II.
(Continued from p. 177.)
Notwithstanding the additions to the Committee Mr Palmer, though an excellent catechiser, was evidently very dilatory, and submitted nothing to the Assembly. The Assembly took the matter now in hand and ordered the Committee on 12th May “to meet this afternoon.” This had the desired effect on Mr Palmer, for next day he submitted a report, the substance of which is not given; but from the debate, reported at some length in the Minutes (Minutes of Westminster Assembly, pp. 91-94), it appears, as Dr Mitchell suggests, to have been somewhat like the Direction prefixed to his own Catechism and which is printed in Dr Mitchell’s collection—”Catechisms of the Second Reformation.” Palmer’s plan was to have a double set of questions and answers. The answers of the first set were each to contain a complete statement of the truth, independent of the question, as it is in the Shorter Catechism. The second set of questions and answers were to break up the statements in the first set by a series of questions answered by a yes or no. Dr Carruthers gives the following example from Wallis’s “Explanation of the Shorter Catechism”:—
Question: 1. What is the chief end of man? Answer: Man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.
Is it to seek himself, or make himself great? No. Or, to enjoy the profits or pleasures of the world? No. Or, is it to glorify God and enjoy Him forever? Yes.
Question: 2. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him? Answer: The Word of God, which is contained in the Old and New Testament, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy Him. Can we receive sufficient directions from our own wisdom, or the light of nature? No. Or, from God’s works of creation and Providence only? No. Or, is the Word of God the only rule? Yes. Or, must we daily expect new revelations from heaven? No. Is that the Word of God which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament? Yes. Or, somewhat else? No.
Samuel Rutherford, who opened the debate, approved of Palmer’s method. He made the suggestion that the second set of questions should be printed in smaller type. He expressed the wish that the lambs should be fed in the “plainest and easiest way.” He concluded by saying: “There is as much art in catechising as in anything in the world. It may be doubted whether every minister understands the most dexterous way of doing it.” Stephen Marshall did not approve of introducing the second set of questions into the Catechism. William Bridge said there were two ends in catechising, increase of knowledge, and test of knowledge, and for the latter end the answers should not be yes and no. George Gillespie remarked that he liked well the form offered to the Assembly, “the capital questions by themselves, and particular questions by aye and no, both put together in the body of the Catechism.” If ministers did not need help, heads of families did. After others had expressed their opinions Herbert Palmer explained that he had refrained from speaking because of his peculiar interest in the discussion. He was not satisfied with the discussion. “Much is spoken of children,” he remarked, “but we have some others to deal withal than children.”
The Committee proceeded to draft a Catechism. The Assembly spent five days in August 1645 on it, and then rested from it for more than a year. On September 14th, 1646, the third answer dealing with the rule of faith and obedience was decided upon. No record of the first two questions is found in the Minutes. The discussion of the draft Catechism proceeded until 4th January, 1646-7. On the 14th January a motion was made by Mr Vines, and the Assembly ordered:—”That the Committee for the Catechism do prepare a draught of two Catechisms, one more large and another more brief, in which they are to have an eye to the Confession of Faith, and to the matter of the Catechism already begun.” These last words clearly indicate that the Catechism to which our attention has been directed in the preceding pages was left unfinished. But it is of importance in view of the Assembly’s instruction “to have an eye to the matter of the Catechism already begun.” Dr Carruthers has constructed this Catechism as far as there is record in the Minutes of the Assembly. It is given in his “Shorter Catechism,” pp. 21-26. The last question in it is: What doth the fourth commandment require?
On 14th April 1647, the Committee made their first Report on the Larger Catechism, and this document engaged the attention of the Assembly until 22nd October following, when it was agreed that the Prolocutor, attended by the whole Assembly, should take the completed work up to both Houses of Parliament.
(To be continued.)
Living Water.
For this must be remembered, that as the herb that is planted or seed grown, needs watering with continual showers of the mountains; so our graces, implanted in us by the Spirit of grace, must also be watered by the rain of heaven. “Thou waterest the ridges thereof abundantly; thou settlest the furrows thereof: thou makest it soft with showers; thou blessest the springing thereof.” Hence He says that our graces shall grow. But how? “I will be as the dew unto Israel; he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon. His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree and his smell as Lebanon. They that dwell under His shadow shall return; they shall revive as the corn, and grow as the vine; and the scent thereof shall be as the wine of Lebanon. . . . Without this water of life communion is weak, flat, cold, dead, fruitless, lifeless: there is nothing seen, felt, heard, or understood in a spiritual and heart-quickening way. Now ordinances are burdensome, sins strong, faith weak, hearts hard, and the faces of our souls dry, like the dry and parched ground.—Bunyan.