explicitly rejected and condemned as being outside of the pale of Reformed orthodoxy. In this way there is abundant clarity about what the biblical and reformed teaching on these thing is as well as what it is not.

Lord willing, we hope to go through each Head of Doctrine at length in future posts, examining them in the light of Scriptures.

The Heidelberg Catechism on the Strict Preaching of the Ten Commandments

Preaching through the Ten Commandments does not seem to be nearly as common in Reformed churches today as it has been in years and generations past. Perhaps some mistakenly believe that to do so in some way implies or lends itself to a kind of legalism of sorts. To be sure, there are legalistic ways of preaching God’s law, but this should in no way prevent us from preaching and teaching the Ten Commandments in our churches in a godly and edifying way.

Q/A 115 marks the end of the Heidelberg Catechism’s exposition of the Ten Commandments (which consists of Q/A 92-115), and it addresses this very topic, saying:

Q.115. Why will God then have the ten commandments so strictly preached, since no man in this life can keep them?A. First, that all our lifetime we may learn more and more to know our sinful nature, and thus become the more earnest in seeking the remission of sin and righteousness in Christ; likewise, that we consistently endeavor and pray to God for the grace of the Holy Spirit, that we might become more and more conformable to the image of God, till we arrive at the perfection proposed to us in the life to come.

This question logically builds upon the previous two (2) questions, where we are taught that the tenth commandment (“Thou shalt not covet” – Exodus 20:17) requires of us that we obey all of God’s commandments from the heart (Q/A 113), and reveals to us that in this life “even the holiest of men” cannot perfectly keep God’s commandments, but “have only a small beginning of this obedience” (Q/A 114).

Here in Q/A 115 the writer of the catechism anticipates a possible objection about the usefulness and necessity of the preaching of God’s commandments in the life of the Christian. If even the holiest of men in this life only have a “small beginning” of the obedience and holiness that is required of them, then what is the use of preaching and teaching the commandments so strictly? Not only that, but why should the catechism itself spend so much time on the subject (no less than 24 questions over a span of 11 Lord’s Days)?

Given the fact the the Heidelberg Catechism itself was intended to be used as, among other things, a preaching guide in the churches, and has been preached as such in Reformed churches all over the world for hundreds of years since it was first published, you might say that Q/A 115 at least in part serves an apologetic purpose of sorts, in that it defends or at least gives us the rationale behind including such a lengthy exposition of the ten commandments in the course of its instruction.

Interestingly, in his commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, Zacharias Ursinus (the principal author of the Heidelberg Catechism itself) goes into great detail answering the arguments or objections of “the Antinomians, Libertines, and other profane heretics of a similar cast, who affirm that the law is not to be taught in the church of Christ.” This almost certainly shows that he had their arguments in view when he composed Q/A 115.

Ursinus goes so far as to state and refute no less than 11 (!) common objections that such heretics made against the strict preaching and teaching of God’s law. Some of these very same arguments are raised in one form or another by modern antinomians of various kinds in our own day as well.

For example, he points out that some object to the strict preaching of God’s commandments on the basis that we are unable in this life to perfectly keep or obey them. Ursinus essentially answers this objection in his commentary by restating the answer to question #115. He also points out that “the law may, to a certain extent, be kept by the regenerate” (p.615). In other words, the fact that we cannot perfectly obey God’s law in this life does not mean that we cannot sincerely obey it at all.

Another common objection (both in Ursinus’s day as well as our own) is based upon a misunderstanding of Paul’s words in Romans 6:14, where he says that we as believers are “not under law but under grace.” Ursinus writes,

“This, however, is to misunderstand the words of the Apostle; for the expression, Not to be under the law, does not mean, that we are not to yield obedience to the law, but that we are freed from the curse and constraint of the law; . . . .” (p.617)

The Westminster Confession of Faith likewise states:

“The moral law doth forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that, not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it. Neither doth Christ, in the gospel, any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.” (19.5)

The gospel of God’s grace in Jesus Christ does not in any way “dissolve” or do away with our obligation to obey God’s law, but rather does “much strengthen this obligation.”

So why is it necessary that the commandments of God be so strictly preached? Q/A 115 offers us at least two reasons. “First, that all our lifetime we may learn more and more to know our sinful nature, and thus become the more earnest in seeking the remission of sin and righteousness in Christ.” In other words, a thorough familiarity with the law of God and the hearing of God’s commandments being “strictly preached” ought to help us to understand more and more just how sinful we still are in this life. And this is something that we will need to learn “all our lifetime.” As Paul says in Romans 3:20, “through the law comes knowledge of sin.” (ESV)

This, of course, is not an end in and of itself, but rather serves the purpose of making us as believers to “become the more earnest in seeking the remission of sin and righteousness in Christ.” It should safeguard us from any delusions of perfectionism or self-righteousness, and cause us to more earnestly seek God’s mercy in forgiving our sins and cleansing us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). As Paul says in Philippians 3:8–9,

Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— (ESV)

Not only that, but the strict preaching of the ten commandments is also for the purpose “likewise, that we consistently endeavor and pray to God for the grace of the Holy Spirit, that we might become more and more conformable to the image of God, till we arrive at the perfection proposed to us in the life to come.”

In other words, it should lead us more and more to grasp our need for the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives, and to pray for His work in us, in order that we might be more conformed to the image of Christ and walk in newness of life according to the power of His resurrection (Philippians 3:10-11).

And so herein lies the pastoral wisdom of including within the catechism such a lengthy section dealing with the Ten Commandments, and why God’s commandments still ought to be strictly preached in our churches. These things are needful for every believer, for God uses the preaching of His commandments (as He does all of Scripture) as an instrument of our sanctification in Christ, by the working of His Holy Spirit within us.

“A Small Beginning” of Obedience (The Heidelberg Catechism on the 10th Commandment)

Heidelberg Catechism Q/A 113-115 deals with the 10th commandment (“You shall not covet” – Exodus 20:17). Here the catechism offers a number of important lessons that we should learn from this commandment.

Q.113. What does the tenth commandment require of us? A. That even the smallest inclination or thought contrary to any of God’s commandments never rise in our hearts; but that at all times we hate all sin with our whole heart, and delight in all righteousness.

The first lesson that the 10th commandment teaches us is a right understanding of the true aim and extent of the law of God – that it is spiritual in nature, and must be obeyed inwardly and from the heart, as well as outwardly in the body. As Thomas Watson puts it, “The laws of men take hold of actions, but the law of God goes further, it forbids not only actions, but desires.” (The Ten Commandments, p.181)

In Romans 7:7, Paul writes:

“What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”” (ESV)

The law of God here reveals to us the true depth and extent of our sin, guilt, and depravity. Like the rich young ruler (Mark 10:17-31), we might deceive ourselves into thinking that we have obeyed God’s law simply because we have not lived an outwardly scandalous life; but the 10th commandment pulls us up short and shows us how all of us have broken all of God’s commandments inwardly.

True obedience must be genuine and from the heart, or it is not really true obedience at all. As Q/A 113 tells us, the 10th commandment means that we must hate sin and love righteousness. That is a tall order. The standard is perfection.

What about believers in Christ? Are we able to perfectly obey God’s commandments after our conversion? No. Q/A 114 addresses this very question as follows:

Q.114. But can those who are converted to God perfectly keep these commandments?A. No, but even the holiest of men, while in this life, have only a small beginning of this obedience; yet so, that with a sincere resolution they begin to live, not only according to some, but all the commandments of God.

Not only before conversion (when we are dead in our trespasses and sins – Ephesians 2:1), but even after conversion as well (after we are born again by the Spirit of God and freed from slavery to sin – John 3:3; Romans 6:14), believers are unable to perfectly keep God’s commandments. Simply put, the Bible does not teach perfectionism.

In fact, as the Heidelberg so memorably puts it here, “even the holiest of men, while in this life, have only a small beginning of this obedience” (!). How humble ought even the godliest of Christians to be, knowing that they “have only a small beginning of this obedience” in this present life! Even the very holiest among us cannot claim to be even close to perfection in this life.

And yet we must make that our sincere goal. Q/A 114 makes this clear when it adds, “yet so, that with a sincere resolution they begin to live, not only according to some, but all the commandments of God.” There is a big difference between a “small beginning” and no beginning at all. As Ursinus himself (the principle author of the catechism) states in his commentary on Q/A 114, “There is, however, a great difference between the regenerate and the unregenerate when they sin.”

We cannot use our inability to keep God’s commandments perfectly as an excuse for a lack of desire and effort to do so sincerely, however imperfectly. As Paul himself says, “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.” (Philippians 3:12, ESV)

For the believer in Christ, God’s law is not to be viewed as a merit badge or a burden to bear. As John tells us, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.” (1 John 5:3, ESV)

Our sanctification in this life is every bit as much a part of our salvation that is ours only by the grace of God in Christ as is our justification, adoption, and glorification. In fact, sanctification in this life and glory in the next are very closely-related. Thomas Watson puts it well:

“Sanctification and glory differ only in degree: sanctification is glory in the seed, and glory is sanctification in the flower. Holiness is the quintessence of happiness.” (A Body of Divinity, p.242)

So sanctification, the ongoing work of God’s grace in our lives whereby we are “enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness” (Westminster Shorter Catechism Q/A 35) is the beginnings of the glory that we will finally and fully enjoy in heaven one day.

When seen in that light, the effort expended on our part in dying to sin and living unto righteousness in this life can be seen not as a burden to bear, but as a blessing to enjoy, and a goal for which to pursue. It is but a foretaste of the perfect holiness and happiness that will be ours to enjoy forever in heaven with the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Heidelberg Catechism on the 5th Commandment (Honor Your Father and Your Mother)

The Heidelberg Catechism includes just one question regarding what is involved in obeying the 5th commandment, but it says a lot in just a brief space:

“Q.104. What does God require in the fifth commandment? A. That I show all honor, love, and fidelity, to my father and mother, and all in authority over me, and submit myself to their good instruction and correction, with due obedience; and also patiently bear with their weaknesses and infirmities, since it pleases God to govern us by their hand.”

Notice that the basic gist of this commandment is that God requires of us that we show the proper honor, respect, submission, and obedience to the earthly authorities whom He has placed over us in His most wise and good providence.

That obviously starts with our parents, who are the first authority figures we normally encounter in our lives. In many ways it is in the home where we first learn (or fail to learn) respect for and submission to authority.

Clearly the Heidelberg rightly teaches that this honor, respect, and submission extend well beyond our earthly parents to all of the other earthly authority figures in our lives as well (i.e. “all in authority over me”). As Paul says in Romans 13:1, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” (ESV)

The sovereign wisdom and providence of God are to be kept in mind when dealing with those who are in authority over us. We are to remember that “there is no authority except from God,” and that includes those in authority whom we may not particularly agree with or appreciate. As Q/A 104 puts it, we are to submit to them “since it pleases God to govern us by their hand.”

That is why Paul goes on to say, “Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.” (Romans 13:2, ESV)

Notice also that the catechism anticipates the most common objection to godly submission in every context, in that it tells us that we must “also patiently bear with their weaknesses and infirmities, since it pleases God to govern us by their hand.” Perfect wisdom and decision making on the part of those who are over us in this life are not the prerequisites for our submission. Otherwise no one would ever be worthy of submission.

Even the very best earthly fathers are just doing the best that they can. (See Hebrews 12:.10.) And their imperfections in no way render our honoring and obeying them to be optional.

We are to bear with the weaknesses and infirmities of the authorities whom God has placed over us in His infinite wisdom. That includes parents, husbands, officers in the church, and civil authorities, among others. And the reason, as always, is that “it pleases God to govern us by their hand.”

Ask yourself this, how do you think and speak of the earthly authorities whom God has placed over you? Disagreeing with them, even criticizing them (depending on the way that it is done, of course) may even be necessary at times. But do you show them the respect and honor that is due to them for the sake of their God-given office?

As believers in Christ, we must submit to those whom God has been pleased to place over us, and we must do so in such a way that we “also patiently bear with their weaknesses and infirmities,” and even pray for them (1 Timothy 2:1-4).

In his book on the Heidelberg Catechism entitled, The Good News We Almost Forgot, Kevin DeYoung writes,

“I doubt many of us regularly feel convicted by the Fifth Commandment, but we probably should. How are we really doing? Do we joyfully submit to parents, husbands, and the rule of law? Are we patient with pastors and senators and middle managers? Do we give glad respect to denominational executives, committee chairpersons, and department heads? Do we take care of our aging parents without grumbling and complaining? Do we ever consider their feelings and desires above our own when making plans for the holidays? Would we be happy if our young children treated us like we, now grown, treat our parents?” (p.187)

We may not give the 5th commandment much thought, but we should. And if we were to do so, no doubt most of us would find plenty of room for confession, repentance, and improvement. May God work in us what is pleasing in His sight, by His grace and Holy Spirit, to the glory of the name of Jesus Christ.

The Heidelberg Catechism – Lord’s Day #2 (Q.3-5)

In the previous question (Q.2) we were told that there are three (3) things that we need to know in order to live and die in the joy of our comfort in Christ. (Those three things essentially form the outline or structure of the Heidelberg Catechism.) The first of these things that we must know is the greatness of our sin and misery.

The catechism’s treatment of the subject of our sin and misery is found in Q.3-11. This is easily the shortest of the three sections in the catechism. In his book, The Good News We Almost Forgot, Kevin Deyoung writes,

“Compared with the amount of time spent on other topics, the Heidelberg Catechism does not spend a lot of time on human depravity. The grace section of the catechism [Q.12-85] covers twenty-seven Lord’s days and seventy-four Questions and Answers. The gratitude section [Q.86-129] is only a little shorter, covering twenty-one Lord’s days and forty-four Questions and Answers. The guilt section [Q.3-11] is by far the shortest with only three Lord’s days and nine Questions and Answers. The authors of the Catechism wanted Heidelberg to be an instrument of comfort, not condemnation.” (p.25)

But don’t let the brevity of this section fool you. Without a right understanding of the greatness of our sin and misery we can never really understand the greatness of God’s grace in the gospel of Christ.

In his 2-volume set of lectures on the Heidelberg Catechism, Guilt, Grace and Gratitude, George W. Bethune writes,

“To understand and appreciate the salvation by Christ, it is necessary that we should know our misery, its source, its extent, and our utter dependence upon divine grace through Christ for pardon, favor, a new life, and immortal happiness.” (p.31-32)

If we don’t first understand the bad news of our sin and misery outside of Christ, how will we ever rightly appreciate just how good the good news of Christ really is? That is why the catechism begins where it does, with a brief explanation of our sin and misery.

The questions for Lord’s day #2 (Questions 3-5) of the Heidelberg Catechism begin to unfold for us what the Bible teaches about the greatness of our sin and misery outside of Christ.

The Necessity of the Law of God

The first thing that the catechism teaches us in this section is the necessity of the law of God in revealing our sin and misery to us. It says,

Q.3. How do you come to know your misery? A. The law of God tells me.

The Word of God clearly teaches us that it is the law of God that reveals our sin and misery to us. In Romans 3:19-20 the Apostle Paul writes,

“Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.” (ESV)

“Through the law comes the knowledge of sin” (v.20). We can only truly perceive the depth of our sin and misery in light of the law of God. It is there that we find the true standard of righteousness by which sinners must be judged.

And in making us aware of our sin and misery, the law of God then also reveals our need for the Savior. Theologians often refer to this as the pedagogical use of God’s law – the use wherein the law drives us to Christ for salvation from our sins.

The Requirements of the Law of God – Love for God and Neighbor

The next thing that the Heidelberg Catechism does is sum up what the law of God requires of us:

Q.4. What does God’s law require of us? A. Christ teaches us this in summary in Matthew 22:37-40: “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. “And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

It is interesting that Ursinus (the author) chose this passage from Matthew’s Gospel rather than the text of the ten commandments (i.e. Exodus 20:1-17; Deuteronomy 5:6-21) in order to show us the requirements of God’s law. The catechism actually includes a somewhat lengthy exposition of the ten commandments in the very last section (the gratitude section). And so we see that not only does the law of God show us our sins and so drive us to Christ for salvation from our sins, but it also shows us how we are to live and show our gratitude to God after we come to Christ by faith for salvation!

This summary of the law of God found in the great commandment shows us the futility of mere morality, because it shows us the true nature of the kind of obedience that God requires of us, as well as the only right motive of such obedience.

Many people might fool themselves into thinking that they have obeyed God’s commandments simply because they have not outwardly committed the acts of murder or of adultery. But the Lord Jesus shows us in the sermon on the mount (Matthew 5-7) and in the great commandment (Matthew 22:37-40) that true obedience must extend to the heart, and must also and come from a heart of love to God and our neighbor.

The Depravity and Inability of Man

Not only does the law of God reveal our sin and misery to us, but it also shows us just how far we fall short of obedience to God. Not only do we not love God and love our neighbor as ourselves, but we actually have a marked tendency to do the opposite! In Q.5 we see not just our sin and guilt, but our depravity outside of Christ as well:

Q.5. Can you live up to all this perfectly? A. No. I have a natural tendency to hate God and my neighbor

The problem is not with the law (Romans 7:12), but rather with us. We are utterly unable (and unwilling) to keep it. And not only do we fail to keep it, but we actually “have a natural tendency” to do the very opposite of what the law requires – we not only fail to love God and love our neighbor, but we actually tend to hate God and hate our neighbor!

In Ephesians 2:1-3 the Apostle Paul puts it this way:

“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.” (ESV)

Here we see the utter helplessness and hopelessness of our condition outside of God’s grace in Jesus Christ. And because of this, we also can begin to see a better glimpse of the greatness of the salvation that is ours through faith in Jesus Christ.

In the questions and answers for the following Lord’s day (Q.6-8) the catechism addresses the topic that most naturally follows upon these things – how did mankind come to be in this condition of sin and misery? It doesn’t take long to see the logical progression of thought in the way the Heidelberg lays out its case for the gospel of Christ.

The Heidelberg Catechism Q.2 – Guilt, Grace, and Gratitude

The Outline of the Heidelberg Catechism

The Heidelberg Catechism is outlined or structured around three (3) headings of doctrine. These essential doctrines of the Christian faith and life are often summarized by the terms Guilt (Q.3-11), Grace (Q.12-85), and Gratitude (Q.86-129).

This outline (although not employing these exact terms) is made explicit in Q.2:

Q.2. What must you know to live and die in the joy of this comfort?
A. Three things: first, how great my sin and misery are; second, how I am set free from all my sins and misery; third, how I am to thank God for such deliverance.

G.I. Williamson goes so far as to state that here in Q/A #2 of the Heidelberg, “we have a comprehensive outline of the whole catechism” (The Heidelberg Catechism: A Study Guide, p.7).

Guilt refers to our “sin and misery” outside of Christ; Grace refers to how we are set free from our sin and misery through faith in Christ; and Gratitude refers to how we are to thank God for our great salvation that we have by His grace in Christ.

This outline simply echoes the same basic outline or structure of the gospel itself, as found in the book of Romans (Paul’s magnum opus on the gospel). The book of Romans can also be broadly outlined by guilt – our sin and misery (Romans chapters 1-3); grace – being set free from our sin and misery through Christ (Romans chapters 4-11); and gratitude – how to thank God for His grace (Romans chapters 12-16).

Guilt – The Greatness of Our Sin and Misery

The first thing that we need to know in order to live and die in our only comfort in Christ is the greatness of our sin and misery. You might wonder why that necessary for us to know. The truth about the greatness of our sin and misery is certainly unpleasant to consider, and has never been a popular message. But without a right understanding of these things, how can anyone even begin to rightly understand the gospel itself?

In truth, we cannot begin to appreciate the greatness of God’s grace in the gospel of Christ, unless we first have a clear understanding of just what it is that the Lord Jesus Christ came to save us from in the first place. And so to try to take a shortcut in our gospel preaching by avoiding the law (with its testimony to our depravity and sin, and the just judgment of a holy God), is really to undermine both the gospel message itself, as well as the only true comfort any sinner can ever have in life and in death.

Questions 3-11 of the Heidelberg Catechism deal with our sin and misery in some detail, teaching us that the law reveals our sin and misery to us (Q.3-5; Romans 3:20); the creation and the Fall of mankind (Q.6-8; Genesis 1-3); and the perfect holiness, justice, and wrath of God against sinners (Q.9-11; Romans 1:17; 6:23).

Grace – The Way to Be Set Free from Our Sin and Misery

Not only must we know the greatness of our sin and misery, but we must also know the way to be set free from our sin and misery, in order that we might live and die in the comfort of our salvation. This section of the catechism (Q.12-85) basically deals with the Christian faith (i.e. what we are to believe).

In other words, we need a thorough understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ!

In explaining the way of salvation to us the Heidelberg goes into great deal about Christ as our Redeemer and His work of atonement for our sin (Q.12-19), the nature of saving faith in Christ (Q.20-21), and what we are to believe, consisting in a lengthy exposition of the Apostles’ Creed (Q.22-58), and the Sacraments (Q.65-82).

How different this is from the minimalist mindset of many in the church today, who view doctrine as unnecessary, or even as divisive or detrimental. Simply put, doctrine matters. And the choice is not simply between having doctrine or not having doctrine, but rather between having true doctrine (and so having a right understanding of the gospel) or having false doctrine.

No wonder the Heidelberg Catechism spends so much time teaching us about the way of salvation in Christ.

Gratitude – How We Are to Thank God for So Great a Salvation

Lastly, we must also know how to thank God for delivering us from our sin and misery through the gospel of Christ in order to live and die in the comfort of our salvation. This section of the catechism (Q.86-129) basically deals with the Christian life (i.e. how we are to live).

These things basically consist in good works, obedience to God’s commandments, and prayer. It may surprise some to see that the author of the catechism (Ursinus) chose this section of the catechism (the “gratitude” section) rather than the first section section (the section on our guilt) as the place to expound upon the ten commandments in detail (Q.91-115).

This is in keeping with the teachings of John Calvin, who taught that the use of the law as our rule for life (often referred to as the third use of the law) is the “principal use” of the law for the Christian (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.7.12).

It is also in this section where the Lord’s Prayer is taught in detail (Q.116-129) Q.116 goes so far as to call prayer “the most important part of the thankfulness God requires of us.” No wonder the Scriptures so often associate thankfulness with prayer (e.g. Philippians 4:6; 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18).

And so Q/A #2 of the Heidelberg provides us with a road map of sorts, showing us where we are in our studies throughout the rest of its many questions and answers, and helping us to better understand the logical structure and flow of thought in this great historic teaching tool and form of unity in the Reformed faith.

Heidelberg Catechism Q.1 – Your Only Comfort in Life and in Death

The Starting Point of the Heidelberg Catechism

The Heidelberg Catechism starts with the most important question that one can ask – literally a question of life and death! In doing so, the catechism wastes no time, and shows us that the Christian faith is no trivial matter. This sets the tone for everything that follows:

Q.1. What is your only comfort in life and in death?
A. That I am not my own, but belong—body and soul, in life and in death—to my faithful Savior, Jesus Christ. He has fully paid for all my sins with his precious blood, and has set me free from the tyranny of the devil. He also watches over me in such a way that not a hair can fall from my head without the will of my Father in heaven; in fact, all things must work together for my salvation. Because I belong to him, Christ, by his Holy Spirit, assures me of eternal life and makes me wholeheartedly willing and ready from now on to live for him.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism similarly begins by asking “What is the chief end of man?” It answers by saying that man’s chief end “is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.” Both catechisms have good starting points, for both begin by making us face questions of ultimate and eternal significance.

In his book on the Heidelberg Catechism, The Good News We almost Forgot, Kevin DeYoung writes,

“In truth, both catechisms start in appropriate places. Heidelberg starts with grace. Westminster starts with glory. We’d be hard-pressed to think of two better words to describe the theme of biblical revelation.” (p.21)

Whether you begin with grace (Heidelberg) or glory (Westminster), either way both catechisms begin by asking questions regarding the state of sinful man in relation to his Creator.

The Source of Our Only Comfort in Life and in Death

The catechism begins by pointing believers to the only true source of comfort in life and in death – that we have been bought with a price, and belong (in life and in death) to our Lord Jesus Christ. The first part of the answer spells this out for us when it has us confess in very personal terms (i.e. “I,” “my,” etc.) that our only comfort is found in this:

“That I am not my own, but belong—body and soul, in life and in death—to my faithful Savior, Jesus Christ.”

This is a truth that the Scriptures point us to again and again, especially in the writings of the Apostle Paul:

• “For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.” (Romans 14:7–9, ESV, Italics added)
• “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” (1 Corinthians 6:19–20, ESV, Italics added)

Why is that a source of such great comfort in life and in death? The answer to that question is found in what Q.1 has to say about the redemption of Christ – the price that He paid for our salvation from sin – and what that redemption has accomplished for all who are in Christ.

The Redemption of Christ

Why is it that we no longer belong to ourselves, but rather to our faithful Savior? Because, as the catechism goes on to have us confess (again, in very personal terms),

“He has fully paid for all my sins with his precious blood, and has set me free from the tyranny of the devil.”

So the ultimate source of our only comfort in life and in death is that we no longer belong to ourselves, but to Christ; and that is only the case because of His redemption for our sins by His cross and resurrection.

And what did Christ’s redemption accomplish? At least two things: 1.) Forgiveness and the Removal of Guilt (“fully paid for all my sins”), and 2.) Freedom to Serve God (“and has set me free from the tyranny of the devil”). You could say that these two things generally are speaking of justification and sanctification.

• “ . . .waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.” (Titus 2:13–14, ESV)
• “Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery.” (Hebrews 2:14–15, ESV)

The Providential Care of Christ

Not only is the redemption of Christ a source of great comfort for us in life and in death, but so also is His providential care for us. The catechism goes on to say:

“He also watches over me in such a way that not a hair can fall from my head without the will of my Father in heaven; in fact, all things must work together for my salvation.”

Not only are we redeemed by Christ, but we are also unfailingly preserved in the love of God in Christ as well. Not only can nothing separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:37-39), but He also watches over us in this life in such a way, that nothing can so much as harm a hair on our heads apart from the will of God.

Here the Heidelberg Catechism is borrowing language directly from at least two passages:

• “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.” (Matthew 10:29–31, ESV)

• “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” (Romans 8:28–30, ESV)

The Assurance of Christ

Lastly, this opening question of the catechism speaks of the great blessing of the assurance of our salvation and the work of the Spirit of Christ within us:

“Because I belong to him, Christ, by his Holy Spirit, assures me of eternal life and makes me wholeheartedly willing and ready from now on to live for him.”

This assurance is also part of the only comfort in life and in death that is ours only in Christ! Not only are we assured of eternal life in Christ by the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit enables us to live for our Savior the rest of our days!

Do you belong to Jesus Christ by faith, so that you yourself have the only true comfort in life and in death that is found in no longer belonging to yourself, but rather in belong to the Lord Jesus Christ, in body and soul, and in life and in death?

No other comfort will do. Every other source of comfort will ultimately let you down, both in this life, and certainly in the day of judgment.