One main point that flowed out of this liberty and that is of immense practical relevance today is in regards to pastoral prayer. Owen’s point was simple and powerful: Jesus Christ gifts those who serve as his ministers with all they need to accomplish their ministry, not only in terms of preaching, but also in terms of praying publicly. In what follows let me present Owen’s argument and then make some applications for us today.

Owen’s Teaching

Owen contrasted the ordinances of worship under Moses, which were many and burdensome, with those ordinances instituted under Christ in the New Covenant, which were few, and consisted of “preaching of the word, administration of the sacraments, and the exercise of discipline,” and all “with prayer and thanksgiving”(Works, 15:8, 10).

Importance of Ephesians 4

In proposing this, Owen went on to substantiate this spiritual ability of prayer that Christ has given pastors to administer his worship in an exposition of one of his favorite texts: Ephesians 4. How were pastors enabled to build up the Church? Based on Ephesians 4 Owen said, “by the communication of grace and spiritual gifts from heaven unto them by Christ himself” (Works, 15:11). God had done this with the Levites of the Old Testament, enabling their shoulders to bear the ark and their arms to slay the sacrifices. Now that these ordinance were removed and the gospel’s spiritual worship put in their place, God again has “undertaken to supply the administrators of it with spiritual strength and abilities for the discharge of their work, allowing them supply of the defect of that which he hath taken upon himself to perform” (Works, 15:11). In summary, Owen’s point was that since the Lord Jesus Christ delivered his disciples from the yoke of Mosaic ceremonies, God has appointed the ordinances, those to be ordained to administer them, and the gifts necessary to administer these ordinances in the New Covenant (Works, 15:12).

Why was this so important to Owen? It was because of the context in which he pastored and wrote. The prelates of the restored Church of England justified their imposition of the Book of Common Prayer by insisting that the apostles used liturgies. Owen saw this as a denigrating of the ministry, and therefore of Christ himself. In a moment of sarcastic humor, Owen said that anyone who believed Peter composed forms of prayer and homilies for the disciples “must fetch his evidence out of the same authors that he used who affirmed that Jesus Christ himself went up and down singing masses!” (Works, 15:16) Underlying the prelates’ position was the objection that while the apostles had extraordinary gifts, ordinary ministers did not have these gifts and therefore needed the Prayer Book. Those who desired to impose a liturgy said the ministers of England had a disability “to celebrate and administer the ordinances of the gospel, to the honour of God and edification of the church, without the use of them” (Works, 15:17). Owen responded by saying that if the bishops and pastors after the apostles did not need forms of prayer, from where did their ability to pray and lead the people of God come? If their ability came from Jesus Christ, did these ordinary bishops and pastors have any gifts beyond what Jesus promised? Moreover, if this was the case with these ordinary ministers, did Jesus promise these gifts for all ordinary ministers to the end of the world? (Works, 15:17–18) Again, Owen said that to say Christ’s provision was not sufficient for goals of edification and glorification or that he no longer gifted ministers as he did with the apostles were both “equally blasphemous; the one injurious to his wisdom, the other to his truth, both to his love and care of his church” (Works, 15:48).

Evidence from the Church Fathers

In refuting the imminent imposition of the Prayer Book, Owen delved into patristic history to show that there was not “any attempt to invent, frame, and compose any liturgies for prescribed forms of administering the ordinances of the gospel.” He even cited the Roman cardinal, Baronius, who said the ancient churches’ practice of prayer “is wholly silent as to the use of any forms amongst them” (Works, 15:21, 22). Owen adduced the writings of Eusebius, Polycarp, Clement, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian, especially noting that Origen, Tertullian, and Justin Martyr spoke not of imposed prayers, but only described prayers that were offered. Justin even spoke of prayer “according to our abilities” (Works, 15:22, 23; cf. Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch. 67).

Improving Christ’s Gifts

To say that Christ no longer gifted his ministers as he did the apostles was either blasphemy because it meant he no longer kept his promise or it was an indictment upon ministers who were negligent and careless in not improving whatever gifts they did have. It was incumbent, then, upon ministers to stir up and make effectual their gifts. As Owen said, in an expression of his experimental theology,

I suppose all impartial men will grant that there ought to have been a return unto Him endeavoured from whom that were gone astray . . . Finding themselves at the loss wherein they were, should they not have searched their hearts and ways, to consider wherefore it was that the presence of Christ was so withdrawn from them, that they were so left without the assistance which other ministering in their places before them had received? Should not they have pulled out their single talent, and fallen to trading with it, that it might have increased under their care? Was not this the remedy and cure of the breach made by them, that God and man expected from them? Was it just, then, and according to the mind of Christ, that, instead of an humble returnal unto a holy, evangelical dependence on himself, they should invent an expedient to support them in the condition wherein they were, and so make all such returnal for hereafter needless? (Works, 15:27–28).

So what of those in the ministry who seemed not to be gifted as others? Owen’s first response was to question their calling: “I shall desire them to consider whether indeed such persons be rightly called unto the ministry . . . there seems to be a direct failure of the promise of Christ, which is blasphemy to imagine” (Works, 15:48–49). Owen’s second response was more positive. Those who were truly called but did not feel they had the requisite gifts needed were called upon “to stir up the gifts that they have received by the use and exercise of them” (Works, 15:49).

Since the using of Christ’s gifts edifies the church, Owen inquired how these gifts “may be improved, so that they may ‘excel to the edifying of the church,’ which is expressly required of them” (Works, 15:52). The word “improve” was used in the seventeenth century to mean using something in a profitable way; to benefit from something (e.g., Westminster Larger Catechism, Q&A 167). How does a minister do this? “Edification, then, depends on the improvement of gifts, and the improvement of gifts on their due exercise according to the mind of Christ” (Works, 15:52). To improve the gift of prayer a minister had to use his gift. This meant he needed to pray, and not merely to read. This was essential as any lack of exercise of these gifts, whether by neglect or hindrance of them by others, was to hinder the church’s edification (Works, 15:53).

Contemporary Application

What can we learn from John Owen’s teaching on pastoral prayer in A Discourse Concerning Liturgies, and Their Imposition? There are four areas of application that I believe are good and necessary for us to draw from his work.

First, he would have us as pastors and those studying for the ministry pray fervently that the Lord would enable us to “fan into flame the gift of God” within us (2 Tim. 1:6; ESV). We must not neglect our gifts (1 Tim. 4:14) but must improve them. Paul uses a word here in 2 Timothy 1:6, anazopurein, that is used nowhere else in the New Testament. This word signifies giving new life to a fire; to rekindle it. We fan our gift, which is likened to a flame, as Owen said, by using our gift. One of his contemporaries, Matthew Poole (1624–1679), elucidated upon this idea when he said,

He adviseth him to put new life unto that holy fire (the word signifies the recovering of fire choked with ashes or decaying) which God had kindled in him, by daily prayer, and meditating on the things of God and use of his gifts, improving those spiritual abilities which God had given him (A Commentary on the Holy Bible, Volume III: Matthew–Revelation, 791).

To fan into flame our gift of prayer we need to pray in private, we need to mediate upon the Word and the Lord, and we need to use our gift in public.

Second, Owen would have pastors and ministerial students study prayer and pray during their study. To study prayer may seem an odd suggestion, but it is helpful. While the Holy Spirit teaches us how to pray by praying through us (Rom. 8:26), he also uses the means of other ministers as models of prayer. The studious pastor and student should be acquainted with the development of liturgical prayer from the patristic era through the modern period by acquaintance with Bard Thompson, Liturgies of the Western Church, and William D. Maxwell, An Outline of Christian Worship: Its Development and Forms. To read some of the best prayers in the Reformed tradition, we need to read Charles W. Baird, The Presbyterian Liturgies: Historical Sketches. Two of the great Puritan works that deal with public prayer are William Perkins, The Art of Prophesying, and Matthew Henry, A Method for Prayer. Finally, two recent works that discuss and give samples of prayer are Hughes Oliphant Old, Leading in Prayer: A Workbook for Worship, and Terry Johnson, Leading in Worship.

We also need to pray during our study. Reading and translating Hebrew and Greek, reading commentaries, and writing sermons must not be academic or perfunctory. It must be saturated in prayer. I have found the longer I am in the ministry the less time I take in actually reading and writing and the more time I spend praying over what I have read and written as I prepare for preaching on the Lord’s Day.

Third, Owen would have us challenge ourselves. If fanning into flame our gift of prayer means that we need to exercise ourselves in public prayer, then we need to challenge ourselves week after week to pray in public and not merely to read prayers. To young ministers I would issue this challenge: at the beginning of your ministry write out your prayers as you do your sermons, but little by little take less and less into the pulpit until you are able to pray extemporaneously. When we challenge ourselves in this holy manner, we decrease and the Lord increases; we are humbled and he is exalted; we are weak but he is strong. And in doing this, the Lord will begin to use us in leading our people before the throne of grace (Heb. 4:16).

Fourth and finally, Owen would have our institutions that prepare men for the ministry to teach public prayer. Speaking from a North American vantage point, the “art of prophesying” has been falsely divided. Our seminaries teach preaching, but not prayer. For the Puritan father William Perkins, these two were held together. The art of prophesying meant both the art of preaching as well as praying. In the former, students need to be taught how to speak from God to his people, but in the latter, how to speak from the people to their God.

According to John Owen, then, Jesus Christ as head of the Church has gifted those who minister in his name to exercise their ministry for his people’s edification and for the glory of God. We need to believe this; and believing, we need to act upon it, working hard to fan our flame in studied prayer, in challenging ourselves to pray in the power of the Holy Spirit, and in teaching our students to do so as doctors, professors, theologians, and pastors.

Below is the proposal (footnotes converted into parenthetical references), which should come to reality by May when I am scheduled to graduate, Deo volente.

__________

“The Liturgical Theology of John Owen”

by Daniel R. Hyde

John Owen (1616–1683) was called “the Calvin of England” [Memoirs of Ambrose Barnes, ed. W.H.D. Longstaffe (London: Surtees Society, 1867), 16] and the “Atlas and Patriarch of Independency” [Anthony Wood, History and Antiquities of the University of Oxford, ed. John Gutch, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1791), 2:650] by his contemporaries while his epitaph depicted him as “worthy to be enrolled among the first Divines of the age” (Et Seculi hujus Insignissimis annumerandus). Over the past decade the secondary literature on this preeminent and voluminous theologian of the high orthodox period has increased. In 1987 Sinclair Ferguson’s PhD thesis on Owen’s doctrine of the Christian life was published [John Owen on the Christian Life (Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1987)]. Eleven years later in 1998 Carl Trueman published a significant study of Owen’s Trinitarian theology [The Claims of Truth: John Owen’s Trinitarian Theology (Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1998)]. 2002 marked the publication of Sebastian Rehman’s important study of Owen’s theological method [Divine Discourse: The Theological Methodology of John Owen, Texts & Studies in Reformation & Post-Reformation Thought, gen. ed. Richard A. Muller (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002)]. In 2004 two more popular books were published, one by Richard Daniels on Owen’s Christology [The Christology of John Owen (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2004)] and another by Jon Payne on Owen’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper [John Owen on the Lord’s Supper (Edinburgh, Scotland: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2004)]. In 2007 two substantive works came to press. Carl Trueman published another considerable study of Owen’s doctrines of God, covenant theology, and justification that located his thought within the High Orthodox period [John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man, Great Theologians, eds. John Webster, Trevor Hart, and Douglas B. Farrow (Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2007)]. Alan Spence’s PhD thesis was published, dealing with Owen’s Christology [Incarnation and Inspiration: John Owen and the Coherence of Christology (London/New York: T&T Clark, 2007)].

Yet no study has yet come to press on his liturgical theology despite the prominence of liturgical theology in the Works of John Owen. While he wrote simply on worship early in his ministry, in his second and third published works, The Duty of Pastors and People Distinguished (1643)  and Two Short Catechisms (1645),  especially of note is the prominence of liturgical theology after 1660, when he stepped down as Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, and 1662, when he was ejected by the Act of Uniformity. For example, he dealt with liturgical theology contra Rome in Animadversions on a Treatise Entitled Fiat Lux (1662) and contra the Anglicans in A Discourse Concerning Liturgies, and Their Imposition (1662). In A Brief Instruction in the Worship of God (1667) he gave a positive presentation of the Congregational way. Later, he wrote A Discourse of the Work of the Holy Spirit in Prayer; with a Brief Inquiry into the Nature and Use of Mental Prayer and Forms (1682).  Sometime towards the end of his life he wrote An Answer unto Two Questions . . . with Twelve Arguments against any Conformity to Worship not of Divine Institution (published posthumously in 1720).

Originality

Despite the important secondary works above, there is scant material devoted to Owen’s liturgical theology. This thesis attempts to fill that lacuna. There are only brief references to Owen’s important 1662 liturgical treatise, A Discourse Concerning Liturgies, and Their Imposition, within several books and essays. As far as journal articles, there is a dearth of material on Owen’s liturgics. In a survey of journals only two articles deal directly with Owen’s liturgical theology. The first is a popular article that draws general applications for today [Douglas Jones, “Liturgy Lessons from Owen,” Reformation & Revival 5:3 (Summer 1996): 111–118] while the other is a journal article that briefly surveys Owen’s doctrine of worship in his massive commentary on Hebrews [A. Craig Troxel, “‘Cleansed Once for All’: John Owen on the Glory of Gospel Worship in ‘Hebrews,’” Calvin Theological Journal 32:2 (November 1997): 468–479]. Owen’s liturgical theology represents an area for further scholarly enquiry. In 2008 I sought to begin making a contribution of Owen liturgical studies [“For Freedom Christ Has Set Us Free: John Owen’s A Discourse Concerning Liturgies, And Their Imposition,” The Confessional Presbyterian 4 (2008): 29–42].

Viability

The viability of this thesis is found in two facts. First, despite the lack of secondary material on this specific topic, the growing secondary literature will be invaluable in placing Owen’s liturgical theology in its high orthodox context. Second, there are major primary sources in Owen’s Works mentioned above that have yet to be studied in great detail.

This material shows is that Owen’s liturgical theology was governed by several key factors: first, the sufficiency of Scripture; second, Christian liberty won by Christ; third, the work of the Holy Spirit in equipping ministers; fourth, Christ’s heavenly priesthood; and fifth, Owen’s desire for true catholicity.

Potential

The potential of this Master of Theology (Th.M.) thesis is twofold. First, this thesis will serve the academy by making a significant contribution to the growing field of John Owen studies in an area where no study has yet been done. Second, this thesis will serve the church by providing a study of a Puritan’s practical/pastoral theology. Since all Reformed ministers, consistories/sessions, and believers engage in the worship of God every Lord’s Day and seek to do so in an ever-increasing idolatrous context, this work will equip these for authentic Reformed ministry in the twenty-first century.

The audio is now available at SermonAudio here.

A .pdf outline is available here.

Throughout this Discourse Owen argued in a typically dispassionate, cogently argued manner, but his experimental theology bursted forth in a passionate way, when he said:

I suppose all impartial men will grant that there ought to have been a return unto Him endeavoured from whom that were gone astray . . . Finding themselves at the loss wherein they were, should they not have searched their hearts and ways, to consider wherefore it was that the presence of Christ was so withdrawn from them, that they were so left without the assistance which other ministering in their places before them had received? Should not they have pulled out their single talent, and fallen to trading with it, that it might have increased under their care? Was not this the remedy and cure of the breach made by them, that God and man expected from them? Was it just, then, and according to the mind of Christ, that, instead of an humble returnal unto a holy, evangelical dependence on himself, they should invent an expedient to support them in the condition wherein they were, and so make all such returnal for hereafter needless? (Works 15, 27–28)

What use are Owen’s words for us today? To my brothers in the ministry and those preparing for the ministry, stir up the gifts that your Lord Jesus Christ has placed within you by the power of his Holy Spirit! Fan your flame (2 Tim. 1:6). Work hard at preaching the law with force and work hard at applying the tender words of the gospel to your people’s souls. And exert yourselves in praying as men standing between God and man, heaven and earth. Administer the sacraments with passion as they are a foretaste of heaven.

So . . . what did the great Puritan, John Owen, say about our level of experiential delight in the weekly worship of God? Do we actually believe that worship should be a delight? Is it okay to feel anything in worship?

I have been making my way through John Owen’s 1667 treatise, A Brief Instruction in the Worship of God and Discipline of the Churches of the New Testament, which came to be known as “The Independents’ Catechism” (Works 15, 447–530). This treatise speaks to us today as we seek a helpful way forward for ourselves and our family, friends, and visitors to our churches who feel like we may be cold.

In one of the more beautiful and practical sections of this treatise, Owen spoke of our delighting in the divine service. Picking up in question and answer seven, we read Owen saying that when we gather for the divine service there are four “chief things that we ought to aim at in our observation” (Works 15, 455–456):

1. To sanctify the name of God.
2. To own and avow our professed subjection to Christ.
3. To build up ourselves in our most holy faith.
4. To testify and confirm our mutual love.

Owen went on to explicate this first aim, or, chief end, of the Christians’ observation of the divine service by further dividing it into five parts (Works 15, 456–459):

1. to reverence God’s sovereign authority in appointing his gospel institutions.
2. to regard God’s special presence in his ordinances.
3. to exercise faith in the promises of God annexed to his ordinances.
4. to delight in his “will, wisdom, love, and grace” manifested in his gospel ordinances.
5. to persevere in our observance of Christ’s ordinances.

For our purposes, here I want to focus in on the fourth point that Owen made, namely, that we sanctify the name of God in worship by our delighting in God’s will, wisdom, love, and grace as they are manifested to us in the gospel ordinances (by which he means, Word, sacraments, prayer, and discipline). So what precisely does it mean to “delight” in worship?

First, Owen says what it does not mean. Our delighting in the service does not mean what he called a “carnal self-pleasing, or satisfaction in the outward modes or manner of the performance of divine worship.” What did Owen mean by this? He was saying that our delight in worship was not to be found in our sinful and experiential delights. In a word, worship is not about you! Further, he was saying this against those in his time who sought for delight in the outward form and beauty of the liturgy itself. Here Owen sought to cut off any idea that worship was for our pleasure, whether in serving our emotions or even serving our eyes, such as in the Mass or the English Prayer Book with its pomp and ceremony in the days of Archbishop Laud’s high church experimentation. So our delighting in the divine service is not about “what we get out of it,” to use an evangelical phrase. For many of us who became Reformed later, we get this. But here is where Owen warns us in a way we need to hear. We are not to find our delight in the divine service in the mere fact that our liturgy might have ancient roots, or in the trappings of candles, banners, crosses, incense, kneeling, coming forward for communion, vestments, the Geneva robe, or the fully printed-out liturgy itself. Owen is saying, be careful of the trappings of high church.

Instead of this, Owen said that our delighting in the divine service was rooted in “contemplation on the will, wisdom, grace, and condescension of God.” Our God has drawn near to us! And he has done so, as Owen wrote, “of his own sovereign mere will and grace.” Why? Owen gave five beautiful reasons:

1. “so to manifest himself unto such poor sinful creatures as we are”
2. “so to condescend unto our weakness”
3. “so to communicate himself unto us”
4. “so to excite and draw forth our souls unto himself”
5. “and to give us such pledges of his gracious intercourse with us by Jesus Christ”

When we gather for the Divine service (meaning, God’s service to us in Word and sacrament and our service to him in prayer), we are to find our delight in our covenant God himself, not in anything else, whether within us or whether external to us that we have contrived. It is our communion with God that brings us delight and the means of grace serve to bring us closer to him that we might glorify him and delight in him.

Christian, God has so stooped down to you that he invites you into his heavenly presence in worship. What a privilege! Believer, delight in worshipping the Lord your God!

You can read some of my thoughts on this in the comments on Hart’s post, but suffice it to say it is a complicated question (isn’t all history this way?). Sure, Calvin and Owen lived at different times and under different circumstances, which answers some of the question. Yet, was Owen against all “liturgy?” Depends on what you mean, whose liturgy, and the necessity of such liturgy. Was Owen against all forms of prayer? Again, it depends on what treatise you are reading, when it was written, and for what purpose a form of prayer is offered.

I hope my ThM thesis on The Liturgical Theology of John Owen sheds some light. I think the answer is that there is essential continuity in terms of the principles of Reformed worship but legitimate discontinuity in terms of the practice of liturgical prayer. This discontinuity is more than just a result of their historical circumstances, but a deeply held theological principle for Owen regardless of when and where he ministered.

So far my thesis revolves around five key principles for Owen, found in such writings as “A Discourse Concerning Liturgies, and Their Imposition,” “A Brief Instruction in the Worship of God,” “A Discourse of the Work of the Holy Spirit in Prayer,” and his massive Hebrews exposition. These principles are 1) the sufficiency of Scripture, 2) the freedom won for the Church by Christ, 3) the work of the Holy Spirit, 4) the catholicity of the Reformation, and 5) the heavenly priesthood of Christ. I pray my thesis holds water academically and also helps the Reformed churches practically in our time and place.