The Spirit and the Word in preaching

This article was originally published in the July edition of Evangelical Times.

In the last few decades there has been a welcome recovery of expository preaching in the UK. In both the Free Churches and the Church of England, men are being trained to teach the Bible. It is right that preachers should give attention to accurate exegesis, biblical doctrine, sermon structure, the use of illustrations and telling application. But the role of the Holy Spirit in the proclamation of the gospel is sometimes neglected. This can turn preaching into little more than a well-delivered exposition rather than an event in which the God of gospel grace is encountered in his Word.

I once went to hear an address on ‘The power of God’s Word’. The speaker said many helpful things about God’s Word, both written and preached, encouraging us to have confidence in the power of Scripture. But he neglected to say anything about the role of the Spirit in preaching and I raised this in the question session. He replied that in preaching we must rely upon the God who upholds all things, but still had nothing specific to say about the Holy Spirit. Sadly, in some circles, any talk of seeking the Spirit’s empowering is dismissed as worryingly Charismatic. These friends suggest that the Spirit is so wedded to the Word that the Word invariably comes with power.1 But is this necessarily so?

The Word has power

The Second Helvetic Confession admirably sums up the Reformed view of preaching thus: ‘The preaching of the word of God is the word of God’ (chapter 1). We cannot emphasise enough the authority of God’s written Word. The business of preaching is to proclaim no other Word than the biblical gospel. But we live in a visual society where words are often discounted — which creates a problem for preachers, for words are our stock in trade! But words are never ‘just words’. They always do something — they are ‘speech acts’. In the Bible we have God’s Word in words. Scripture is composed of basic units of speech — words and sentences. Now, words are very powerful things. When a Minister says to a couple, ‘I now declare you husband and wife’ it is then that they are married. In everyday life, we accomplish things by speaking words — whether we ask someone to pass the salt cellar or book a holiday.

In Scripture we have God’s ‘speech acts’. By words he makes promises, utters warnings, and enters into a covenant relationship with his people. Scripture is not simply a record of God’s words — it is the communicative action of the triune God. But it is one thing for God to do things with his words, like make promises. But what guarantees that God’s words will produce results? He may make a promise, but we still have to trust in that promise!

The Spirit enables our response

It is here that the work of the Holy Spirit comes into its own. He enables people to respond appropriately to God’s communicative action in Scripture.2 That is why the Bible emphasises the importance of the work of the Spirit in relation to preaching. Paul testifies: ‘our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance ...’ (1 Thessalonians 1:5; cf. 1 Corinthians 2:1-5).

Yes, Paul’s message came in word. But it was the Spirit who enabled the apostle to preach with power and full conviction. That was the reason why many in Thessalonica turned from their idols to the living and true God (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10). Certainly, ‘The preaching of the Word of God is the Word of God’ — but our preaching will only be received as such by the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit. ‘For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe’ (1 Thessalonians 2:13).

The Spirit’s presence in preaching

On the Day of Pentecost, the risen Christ poured out his Spirit upon the church. God’s people were filled with the Holy Spirit to enable them to bear witness to the gospel (Acts 1:8; 2:1-4). Empowered by the Spirit, Peter preached and 3,000 people were converted, baptised and added to the church. Pentecost inaugurated a new era of the Spirit. As such it was an unrepeatable event. But there was still need of further fillings to empower gospel preaching (see Acts 4:8, 31). Art Azurdia comments:

'While it must be affirmed that all Christians are indwelt by the Spirit permanently, and all believers will experience the effects of the Spirit’s presence in their lives ... there is another work of the Spirit directly related to the proclamation of the word of God, a unique filling of the Spirit which amounts to an access of power. This is a spontaneous work of God attending the declaration of his word which is given sovereignly and selectively’.3

The Holy Spirit gives preachers clarity of thought, boldness of speech and heaven-sent authority. The Jewish Sanhedrin witnessed ‘the boldness of Peter and John’ (Acts 4:13). The Jerusalem church prayed, ‘Now, Lord ... grant to your servants that with all boldness they may preach your word’ (Acts 4:29). Their prayers were answered — ‘they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God with boldness’ (Acts 4:31). Paul asked for prayer that, ‘I may open my mouth boldly to make known the mystery of the gospel’ (Ephesians 6:19).

The effectiveness of preaching

The Holy Spirit not only emboldens preachers, he gives preaching its saving effectiveness. The Spirit convicts the world of sin (John 16:8). He brings the sinner to new birth as the gospel is proclaimed (John 3:8; 1 Peter 1:23-25). Christians too need to sit under Spirit empowered preaching. God transforms us by his Word. The Spirit enables believers to trust God’s promises and obey his commands. Above all else, God himself is revealed when Jesus Christ is preached in the power of the Spirit. Howell Harris said of the Christ-exalting, Spirit-empowered preaching of Daniel Rowland: ‘a spiritual eye must see and acknowledge that God is there’.4

Our spiritual forebears recognised this. John Calvin said that preaching is ‘dead and powerless if the Lord does not make it efficacious by his Spirit’.5 William Perkins, the early English Puritan, taught:

‘The demonstration of the Spirit is, when as the minister of the word doth in time of preaching so behave himself that all, even ignorant persons and unbelievers, may judge that it is not so much he that speaketh, as the Spirit of God in him and by him ... This makes the ministry lively and powerful’.6

To summarise, the relationship between Word and Spirit in preaching may be described thus —

The Spirit’s empowering presence enables preachers to proclaim the Lord Jesus with boldness, liberty and life-transforming effectiveness. His presence makes preaching an event where the God of the gospel is encountered in all the fullness of his grace and power.

Seeking the Spirit’s empowering

Some dismiss the need to pray for the Spirit’s power because they say that Spirit invariably works with the Word. But Charles Hodge reminds us that we must actively seek the blessing of the sovereign Holy Spirit:

‘It is important that we should remember, that, in living under the dispensation of the Spirit, we are absolutely dependent on a divine Person, who gives or withholds his influence as he will; that he can be grieved and offended; that he must be acknowledged, feared, and obeyed; that his presence and gifts must be humbly and earnestly sought, and assiduously cherished, and that to him all right thoughts and right purposes, all grace and goodness, all strength and comfort, and all success in winning souls to Christ, are to be ascribed’.7

We must follow the pattern of the early church and pray that preachers will be endued with Holy Spirit boldness and power. That is the great need of the hour. Jesus taught that Christians should pray expectantly to the Father for the gift of the Holy Spirit — ‘If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!’ (Luke 11:13). Let us urgently ask the Father for a fresh outpouring of the Spirit upon those who preach the gospel of Jesus Christ today.

References

1. See Moore Theology, by Philip Eveson, Foundations (Affinity, Autumn 2006).
2. See The Drama of Doctrine by Kevin J. Vanhoozer (WJK, 2005) on the value of speech-act theory for theological reflection.
3. Spirit Empowered Preaching by Arturo Azurdia III (Mentor, 2007) p.105.
4. Daniel Rowland by Eifion Evans (Banner of Truth Trust, 1985) p.5.
5. From Pentecost Today, by Iain Murray (Banner of Truth Trust, 1998) p.81
6. Ibid, p.82.
7. Systematic Theology Vol. III, by Charles Hodge, p.476.

An interview with Jeremy Brooks

Jeremy Brooks is the recently appointed Director of Ministries at the Protestant Truth Society, for whom I work on a part-time basis. We discuss his new role and matters of Protestant interest.

GD: Hello Jeremy Books and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.

JB: Hi Guy, and thank you for having me on your blog. I've read so many interviews here over recent years, and never imagined that you'd ever be interviewing me! [GD: Fame at last, Jeremy!]

I was born in 1975, the eldest of four brothers. My father had been ordained into the ministry a couple of years earlier. He spent the first six years of his ministry in two different evangelical Anglican churches, and has spent almost thirty years since in four different independent evangelical churches. When I was seven years old, the family moved to York, where my father was the minister of York Evangelical Church for just short of twenty years. So although I wasn't born in Yorkshire, that was as much home as anywhere.

From as far back as I can remember, I believed the Bible and felt called to the ministry. However, I remember making a childlike profession of faith when eight years old, and then being baptised in my early teens. There were times of doubt, as well as many inconsistencies, but what was known in the head increasingly became known in the heart too, and the sense of call to the ministry grew stronger and stronger.

After school, I studied Economics and Business for a couple of years, and then worked in Sales and Marketing - first in the motor trade and then in Christian publishing. After training for the ministry, I was ordained and inducted to the pastorate of Salem Baptist Church, Ramsey, Cambridgeshire in April 2001. I ministered in Ramsey until this August, and began my new role as Director of Ministry at the Protestant Truth Society on 1st September.

I should also say that I married my wife, Lydia, back in July 2000, and that the Lord has blessed us with four children - Eleni (7), Noah (5), Alice (3) and Ezra (1) - and that our fifth is due quite soon!

GD: What made you leave pastoral ministry to join the PTS as their Director of Ministry?

JB: I have to confess that if one of my friends had done the same thing a year or two ago, then I don't think that I would have thought very highly of them. However, the Lord moves in mysterious ways, and slowly but surely everything seemed to point to the rightness of the move. During Summer 2007, we felt that the Lord might be loosening our hands from the work in Ramsey. Then during Autumn 2007 I was approached by another church which had already approached me twice before, so we thought we knew what the Lord was doing. But we were wrong. As previously, that expression of interest didn't result in a call, so we sought to throw ourselves into the work in Ramsey once again. However, the sense that our time there was coming to an end increased rather than decreased. It was early this year that we began to wonder whether the Lord was moving us to something different, and to cut a long story short, I'm now working with PTS.

I have to say that all I ever wanted to do was to spend my whole ministry pastoring one church, as many of my heroes have done. However, what is the Lord's will for some is not the Lord's will for all, and the important thing for any of us is to be where the Lord wants when the Lord wants, and I have no doubt that the Lord wants me where I am doing what I'm doing. We were sorry to leave Ramsey, and the church there were sorry to see us go, but our work there was done, and a new challenge was calling.

GD: Where did you train for the preaching ministry and what did you find most helpful about your training?

JB: I trained for the ministry at London Reformed Baptist Seminary. It was a part-time course lasting four years. It wasn't as thorough as a full-time course, but it was a very practical preparation for real-life ministry. We had many visiting lecturers, including such men as Joel Beeke, James Grier and Robert Reymond, but it was the lectures of the Principal, Peter Masters, that I found most helpful. I wouldn't dot every "i" and cross every "t" with Dr Masters (in fact, I've yet to meet anyone that does!), but I found him always worth hearing, I benefited from his teaching in so many ways, and readily acknowledge that I owe him an incalculable debt.

GD: Who has had the biggest influence on your theological development?

JB: I owe so much to so many, but not least to my father, Richard Brooks, and my father-in-law, Malcolm Watts. It is not an exaggeration to say that I have learned more from these two men outside seminary than many men ever learn inside one!

GD: Some might see organisations like the PTS as a slightly old fashioned and backward-looking. How do you see as the mission of the Society in relation to the churches and the nation in today's world?

JB: Some undoubtedly do, and sometimes with some justification. The challenge for such organisations is to look both backwards and forwards at the same time! What I mean is that, on the one hand, we shouldn't rubbish our past, as is popular today, but on the other, we shouldn't live in it, but should have a clear, bold, adventurous vision for the future. Regarding the PTS, a lot has changed since 1889, and yet the big picture is just the same. What's true is true, what's false is false, and both church and nation need all the help they can get to know the difference. The mission of the PTS is both to assist the churches in holding onto the true gospel as rediscovered at the Protestant Reformation, and to encourage the nation to treasure rather than despise our great Protestant heritage. I believe that mission is as necessary as ever.

GD: What is your role as Director of Ministry?

JB: The PTS used to have General Secretaries. These were normally ministers, but they were responsible for overseeing both what we might call the ministry and business aspects of the society. What the Council has done recently, is to appoint George Rae (manager of the PTS Bookshop for twenty years) as Company Secretary and myself as Director of Ministry. Therefore, instead of having a minister trying to be a businessman or a businessman trying to be a minster, we have a businessman doing what he's good at and a minister doing what he's called to do. Preaching is central to my role, but I also oversee the team of Wickcliffe Preachers (I like to see that in terms of being first among equals), I'm editing the magazine, Protestant Truth, from the next issue, I speak to the media, and am responsible to the council for the spiritual leadership of the society.

GD: For many people today the very word "Protestant" has almost wholly negative connotations. How would you define what it means to be a Protestant Christian?

JB: You're right that many don't like the word "Protestant", even those who are Protestants without realising it! Nonetheless, I don't think we should give the term up, because it is really a historical term describing anyone who believes the true gospel as rediscovered at the Protestant Reformation. In that sense I see terms like "Christian", "Evangelical", and "Protestant" as really meaning one and the same thing.

GD: Was John Kensit, founder of the PTS a rabble rouser or Protestant Martyr?

JB: Opinion is polarised. Many think he was very much the one, and many think he was very much the other. It is a historical fact that he was killed as a direct result of his stand for the truth, therefore I would assert that he was most definitely a Protestant Martyr. Regarding being a rabble rouser, well I probably wouldn't want to defend everything he ever said or did, but anyone who has ever done anything significant for God has been open to being misunderstood. In a day of largely spineless evangelicalism, a few more Kensits wouldn't go amiss.

GD: Is Roman Catholicism the biggest threat to the gospel in the UK?

JB: All thinking evangelicals would have to agree that Roman Catholicism is a big threat to the gospel in the UK, but whether or not it is the biggest threat probably depends upon your interpretation of Scripture. In many ways it may not appear to be the biggest threat at present, but I believe that Scripture teaches that it is the greatest threat of the New Testament age, and I wonder whether the very fact that it doesn't appear so threatening as sometimes it has doesn't add to rather than subtract from its danger.

GD: How do you view the Evangelicals and Catholics Together Movement?

JB: The short answer would be "A mistake", and the long answer would be "One of the greatest evangelical mistakes of the last century". I have some respect for some of those involved - for example, so many of us owe so much to J. I. Packer - but he and others have been very unwise in seeking to reconcile the irreconcilable in this way. When all's said and done, Evangelicalism and Catholicism or Romanism don't mix. They never have, and never will.

GD: The media (here and here) and blog-land, (here and here) have picked up on your recent criticism of the Archbishop of Canterbury's sermon at Lourdes. What was that all about?

JB: The Archbishop visited Lourdes to preach at the 150th anniversary of the shrine there. This was an unprecedented action which appalled all true Protestants. Lourdes represents everything about Roman Catholicism that the Protestant Reformation rejected, including apparitions, mariolatry and the veneration of saints. The Archbishop's simple presence there was a wholesale compromise, and his sermon which included a reference to Mary as "The Mother of God" was a complete denial of Protestant orthodoxy. At a time when our country is crying out for clear Biblical leadership, it is nothing short of tragic that our supposedly Protestant Archbishop is behaving as little more than a Papal puppet.

GD: I think your concerns are well placed. But doesn't the term "Mother of God" or at least theotokos - "God-bearer" have an honoured place in the Chuch's confession? The term is used in the Definition of Chalcedon (451), which is affirmed by Protestants and Roman Catholics alike.

You're right that the term theotokos is more accurately translated "God-bearer" rather than "Mother of God", and you're right that that term was used in the fifth century and is accepted as a part of Protestant orthodoxy. However, that term was used at that time not to make much of Mary but to make much of Christ, and to assert his divinity at a time when it was popular to question it. The term has since been mistranslated and misused by Roman Catholics to make too much of Mary. When assessing the Archbishop's recent remarks, it's important to remember that he wasn't speaking to a fifth-century audience, but rather to twenty-first century Roman Catholics. Therefore, he can't hide behind what the term really meant, but must accept that his Roman Catholic audience will have understood it in accordance with their theology rather than ours.

GD: Quite. In the light of Roman Catholic misuse of the term, Donald Macleod wisely said, "We certainly cannot feel free to use theotokos without careful elucidations and safeguards." (The Person of Christ, IVP, 1998, p. 188). Rowan Williams signally failed to do that. Now, should para-church organisations like the PTS intervene on controversial, yet secondary issues like Bible versions or hymn books?

JB: Yes and no! It depends which such organisations. Regarding the PTS, our mission is bigger than Bible versions and hymn books. Therefore, within agreed parameters, people of different persuasions can work together, and we respect such differences of opinion. However, some organisations have a more specific mission, and are surely free to do so.

Also, I think the phrase "secondary issue(s)" has become rather over-used. It was Dr Lloyd-Jones who popularised it, and I have great respect for him (I wouldn't dare not to when being interviewed by a Welsh preacher). However, I think Dr Lloyd-Jones understood a secondary issue to be something that wasn't of primary importance, whereas most evangelicals today understand it to be something of no real importance whatsoever. Therefore, although I don't think that Bible versions and hymn books are primary, in the sense that these things are not essential to salvation, I do think that they are far from unimportant. Surely having as accurate a Bible as possible and rendering the most acceptable worship we can should be two of the most important issues to any Christian or church.

GD: If time travel were possible, which figure in post-biblical church history would you like to meet and what would you say to him?

JB: There could be so many, and yet there's only one. It would have to be Charles Haddon Spurgeon. No figure of history has had a greater effect upon my life and ministry than the Prince of Preachers. I'd be happy just to listen to him preach, but if he had time to talk, then I'd start by saying "Thank You", and see where the conversation went from there.

GD: Is it possible to be faithful to Scripture and truly contemporary?

JB: I would go so far as to say that it is impossible to be truly contemporary without being faithful to Scripture! Nothing is ever more contemporary than the Bible and the message of salvation in Jesus Christ, so the more faithful we are to Scripture the more relevant we'll be to our generation. We must remember that man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the heart, and what counts is what lasts. Sadly, I believe that much so-called contemporary evangelicalism won't last very long at all, because it leans harder upon the wisdom of men than it does upon the Word of God.

GD: Care to name your top three songs or pieces of music?

JB: I must confess to being something of a Philistine in this department. I'm not really musical, and although I can appreciate all sorts, I'm really no connoisseur. I suppose the impressive thing to say would be that my tastes are somewhat eclectic, but that would be code for the fact that my appreciation of music is a mile wide but only an inch deep!

GD: What is the most helpful theological book that you have read in the last twelve months? It is a must read because?

JB: To be honest, I'm not sure that I've read anything earth-shatteringly brilliant this last year, but I've read a lot that I've appreciated. One such book, would be the rather large and awkwardly shaped volume of The Works of Andrew Fuller republished by The Banner of Truth. I wouldn't say that Fuller's Works are among the first that a young minister should have on his shelves (he's not as high as some, not as deep as others, and not as sweet as many), but as I've dipped into them at various times during recent months I have found them again and again to be helpful, stirring, and enlivening.

GD: Ever thought of starting a blog?

JB: Yes ... many times ... but never for more than a few seconds at a time!

GD: Probably just as well. Thanks for dropping by for this chat. Every blessing for your new ministry.

Interesting Stuff

Byron Smith of "Nothing New Under the Sun" has a thoughtful piece on The Change We Need: Reflections upon Obama.

Paul Helm of "Helm's Deep" has posted some new articles for November, including Analysis 20 - History and Dogma and Natural Law and Common Grace. The Prof's Calvin: A Guide for the Perplexed, T & T Clark, 2008 is out now. He kindly sent me a review copy, which I hope to be able read and review on the blog by the end of the month.

Martin Downes of "Against Heresies" draws our attention to Crazy NICOT/NICNT Commentary sale at Amazon, with bargains such as, Waltke on Proverbs (2 Volumes) £6.00 and £6.80 instead of £28.00. Wenham on Leviticus £1.99 instead of £22.00.Barnett on 2 Corinthians £4.79 instead of £30.00. [Update: looks like the sale is over - see comments and weep].

Gary Brady of "Heavenly Worldliness" has a couple of posts on the Puritan Thomas Brooks, Refreshing Brooks 01 and Refreshing Brooks 02. Spot the pun.

The Irish Articles on Regeneration and union with Christ

James Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh (1625-1656),
principal author of The Irish Articles (1615)

In the bumper issue of The Banner of Truth magazine for August-September 2008, Michael Haykin devoted an article to "Regeneration and Faith, according to Two British Confessions". The first was The Scottish Confession of Faith (1560) and the second The Irish Articles (1615). The definition of regeneration in the latter Confession really grabbed my attention. Haykin stresses the anti-Arminian polemic in the Articles. But what impressed me was that the new birth is not treated simply as link in the chain of salvation. It is subsumed under the heading of union with Christ. Note the allusions to John 6, 1 Corinthians 12, Ephesians 2 & Titus 3.

Of the communicating of the grace of Christ.

32. None can come unto Christ unless it be given unto him, and unless the Father draw him. And all men are not so drawn by the Father that they may come unto the Son. Neither is there such a sufficient measure of grace vouchsafed unto every man whereby he is enabled to come unto everlasting life.

33. All God's elect are in their time inseparably united unto Christ by the effectual and vital influence of the Holy Ghost, derived from him as from the head unto every true member of his mystical body. And being thus made one with Christ, they are truly regenerated and made partakers of him and all his benefits.

I think that is a most helpful definition of the biblical doctrine regeneration. We are born again as Christ unites us to himself by the power of the Holy Spirit. But this aspect of the new birth is seldom given the emphasis it deserves in Reformed theology. Both Louis Berkhof and Robert Reymond seem so keen to locate the place of regeneration in the ordo salutis (order of salvation), that union with Christ hardly gets a mention. (See Berkhof's Systematic Theology p. 465ff & Reymond's A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith, 1998 edition, p. 708ff). Sinclair Ferguson shows us a more excellent way,

"Every facet of the application of Christ's work ought to be related to the way in which the Spirit unites us to Christ himself, and viewed directly as issuing from personal fellowship with him. The dominant motif and architectonic principle of the order of salvation should therefore be union with Christ in the Spirit." (Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit, Contours of Christian Theology, IVP, 1996, p. 100).

See also my review of Gary Brady's recently published, Being Born Again.

Welcome Break

On Thursday of last week we set off for Paignton, Devon for a mini-half term break. On Thursday evening I spoke on Rome and Biblical Christianity - What's the Big Difference? The talk was a kind of mash-up of some stuff that was originally posted on the blog on ecumenical issues and Roman Catholicism, here, here and here. Friday was more of a family day. We visited Paignton Zoo, went go-karting and caught a film in the evening. Zoos always make me feel a little sorry for the the animals. Modern zoos provide their animals with largish enclosures, rather than the old concrete and steel cages. But there's still something slightly sad about gawping through a perspex window at a pair of majestic lions dozing in the autumn sun. We travelled back home on Saturday in readiness for preaching on Sunday on John 17:24-26 and 1 Peter 3:7. In case you were wondering, I think that the big difference between Rome and Biblical Christianity....

"can be summed up in the little word 'alone'. We believe in salvation through grace alone, by faith alone, in Christ alone to the glory of God alone in accordance with the witness of Scripture alone."

The Preaching of Jonathan Edwards by John Carrick

The Preaching of Jonathan Edwards by John Carrick,
Banner of Truth Trust, 2008, 465pp,

In recent years there has been a revival of interest in Jonathan Edwards, the New England preacher-theologian. For many a long year his great treatises lay neglected. The Age of the Enlightenment had little time for a hell-fire preacher who taught that mankind is enslaved to sin. But the evils of the 20th century made people think again. Perhaps Edwards has something important to say to the modern condition? Academics like Perry Miller saw Edwards as an intellectual giant and gave fresh attention to his more philosophical writings. The advent of so-called neo-orthodox theology, associated with Karl Barth also helped to create a climate that was more sympathetic to Edwards' God-centered concerns. In the wake of Word War I, Barth became disillusioned with the easy optimism of Liberal theology. In his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, he exposed the terrible power of sin and and demanded that we let God be God. But perhaps it was the resurgence of the Reformed faith in the 20th century, associated with the ministry of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, that has helped to stimulate greatest interest in Jonathan Edwards. Lloyd-Jones was a great champion of Edwards’ theology and recommended his writings to all who would listen. More recently, John Piper has attempted to popularise the preacher-theologian's 'God entranced vision of all things.' All these factors have led to an increasing recognition of the value of the theology of the Jonathan Edwards. But relatively little work has been done on the preaching of the New England divine. This is a great pity because Edwards saw himself first and foremost as a preacher of God's Word. John Carrick has helped to rectify that lacuna with this in-depth study of Jonathan Edwards’ preaching.

Carrick focuses first and foremost on the content of Edwards’ sermons. He was a God-centred preacher, who proclaimed the glory of God in mercy and judgement. There was a winsome Christ-centeredness to his ministry, as he preached Jesus Christ in all his wonderful meekness and majesty. Edwards was no hyper-Calvinist. He believed strongly in the sovereignty of God and he also offered Christ freely to all men. He strongly urged his hearers to seek salvation in Christ. Both here and throughout the book, Carrick quotes satisfying chunks from Edwards' sermons to illustrate his point.

Edwards was an applicatory preacher. He always sought to apply the exposition and doctrine of his text to his hearers. He urged them to examine themselves in the light of Scripture and to follow biblical examples of good Christian conduct. The samples of Edwards' preaching given in the text show how the preacher ministered the Word with searching power. I often found myself challenged, convicted and encouraged as Edwards, though dead continues to speak through his sermons.

The New England preacher rejected the highly polished sermonic style that was becoming fashionable in his day. He adopted a studied plainness in the pulpit. But that does not mean that he neglected to develop a gripping and compelling way of preaching. Carrick analyses the major elements of Edwards’ homiletical arsenal. His sermons had arresting introductions and powerful conclusions. He used vivid illustrations and telling imagery. He would repeat for the sake of emphasis and eloquently exclaim on the glories of the gospel or the wickedness of sin.

It is sometimes thought that Jonathan Edwards was a manuscript preacher, who read his sermons in full. But Carrick challenges this, drawing attention to new research on the preacher’s sermons. Edwards’ notes contain headings and prompts as well as blocks of fully written out text, suggesting that he extemporised at some points in his preaching. The editor of the Yale editior of Edwards' sermons suggests that his tendency to employ a more extemporary method of speaking was due to his increasing disillusionment with the church at Northampton. He just couldn't be bothered to write full sermon manuscripts any longer. But as Carrick shows, this is not borne out by the facts. The preacher's move towards extemporary preaching was a sign of development and maturation, not deterioration.

Jonathan Edwards was, of course mightily used of God in the Great Awakening. He knew very well that it is the Holy Spirit who empowers preaching and makes it effective. Carrick devotes a helpful chapter to the Spirit of God in preaching. He concludes with some wise and cautionary words on how contemporary preachers may best follow Edwards’ example. The preacher would spend thirteen house a day in the study. While his people were welcome to visit him at home, he tended to neglect pastoral visitation. This had the effect of distancing Edwards from his congregation. His perceived remoteness did him no good when he faced difficulties with the church he pastored in Northampton. Although the church had experienced two seasons of revival under his ministry, he was ultimately dismissed my the majority of his people. It is undoubtedly a good thing for Pastors to study theology, but not to the extent that we fail to visit our people in their own homes.

Carrick draws on the life and times of Jonathan Edwards to set his preaching in its historical context. He pays special attention to some of the preacher's most famous sermons such as "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" and his series on 1 Corinthians 13, "Charity and its fruits". He gives us examples of Edwards' early sermons preached in New York, messages delivered in the Great Awakening at Northampton, and his preaching during the Stockbridge years. The author is evidently on familiar terms with the Edwards' published sermons and interacts well with the secondary literature. As Carrick rightly says, the New England preacher-theologian was a "supernova", whose preaching still has the power to enlighten and bless 250 years after his death. I warmly recommend this excellent study to all who have an interest in preaching the Word of God.

An edited version of this review will appear in a forthcoming edition of Protestant Truth Magazine.

Blogging in the name of the Lord, Series 4 "Box Set"

On Monday I posted the last interview in Blogging in the name of the Lord: Series 4. I hope readers have enjoyed eavesdropping on these conversations about theology and ministry with a variety of Christian bloggers. Here is a nice "commemorative box set" containing all the interviews in date order. A new series of Blogging in the name of the Lord will hopefully make an appearance early in 2009.

Tim Challies

John M. Frame

Peter Mead

Paul Wallace

John Hendryx

Mark Jones

Stephen Dancer

Blogging in the name of the Lord: Stephen Dancer

This is the last in our series of interviews with Christian bloggers. In the hot seat today is...

Stephen Dancer

GD: Hello Stephen Dancer and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.

SD: Hi Guy. Thanks for asking me to take part. I'm 45, husband to Susan for 21 years, and father of a 15-year-old daughter. I have been a minister of the gospel for 18 months. Before that, I have been a nuclear physicist at Glasgow Uni, a design engineer in an aerospace company, and a dossing student studying theology.

GD: Your blog is called "Doggie's Breakfast" er... why?

SD: Nothing mysterious. I started the blog while I was a student. At the time I was not sure what it was going to consist of - a mixture of personal news, theological reflection, reviews, other bits and pieces. In other words, a dogs breakfast of a blog! Apart from some fairly pretentious greek-sounding names, that was the best I could come up with.

GD: Maybe you sould have stuck with a pretentious greek-sounding blog like, "Kreas-Aptos". It's not too late to change. Now, what do you most enjoy and what do you find most frustrating about blogging?

SD: I enjoy the interaction and fact that people are interested in some of the same things I am. In the early days when I was studying theology as a distance learner, no one around me was thinking about thing things I was thinking about. To write about them and have others comment was a great blessing. One of the frustrations is that now I am in full-time ministry I don't get the time I would like. Another is that I am more inhibited about writing now than I once was. I have to think more carefully about what I write in case it has effects I did not intend.

GD: Yes, throwaway remarks on the blog can lead to some tricky pastoral visits. What does your family think about your blogging habit?

SD: I think they think it is a bit eccentric! My wife reads it now and again.

GD: Do church members read your blog? Reactions?

SD: Interesting question. I don't really know. Our congregation is small (it's a church plant getting started) and not many are internet savvy, even the younger ones. Only occasionally do I get a comment from them about it. Probably just as well.

GD: Which theology/ministry blogs do you find most profitable?

SD: The ones that I get most help from are Building Old School Churches, Church Matters, Exiled Preacher, Helm's Deep, Against Heresies, More Than Words, Reformation21, The Ugley Vicar, Thomas Goodwin, Tim Chester, TheResurgence, Etranger and The Blue Fish. But actually, I read a wide variety of other blogs. That means there are many things I disagree with. However, there is often much that I can learn from in areas not covered by conservative ministry blogs.

GD: Tell us how you became aware of a call to pastoral ministry.

SD: It all happened rather gently. In 1989 my wife and I moved from Glasgow to Derby for my work. I was moving from academia it the engineering industry. Being a bit naive we joined our local United Reformed Church. "Hey, it's Reformed", I thought! I soon discovered it wasn't, but we stuck with it because there were a good number of evangelicals in the congregation. Over time I had the opportunity to preach occasionally. Partly this was out of necessity since preachers seemed hard to come by. However, I found that people in the church began asking me if I had considered entering the ministry. I took the suggestion seriously enough to consider taking a URC lay-preacher training course. I did not get very far with it because I was beginning to have serious doubts about the URC.

In 1997, after 8 years of trying, we finally left the URC over doctrinal issues to attend Woodlands Evangelical Church in Derby. This was like coming into the light! The elders there were very gracious and allowed me to explore whether or not I had a gift for preaching by giving me an opportunity every couple of months. Again some people began to ask whether I had considered full time ministry and if not then perhaps I should.

A couple of things began to happen. Firstly, in coming to Woodlands I began to explore Reformed theology more intensely. In a sense this was a return to my roots in Glasgow. "Just what exactly was I being taught at the Tron in Glasgow?" Woodlands itself would not place itself in that camp completely, but the biblical teaching was the catalyst. This study stimulated an increasing desire to preach the doctrines I was rediscovering. Secondly, I began to think through with Susan what full time ministry might mean for us. We are both naturally cautious people, so this took some time.

Finally, in 2000 I got in contact with the EPCEW since I had come to evangelical presbyterian convictions. In 2001 I finally started theological study at WEST by distance learning. During that time, I had a very useful two years working with Gareth Crossley church-planting in Derbyshire which helped confirm the sense of call.

GD: Who has had the biggest influence on your theological development?

SD: You might expect this from a presbyterian, but John Calvin and John Murray!

GD: What did you find most helpful about your theological studies at WEST?

SD: Probably two things. Firstly, learning the biblical languages had instilled in me a greater love for the Scriptures. It is not so much that one sees a different picture with them. It is just that one sees in higher definition. I love that. Secondly, WEST helped me grow in confidence in the Word such that one need not be afraid of authors who seem to be influential yet wrong. The training at WEST has helped me to discern and evaluate much better than I ever could without it, even if I were a good reader. I meet plenty of people who read plenty but who collect ideas like magpies, yet are unable to make real sense of what they are reading.

GD: Who has taught you most of what it means to preach the Word of God?

SD: There are some things that are "better felt than telt" (to use a Scottish saying). So I have probably learned the most from observing the example of Eric Alexander when at St. George's-Tron, Glasgow. The clarity of his thought and the power and passion of his delivery remain with me. Many lives were changed as a result.

GD: Has being in full time ministry been anything like you expected?

SD: No it's different. I sort of expected when I started in this route that I would end up in a settled pastoral situation. As it turned out, I came to the conviction while training that the church needed to be planting churches, not just doing evangelism. So it was, in a sense, easy for me to join with EPCEW church-panting strategy. However, I did not expect that I would constantly feel out of my depth. Nor did I expect that I would constantly be tempted to worry about whether I am doing the right things day by day. However, I see these as training in dependency from the Lord.

GD: Yes, feeling out of your depth is something of an occupational hazard for pastors. But it keeps us hanging onto the Lord for dear life. Now, your blog features a rather long list of books you have read during 2008. Many pastors I know seem to make little time for reading. Why do you think that it is important for Ministers to keep on studying works of theology?

SD: I struggle with reading. I always have done. My reading rate is 20-30 pages an hour. And that's better than it was! It is easy for me to put off reading some 17th century writer (I am reading Herman Witsius at the moment) because of long sentences, or wierd vocabulary. But it is worth it. I need to feed my soul by having the conversations in my mind with old, dead guys, and young live ones. And there is a ministry benefit - I remember Stuart Olyott saying once (to paraphrase), "If you want your preaching to be interesting, read!" I think what he was getting at was that the preacher's reading benefits his congregation too.

GD: With your scientific background in mind, how would you describe the relationship between science and theology?

SD: I find a couple of scriptures helpful here. Genesis 1:1 gives us the marvellous presupposition we need to have - God exists. Then Psalm 19 marvelously explains how God reveals himself, first in Creation (vv.1-6) then in his Word (vv7-14). Of course, the former is limited. Creation only declares the presence of God. The Word declares who he is and how he can be known. Scientific knowledge fits into the former category of revelation. With the presupposition of Gen 1:1 science is discovering God's handiwork and how he sustains the universe (Heb 1:3).

Of course, the problem comes when many scientists ditch the presupposition of God. My experience is that such scientists don't realise that they accidentally adopt other presuppositions in the scientific process. Thereby, they unwittingly adopt a faith position, which they abhor, and often they smuggle in other presuppositions to make sense of the life they actually live. This can make for a fraught relationship between public science and public theology.

GD: A good presuppositionalist answer there! Right, if time travel were possible, which figure in post-biblical church history would you like to meet and what would you say to them?

SD: I would like to meet John Calvin and ask, "What was the truth about your part in the Servetus affair?

GD: I wonder what he'd say. Who is your favourite fiction writer?

SD: I don't know that I really have an out and out favourite, as I don't read much fiction. One write I have enjoyed is Ian Rankin

GD: Which contemporary theologian would you like to see writing a full length systematic theology, and why?

SD: I guess I have always wondered if Richard Gaffin should do so. I have enjoyed his lectures, articles and books since he combines exegetical rigour with profound insight. His thinking on union with Christ has certainly changed me.

GD: A full-on systematics by Gaffin would be a mouth-watering prospect. If anyone reading this has any infuence with RG, then tell him to do it! I hesitate to ask you this, what with you being a Led Zeppelin loving Presbyterian Mosher, but care to name your top three tunes or pieces of music (not necessarily Christian)?

SD: I have tried to like classical, and I have tried to like Christian, but to little avail. The only thing I like along that line is congregational singing.

So, from a Mosher's perspective here are three (that's hard - only three? [You're fortunate I gave you three, so don't push it - GD]):

Rock'n'Roll (Led Zeppelin)
Where the Streets Have No Name (U2)
Bling (The Killers)

But then, it may change next week...

GD: That wasn't too bad - for a Mosher. Great U2 tune in there. Now, what is the most helpful theological book that you have read in the last twelve months? It is a must read because?

SD: I read Robert Letham's "The Holy Trinity" slightly over a year ago. Does that still count? [Oh alright then, becasue I liked it too, see review]. We need to recover the habit of wrestling with who God is and what he is like. This book helps.

If you want one strictly within the last 12 months, I re-read William Guthrie's "The Christian's Great Interest". Heart warming and helpful in knowing what saving faith is. Everyone should read this.

GD: What is the biggest problem facing Reformed Evangelicalism today and how should we respond?

SD: I can only see what is around me and would not claim to know the general state of RE. But I see fear, not necessarily amongst ministers, but amongst elders and members. Many churches are small and struggling, have worries about resourcing the ministry, and are inward looking. This is often contrary to the articulated position. This is a pastoral problem. I believe that as ministers we need to be leading our people to the great truths of the Bible, seeking to persuade them that it is reasonable to believe what it teaches. But also, as pastors, we need to be aware of how the word we are preaching is being believed by our people. That's a constant challenge - to minister to the heart.

GD: It certainly is. Thanks Stephen, for dropping in for this little chat. Every blessing with your ministry!

That was the final interview of Blogging in the name of the Lord: Series 4. I hope to host another set of conversations with Christian bloggers sometime in the New Year.

Blogging in the name of the Lord: Mark Jones

This is the sixth in our series of interviews with Christian bloggers. In the hot seat today is...

Mark Jones

GD: Hello Mark Jones, and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.

MJ: Thanks, Guy, for the chance to share something with your readers. I am 28 years old; I am married (five years to Barbara) and have two children (Katie [3] and Joshua [1]). Currently I am finishing up my PhD thesis on Thomas Goodwin’s Christology at Leiden University (hope to be done by May 09) and I also Pastor a PCA church in Vancouver, Canada. Other than that, I’m a huge Liverpool F.C fan!

GD: Your surname implies a Welsh origin. Are you a member of the great Welsh diaspora?

MJ: Unfortunately, I am not. My father was adopted, so the name is by adoption; I think I’m part Irish, but I try to keep that hidden, if possible ;)

GD: Ah well. Your can trust me with your Irish secret, I'm a Pastor. Your blog is called "Thomas Goodwin". What made you start blogging?

MJ: Crawford Gribben suggested to me that I start a blog devoted to Goodwin during the course of my PhD studies; he’s responsible, then.

GD: So he's to blame. What are the strengths and weaknesses of blogging as a medium for theological reflection?

MJ: I’m not really an expert on blogs, but as far as I can tell there are basically two sorts: ones that share news and others which try to say something meaningful. On the whole, the “news sharers” are where I frequent most often, just to stay up-to-date on the latest news; the blogs, like my own, that try to say something meaningful (i.e. original thought) are made up of more bad than good, in my opinion. I think the weaknesses of blogs have been well-documented; all I will say, however, is that they can be an incredible waste of time for both the blogger and reader; I would hate to cause someone else to sin!

GD: Maybe we should call this to a halt right now. But then again, which blogs have you found most helpful?

MJ: I don’t really have any favourites; I do, however, enjoy reading anything Carl Trueman (see his Blogging in the name of the Lord interview here) writes at Reformation 21; he’s by far the most interesting of that gang!

GD: Why are you so drawn to the Puritan Thomas Goodwin?

MJ: Because he’s not John Owen! Actually, to be honest, it was Crawford’s fault; I was supposed to do my PhD under him at Manchester (until he decided to move to Trinity College) and he suggested Goodwin; I went for it and I haven’t regretted the decision at all. Goodwin hasn’t received the attention that Owen has in last ten years; I think in many ways Goodwin was Owen’s superior, not just in age!

GD: Goodwin was famously one of the five Indy "dissenting brethren" at the Westminster Assembly. Have his Independent views on Church government made you re-evaluate your Presbyterianism?

MJ: Actually, I’ve never been the most convinced Presbyterian; Presbyterians make Acts 15 say a lot more than it does – I hope no one from my Presbytery reads this – and then there are different types of Presbyterianism. I’m quite comfortable with the “Congregationalism” of the 17th Century, which is quite close to modern-day Presbyterianism. Modern-day “Congregationalism”, however, is not what I think Goodwin or Owen envisaged.

GD: Interesting answer. I tend to be olde Indy as in John Ownen's The True Nature of a Gospel Church - Works Volume 16) rather than new Congie. Right, what is Thomas Goodwin's distinctive contribution to Christology?

MJ: Hmmm ... you can read my book when it comes out next year in September! It would be hard to identify a “distinctive” contribution in Goodwin; I would say his understanding of the glory of Christ in both his divine and human natures, especially in light of Christ’s heavenly reward, is something that Goodwin devotes a lot of attention to in a way that brings out the richness of his Christology.

GD: Do you agree with Goodwin's exegesis of Ephesians 1:13 - that the sealing of the Spirit is a post-conversion experience of assurance?

MJ: No. I think Goodwin misinterpreted Eph. 1:13; part of the problem is the KJV translation; part of the problem was Sibbes influence; and part of the problem was Goodwin’s own conversion experience, I think.

GD: Do you accept Goodwin's view that the witness of the Spirit is the highest form of assurance, over and above faith in the promises and the evidence of grace in the heart (see here)?

MJ: Well, this is a complex issue in Goodwin; I commend to everyone Michael Horton’s study on Goodwin’s doctrine of assurance. Goodwin wrote: “I have come to this pass now that signs will do me no good alone; I have trusted too much in habitual grace for assurance of justification; I tell you Christ is worth all”. The subjective element of assurance had overshadowed the objective aspect in Goodwin’s day. I think he’s trying to bring a corrective here; but, I don’t think he succeeds because even the witness of the Spirit can be subjective. There’s lots to say on this issue, but I think Calvin basically got it right and Goodwin didn’t!

GD: I think it’s the other way round, but there we are. How would you advise a believer struggling with assurance of salvation?

MJ: As a Pastor, I know that every case must be judged on its own merits. That said, I think that the Scriptures are clear that the subjective and objective aspects of assurance are helpful. I think the Psalms need to be read and re-read; it’s amazing how often the Psalms will speak to our spiritual state in a way that no other portion of Scripture does. Plus, singing the Psalms leaves a Christian with little doubt which side he/she is on! Prayer, too, is immensely helpful in terms of assurance. But, Goodwin is right; Christ is worth all; and so I would say the objective work of Christ must be uppermost in one’s heart and mind.

GD: What do contemporary Evangelicals have to learn from the Puritans regarding the danger of identifying a political party or cause with the kingdom of God?

MJ: I think we need to be careful with our eschatology; the Puritans, Goodwin especially, had horrible eschatology. Goodwin thought he was living on the verge of eschatological glory (1650-1700s); he thus interpreted a lot of the political events in light of the book of Revelation. A lot of the madness among certain evangelicals today is basically a re-run of the seventeenth century, most of them just don’t know it! In light of history, we need to be very cautious with our ideas of how politics relate to the kingdom of God.

GD: Wise words. Now, if time travel were possible, which figure in post-biblical church history would you like to meet (apart from Goodwin!), and what would you say to him?

MJ: Wow, what a question. I think I’d like to meet George Whitefield and ask him to preach! He must be one of the greatest preachers who has ever lived.

GD: No arguments there. The great Puritan preachers like Thomas Goodwin and John Owen were pastor-theologians. Today, the Reformed churches are blessed with theologians and pastors, but there seem to be few pastor-theologians. What can be done to rectify this?

MJ: Owen and Goodwin were operating with incredible “hard drives”. I really don’t like the present understanding that the scholars in the Seminaries are the experts! Seminary profs are like warm-up drivers; Pastors are the ones who do the formula one racing; the best theologians in the church, historically, have been Pastors. The problem is that for Pastors it is so incredibly hard to keep up-to-date with all the relevant scholarship. I don’t know how some of these Pastors write so many books AND care for their flock. Of course, if one is simply a “Teaching Pastor” (though, I don’t understand how anyone can really preach effectively to their congregation if they don’t know them) then it may be possible to be a Pastor-Theologian. So, I guess my answer is that maybe we should get rid of Seminaries ... but that’s perhaps too bold an idea!

GD: Maybe. Now, you recently advised your readers, "Master at least one systematician; but if you decide to take my advice, I would say that Bavinck's your man!" Why is Bavinck the best for systematic theology?

MJ: I think Bavinck combines systematics with historical theology better than anyone. He’s not always exegetically rigorous, but he gives you a good sweep of the history of doctrine. I like being able to read ST and HT in one go! Saves me time.

GD: There is no doubt lots of time to be saved reading by Bavinck’s four volume dogmatics. Who is your favourite contemporary Reformed theologian?

MJ: I think Richard Gaffin is probably the best Reformed theologian we have right now; he’s influenced me a lot; the Reformed world is lacking high calibre systematicians; where are the Warfield’s or the Hodge’s? I really enjoy Carl Trueman’s work, too. But he’s a historian, not really a theologian.

GD: I’ve a lot of respect for Gaffin’s rich exegetical approach to theology. With him you don’t just get a dollop of doctrine followed by a string of proof texts. Trueman is a very stimulating and provocative church historian. What is the most helpful theological book that you have read in the last twelve months? It is a must read because...

MJ: I’ll go for two: Goodwin’s “The Heart of Christ in Heaven Towards Sinners on Earth” is one of the very best books I’ve ever read; it really is a “must-read”, and I don’t say that lightly. What amazing Christology; and Goodwin combines rich theology with pastoral care for his readers. I also think that Willem van Asselt’s book on Cocceius is probably the best book I’ve ever read in the field of Historical Theology. His book has an uncanny ability to humble anyone in the field of HT. It was worth the $200 I paid!

GD: Care to name your top three songs or pieces of music (not necessarily Christian)?

MJ: I like African music (Johnny Clegg and Savuka) because of my African roots (I was born in South Africa). Other than that, I really like listening to my congregation sing, especially when they sing Acapella; there’s nothing better than hearing human voices praise God.

GD: What is the biggest problem facing Reformed Evangelicalism at this time and how should we respond?

MJ: Our preaching is boring; I’m a huge fan of Martyn Lloyd-Jones and his view of preaching; we’ve become too academic and so many Reformed “sermons” are lectures. We are also very bad at application; many of our preachers couldn’t convict a fly. We need to pray that God will raise up great preachers, not young Reformed guys who know their so-called “five-points”.

GD: Amen to that, brother! And thanks, Mark for dropping by for this enjoyable conversation.

Only one more Blogging in the name of the Lord interview to go in this set. Who will grace the hot seat for the series grand finale? You'll have to wait and see....

Thomas Goodwin's perspective on assurance of salvation

Thomas Goodwin's teaching on assurance of salvation might be helpfully to analysed using John Frame's tri-perspectival approach to theology. For Goodwin, there are three aspects to assurance of salvation: 1) Faith in the promise of the gospel. 2) The testimony of grace- transformed life. 3) The direct witness of the Spirit.

The first point corresponds to John Frame's normative perspective. Saving faith places its trust in the authoritative promise of God found in Scripture, the 'norming norm'. The second point is in the realm of the situational perspective. With grace in his heart, the believer seeks to practice the gospel in every given situation. The third point brings in the existential perspective. It is about the believer's experience of the direct and personal witness of the Spirit, assuring him that he is a child of God.

Now, as Frame insists, while his three perspectives may be distinguished, they should not be divided. So with assurance, a profession of faith alone, apart from a changed life is no basis for assurance. Faith without works is dead. On the other hand, to focus on searching for grace in the heart, while loosing sight of the objective promise of salvation in Christ, is introspective and dangerous. We must also say that the Spirit will not give experiential assurance to those without genuine faith that works by love. All three perspectives must therefore be brought into play when seeking assurance of salvation, the normative - faith in Christ. The situational - the evidence of new life. And the existential - the witness of the Spirit. Yet, as assurance is about Christian experience, the most vital aspect is the direct witness of the Spirit, Romans 8:15-16.

Westminster Confession of Faith XVIII:II

"This certainty is not a bare conjectural and probable persuasion grounded upon a fallible hope;but an infallible assurance of faith founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the inward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made,the testimony of the Spirit of adoption witnessing with our spirits that we are the children of God, which Spirit is the earnest of our inheritance, whereby we are sealed to the day of redemption."

For more on Goodwin and assurance see my Thomas Goodwin: His Life, Times, and Quest for Assurance, under Articles About Goodwin, here.