2nd Corinthians – Godly Social Order

Living Letters

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Godly Social Order

Lesson: 5-25

Genre: Talk

Track: 5

Dictation Name: RR4163B

Location/Venue:

Year: 1998-2000

[Mark Rushdoony] It is a good thing to give thanks unto the Lord, and to sing praises unto Thy name, oh most High. To show forth Thy loving kindness in he morning, and Thy faithfulness, every night.

Let us pray. Our most good and gracious heavenly Father, we thank Thee for the multitude of mercies you show us every day, we thank you for your goodness to us this Sunday morning. We thank you for the opportunity we have to begin our week by worshipping you, and by acknowledging our total dependence upon you, in the salvation you have provided through your Son, Jesus Christ. We pray from grace that the meaning of your salvation might become more and more part of our lives, more and more a part of our action. We pray that you would give us grace in this service, help us to understand your word better, we pray that you would bless those who gather together this day in your name everywhere. Encourage them in faithfulness to you, and to the kingdom of your son Jesus Christ. We ask this in His name, amen.

[R. J. Rushdoony] Our scripture this morning is the third chapter of 2nd Corinthians. 2nd Corinthians 3:

“Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you?

2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:

3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:

5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.

11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.

12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:

13 And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:

14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.

17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.”

This is quite an interesting chapter, for reasons that we are not generally aware of. Because we read the Bible, and we are looking for what is says to us, which is very good, and not what it said to the people to whom it is written, which sometimes is important for us to know.

Now, Paul in this chapter has one concern. He has been having problems with the Corinthian church. He is going to visit them again, and he knows that they are already raising objections. The last time he was there he called attention to so many sins in the members, and demanded that they deal with the sins, and that the congregation repent, that there were a number in the church who were very unhappy about Paul coming back again.

Well, they said in their letter to Paul, he had come to them originally and was coming again, without any letters of recommendation. Now, in a sense this was a fairly good requirement that the early church had. Even in New Testament times, in Paul’s day, there were a great many false apostles, false teachers, false apostles, who were going here and there and trying to exploit the churches. So very early the decision was, when you go to a strange city and go to the church, whatever you are, just a member planning to join this new church, or a teacher, or an apostle, take a letter of commendation with you. Then they will know you not as a stranger, but someone recommended by another church of Christ.

Well, of course, these letters were required of people who were not well known. They would not be required normally of an apostle, or of someone not only an apostle, but one of the greatest teachers in the early church, Saint Paul. In the first verse, Paul says: “You asked for letters of recommendation or commendation, and I didn’t bring any.” Why should Paul have had to bring them? Very few people were better known in the early church were better known than Paul. Much of the New Testament is written by him. In all of the Bible he is one of the major figures and writers. So in asking for a letter of commendation, they were being insulting. That was the only purpose in so doing.

Now, before we go on, it is as I have already pointed out, very important to bear in mind, that this was a good custom. It was simply being misused in being required of Paul. We still have letters of transfer from one church to another, not always necessarily used, but commonly used across the church. But letters can mislead, especially in our time. There are too many churchmen and too many sessions or boards that don’t like to say anything wrong about anyone. So if someone transfers to another church in another city, they won’t say: “This man has been a member of our church, but he has also been a trouble maker. He has this fault and that, which you had better bear in mind.” They don’t say this.

We had a supporter visit us who had been driven almost to bankruptcy because he had hired as the treasurer in his little corporation a prominent church member. And he was robbed of virtually all their capital. Had not he had a father who could bail him out to a degree, so that he was able to survive, he never would have made it.

Now, he subsequently found out that this man had robbed a number of people in that church, and in a church in another city where he had previously been, and tracked it down to three or four cities where the man had pulled this same scam, and gotten away with it because: “Well, he is a brother in the Lord, you can’t take him to court for that,” and so on. In fact, this young man found himself in trouble with the church, because he wanted to take this man to court.

So, letters of commendation do not mean too much. It doesn’t meant it was a bad practice, it was a good one that the early church required as a half way step to knowing something about a man, and the council of Chalcedon in 451 restated this requirement. However, even in the early church, troubles came about because of these letters of commendation.

For example, a few generations after Paul in the reign of the Antonine Emperors, a very prominent cynic philosopher named (Paragrinas?) or Paraguay in English, pretended to be a Christian. He though these were, in modern parlance, good suckers to be taken. Now, a very compelling and a forceful figure, he immediately became very prominent in church circles. He had no lack of letters of commendation, when he went from city to city. But he was a scoundrel. He was finally imprisoned for some of his doings, by the Romans themselves, ungodly Romans. And then the church woke up to the fact, that here is a man that in place after place has done these things. And they condemned him. But he continued to have some followers.

This kind of thing has taken place over the centuries. Now, here is Paul, an apostle, known as much as any man in the early church; and they are requiring letters of commendation to them, and offering to write letters of commendation from them to anyone else. Which was a way of saying: “We are putting you under our authority.” Well, Paul says in effect: “I am the letter writer. You are my letter, written in our hearts, known and read of all men.” In other words, you character has been reshaped by me in many cases, so that you are my letter of recommendation. Because he says: “If you are truly converted you are a letter of Christ, ministered by us, not written with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God. Not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.” That is, in your lives.

So, he says: “We have our sufficiency of God, and it is God who will commend us, and God who has commended us to those who are of the faith. Because He has made me and my associates able ministers of the New Testament.”

Then he goes on to say: “The letter killeth and the Spirit giveth life.” This is one of the most misused texts in the whole of the Bible, perhaps. So that people who are anti-nomian take this to means that: “Well, the Law is not any good, it is the Holy Spirit that is important.” He is referring in the letter to the law, and the Spirit to the Holy Spirit in Christ, but what he is saying is this: the law finds us in our sin and condemns us, which is good. And then the Spirit gives life. Both are the working of the Lord. In fact, he goes on to say that the ministration of death, that is the law, written and graven in stones, was glorious. He is definitely saying the law is of God, it was glorious. So full of the Spirit that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses, for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done away.” There was a great glory in the law, it is still there. But it is now surpassed and superseded by the fullness of the glory in the Holy Spirit.

So, Paul is not separating law and Spirit, he is binding them together. So he says: “The law was glorious, so the ministration of the Spirit is even more glorious.” So Paul says that there is a glory in the law, but that glory is fulfilled, and finds itself even more in the glory of the Spirit. The one is not opposed to the other, they both come from the Lord.

And Moses, because he was a giver of the law, was so full of the Spirit that he had to wear a veil over his face, because they could not look at him. As sinners they felt in his countenance the glory of the Lord, and were fearful and afraid. Because their minds were blinded, they did not see that the glory of the law was the glory of God, and the glory of the Spirit.

Sadly, Paul says: “They are blinded to this day. They do not see the glory of the Lord in the law.” The implication being, if they truly have the Spirit, they will know the glory of God both in law and Spirit. But the veil is on the hearts of Israel to this day. But when Israel turns to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.

Now the Lord God, Christ, is that Spirit. And where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. Paul here speaks of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost as one being. Then he goes on to say that there is freedom in that one being, in the law and in the Spirit. But we all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even by the Spirit of God. So that, if we go from the glory of the law to the glory of the Spirit, we are continually changed by the Holy Spirit into greater and greater conformity to the law, which is the expression of Gods being and nature.

So, Paul says: “We then are truly letters of God, letters from the Lord to the world.” Let us pray.

Our Lord and our God, we give thanks unto Thee for this Thy word. We thank Thee that by Thy grace and mercy we have been called and made into living letters, letters that speak of Thee, of Thy kingdom, of Thy grace and glory. Bless us as we serve Thee, make us joyful by Thy Spirit, in the law and the wholeness of Thy word, in Christ’s name, amen.

Are there any questions now about our lesson?

It is interesting that Paul cites this practice of the early church. We have it, as I said, to this day. But it is not infallible, and it requires people who are faithful to the Lord to be able to tell the truth, because they are afraid not of man, “how can we say that he is a scoundrel, how can we say that he has had serious problems while a member of our congregation.” No, they just write a letter saying: “John Doe and his family are members in good standing.” And are happy to transfer him to some other congregation to get rid of the problem.

That is done very very frequently, and it is wrong. So, this chapter is important, because what it is telling us is not only what happened to Paul in this matter, but telling us, letters of commendation are not to be written blindly or ignorantly, nor dishonestly. A very common practice. Yes?

[Audience Member] The early American Founding Fathers made much of, “Where the Sprit is, there is liberty” in terms of the principal of self government, was that in misuse or misappropriation of the scripture?

[Rushdoony] What was that?

[Audience Member] The early American Founding Fathers made much of the text, “Where the Sprit is, there is liberty” in terms of the individual governing of individuals and of communities, was that a misapplication?

[Rushdoony] No, the Founding Fathers had a very strong sense of the meaning of the text. The Puritans who had come over here had at first tended to be overly zealous about human management. They wanted to substitute for the work of the Spirit, the work of the church. So they were governing, over controlling. And that led to a distrust of the Spirit. There was a reaction against that, and some have, most historians have acted as though that reaction meant the death of Puritanism. But it did not. Puritanism was a very strong force in this country for generations after the Constitutional era. What they did was to recognize that it was less institutional, and more personal. That the Holy Spirit can work through institutions, but He must work especially through us. And so there was a greater trust in the working of the Holy Spirit, and it would make a good work sometime for some P.H.D. scholar to trace the use of the Doctrine of the Spirit in Colonial and early America. It would tell us a great deal about our country. We tend to underrate our Christian origin.

Are there any other questions or comments?

Yes? David?

[Audience Member] Well, Rush, because we tend to underrate our Christian origins because there really hasn’t been anyone to give us a true Christian perspective of us.

[Rushdoony] I can’t quite catch it…

[Audience Member] Your statement about not underrating our Christian origin is due to the fact that we haven’t really had that many Christian writers to write a real Christian viewpoint about our Christian origin.

[Rushdoony] Can someone tell me what David said? I can’t hear? Come up here where you usually sit, and then I will be able to hear you David.

[Audience Member] Your statement about our Christian origin, the problem is that we really have not had a real good Christian historian give us a real Christian viewpoint about the year 1770, or 1850, or 1680. Except you.

[Rushdoony] That is very true, we have not had the Christian historians to give us a good account of our origins, and the sad fact is, that the Puritans created the place to do this sort of thing, Harvard. But Harvard went very quickly Unitarian. So the history of the United States does represent pretty much a Unitarian perspective. Not a Christian one. And in a sense, Unitarianism during most of our history has been our established religion, because it has prevailed in Washington and in the courts. Unitarianism today does not require even a belief in God, in some vague sense, and that is the current Unitarianism which prevails. You vaguely affirm the heritage, without being specific about anything in it.

Any other questions or comments? Well, if not, let us conclude with prayer. Our Father, we give thanks unto Thee for this Thy day. We give thanks unto Thee that, Thou dost forever renew us, and we shall share the glory of the Eternal in due time. We give special thanks this day for the birth of another covenant child, Ross John Rushdoony. Born last night, to Mark and Arlene. Bless them as they rear their child in Thee.

And now go in peace, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, bless you and keep you, guide and protect you, this day and always, amen.