Introduction to the 1689 Confession

The Confessional Nature of Christianity and the Need for a Creed

Yes, so a whole new project in front of us and what we're going to be doing over the next 40 weeks or so, Lord willing, is to take bite-sized chunks out of the confession to study them together and the intention, as we've discussed at our members' meetings and as we'll discuss in upcoming members' meetings, is to affirm the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith as the confession of our church in lieu of our current confession.

But it's only fair and right and appropriate that we first teach through it so that we have a sound understanding of it and we can affirm it intelligently, affirm it with informed consent, if I can say it that way.

Now what we're going to be looking at today, the confession itself has 32 chapters. We're not actually going to be dipping into the chapters, but today we're going to be doing a general introduction of the confession, looking at two sections in our introduction.

The first section I've titled A Case for Confessions, and we'll be looking at five headings as we make a case for a sound confession. And then section two is we'll look briefly at the history of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession.

Some people might ask the question, why in 2025 would we adopt a confession that was last published in 1689 or officially published in 1689? And I hope that as we look at these two sections tonight, we'll come to a conclusion that in fact, it is good and wise and appropriate.

And perhaps I would suggest there is no better confession to hold to than the 1689. And as we see the formulation of it in the history of the church, and then as we go through it together chapter by chapter, I trust, I'm praying that we all end up on the same page, coming to have a deep appreciation for this confession.

So before we begin, we'll pray together, ask for the Lord's help, and then we'll go through and dive right in. Our Father in heaven, Lord, we are so exceedingly grateful to you for all the kindness that you have shown us over this day and Lord this week, and even already this year, and Lord for all of our lives, that what do we deserve?

We deserve a place of darkness and separation from you. But Lord, even while we were still sinners, Christ died for the ungodly, even for us particularly. Lord, we thank you that you have not only given us the blessing, the unspeakably good blessing of your son in our place on that cross, and then conquering death in our place, rising from the tomb, but Lord that you've given us your church, you've given us your word, you've given us your Holy Spirit, you've given us every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places so that we not only enjoy justification, and fellowship, and sanctification through your word, but also Lord adoption, and glorification, and every other blessing, Lord, I think of all the blessings in Ephesians 1.

Lord, you are such a good, and kind, and faithful God, and Lord we glorify you, and we desire to glorify you tonight, Lord not now to hold to the traditions of men, but Lord to see the summary of your word captured in this small book, and Lord to hold to something that's even more robust than what we have already, but Lord a summary of your word at best, Lord not a replacement, Lord not a tradition that we hope will, or even will not hope for, but would allow it to supersede your word, but Lord merely a summary, a standard of doctrine, but like orange juice squeezed from an orange, only that which comes from your word, and adding and taking away nothing, Lord we ask that you would bless our time together in Christ's name, amen.

So, you don't have the confession yet in front of you, but what will happen is as we go through it, I will include the original text of the confession, what is in this book here, in each of the chapters, so I'm expecting by the end of our time, you're going to have a bursting duotang, but this will be, I imagine, one of the larger packets, this is 10 pages, I expect that most others will be maybe four to five pages as we go along.

I do have copies of the confession in the modern English, does anyone not have a copy that would like a copy? Or have a spouse that doesn't have a copy that would like a copy? No? Good. Looks like we'll need one, perfect, there you go, you're very welcome.

And then, if it's not in the meantime, this is one of the blessings of the Trinity Hymnal, in the meantime, if you're looking, and I will make a couple of references to the confession tonight, if you're wanting to see it in the original English text, you can actually find it in the back of the Trinity Hymnal.

So that's one of the blessings of this hymnal, is that it actually contains the Second Lenten Baptist Confession. I see Sam's smirk there, he knows that this was intentional. So, with that, brethren, we will jump into section one, this is a bit different because I'm not used to teaching in a more scattered way as opposed to expository preaching, so we'll see how it goes, but we're going to look first at a case for confessions.

And not just the Second Lenten Baptist Confession, but all confessions. Some people will ask the question, should we have confessions? Is it not enough that we have God's Word in the Bible? Here it is.

Can't we say, if people were to come through the back door of the church and they ask us, what do you believe? Well, we believe the Bible. We're going to come and ask those questions tonight, is it sufficient, in the world in which we live and the myriad of interpretations and the multiplication of cults, for instance, to say that we believe the Bible?

And what happens when we ask the question, what does the Bible teach? Well, we're going to look at how a confession helps us in that way. And I'm going to list under five headings, and the first is this, that our Christian identity recommends a confession.

Now, what do I mean by that? You see in the line there, you have a good vantage point to my notes, it simply cannot be denied that our very Christian identity is confessional. And you'll see quotes throughout, I've tried as often as possible, I'm doing housekeeping as we go, to include the reference at the bottom, the citation at the bottom, wherever I have access to those citations.

Rob Ventura says this, it has been correctly said that true Christianity is confessional Christianity, and that a church with a little creed is a church with a little life. The true church has always confessed her faith openly for there is faith, which is once for all delivered to the saints.

As Christians, we should never be ashamed of this fact. And one of the things that we need to recognize as we go along is that so often in scripture, we see that the germs of confessions emerging from the text of scripture itself.

The text of scripture is inspired and it's authoritative, unlike human confessions, and yet we see the valuable contribution made that scripture points to, where we see these various summaries of biblical doctrine throughout.

And I want to take us through a couple of them really quickly. Deuteronomy chapter 6 and verse 4, if you have your Bible, you can open there. Does anyone know what this confession has been called by the Jews?

Starts with an S. The Shema. The Shema, it reads like this, Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Commentary on this says that the Shema, the Hebrew word for hear, has become the Jewish confession of faith recited, in their case, twice daily by the devout.

That even in the Old Testament, there was the emergence of some of these confessions of faith. We see an early confession of faith in Matthew chapter 16. As the Lord is with his disciples, he asks them, who do you say that I am?

Or who do people, who do the others say that I am? They give a myriad of answers and then he asks his disciples, who do you say that I am? And Peter, we know, answers. Often being the first one to speak, he says, you are the Christ, verse 15, you are the Christ, the son of the living God.

And Jesus answered him, blessed are you, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

That upon the apostles, we believe, I think Ephesians 2 is fairly clear on that, and upon this confession, the Lord is going to build his church upon the apostles and the apostolic confession. In 1 Corinthians chapter 12 and verse 3, we read here, Paul says, therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the spirit of God ever says Jesus is accursed, and no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

Now I'm not going to go into all of them, but if we continue on, we see in 1 Timothy chapter 3, great indeed we confess is the mystery of godliness, and we see the beginnings of what would have been, or what was, excuse me, an early Christian confession, that he was manifested in flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory, or the reference to Christ's humility in Ephesians or Philippians chapter 2 and verse 5.

And there the Reformation Study Bible says this, that this is a hymn to Christ that may be divided into six stanzas. The first three to celebrate Christ's humiliation, and the last three to celebrate his exaltation, set to meter, as it were, to help the early disciples memorize these details about Christ's humiliation on the cross.

But it didn't just stop in Scripture, and we'll look at more even as we go from Scripture, but this confessional impulse on the part of the Church bled from not only Scripture, but into the early Church, so that we see that in the Didache, an early Christian treatise that was written somewhere, or compiled somewhere between AD 50 and AD 100, that there is an early creed in the Didache, including even a catechism.

And so many have looked at that and seen that as one of the earliest Christian creeds. And then, to list just a couple, we see the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, we'll look a little bit later this evening at how those came about, the Athanasian Creed, the Heidelberg Catechism, the 39 Articles, and so on, until you see at the bottom there, the Second London Baptist Confession, first published in 1677, and then again in 1689.

So, it could be said that creeds and confessions have been most prevalent in the Church, especially when the Church was most concerned with biblical fidelity and sound doctrine. You will look at those confessions and see that after AD 500, the Athanasian Creed, there's a big gap.

Now, certainly we start to disagree with creeds, not to say that there weren't other declarations, councils, or other things that took place, but really, the most solidly faithful periods of history have been when the Church is encountering error, and they're responding to that error by teaching the Church and by repeating these creeds and confessions.

Rob Ventura says this confession, referring to the Second London Confession of Faith, I see I have my F and my C backwards there, has been in greater or lesser use among the Churches at various stages of history, but whenever it was heartily embraced and faithfully applied, the Churches were the strongest and purest, doctrinally and morally.

So, we see this confessional impulse. It's part of our Christian heritage, but there's more. Simple honesty demands that we hold to a confession, and you'll see that simple honesty is in scare quotes.

For those of you who are familiar with Sam Waldron, he was my professor for Symbolics, the study of the Second London Confession, and whenever I see those words, I just hear it in his voice, simple honesty.

He said in one of his lectures, he said simple honesty demands that we possess a confession of our doctrinal standards because, and I'm quoting him here, every Church, though it is often denied and sometimes perhaps even unwritten, has a creed.

It's just more honest to admit that you have a creed and to state it clearly. Unwritten creeds are just the worst and most tyrannical kind of creeds of all. Now, some of us have perhaps been to or visited churches where there are unwritten creeds, and over time you come to learn those creeds, and you wish that perhaps earlier on you had known a little bit more about what it was that that church believed.

So, simple honesty demands that we simply make clear what it is that we believe. Chad Van Dixhorn, he adds to this, he says, the desire to state truth openly is a basic Christian instinct. Cults hide things, and I might add, if I could, Christians don't.

We simply, we show our cards. We let people know what we believe, and I remember hearing one story in Grand Rapids where there's a myriad of Reformed churches and a few Reformed Baptist churches that some of these Reformed folks would be in Grand Rapids, would come through the door of a Reformed Baptist church wondering, okay, what is this church about?

And they maintained a little track rack at the front of the church where, as some of these Reformed folks came in wondering, is this a heterodox church? Is this a Pentecostal church in Baptist form? They would simply say, this is what we believe, and would be able to show them how there were similarities between the 1689 Second London Confession and the Westminster and the Savoy of the Congregation of the Congregationalists.

So I say there, therefore we must not hide what we believe, but we must confess it publicly. This should be done in as many places as appropriate. So to our members in our church constitution, on our church website, in a rack at the front door made available to those who would want to know what we're about, so that in two years' time or three years' time, they don't ask the question incredulously, wait a second, you believe what about the Atonement?

You believe what about Christ or what about the Lord's Day? When we can say, this is what we believe. Also, a confession is helpful for avoiding and exposing error. Many of the ancient and modern creeds and confessions have been drafted to respond to and to counter heresy and doctrinal error.

So I mentioned just a few minutes ago how the Apostles' Creed arose early in the church to respond to a false doctrine. In this case, Gnosticism. Arianism, the denial of Christ's divinity led to the formulation of the Nicene Creed.

Errors concerning the nature of Christ led to the, oh I misspelled that as well, the Creed of Chalcedon. Rome and the Papists led to many of the Reformation creeds and confessions. We'll see, as we go through the 1699 Confession, how there are many places where it addresses that.

It reads like a Reformation document, even to the point of identifying the Pope as the Antichrist. Now I believe that we can have different views on that particular thing. I would say the Pope is an Antichrist, but perhaps not the Antichrist.

The Lord knows. B .H. Carroll says, The modern cry, less creed and more liberty, is a degeneration from the vertebrate to the jellyfish, and means less unity and less morality, and it means more heresy.

Definitive truth does not create heresy, it only exposes and corrects. Shut off the creed, and the Christian world will fill up with heresy, unsuspected and uncollected, but nonetheless deadly. And then relying a bit more on Sam Waldron's work, he points out that in the New Testament we see these creedal formulations beginning to develop specifically to address heresy.

Good example, we will remember the Judaizers that came to the early church in the book of Acts, and how they were causing a great deal of disruption in Antioch, and so what ended up happening was the Jerusalem council came together with the apostles and the elders and various others, and there they met and determined to put together a letter to clarify what it was that the Christians ought to believe on the matter of the Jewish law, specifically the civil and ceremonial law, and having put together that letter, they sent it back with messengers to the church in Antioch to be read aloud.

That would be one such example of the church coming together to articulate what it is we believe on a certain point, document it, and then declare it, confess it. But we see it too when Gnostic error came up in 1 John chapter 4 verse 2.

As the Gnostics were beginning to come around denying the bodily coming, or at least the bodily existence of our Lord Jesus, John put together this formulation. He said, By this you know the Spirit of God.

Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, verse 3, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the Spirit of the Antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.

And then we see these germinal creeds throughout the scriptures, but especially near the end of the New Testament. Now just to keep you guys engaged, I want to ask you, why do you think we see these germinal creeds?

You'll see this in point 3 there, in this section under point 3, I guess point 3 in the subheading point 3. The New Testament contains many such germinal creeds, 1 Timothy 1, 1 Timothy 3, 1 Timothy 4.

Why do you think we see so many of these germinal creeds in the latter half, the tail end of Paul's life, in the tail end of our New Testament? Yes, exactly. So as the church is existing, and as error begins to become introduced, we read all of these trustworthy statements of Paul.

It is a trustworthy statement worthy of full acceptance that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners of whom I am the foremost. So as the church's Christology is not so much developing, but being revealed, and then as error is being introduced, these germinal creeds begin to pop up.

Now who here has had a conversation with someone, I'm sure we've all encountered someone like this, or perhaps it was us, or maybe it is us, who would say, I have no creed but Christ, or I have no creed but the Bible.

Who here, maybe just by a show of hands, has experienced that? How would you respond, if I were to ask you, how would you respond to someone who says, we don't need a confession, I've got my Bible, I believe the Bible, don't you believe the Bible?

No creed but Christ, no creed but the Scriptures. How would you respond to that? Yeah, it is a creed. Now it might be a very minimal creed, but already they're refuting themselves in putting that creed forward.

Marcus Dodds says, a man may accept the same inspired books as yourself, while he rejects every important article of faith that you find in these books. Now we've seen this, haven't we? I don't know about you, but I recall many times, especially my first time, encountering the Jehovah's Witnesses.

We sat down at the kitchen table, across from each other, we opened up our Bibles, the same Bible, they had a King James, and I had I think an NASB, and we sat across the table, we looked at each other, and looking at the exact same text, we came to the complete opposite conclusions.

And so he goes on, they use the same inspired books, and yet they reject every important article of faith that you find in these books. If we are to know who believes as we do, and who dissents, we must state our creed and language explicitly rejecting such interpretations of Scripture as we deem to be false.

This is what the early church was doing, as they're speaking about Jesus is Lord, and Jesus came in the flesh, and like this, they are seeking to discern who belongs to us and who does not belong to us.

Yes, sister? Oh, yes, no, good question. So, think of it this way, a germ, like a seed that goes into the ground, these are the beginnings, they're the early formulations of a creed. And so when Paul uses these trustworthy statement expressions, there's an indicator that these are trustworthy statements because we're familiar with them.

It's a statement that people are using regularly. So I might say, you know the old saying, this, right? And what he's saying is it's a trustworthy statement, worthy of full acceptance, and this is something that they would have been familiar with, and so it's the germ, it's the seed in the ground of a confession on a particular matter, in this case, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.

Not the righteous, not like the synagogues of Satan might say, but he came to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. Does that make sense? So we see these early doctrinal standards that are being established in the church within scripture itself, and then working its way out from there.

Church Unity, Doctrinal Clarity, and the Value of a Robust Confession

Number four, say the spiritual unity of the church demands that we express what we believe in some kind of confession. First Corinthians chapter 1 and verse 10 speaks to what the Lord's mind is towards us and our unity.

Paul says, I appeal to you brothers by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. Now, John MacArthur, and I really enjoy actually, you'll see this throughout, I enjoy taking the commentary from men who don't fully agree with us on these points, just to demonstrate the universality of them.

So John MacArthur is not confessional in the same way that we are seeking to be, and yet this is what he says. Weak commitment to doctrine and commitment to disunity of doctrine will severely weaken a church and destroy the true unity.

In its place there can be only shallow sentimentalism or superficial harmony. Now, the second London Baptist confession is, as you can see, it's far more robust than I think our current statement of faith, which can be printed on three pages.

And someone might ask, why? Why? Why the thickness? Why the detail? Why are we going to do this? Well, as I'll mention in my next point, it's an important teaching tool, but also it's an important tool for unity, that we can look at these doctrines and we can say, amen, I agree, I believe that too.

Of course, Christ is our greatest source of unity, but then we can rejoice in this, and we've all been there, where you're with a dear brother or sister in Christ, and you have so much in common, and then something comes up and you go, oh boy, now what do I do with this?

A good example is a friend of mine who believes in Christus Victor and the ransom theory of atonement, and denies penal substitutionary atonement. And as I'm sitting and talking with him, we're talking about Christ, we're talking about the inerrancy of scripture, we're talking about all of these good things, and then I speak of, I'm so glad that the Lord Jesus died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins.

Whoa, no, no, he did not do that. What do you mean he didn't do that? So the scripture says, no, he did this to triumph over the evil one. He did this to pay ransom to Satan. Well, right away, this man and I have some issues, and this becomes a standard whereby at least we can say this is what we believe, and this is why, in the case of the Confession even, there are proof texts galore to show us, okay, well, I hold to this, let's look at some of the texts, pointing us back to scripture.

One of the framers of the Second Lenten Baptist Confession, a man named Nehemiah Cox, was once forced to defend the particular Baptists, that's just another way of saying reformed Baptists, the particular Baptist churches in England from a man, he was an evangelist and an author named Thomas Collier, who accused these churches of being heretics because they were Calvinists, and in response, he wrote a little book, listen to this book, we don't see many of these on Facebook anymore, but the Vindicia Veritatis, or a Confutation of the Heresies and Gross Errors Asserted by Thomas Collier, and in this book, he says this, there can be no gospel peace without truth, nor communion of saints without an agreement in the fundamental principles of the Christian religion.

We want to know that we agree on the fundamentals, and so when a church affirms a confession, we say to this friend of mine, for instance, we greatly appreciate you, I appreciate your friendship, I appreciate your views on the inerrancy of scripture, and on the resurrection of Christ, and on the nature of the church, and this, and this, and this, but before we can proceed, we want to agree on the atonement, we want to agree on the nature of Christ's atonement, because we want to have true Christian fellowship, and the position that you are articulating, it's not just that it contradicts the confession, it contradicts scripture, but this becomes the standard, we don't say, well, the Bible is our standard, we say the statement of doctrine becomes the standard, because you can say, yes, I believe the Bible, and come to a completely different conclusion.

And then point five, a robust confession becomes an invaluable resource for sound biblical instruction. This is, for me, my favorite point as it refers to the value of a confession like the 1689 in the church, is that our church at present has a much briefer statement of faith, and it's much more accessible to a new believer, and that's one of the strengths that it has, but one of the advantages that we have with a more robust confession is essentially what we get is a concise package of gems, of a miniature systematic theology in one volume that we can give to all the members of the church, and use even for the purpose of discipleship.

This modern confession has 60 pages, and just in these 60 pages, we can take a brother to, for instance, the doctrine of God, and look at the doctrine of the Trinity, or of eternal generation of the Son, or the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, and we can begin to get deep into these doctrines just by looking at the doctrinal standard of our church.

Now, what this means is not that we require babes in Christ to study this, to become theologians, and only then can they be members of the church. What it means is to say that the church is going to teach according to this.

We want to see that you hold to sound Christian doctrine without gross error, and over time, we can use the doctrinal standard of our church to disciple and to encourage, not to replace Scripture, but just the way that we might put knowing God by J. I. Packer in someone's hands, or the knowledge of the holy into someone's hands, so they might learn more about the doctrine of God.

We can put this in someone's hands and say, you know, there are doctrines that you've never heard of yet, and you can read through this, and go to the Scripture references, and begin to learn, and we can study these things.

Again, I repeat ad nauseum, not to replace Scripture, but as a summary of sound Christian doctrine, as a summary of what Scripture teaches. Spurgeon, I think, details this very nicely in this quote. We always have to have Spurgeon's quote.

He says, this little volume is not issued as an authoritative rule or code of faith. If you think that what I've said thus far is that I'm putting this forward as a rule and code of faith, I am not. He says, whereby you are to be fettered, but as an assistance to you in controversy, as a confirmation in faith, and as a means of edification in righteousness.

And here, he's essentially encapsulating what I just said. Here, the younger members of our church will have a body of divinity in small compass, by means of Scriptural proofs, and by means of Scriptural proofs, will be ready to give an account for the hope that is in them.

Be not ashamed of your faith. Remember that it is the ancient gospel of martyrs, confessors, reformers, and saints. Above all, it is the truth of God, against which the gates of hell cannot prevail. Let your lives adorn your faith.

Let your example adorn your creed. Above all, live in Christ Jesus and walk in him, giving credence to no teaching but that which is manifestly approved by him and owned by the Holy Spirit. Cleave fast to the word of God, which is here mapped out for you.

So, if we see the confession, not as a rule, not as a substitute, not as an addition, but as he says, a summary of sound doctrine as a map in small compass, then we will understand what it means to hold to a confession.

Now, we'll look at section 2, the history of the confession, but I just want to ask, are there any questions before we move on? Or any contributions? I'll trust I'm going to ask a question at the end, so I'll try to get you talking by the end of it.

The Reformation, the Puritans, and the Road to the 1689 Confession

So, section 2, the history of the 1699 Second Lenten Baptist Confession. Now, what I've done here is to put together a timeline so that we can really find ourselves in the history of this confession, and then to look at the sources of the confession.

So, we'll start not at the beginning, we won't start at Genesis 1 -1, but we will start when Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the castle church door in Wittenberg, Germany. Now, we know for many of us who are Reformation buffs that that happened in 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses, and it was said of that nailing of that 95 Theses to the door, if in fact that was what happened, that the echoes of that hammer resounded through Europe in terms of the spread then of Reformation doctrine.

It wasn't that Martin Luther was looking at creating a schism in the church and branching off into a Protestant church, but was seeking to correct the errors that he saw in the Roman Catholic Church. So, that really kicked off the Reformation as we know it today.

Now, William Tyndale's work was published in 1526, his English New Testament, which also, too, aligning with the printing press, led to really what was a massive revival of knowledge of the gospel in Europe.

And you might remember that William Tyndale, some of his famous words were, Lord, open the king's eyes. And fascinatingly, in the years that followed, we see that in 1534, Henry VIII led Parliament, British Parliament, to separate from the Roman Catholic Church.

You might remember that he divorced his wife, wives, and had some put to death even. And in the midst of that, created the Church of England and became the supreme head of that Church of England. And then from there, the Lord did in fact open his eyes.

In 1538, he commissioned the translation of an English Bible, which became known as the Great Bible. And many others followed after that. King Edward VI became king in 1547, so we can see now 30 years or so after the beginning of the Reformation, and began or continued to advance Protestantism.

The Book of Common Prayer, which became one of the guiding books in the Church of England, was published a couple of years later. And things were going reasonably well for Protestant Christianity in Britain until 1553.

In 1553, you might recognize that name, Mary Tudor. She became the queen and sought to re-establish Roman Catholicism. And we see here, nearly 300 Protestants are martyred during her reign, including Thomas Cranmer.

Steve, you read a biography. Was it on Thomas Cranmer? I believe it was Cranmer that said, be of good courage Master Ridley, as they were being burned at the stake. I think it was Thomas Ridley that was next to him.

Maybe I'm confusing names there. And they were lighting Thomas Cranmer and he was already on fire and they were having difficulty lighting Master Ridley's wood. And he was quite concerned, as I think I would be, watching them light a fire at my feet.

And he said, be of good courage Master Ridley. In 1558, five years later, Queen Elizabeth inherited the throne, Queen Elizabeth I, and restored Anglicanism. Now we have some little gems here along the way of different people who were born, just so we can place them.

But William Perkins, that same year, who was called the Prince of the Puritans, one of the first Puritans, was born during that time. A year later, the Act of Uniformity, one of the first appearances of it, required then the Book of Common Prayer for public worship.

Now what I want to show you as we go through this timeline, is that as Protestantism enters England, it does not enter under necessarily the best form, not with the best motives. But Anglicanism begins to take shape in England.

And as Anglicanism begins to take shape under the King and the Parliament, it begins to take a shape that is moving away from faithful Biblical Christianity, and really veering closer and closer, or alongside at least, Roman Catholicism.

And so you see this Act of Uniformity insisting that the Book of Common Prayer be used, and then eight years later in 1567, clerical vestments begin to appear. And the Puritans, now that are on the scene, are becoming more and more concerned about the course of the Church of England, and are wanting to seek further reformation.

So they're seeking a purer church, and that's where the word Puritan came from. It was actually a name that was used to revile them, as those people who wanted to purify, they're Puritans, they're the stuffy men who have no fun, and always have long faces.

But what happens? We see in 1571, the Parliament approves what was called the 39 Articles of Religion, stating the doctrinal beliefs of the Church, and so this was the confession of the Church of England, the Anglican Church.

In 1583, John Whitgift becomes the Archbishop of Canterbury and enforces uniformity in public worship. And so, as the Puritans are pulling back, seeking to reform and purify the Church, the Church is becoming more militant, the Church of England is becoming more militant in its pursuit of uniformity to their doctrines.

We see the death of William Perkins in 1602, as well nearby the birth of Oliver Cromwell, who is going to be coming up later in our story. In 1604, King James I rejects most Puritans' request for reform, including in their millenary petition.

So they're here putting forward documents to request reform, and they're being put off for it. In 1611, he commissions the King James version, or the authorized version. In 1616, Richard Baxter and John Owen are born, same year William Shakespeare dies.

So we're beginning to see where we are in terms of secular history. In 1618, James I advocates Sunday recreation. You might have heard me make reference to this about a month ago. Sunday recreation in opposition to Puritan Sabbatarianism.

So scheduling dances and sporting events and various things on the Lord's Day so that he might be able to trip up the people in the Church from maintaining their Sabbatarian convictions. Well, as this opposition is mounting, the Puritans in Britain are now beginning to look beyond Britain.