Some of you will remember that I wrote against Rev. Koole’s teachings in the Standard Bearer regarding, “There is something you must do in order to be saved.” Some of you may even remember that I was one of the 32 group of concerned men who started the Sword and Shield. I was one of the first who wrote Prof. Engelsma in opposition to his teaching that man is somehow first in a sense when it comes to his own salvation. I wrote the three editors of the SB rebuking them sharply for their wickedness against Rev. VanderWal in his suspension. That very letter was read to the consistory of Wingham when all seemed lost. I personally rebuked Prof. Cammenga to his face for making the whole issue to be that of antinomianism before the Synod of 2017. I was even told that my letter in the SB was the very incentive that prompted the founders of the Sword and Shield to have their first meeting. I love that truth with all my heart.

Today I stand in complete amazement and sadness over the fact that in just a very short time under the leadership of Rev. Lanning and Rev. Langerak the RPC has been led away from the Old Paths of the Reformed Faith and teachings of solid reformed men as  Rev. Herman Hoeksema when it comes to the distinction between the preaching of the Gospel and the Living and abiding Word of Christ, the christian day schools as a responsibility of law and not of thankfulness and doctrines concerning faith itself. I plan on writing a separate article on each error showing clearly how this is so.

Today I take up pen and paper to address the heresy that Rev. Lanning is now teaching in FRPC in his response to a blog post writer who wrote, “The WORD does not need the Church.” (See Rev. Lanning’s response in his sermon on the Means of Faith 11/6/22 pm) By this statement the blog post writer obviously is referring to the Living and abiding Word of Christ in distinction from the preaching of the gospel. Whether or not that is exactly what he meant this statement is soundly Reformed and Biblical. Yet Rev. Lanning shows either his profound ignorance of this reformed truth or his willing malicious intent against it when it comes to the doctrines of regeneration, calling and that of the Living and abiding Word of Christ in distinction from the preaching of the gospel in salvation, by scoffing and ridiculing that statement. The blog writer speaks the truth, Rev. Lanning speaks the lie. Rev. Lanning not only ridicules that statement but worse yet minimizes and mocks the Living Word of Christ and therefore Christ Himself in that sermon. It’s that serious.

The teachings of Rev. Herman Hoeksema and the truth which I believe with all my heart stand in direct opposition to Rev. Lanning. For one of the best explanations anywhere to be found on the distinction between the Living and Abiding Word of Christ and the preaching of a man, listen to Rev. Herman Hoeksema’s sermon on Baptism and Regeneration on I Peter 1:23–25 as recorded for us on Old Paths Recordings. In this connection Canons, Head 3 & 4 Article 12 says that this work of God is “supernatural, not inferior in efficacy to creation or the resurrection from the dead…” In that sermon Rev. Herman Hoeksema says that this implanting of regeneration is so divine, a new creation, that he cannot understand how anyone can conceive that the preaching of a man is needed. He further states, “I cannot understand how any reformed man can ever teach anything different.” Rev. Herman Hoeksema asks, “Do you think God used any word of man when He created the world? Neither does He use the preaching of a man in regeneration. It is other worldly.” I assure you; you will hear in the beginning 5 minutes already of that sermon a fierce opposition to what Rev. Lanning is now teaching. Your heart will sing when you hear the truth taught by Rev. Herman Hoeksema over against the lie. The Living and abiding Word of Christ is not dependent upon some preacher who has an overinflated sense of his own self-importance, nor is the salvation of the elect dependent upon a church. It’s the other way around. Both the preaching and the work of the church are dependent upon the Living and Abiding Word of Christ. The WORD does not need a preacher or a church, but the church and the preaching needs the WORD and has no reason to exist without the WORD. Does not Rev. Lanning understand that he can preach till he’s blue in the face but Rev. Lanning and the preaching of FRPC has never saved anyone nor will they save anyone? Rev. Lanning forgets that no man can even hear Christ in the preaching of the gospel unless that man is already saved and has been given the gift of faith. The preacher nor the Church saves, Christ alone saves! Two people can sit in the same pew, brothers perhaps, one is saved and one is not. Do you think the preaching they both hear saves one and not the other? Christ alone saves, and Christ alone hardens. That cannot be emphasized enough especially today where preachers no longer understand, whether out of ignorance or out of pride, that the Living and Abiding Word of Christ does not need a preacher or a Church to save His own nor do they understand any longer what faith is. The Spirit of Christ may choose to operate with the preaching but is not limited to work through the preaching. That distinction was made by the Reformed long ago over against the teaching of the Lutherans. Nor is that the teaching of independentism as claims Rev. Lanning, but that of the Reformed Truth itself. The preacher and the Church are totally helpless to save without Christ, are not needed by Him, and are used by Him simply as a means He is pleased to use to feed His lambs and strengthen the faith He has already given His own elect. The preaching of the gospel does not, emphatically does not, create faith, contrary to the teachings of Rev. Lanning. The Spirit of Christ alone can give the gift of faith. Faithful preaching can only strengthen the faith that has already been given the elect as His gift. The preacher and the earthly form of a church are nothing apart from Christ. Nothing at all!  Christ is everything and man is nothing! That is the Reformed faith!  Rev. Lanning seeks to make your salvation dependent upon his preaching and that of FRPC and not on Christ alone. He does this by making his preaching and the church’s role the emphasis and focal point of salvation instead of the Living and Abiding Word of Christ. Rev. Lanning would rob Christ of His glory. Rev. Lanning seeks to lead his congregation right into the arms of Rome and it’s teaching of salvation in relationship to the church when it comes right down to it.

Rev. Lanning says in his sermon that to say that the WORD does not need the Church is to separate salvation from the means of salvation. This is a serious accusation, extremely dangerous, false, and deceptive because at first glance it has the appearance of truth.  It is the devil’s own lie. Rev. Lanning in that sermon makes Christ’s work dependent upon a man’s preaching. Furthermore, it is not the truth as it is evident that Rev. Lanning’s teaching has no answer for the salvation of infants or young children who die in infancy. Rev. Lanning’s teaching is in essence the same as Rev. Koole’s in that it makes salvation conditional.  Rev. Lanning makes hearing the preaching as taught by him and being a member of FRPC a condition of salvation. It’s the lie through and through again repeating itself in a matter of less than two years just in different form. The WORD alone saves! That has been the battle cry of the Reformed and that is the truth as it has triumphed through history conquering all that opposes the Truth. Rev. Lanning stands in direct opposition to that Truth.

As I began to point out Rev. Lanning’s teaching is false because it has no answer to the salvation of infants or to the parents whose infants die in infancy, but in contrast the Reformed Faith does. He cannot, for he has stated plainly and by implication and that not so subtle that there is no salvation outside of hearing his preaching and being a member of RPC. In direct opposition Rev. Hoeksema correctly points out in his sermon on Baptism and Regeneration that infants do not understand the preaching, nor can they discern what is being preached to them. As the Baptism Form states so beautifully under Head I, first paragraph, “for as they are without their knowledge (young children, emphasis mine HDB) partakers of the condemnation in Adam, so are they again (that is without their knowledge, emphasis mine HDB) received unto grace in Christ…” The only correct view is to understand the Reformed view that the Living and Abiding Word of Christ normally saves the elect infants of believing parents without the aid of the preaching of the gospel. Rev. Hoeksema points out correctly that the Reformed teach that the elect infants of believers who die in infancy are saved and go to glory without the means of preaching. Furthermore, as evidence to that truth, Rev. Hoeksema points out that most teenagers when making confession of faith cannot point to the day of their regeneration and being brought to faith in Christ. Rev. Lanning does not teach the Reformed Faith but another teaching of his own imagination. His teaching is essentially the same as Rome’s.

It is interesting to note that both Rev. Koole and Rev. Lanning both stumble headlong over the truth that Rev. Herman Hoeksema was trying to drive home with his sermon on the Philippian jailor. In the Philippian jailor we are now talking about the salvation of adults. It was over this sermon where the controversy all started. If there was one thing Rev. H.H. was trying to drive home in that sermon it was the truth that the Philippian jailor was regenerated and saved without the preaching of the gospel. The physical earthquake was only a symbol of the supernatural work of the Spirit of Christ that was happening in the heart of the Philippian jailor. The lie always opposes the Truth. So, Rev. Lanning takes great offense to the truth that the Reformed has always loved, that is, the WORD is not dependent upon man, even a preacher or a church. The Word may work with the preaching but is not bound by it. It is a Reformed doctrinal truth that abases man and extols Christ and His perfect work alone. It is the doctrine that makes man nothing and Christ everything. Natural man and the carnal preacher hate that Truth.

The truth is never a weapon of tyranny, true enough, but false teachers are always tyrants. False teachers always seek to usurp the authority of Christ in His Church, claim it for their own and produce tyranny in the Church. They trouble the church on every side. The dictatorship and doctrines of men scatter and destroy the sheep, not the Truth. True sheep of Christ in the FRPC are bleeding, wounded and scattered. Many I hear of who weep not knowing where to go anymore. The Great Shepard who loves His lambs will not tolerate this for long. Demand of your minister that the Truth and nothing but the whole Truth be taught off your pulpit and if he refuses show him the door straightway. Perhaps the Spirit of Christ will spare and restore.

The Spirit of Christ always points to and promotes Christ and Christ alone. We say that the Spirit is self-effacing. A faithful preacher of the gospel will always have the same attitude of John the Baptist. He must increase but I must decrease. What did you hear in that sermon and others of Rev. Lanning? Did you hear Christ alone saves and is pleased to use weakest means to strengthen the faith of His own? Or did you hear, Christ plus the preaching of a man and membership in this church alone saves? Or the ultimate worst, The preaching of a man and membership in this church alone saves? If you heard anything but the first you have reason for great concern. Rev. Lanning extols the means Christ is pleased to use to strengthen the faith of His own over above the work of Christ in salvation itself.  Christ commands His church to try the Spirits. He commended the Bereans as noble for they put their preacher to the test of the word of God and mind you the man whose words they were putting to the test were none else than the greatest of the apostles. Rev. Lanning is not greater than the apostle Paul.

If your minister will not hear the Truth, then show him the door straightway.  In the context of christian discipline and in direct opposition to Rev. Lanning’s teaching, Christ declares plainly in Matthew 18:20, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”  You may not have a preacher or even an instituted church, but the living and abiding WORD promises you He will be in your midst. The WORD is not bound by a preacher or a church.

I encourage you to listen to Rev. Herman Hoeksema’s sermon on Baptism and Regeneration to hear the Truth in opposition to the lie being taught in your midst.  The Truth alone will set you free. Let no man take your crown.

—Herman Boonstra

Loveland Colorado

—————

RESPONSE

Introduction

The above letter comes from the pen of one of the founding members of Reformed Believers Publishing (RBP). I also am a founding member of RBP, but let’s just say that our correspondent and I long ago parted ways. Our correspondent alleges that I am not Reformed and, in fact, that I am a false prophet who mocks Christ by my doctrine.

I deny our correspondent’s allegations, and I maintain that our correspondent is not Reformed. He, of course, would deny this, and then I would deny his denial, and this would go on without end. I suppose that Herman Boonstra and I could hammer back and forth at each other all spring and summer about who is Reformed and who is not, but I don’t see much profit in that for the readership of Sword and Shield. In fact, I strongly considered not publishing his letter because I see it as empty grandstanding by an enemy of the gospel. Sword and Shield has published its fair share about roosters, but that does not mean that its pages are a yard where a man should strut around and preen his feathers.

I do, however, see profit in addressing the doctrinal issue that the letter raises. This doctrinal issue has played a significant role in the recent withdrawal of several members from the Reformed Protestant Churches (RPC). Because of the doctrinal matter, then, our correspondent’s letter and this reply are printed.

The Doctrinal Issue

The doctrinal issue is this: Is God pleased to use the preaching of the gospel to save his people, or is God pleased to save his people without the preaching of the gospel?

The reader will have to keep in mind that this is the issue. The issue is not whether God could save his people without the preaching of the gospel. We are not dealing with a question of God’s omnipotent ability but with a question of God’s will. Besides, scripture and the confessions are not interested in hypothetical questions in salvation, but they are very interested in what God has revealed as his actual power and good pleasure in salvation. Nor is the issue whether Christ himself personally saves the elect sinner. (Yes, he does.) Nor is the issue whether the Holy Spirit sovereignly creates faith. (Yes, he does.) Nor is the issue whether the minister himself personally saves the elect sinner by his preaching. (No, he does not.) Nor is the issue whether the preaching of the gospel operates independently of God in salvation. (No, it does not.) Nor is the issue whether the Word of God depends upon the church. (No, it does not.) Nor is the issue whether the church depends upon the Word of God. (Yes, it does.)

Any suggestion that these other things are the issue is only a loud attempt to pick a fight where there is no fight. There certainly is a fight to be had. But let us fight where there is a doctrinal difference between us. That doctrinal difference is over this question: Is God pleased to use the preaching of the gospel to save his people, or is God pleased to save his people without the preaching of the gospel?

God Saves through Preaching

The Reformed faith is that God is pleased to use the preaching of the gospel to save his people. This is not because there is any power in the man who preaches but only because God makes the preaching his instrument by which he bestows salvation. The preaching of the gospel is God’s means by which he calls the elect sinner out of darkness into God’s marvelous light. It is God’s means by which he declares to the elect sinner the fullness of God’s promise in Christ. It is God’s means by which the Holy Ghost works faith in the hearts of the elect. It is God’s means by which he feeds and nourishes the elect sinner with the bread of life unto everlasting life.

The Reformed faith further teaches that God is not pleased to save his people without the preaching of the gospel. Although God makes himself known to all men through the creation, so that they know that there is a God and that he is to be worshiped, God does not translate men out of their sin and death and misery by his revelation of himself in the creation. Men are rendered without excuse by what they know of God in the creation, but they are not delivered from their sin. Only by the preaching of the gospel does God deliver men from darkness to light because only the preaching of the gospel declares the good news of salvation in Christ.

The Reformed faith further teaches that neither the minister of the gospel nor the members of the church may try to separate salvation from the preaching of the gospel, as if God’s people can have salvation without preaching. God himself in his good pleasure has joined salvation and preaching together, and man may not tempt God by trying to separate what he has intimately joined. In fact, so closely is salvation joined to the preaching of the gospel by God’s ordinance that the more the church preaches the pure gospel of salvation, the more the church enjoys the blessings of her salvation. This “more” is not due to any faithfulness or goodness on the part of man, whether minister or congregant, but this “more” is due to the power of the gospel by which God saves his people.

The Reformed confessions are explicit that God is pleased to use the preaching of the gospel to save his people and that God is not pleased to save his people without the preaching of the gospel.

The Holy Ghost works faith by the preaching of the gospel.

Q. 65. Since then we are made partakers of Christ and all His benefits by faith only, whence doth this faith proceed?

A. From the Holy Ghost, who works faith in our hearts by the preaching of the gospel, and confirms it by the use of the sacraments. (Lord’s Day 25, in Confessions and Church Order, 108)

The Holy Ghost bestows Christ and his salvation upon us through the preaching of the gospel.

Q. 67. Are both Word and sacraments, then, ordained and appointed for this end, that they may direct our faith to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as the only ground of our salvation?

A. Yes, indeed; for the Holy Ghost teaches us in the gospel, and assures us by the sacraments, that the whole of our salvation depends upon that one sacrifice of Christ which He offered for us on the cross. (Lord’s Day 25, in Confessions and Church Order, 108)

God opens the kingdom of heaven to his elect people by the preaching of the gospel.

Q. 83. What are the keys of the kingdom of heaven?

A. The preaching of the holy gospel, and Christian discipline, or excommunication out of the Christian church; by these two, the kingdom of heaven is opened to believers, and shut against unbelievers. (Lord’s Day 31, in Confessions and Church Order, 118)

God saves by the Holy Spirit through the preaching of the gospel.

What therefore neither the light of nature nor the law could do, that God performs by the operation of the Holy Spirit through the Word or ministry of reconciliation, which is the glad tidings concerning the Messiah, by means whereof it hath pleased God to save such as believe, as well under the Old as under the New Testament. (Canons of Dordt 3–4.6, in Confessions and Church Order, 167)

And then there is Canons 3–4.17, which forbids the separation of salvation from the preaching of the gospel, as if believers can have salvation without the means of preaching that God has ordained. Remember that the line in this article that reads, “Grace is conferred by means of admonitions” means “Grace is conferred by means of the gospel.”¹

As the almighty operation of God whereby He prolongs and supports this our natural life does not exclude, but requires, the use of means, by which God of His infinite mercy and goodness hath chosen to exert His influence, so also the before mentioned supernatural operation of God by which we are regenerated in no wise excludes or subverts the use of the gospel, which the most wise God has ordained to be the seed of regeneration and food of the soul. Wherefore, as the apostles and teachers who succeeded them piously instructed the people concerning this grace of God, to His glory, and the abasement of all pride, and in the meantime, however, neglected not to keep them by the sacred precepts of the gospel in the exercise of the Word, sacraments, and discipline; so, even to this day, be it far from either instructors or instructed to presume to tempt God in the church by separating what He of His good pleasure hath most intimately joined together. For grace is conferred by means of admonitions; and the more readily we perform our duty, the more eminent usually is this blessing of God working in us, and the more directly is His work advanced; to whom alone all the glory, both of means and of their saving fruit and efficacy, is forever due. Amen. (Confessions and Church Order, 170)

The confessions teach that God is pleased to save his people by the preaching of the gospel because this is the doctrine of scripture.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Rom. 1:16)

13. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

14. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15. And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

16. But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

17. So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. (Rom. 10:13–17)

On the basis of the word of God, the Reformed faith teaches that God is pleased to save his elect people by the preaching of the gospel and that he is not pleased to save his people apart from the preaching of the gospel in the true church institute.

Salvation Supposedly without Preaching

Correspondent Boonstra takes a different position than the confessions. He teaches that God saves his elect people apart from the preaching of the gospel. He teaches that God does not work faith by the preaching of the gospel. Our correspondent will allow the Holy Spirit to operate with the preaching if the Spirit wants to, and our correspondent will allow the preaching of the gospel to strengthen faith that has already been bestowed. But our correspondent emphatically denies that the Spirit creates faith by the preaching of the gospel, and he emphatically denies that God saves his people by means of the preaching.

Here is our correspondent:

The preaching of the gospel does not, emphatically does not, create faith, contrary to the teachings of Rev. Lanning. The Spirit of Christ alone can give the gift of faith. Faithful preaching can only strengthen the faith that has already been given the elect as His gift. (The emphasis is Boonstra’s.)

Remember the issue. The issue is not whether the Holy Ghost could work faith apart from the preaching. The issue is not whether the Holy Ghost himself personally works faith. The issue is not whether the minister or church creates faith. Rather, the issue is whether the Holy Ghost saves his people, including working faith in them, by the preaching of the word. The confessions say that he does: “The Holy Ghost…works faith in our hearts by the preaching of the gospel” (Lord’s Day 25, in Confessions and Church Order, 108). The scriptures say that he does: “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). Herman Boonstra says that he does not:

The preaching of the gospel does not, emphatically does not, create faith, contrary to the teachings of Rev. Lanning. The Spirit of Christ alone can give the gift of faith. Faithful preaching can only strengthen the faith that has already been given the elect as His gift.

Our correspondent tries to maintain his teaching on the basis of the distinction between “the Living and abiding Word of Christ,” on the one hand, and the “preaching of the gospel,” on the other hand. Although our correspondent does not explain exactly what he means by this distinction, it is clear enough what he means from his references to 1 Peter 1:23–25 and the corresponding sermon by Herman Hoeksema. Our correspondent evidently is speaking of the biblical distinction between the second person of the Trinity as the living Word, come in our flesh, and the declaration and proclamation of that living Word in the preaching of the gospel. When Peter speaks in 1 Peter 1:23–25 of our being born again, he speaks of two “words.” One Word is an incorruptible seed. It is a Word that liveth and abideth for ever. It is a Word that endureth forever. That Word is the eternal Word, who was in the beginning with God and who is God (John 1:1–2). The other “word” in 1 Peter 1:23–25 is the preaching of the gospel. God accomplishes our regeneration by implanting the first Word, the living and eternal Word, in our hearts directly as the incorruptible seed of our lives. We know this Word, who has been implanted in our hearts, by the second word, the preaching of the gospel. For “this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you” (v. 25).

In his letter correspondent Boonstra makes much of the distinction between these two words. He writes often of “the distinction between the preaching of the Gospel and the Living and abiding Word of Christ.” In fact, I think it is fair to say that this distinction is the foundation of Boonstra’s doctrine in his letter. His main doctrinal point is built on the fact that there is a distinction between the living and abiding Word of Christ, on the one hand, and the preaching of the gospel, on the other hand.

Our correspondent is correct that there is a distinction between the living and eternal Word, on the one hand, and the preaching of that Word, on the other hand. But Boonstra is grievously mistaken in how he uses that distinction. He uses the distinction to separate the living Word and the preaching of the gospel. The point at which he separates the living Word from the preaching is the salvation of the sinner. For Boonstra the salvation of the sinner is accomplished by the living Word but without the preaching of the gospel. For Boonstra God gives the elect sinner the gift of faith by the living Word but without the preaching of the gospel. The most that Boonstra will allow the preaching in salvation is that “the Spirit of Christ may choose to operate with the preaching but is not limited to work through the preaching.” The most that Boonstra will allow the preaching in salvation is that it can strengthen faith but not that it is God’s power by which he creates faith.

The preaching of the gospel does not, emphatically does not, create faith, contrary to the teachings of Rev. Lanning. The Spirit of Christ alone can give the gift of faith. Faithful preaching can only strengthen the faith that has already been given the elect as His gift.

Our correspondent insists that the preaching of the gospel be excluded from salvation. So insistent is he that he made the exclusion of the preaching from salvation the title of his letter: “The Living and Abiding Word of Christ Alone, Saves.” By the word “alone” in his title, Boonstra excludes preaching from salvation. If our correspondent were simply teaching that preaching does not operate as an independent power from God, he would be correct. If he were simply teaching that Christ and his Spirit do the actual work of salvation and that preaching is the means by which Christ and the Spirit are pleased to work, he would be correct. But this is not Boonstra’s teaching. His teaching is that the living Word and the preaching must be distinguished so that the preaching can be excluded from salvation. I believe it is a fair interpretation of the word “alone” in our correspondent’s title to read it this way: “The Living and Abiding Word of Christ [without Preaching], Saves.”

Boonstra’s stand is contrary to the Reformed confessions. When he separates the living Word from the preaching of the gospel in order to exclude the preaching of the gospel from salvation, he does what the confessions forbid.

As the almighty operation of God whereby He prolongs and supports this our natural life does not exclude, but requires, the use of means, by which God of His infinite mercy and goodness hath chosen to exert His influence, so also the before mentioned supernatural operation of God by which we are regenerated in no wise excludes or subverts the use of the gospel, which the most wise God has ordained to be the seed of regeneration and food of the soul…Be it far from either instructors or instructed to presume to tempt God in the church by separating what He of His good pleasure hath most intimately joined together. (Canons 3–4.17, in Confessions and Church Order, 170)

Bizarre Charges

Correspondent Boonstra’s position leads him to make bizarre charges against me for my position that God is pleased to save his people by the preaching of the gospel and that he is not pleased to save his people apart from the preaching of the gospel.

First, Boonstra charges me as being “some preacher who has an overinflated sense of his own self-importance” and many like things. I am certainly capable of such pride, but that is not why I believe what I do about the preaching. Let me put it personally. I believe that God uses my preaching of the gospel to save his people and that God is not pleased to save his people apart from such preaching of the gospel. This has nothing whatsoever to do with me but has only to do with what God says about preaching. God says that it is his power to save (Rom. 1:16). God says that faithful preaching of the gospel is not the word of man but the word of God (1 Thess. 2:13). God says that faithful preaching of the gospel is Jesus himself speaking to his sheep by his own voice (John 10:27). When I insist that members of the congregation listen to my preaching, heed my preaching, receive my preaching, believe my preaching, submit to my preaching, obey my preaching, and not leave my preaching for another gospel, none of that has anything to do with the “my” but has everything to do with the “preaching.” The gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation, so I must insist that both I and the congregation heed my preaching.

Second, Boonstra charges me with making Christ, or the living and abiding Word of Christ, to depend on men.

The WORD does not need a preacher or a church, but the church and the preaching needs the WORD and has no reason to exist without the WORD. Does not Rev. Lanning understand that he can preach till he’s blue in the face but Rev. Lanning and the preaching of FRPC has never saved anyone nor will they save anyone?

And again,

Rev. Lanning seeks to make your salvation dependent upon his preaching and that of FRPC and not on Christ alone. He does this by making his preaching and the church’s role the emphasis and focal point of salvation instead of the Living and Abiding Word of Christ. Rev. Lanning would rob Christ of His glory. Rev. Lanning seeks to lead his congregation right into the arms of Rome and it’s teaching of salvation in relationship to the church when it comes right down to it.

Again, remember the issue. The issue is not whether God is able to save apart from the preaching. The issue is not whether the living Word needs a preacher or a church. Boonstra confuses the issue when he tries to make it a matter of God’s ability to save his people without preaching. Boonstra confuses the issue when he tries to turn an elevation of preaching into a threat to the power of the living and abiding Word of Christ. Rather than this confusion, the issue is whether God is pleased to save his people by preaching. What does God say his pleasure is? “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (1 Cor. 1:21). This is no threat whatsoever to the power or ability of the living and abiding Word of Christ. It is no denial whatsoever that the church depends upon the Word and not the other way around. It is simply the truth that God saves by the preaching of the cross so that his foolishness is shown to be wiser than men and his weakness is shown to be stronger than men. Now let not Herm Boonstra or anyone else try to separate what it has pleased God to join together.

Third, Boonstra charges me with teaching the same conditional salvation as Reverend Koole and the Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC).

Rev. Lanning’s teaching is in essence the same as Rev. Koole’s in that it makes salvation conditional. Rev. Lanning makes hearing the preaching as taught by him and being a member of FRPC a condition of salvation.

In this charge Boonstra is still dealing with the main point of his letter, which is that the living Word saves apart from the preaching of the gospel. Boonstra camouflages his charge a bit here. He makes it sound like he is merely opposing the preaching of a particular man or membership in a particular institute. But for all of that camouflage, Boonstra is not talking about a particular man or a particular institute. He is talking about preaching the gospel. He asserts again in this context, “The WORD alone saves!” where “alone” means without preaching.

With this charge Boonstra reveals how deep is his opposition to the Reformed doctrine of preaching. He calls the Reformed doctrine of preaching a conditional doctrine. He equates the Reformed doctrine of preaching with Reverend Koole’s doctrine that if a man would be saved, there is that which he must do. The truth of the matter is that the preaching of the gospel is God’s power of salvation exactly because it is not man’s doing but God’s. God operates in preaching (1 Cor. 1:18). Christ speaks in preaching (Eph. 4:20–21). The Holy Ghost teaches in preaching (1 Cor. 2:13). And by this preaching—God-operating, Christ-speaking, and Holy-Ghost-teaching—God saves his people.

Now let Herman Boonstra stop damning the preaching at First Reformed Protestant Church as if it were a matter of some boastful preacher’s trying to subject both men and the living Word to himself. In the pulpit there certainly is a weak preacher, whose words sound foolish to men. But God saves his people by this weak man’s preaching so that the faith of God’s people may not stand in men but in the power of God.

3. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.

4. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

5. That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. (1 Cor. 2:3–5)

And let Herman Boonstra take heed that when he sets himself against preaching as God’s power of salvation, he is not merely opposing this minister or that minister but God himself. “Be it far from either instructors or instructed to presume to tempt God in the church by separating what He of His good pleasure hath most intimately joined together” (Canons 3–4.17, in Confessions and Church Order, 170).

Immediate Regeneration

I found the most interesting part of our correspondent’s letter to be his appeal to the doctrine of immediate regeneration. The doctrine of immediate regeneration is that God regenerates a man without the use of the means of preaching. Whereas God bestows all of the other gifts of salvation by means of the preaching, God bestows this one gift of regeneration directly and without means. The word immediate in immediate regeneration means without means. The other possibility for regeneration would be mediate regeneration, which is that God uses the means of the preaching of the gospel to regenerate his elect people, just as he uses the means of preaching to bestow all of the other gifts of salvation.

Although the doctrine of immediate regeneration is not binding on a Reformed church because it is not demanded by the Reformed confessions, it has been the unofficial position of the Protestant Reformed Churches by virtue of Herman Hoeksema’s firm conviction. In strong language Hoeksema taught immediate regeneration. Our correspondent quotes from a sermon of Hoeksema on 1 Peter 1:23–25 that demonstrates the point: “Do you think God used any word of man when He created the world? Neither does He use the preaching of a man in regeneration. It is other worldly.” I take our correspondent at his word that he has faithfully quoted Hoeksema in that passage. Because of Hoeksema’s firm conviction, I suppose that the Reformed Protestant Churches have carried the doctrine of immediate regeneration with them out of the PRC, so that immediate regeneration is also the unofficial position of the RPC. However, until such time as it is shown to be a confessional matter, there is room in the RPC for a man to be undecided on the issue or even to hold to mediate regeneration.

But for now let us agree with Herman Hoeksema that regeneration is immediate, such that God accomplishes the regeneration of his people by directly implanting the living and abiding Word in their hearts without the preaching of the gospel.

Correspondent Boonstra thinks that he has found proof in the doctrine of immediate regeneration for his position that God saves his people without the preaching of the gospel. The logic of his proof is this: God regenerates his people without the preaching of the gospel; therefore, God saves his people without the preaching of the gospel. Boonstra states his position thus:

The teachings of Rev. Herman Hoeksema and the truth which I believe with all my heart stand in direct opposition to Rev. Lanning. For one of the best explanations anywhere to be found on the distinction between the Living and Abiding Word of Christ and the preaching of a man, listen to Rev. Herman Hoeksema’s sermon on Baptism and Regeneration on I Peter 1:23–25 as recorded for us on Old Paths Recordings.

Boonstra is using the doctrine of immediate regeneration to exclude preaching from salvation. It is this appeal to immediate regeneration that leads him to proclaim, “The Living and Abiding Word of Christ Alone [without Preaching], Saves.”

Boonstra’s error is that he makes the immediate in immediate regeneration apply also to all of the other gifts of salvation. He does not realize that regeneration is a special case. He thinks that Hoeksema’s insistence that God does not “use the preaching of a man in regeneration” means that Hoeksema also taught that the living and abiding Word of Christ saves without the means of the preaching of the gospel by a man. Boonstra leaps from the doctrine of immediate regeneration to the heresy of immediate salvation.

Even the most ardent defender of immediate regeneration recognizes that regeneration is a special case. God’s manner of operation in regeneration—immediate—is not his manner of operation in every other blessing of salvation—mediate. For example, Herman Hoeksema distinguished between regeneration as immediate and the rest of salvation as mediate. After teaching that the preaching of the word is the primary means of grace, Hoeksema wrote,

Here we may ask the question, Is all grace, as it is applied to the elect and wrought in their hearts by the Holy Spirit, mediate? Does the Holy Spirit always work through the means of the preaching of the word and of the sacraments, or is the very first beginning of God’s marvelous work of grace an immediate work of the Holy Spirit?²

For Hoeksema regeneration was a special case. When he insisted that the Holy Ghost accomplishes regeneration without the use of the means of the preaching of the gospel, he never meant that the Holy Ghost accomplishes all of salvation without the use of the means of the preaching of the gospel. In fact, Hoeksema called the preaching of the gospel “indispensable” for salvation. When he wrote of the relationship between preaching and the sacraments, he taught:

The Christian, if need be, can live without the sacraments; but never can he live without the preaching of the word. Without the word of God, he cannot come to a conscious faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. He has no knowledge of Christ and cannot appropriate him by a true and living faith. Through the preaching of the word the Holy Spirit works faith in the believer’s heart. Besides, the preaching of the word is not only the means by which the Holy Spirit works faith in him, but it is also the main means for the strengthening, upbuilding, and sustaining of his faith.³

Why is regeneration a special case? Because God’s elect child must be made alive before he can hear.

It must very definitely be maintained that regeneration is the very first work in the heart of the sinner, and that there can be no saving hearing of the word of God without this regeneration of the heart.⁴

Having regenerated his elect child, God then brings that life to consciousness and manifestation through the preaching of the gospel.

Even as the sustenance of our natural life requires means, so also the new life, which is immediately created in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, requires the means of the preaching of the gospel in order to cause the seed of regeneration to flourish into a conscious faith in Christ, to sustain, strengthen, and nourish it.⁵

Why else is regeneration a special case for Hoeksema? Because it accounts for the regeneration of infants who cannot consciously understand the preaching of the gospel.

Because we believe on the basis of Scripture that regeneration must be conceived as an immediate work of the Spirit, and because for that very reason the regeneration of infants is possible, we regard it as a common rule that in the line of the covenant the elect children are reborn from infancy.⁶

Immediate regeneration is a special case. Not recognizing this, correspondent Boonstra has done with immediate regeneration what may not be done. He has used it—abused it—to exclude the preaching of the gospel from salvation. In this he has not only departed from Herman Hoeksema but from the Reformed confessions and scripture.

Here is Boonstra: “The Living and Abiding Word of Christ [without Preaching], Saves.”

Here is the truth:

The before mentioned supernatural operation of God by which we are regenerated in no wise excludes or subverts the use of the gospel, which the most wise God has ordained to be the seed of regeneration and food of the soul. (Canons 3–4.17, in Confessions and Church Order, 170)

Outside of the True Church Institute There Is No Salvation

There is a reason that our correspondent assaults the Reformed doctrine of preaching. The reason is that the preaching of the gospel happens within the true church institute and not outside of it. Our correspondent’s entire letter about preaching is really aimed against membership in the church institute. The Reformed faith teaches that because the preaching of the gospel is God’s means of salvation, there is no salvation outside of the true church institute. Those who withdraw from the church and live in a separate state from the church act contrary to the ordinance of God. Those who withdraw from the true church institute and keep themselves separate from it are not saved but are damned. This is the explicit doctrine of Belgic Confession 28.

We believe, since this holy congregation is an assembly of those who are saved, and out of it there is no salvation, that no person, of whatsoever state or condition he may be, ought to withdraw himself to live in a separate state from it; but that all men are in duty bound to join and unite themselves with it…Therefore all those who separate themselves from the same, or do not join themselves to it, act contrary to the ordinance of God. (Confessions and Church Order, 60–61)

But our correspondent is an enemy of the church institute. His doctrine, contrary to article 28 of the Belgic Confession, is that a man does not need to belong to a local church institute. His call to anyone in First Reformed Protestant Church who will listen is that he or she should leave the church, not in order to form a true church institute through reformation but to live outside of the church institute. His assurance to those who leave is that living separate from the church is not contrary to the ordinance of God, for they can be sure that the living and abiding Word (without preaching) will be in their midst.

Our correspondent takes aim at the church institute by the phrase “The WORD does not need the Church.” Our correspondent learned this phrase from a post on Rev. Martin VanderWal’s blog, which blog our correspondent references in his letter. In a series of posts on his blog, Reverend VanderWal undermined the necessity of membership in a true local church.⁷ At the time there were several members of the Reformed Protestant Churches who were grunting dissonantly about the decision of the September 2022 classis regarding Christian schools. Some of these disgruntled members left their Reformed Protestant churches and fellowships in order to visit United Reformed churches or Orthodox Presbyterian churches or to sit in their living rooms on Sundays, live-streaming who knows what. In spite of their disobedience to the fourth commandment (“that I…diligently frequent the church of God” [Lord’s Day 38]) and their unlawful separation from the church (“no person, of whatsoever state or condition he may be, ought to withdraw himself to live in a separate state from it” [Belgic Confession 28]), Reverend VanderWal’s blog posts assured these people that God blesses those who live outside the local church institute. That Reverend VanderWal intended to confirm these people in their separation from the church institute became evident at the most recent classis. During his Formula of Subscription examination, Reverend VanderWal refused to acknowledge that he must admonish these people for living outside of the church institute but repeatedly left it to the conscience of each person whether he or she would be a member of the church or not.

In the blog posts one of the key lines that undermined the necessity of church membership was, as quoted by our correspondent, “The WORD does not need the Church.” Our correspondent takes up that line as if it is a profound statement about the sovereignty of God in salvation. Our correspondent damns any objection to that line as making the living Word to depend upon man.

Today I take up pen and paper to address the heresy that Rev. Lanning is now teaching in FRPC in his response to a blog post writer who wrote, “The WORD does not need the Church.” (See Rev. Lanning’s response in his sermon on the Means of Faith 11/6/22 pm) By this statement the blog post writer obviously is referring to the Living and abiding Word of Christ in distinction from the preaching of the gospel. Whether or not that is exactly what he meant this statement is soundly Reformed and Biblical. Yet Rev. Lanning shows either his profound ignorance of this reformed truth or his willing malicious intent against it when it comes to the doctrines of regeneration, calling and that of the Living and abiding Word of Christ in distinction from the preaching of the gospel in salvation, by scoffing and ridiculing that statement. The blog writer speaks the truth, Rev. Lanning speaks the lie. Rev. Lanning not only ridicules that statement but worse yet minimizes and mocks the Living Word of Christ and therefore Christ Himself in that sermon. It’s that serious.

The problem with the line “The WORD does not need the Church” is not that the line is untrue in itself. If we are talking about who needs whom, then the church needs the Word. If we are talking about the inherent power of the living and abiding Word to accomplish all of God’s purpose, then the Word does not need the church. The problem with the line is that we are not talking about whether the living and abiding Word has inherent power. We are talking about church membership. We are talking about whether “Every One Is Bound to Join Himself to the True Church” (title of Belgic Confession 28, in Confessions and Church Order, 60). The line in question was put to use both by the blog writer and by our correspondent to deny that everyone must be a member of a true local church institute.

Our correspondent denies the necessity of church membership, including the necessity of hearing the preaching of the gospel, by attacking a particular preacher and a particular church institute. However, understand as you read that our correspondent is not merely aiming at a particular church institute but at the very idea of membership in a church institute. “Rev. Lanning seeks to make your salvation dependent upon his preaching and that of FRPC and not on Christ alone.” Again: “Rev. Lanning makes hearing the preaching as taught by him and being a member of FRPC a condition of salvation.” Again: “He has stated plainly and by implication and that not so subtle that there is no salvation outside of hearing his preaching and being a member of RPC.”

Here is our correspondent’s point as the conclusion of his letter: 

You may not have a preacher or even an instituted church, but the living and abiding WORD promises you He will be in your midst. The WORD is not bound by a preacher or a church.

There is the point! Our correspondent does not make so much of the living and abiding Word in order to honor the Word but in order to separate that Word from church membership. What is it, really, that our correspondent is arguing? It is this: “The WORD does not need the Church,” so neither do you.

All of the talk about the Word not being bound and the Word not needing the church and the Word not needing a preacher and the Word not depending on the church is pressed to this one conclusion: the believer does not need the church or the preaching, for the believer has the Word without the church or the preaching. Our correspondent’s whole point is to oppose the necessity of church membership. His whole point is that because the Word does not need the church, the believer does not need the church. Because the Word does not need the church, your family does not need the church. Because the Word does not need the church, you can have the Word outside of the church. Because the living and abiding Word does not need the church to preach it, you can leave the church and the preaching and still have the Word.

Our correspondent’s appeal to Matthew 18:20 does not prove his point. His appeal only proves that every heretic has his text. When Jesus promised his disciples, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them,” he was not saying, “The Word does not need the church, and neither do you.” As if Christ were indifferent to whether his elect people would be members of his bride or not! As if Christ were leaving it to a man’s conscience whether that man would join the manifestation of Christ’s body on earth or not! In Matthew 18:20 Jesus was speaking of elders who would make a judgment about the Christian discipline of a member. Where there is an instituted church with a consistory composed of only two or three elders, there is Christ in the midst of them.

18. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

19. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matt. 18:18–20)

Correspondent Boonstra’s doctrine, which he borrows from the aforementioned blog, has had an effect in the Reformed Protestant Churches. The effect has been the departure of several families and individuals from the Reformed Protestant Churches. These families and individuals are not members of any church. Many of them are open to the possibility of joining the United Reformed Churches or the Orthodox Presbyterian Church or who knows what else. But most of them, as of this writing, are not under the oversight of any consistory. They have withdrawn and separated from the church and have not reformed a church institute but sit in their living rooms outside of the church.

By way of contrast, and without a hint of boasting, when the Reformed Protestant Churches had to reform by separating from the Protestant Reformed Churches, it was unthinkable to us that we should become United Reformed, Orthodox Presbyterian, or anything else. Would the truth of the gospel matter so little to us that we would join ourselves to the well-meant offer of the gospel, the conditional covenant, divorce and remarriage, and evolution, just to name a few gross heresies? And when small fellowships of Reformed Protestant people did form, they quickly appealed for oversight to neighboring Reformed Protestant churches until they could be instituted in their own right. The organization of fellowships and churches was characterized by orderliness, and there was never an attempt to undermine church membership in a true church institute. I don’t say this to any praise of myself or the RPC, for I am full of all manner of folly. If the Lord had left us to our own devices, we undoubtedly would have sought our own way. But God mercifully gathered his church by his Word and Spirit, and he did so according to the Spirit’s orderly operation of gathering church institutes, and church fellowships under the oversight of church institutes. I say this so that no one who has left the RPC can say that he or she is just doing what we did in the formation of the RPC. What is going on right now among those who are leaving the RPC is far different, for there is no regard for truth, and there is no regard for order.

Over against our correspondent and those who are of his mind stands the confessional demand for church membership. Let all those who have withdrawn from the institute into nothing take heed that they act contrary to the ordinance of God and that outside of the true church institute there is no salvation. Let them repent and return to membership in the church.

We believe, since this holy congregation is an assembly of those who are saved, and out of it there is no salvation, that no person, of whatsoever state or condition he may be, ought to withdraw himself to live in a separate state from it; but that all men are in duty bound to join and unite themselves with it, maintaining the unity of the church; submitting themselves to the doctrine and yoke of Jesus Christ; and as mutual members of the same body, serving to the edification of the brethren, according to the talents God has given them.

And that this may be the more effectually observed, it is the duty of all believers, according to the Word of God, to separate themselves from all those who do not belong to the church, and to join themselves to this congregation wheresoever God hath established it, even though the magistrates and edicts of princes be against it, yea, though they should suffer death or any other corporal punishment. Therefore all those who separate themselves from the same, or do not join themselves to it, act contrary to the ordinance of God. (Belgic Confession 28, in Confessions and Church Order, 60–61)