ABSTRACT: When the Act of Uniformity (1662) mandated that all English clergy must adhere to the Book of Common Prayer, controversy ensued among the Puritans. Some Puritans, like John Owen and John Bunyan, argued that written prayers in corporate worship violated Scripture and could quench the Spirit. Others, like Richard Baxter, resisted the Act of Uniformity, but still maintained that written prayers could aid Christians’ corporate worship and prevent disorder. Their disagreement reveals how greatly the Puritans prized biblical worship; it also calls Christians today to pray from sincere and engaged hearts, with words shaped by Scripture.

For our ongoing series of feature articles for pastors, leaders, and teachers, we asked Dr. Greg Salazar, Assistant Professor of Historical Theology at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, to explore the disagreement among the Puritans on the use of written prayers in corporate worship.

The last seventy years have witnessed a resurgence in interest in the Puritans. Two events in particular have catapulted the Puritans from the dusty pages of history into the center of mainstream Calvinism. The first was the establishing Banner of Truth Trust in 1957 in order to republish the classics of Puritan literature. Then, recent decades have witnessed the emergence of the New Calvinist movement, which finds its historical and theological roots within the Puritan movement. The result is that there are many (myself included) who are zealous to put down the often-repeated stereotype that the Puritans were those who had “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”1

Some observers of Christianity also have noted how some evangelicals (including those who identify as Reformed) have drifted toward a more liturgical approach to worship.2 In recent years, Christians have desired to understand the Puritans’ view of the use of written prayers in both corporate and private worship. Although many Puritans argued against the Book of Common Prayer’s prescription to use written prayers in corporate worship, some Puritans believed that such a practice was consistent with biblical worship. Moreover, most Puritans — even those who were opposed to the use of written prayers in public worship — believed that it was perfectly legitimate to use written prayers in one’s own private or even family worship.

This article will examine the most important arguments put forward by some of the most influential Puritans — particularly John Owen, John Bunyan, Richard Baxter, and Matthew Henry. It will survey their arguments for and against the use of written prayers in both public and private worship. It will end by exploring four lessons we can learn from studying the Puritans’ perspectives on these important issues.

Persecuted Puritans

In order to grasp why many Puritan divines opposed the use of any set prayers in public worship, it is important to remember the historical context in which the Puritans lived and ministered.3 The Puritan movement began in the early 1560s, when the Protestant Queen Elizabeth I ascended to the throne, following the death of her Catholic sister, Queen Mary I. As a result of this transition, English Puritans were able to return home from Continental Europe (particularly John Calvin’s Geneva), where they had been living in exile to avoid Catholic persecution.

They brought with them newly forged convictions about the nature of biblical — and, in their mind, truly reformed — doctrine, worship, and church polity. They believed the Church of England — with its commitment doctrinally to the Thirty-nine Articles, liturgical set forms of prayer (outlined in the Book of Common Prayer), and episcopal polity — was a “half-reformed” church in need of further reformation along the lines of Calvin’s Geneva. Thus, for the next century, they sought to reform the Church of England. Some pursued these ideals as somewhat-loyal members of the Church of England, while others remained outside the established church and attempted (and often failed) to set up structures alongside it.

While the first eighty years of the Puritan movement saw little success, the 1640s and 1650s were the golden age — insofar as the Puritans’ aspiration of forming a national church on Puritan principles was now within their grasp. However, when Puritanism’s political leader, Oliver Cromwell, died in 1658 and his son Richard took his place as Lord Protector of England, Oliver’s son lacked the charismatic leadership and giftedness of his father. Within two years, Puritans concluded that their vision of a national church would be better executed in the stable soil of a restored monarchy rather than a failing republic. Consequently, the Puritans invited Charles II — son of Charles I, whom they executed in 1649 — out of exile to reinstate the monarchy.

The initial negotiations between parliament and Charles II for a “broadly inclusive” national church that would grant liberty to Puritan consciences around polity and worship looked promising. However, following the failure to reach a consensus on the particular scope and structures of the newly forming church and the election of a new slate of young “Cavalier” Anglicans to parliament in 1661, the political and ecclesiastical tide turned wholly in favor of the Anglicans and against the now-marginalized Puritans.

Now, not only were the Puritans’ hopes for a broadly inclusive national church dashed, but the likelihood of persecution was imminent as the established church handed down a mandate known as the Act of Uniformity (1662). The Act of Uniformity required all ordained English clergy to repudiate their former presbyterian ordination and political allegiances and to submit themselves to reordination by a bishop and to adherence to the liturgical ideals outlined in the Book of Common Prayer, which had had just been revised in a more Anglican direction. Those ministers who failed to conform in writing would lose both their ministerial posts and the livings tied to those posts.4 In the end, over two thousand clergymen in England and Wales failed to conform and were ejected from their pulpits and livings. It was the most significant and systematic persecution of Puritans in their over one-hundred-year history.5

Against Written Prayers in Corporate Worship

Given their conviction that the Church of England was a “half-reformed” church and their experience of persecution by the church they sought to reform, it is not surprising that many Puritan divines opposed the use of any written prayers in public worship. Consider some of the arguments Puritans like John Owen and John Bunyan raised against the practice.

Written prayers violate the regulative principle.

The clearest reason Puritans opposed such prayers is because they believed their use violated the regulative principle for worship — namely, that nothing should be done in corporate worship unless it is prescribed by God’s word.

In one of the most formidable defenses of the regulative principle and his most extended critique on the Church of England, John Owen (1616–1683) argued that his commitment to the regulative principle of worship, and particularly the second commandment, necessitated his opposition to the use of written prayers in public worship.6 Owen argued that they were “a human invention” and an idolatrous violation of the second commandment.7 He even contended that though the apostles were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write Scripture, they were never inspired to write “prescribe[d] forms of prayer, either for the whole church or single persons.”8 Thus, he concludes, if the very apostles were never tasked with this duty, “there is no such especial promise given unto any, this work of composing prayer.”9 Owen’s explanation for why written prayers existed in corporate worship was simple: throughout human history since the fall, man has devised other ways to “worship” God than those prescribed by the Lord himself as “revealed in the Word of God.”10

“The Puritans possessed a vital zeal to worship God according to the prescriptions of Scripture.”

John Bunyan (1628–1688) likewise defended the regulative principle of worship, specifically opposing written prayers because he “did not find” them “commanded in the word of God.”11 Simply put, these Puritans forbade the use of written prayers in corporate worship because the practice was not prescribed in Scripture.

Written prayers are a Catholic and even Old Testament practice.

Second, Puritans believed the use of written prayers in corporate worship was a Catholic and Old Testament practice. For example, both Owen and Bunyan argued that the Church of England’s use of written prayers rendered it guilty of the Catholic Church’s error of worshiping according to human invention.12 Owen went even further to argue that it reduced worship “to the very state and condition wherein they were in Judaism” and therefore was antithetical to Christ’s saving work. For Christ “delivered his disciples from the yoke of Mosaical institutions,” and the very destruction of the temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70 was a providential indication that a transition had taken place in the worship of God. In short, the Old Testament pattern was literally “buried in the ruins of the city and temple,” making it impossible to worship God in that way.13

Prayer is chiefly inward.

Third, Puritans argued that the Book of Common Prayer could not facilitate what was chiefly an inward, spiritual, sincere engagement of the affections expressed in external words. Following the Act of Uniformity, John Bunyan was imprisoned for his nonconformity and was denied the opportunity to be released from prison because he would not promise to cease preaching according to Puritan principles. Bunyan’s opposition to the use of written prayers in corporate worship was a central point of his trial discussion with authorities, especially Sir John Keeling, which took place seven weeks after his initial imprisonment.

In Bunyan’s Discourse Touching Prayer (1662), published during his imprisonment, he argued that the use of written prayers opposed the very essence of true prayer that was to be “with the spirit and with understanding” (see 1 Corinthians 14:15).14 Citing texts like Jeremiah 29:12–13 and echoing John Calvin and Matthew Henry, Bunyan said, “Prayer is a sincere, sensible, affectionate pouring out of the heart or soul to God . . . for such things as God hath promised, or, according to the Word.”15 When he was asked by Keeling at his imprisonment trial if one could “pray with the spirit, and with understanding” using “the Common Prayer-book,” Bunyan replied that he was convinced “that it is impossible that all the Prayer-Books that men have made in the world should lift up or prepare the heart,” for “it is not the mouth that is the main thing to be looked at in prayer, but whether the heart be so full of affection and earnestness in Prayer with God.” When authorities defended the use of written prayers by arguing that “prayers made by men” “are good to teach, and help men to pray,” Bunyan replied that while “one man may tell another how he should pray,” neither he nor the prayer book could help that man “make his condition known to God” or “stirreth up in our hearts desires to come to God,” since that was the Spirit’s work to assist the believer in prayer (Romans 8:26).16

Indeed, Puritans believed that there was nothing distinctly spiritual about the utterance of specific familiar forms, for true spirituality involved engaging the affections in prayer, for only “then the whole man is engaged.”17 Since an emphasis on the importance of heart religion was a major theme laced throughout all of Puritan theology, it is not surprising that it would be central to their understanding of prayer.

Written prayers quench the Spirit.

Fourth, Bunyan and Owen argued that written prayers not only failed to facilitate true prayer, but quenched the Holy Spirit.18 Owen called written prayers “a stinted form of prayers,” whose “constant and unvaried use . . . may become a great occasion of quenching the Spirit.”19 Likewise, the Welsh Independent preacher Walter Cradock (c. 1606–1659) said that those who require using written prayers in public worship “restrain the Spirit of God in the Saints” as well as in the minister himself. For although a minister would come to the Lord in public prayer burdened to pour “out his soul to the Lord” for his congregation, he was “tied to an old Service Book” requiring him to “read” it until they “grieved the Spirit of God, and dried up” their “spirit[s] as a chip.”20

Ministers lead using Spirit-empowered public prayers.

Finally, Puritans argued that ministers were empowered to lead God’s people in corporate worship by the Spirit, rather than by the written words of man. Owen argued that the use of written prayers actually “render[ed] useless” Christ’s true means for leading in public prayer — namely, his “sending the holy Spirit . . . to enable” the minister to lead the congregation in “Divine Worship.”21 In Owen’s mind, there were two kinds of ministers: those who rightly administered the “holy things in his assemblies” by aid of the Holy Spirit, and those who ministered “by the prescription of a form of words” of men.22 Similarly, Bunyan said that even if ministers “had a thousand Common-Prayer-Books” but lacked the “Spirit,” they would “know not what [they] should pray for as [they] ought,” but would be “like the Sons of Aaron, offering with strange fire” (Levitcus 10:1–2).23 Owen and Bunyan likewise argued that since the Spirit must equip ministers with the ability to pray extemporaneously in public prayer, by extension those who relied on the prayer-book liturgy for public prayer lacked the necessary spiritual gifting from God for ministry.24 Puritans sought to even provide less-competent ministers with tools — like Nathaniel Vincent’s “Directions how to attain unto the gift of prayer and readiness of expression in that duty” — to help them grow in extemporaneous prayer.25

For Written Prayers in Corporate Worship

However, while the above arguments were pervasive throughout the Puritan movement, there were other Puritans — most notably, Richard Baxter (1615–1691) — who were open to using written prayers in corporate worship. While Baxter extolled extemporaneous prayer, understood these arguments against written prayers, and had significant concerns about (and desired to reform) the Book of Common Prayer, he nevertheless believed there were some advantages to using written prayers and, like John Calvin, composed set prayers for use in public worship.26 He even went so far as to compose a Puritan alternative to the Book of Common Prayer, complete with liturgical forms and written prayers drawn principally from Scripture and especially the Lord’s Prayer and the Ten Commandments.27 He drafted it in only two weeks and claimed that he only used the Bible, his biblical concordance, and the Westminster “Assemblies Directory.”28 He hoped that his Reformed Liturgy (as it would be called) might be a substitite prayer book that his fellow moderate Presbyterians and Anglican opponents could both support.29 What follows are some of Baxter’s arguments in favor of the use of written prayers in corporate worship.

Written prayers can prevent disorder and unnecessary repetition.

First, Baxter argued that the use of written prayers in worship could prevent disorder and unnecessary repetition in public prayer. He argued that the public “prayers of many a weak Christian” were so plagued by “disorder and repetitions and unfit expressions” that he preferred that they use written prayers.30 He claimed that other Puritans held the same position, saying that the Westminster Assembly divine Simeon Ashe (1595–1662) “hath often told us, that this was the Mind of the old Nonconformists, and that he hath often heard some weak Ministers so disorderly in Prayer, especially in Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, that he could have wish’d that they would rather use the Common-Prayer.”31

Written prayers can be a subordinate help to the Holy Spirit’s leading.

Second, Baxter argued that the use of written prayers could function as a “help” that was “subordinate to the Spirit’s help.”32 He said that written prayers could help Christians to pray in the same way as “spectacles” help others to see or even “sermon notes” help “weak memories” — even sharing candidly that set “forms are oft a help to me.”33 While he agreed with those who contended that true prayer is from the heart, he argued against those who opposed written prayers on this ground, saying that “it is a great error to think, that the gifts and graces of the holy spirit may not be exercised, if we use the same words, or if they be prescribed.”34

The Lord’s Prayer is a written prayer.

Third, the Puritans were perhaps most open to the use of the Lord’s Prayer in public worship since it was prescribed by Jesus himself as a pattern for how to pray. The Westminster Assembly differed over the issue of whether to include the Lord’s Prayer in the Directory of Public Worship. Some divines were happy to include it, while others were reticent to compel churches to use the Lord’s Prayer in worship. While the former divines believed it would serve as a model to train congregants how to pray, the later group believed, as Bunyan and Owen had argued, that not even the mere words of the Lord’s Prayer could incite true prayer from the heart, as this is the Spirit’s work.35 In the end, the Directory of Public Worship did not require ministers to use the Lord’s Prayer in worship, but rather “recommend[ed]” it, as the Westminster divine William Gouge stated, as “a pattern of prayer” and “a most comprehensive prayer . . . to be used in the prayers of the Church.’”36

Written prayers have historical precedent.

Finally, Puritans, particularly Richard Baxter and John Preston (1587–1628), argued that there was sufficient historical precedent throughout the history of the church of trusted Reformed divines using written prayers in corporate worship. For example, John Preston wrote, “There is no doubt that a set form [of prayer] may be used” in public worship, as Luther, Calvin, the early church, and “the Church at all times” had done.37 The diversity of views throughout the history of the church led Baxter to the conclusion that a minister’s conviction concerning written prayer was a secondary matter upon which he should be given liberty of conscience “at his discretion,” since written prayers are “neither in their nature, or by vertue of any promise of God” pertaining “to mens salvation.”38 Understanding this is key to understanding Baxter’s position. For although Baxter himself was affected by the Act of Uniformity, and he defended ministers ejected in 1662, before and after the great ejection he labored to cultivate unity through negotiating a mediating position that might be agreeable to Puritans and Anglicans alike.

Puritan Divines Closer Than Assumed

These disagreements between Puritans over the use of written prayers in public worship were often hidden from public view. One notable exception was a clash between Owen and Baxter that was a result of Baxter receiving a copy of Owen’s Twelve Arguments against any Conformity to Worship not of Divine Institution and Baxter’s responding with his own work.39

Geoffrey Nuttall has persuasively argued that, despite their expressed differences, “Baxter and Owen in fact were . . . close spiritually” on the issue.40 For example, despite all of his opposition to the use of written prayers in corporate worship, at one point Owen appears to soften, expressing that while he does not desire to express “any dissent about” or “to judge or condemn” either the practice of or those who used written prayers, he does argue that it is not necessary to use them.41 This led Nuttall to conclude that perhaps part of the reason Owen and Baxter differed over written prayer was because Owen never got over the fact that it was the Anglicans’ zeal for set prayers that lead to their “silencing, destroying, [and] banishing” his fellow Puritan brothers.42

Using Private Prayer Books

While Puritans were divided about the use of written prayers in public worship, they were, on the whole, quite sympathetic to using private prayer books in personal and family worship. Their reason was singular and simple: they believed these prayer books could be especially helpful in aiding individuals and families in learning how to pray according to Scripture. They said that just as inflatable floaties (what they called “bladders”) could be helpful in aiding a new swimmer to swim, so these private prayer books could aid Christians in learning how to pray in both private and family prayers.43 While dozens of Puritans published these prayer books, many of the most well-known ones — such as Henry Scudder’s The Christian’s Daily Walk, John Preston’s The Saint’s Daily Exercise, Nathaniel Vincent’s The Spirit of Prayer, and Lewis Bayly’s The Practice of Piety — were reprinted continually throughout the seventeenth century in England.

“Puritans were, on the whole, quite sympathetic to using private prayer books in personal and family worship.”

Probably the most well-known of these private prayer devotionals was A Method for Prayer (1710) by the Presbyterian minister Matthew Henry (1662–1714). One gets a sense of the importance Henry placed on prayer by the fact that he actually paused finishing his now-famous commentary on the entire Bible to write it. Henry intentionally composed his work using only scriptural language to demonstrate “the sufficiency of the Scripture to furnish us for us for every good work” and to teach Christians how to plead the promises of God. Nevertheless, he conceded that it was “often necessary to use other expressions in prayer besides those that are purely Scriptural.”44

Henry’s book is organized according to a rather familiar pattern — adoration, confession, petitions and supplications for ourselves, thanksgiving, intercession for others, and a conclusion — that followed the basic outline of the “public prayer before the sermon” in the Westminster Directory for Public Worship.45 His prayer book also contains written prayers for numerous occasions, including daily morning and evening prayers, prayers of parents for their children, shortened prayers children could use to learn to pray, a paraphrase of the Lord’s Prayer for children and youth, and specific prayers for special blessings and challenges.46 There were also prayers one could pray privately (or presumably publicly) in a corporate worship service before the Lord’s Supper and during marriage or funeral services.

Learning from the Puritans

We can learn at least four lessons from studying the Puritans’ perspectives on written prayers. First, the Puritans possessed a vital zeal to worship God according to the prescriptions of Scripture rather than one’s own preferences. In a day in which many churches worship God according to the latest worldly or churchly trends in order to boost church attendance, appeal to unbelievers, or be relevant to the culture, the Puritans understood that God is honored by and will bless only scriptural worship.

“The chief instrument that must be engaged throughout the whole of corporate worship is the heart.”

Second, the Puritans urge us to pursue God with all our heart in corporate worship. Having worshiped in a variety of Reformed church settings over the years, I have noticed that sometimes those most zealous to preserve the regulative principle of worship appear most lacking in the Puritans’ central conviction — namely, that the chief instrument that must be engaged throughout the whole of corporate worship (praying, singing, hearing the sermon) is the heart. They understood that those who simply go through the motions of worship are no different from the Pharisees, of whom Jesus said, “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me” (Matthew 15:8).

Third, this study of the Puritans teaches us that it is possible for faithful Reformed people to differ over secondary matters — and that sometimes those variances are the result of either ignorance of the existence of similar practices within their own Reformed tradition or differing personal experiences. For example, in addition to Nuttall’s insight above about Owen’s and Baxter’s differing personal experiences of persecution, it is possible that some Puritans were not aware that influential Reformed divines like John Calvin composed written prayers for corporate worship.

Finally, the Puritans encourage us to use Scripture to shape our prayers and engage our hearts in prayer. Whether this insight is familiar or new to you, I would encourage you to use either the Psalms, Matthew Henry’s Method of Prayer, or the Valley of Vision collection of Puritan prayers as means to cultivate praying the Scriptures in your daily devotional times with God.47 One section of Matthew Henry’s Method for Prayer that I find particularly insightful is his exhortation to begin one’s Scripture reading and prayer time by meditation on Scripture so as to engage one’s affections toward vital communion with God.48 This practice encourages the believer to fix his “attention” wholly upon “the Lord” and to “set [himself] in his special presence.” Therein, the believer can “attend upon the Lord without Distraction” and without his heart being “far from him when” he draws dear God in prayer.49 Ultimately, the chief lesson the Puritans teach us is to seek the Lord in prayer with the full assurance that as we draw near to him, he will draw near to us (James 4:8).

Christian obedience is a special kind of obedience. It involves more than mere external behavior, more even than proper motivation. Christian obedience involves the miraculous and mysterious union of divine action and human action. The apostle Paul lays out this mystery in Philippians 2:

My beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. (Philippians 2:12–13)

As we consider this mystery, it’s crucial that we get our prepositions right. Christians don’t work for their salvation. Salvation is by grace through faith. It’s not of our own doing; “it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9). Elsewhere in Philippians, Paul says that he’s seeking to gain Christ, to be found in him, not having a righteousness of his own that comes from the law, but the righteousness from God that depends on faith (Philippians 3:8–9). So Christians don’t work for our own salvation. We receive salvation as a gift.

But we do work out our own salvation, and we do so because God is at work within us to will and to work for his good pleasure. We are working out what God is working in. And he is working at the level of our will — our desires, our affections, our choices. Fundamental to salvation is heart change, the transformation of our wills by God so that we will and work for his good pleasure.

Working from Within

The same mystery and miracle of Christian obedience is described at the end of the book of Hebrews:

Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Hebrews 13:20–21)

“We don’t work for salvation. We work out salvation because God works in us to will and work for his good pleasure.”

How does the God of peace equip us to do his will? By working in us what is pleasing in his sight. The same elements are present here and in Philippians: God’s work in us, leading to our working out (that is, doing his will), for his good pleasure and glory. Just like in Philippians, he works in us so that we do his will in a way that pleases him.

Therefore, Christian obedience is special because it knows that prepositions matter. We don’t work for salvation. We work out salvation because God works in us to will and work for his good pleasure.

Christian Double Vision

Christian obedience is also special in another way. God’s work in us produces a special kind of mindset. Think of this in terms of double vision. Consider Philippians 2:1–5, noting the use of the word mind:

If there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus.

Paul’s joy will be complete if the Philippians have the same mindset, the same love, the same soul, the same single-mindedness. And in particular, he highlights what they’re keeping an eye on. They look not to their own interests, but to the interests of others. They don’t act from selfish ambition or pride or vainglory, but they count other people more significant than themselves. They place their happiness in the good of other people. That’s the first part of the double vision: looking to the interests of others.

The second part appears in Philippians 2:12: we look for the approval of God. Paul says, “As you have always obeyed . . . not only as in my presence but much more in my absence . . .” The Philippians were not obeying in order to impress Paul; they were obeying in order to please God.

Whose Approval?

In drawing attention to their constant obedience, Paul is actually highlighting a perennial temptation for obedient people. Whose approval do you have your eye on? If it’s fundamentally a human being, then you will obey only as long as they have their eyes on you. You will obey in their presence, but not in their absence. And obedience that appears only in the presence of certain people is not truly Christian obedience. See how Paul echoes this theme elsewhere:

Bondservants, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord. Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ. (Colossians 3:22–24; see also Ephesians 6:5–8)

Of course, it’s not wrong to desire to please the right people with our obedience. We should want to please our boss by doing our job well. Kids should want to please their parents with their obedience. The issue comes when that’s the only reason we obey. If we obey only when our parents are around, or when the pastor is around, or when our spouse is around, or when the boss is around, or when our Christian friends are around, then our obedience is mere people-pleasing eye-service. It does not please God because it’s not done for his sake.

Obedience from the Inside Out

The prepositions and the double vision are connected. Christian obedience is an obedience from the inside out, not from the outside in. It begins with God’s work in the heart and then is worked out in terms of the double vision — looking to the interests of others while looking for the approval of God. I regularly tell my sons that what I want and expect from them is an obedience from the inside out. I don’t want to follow them around to make sure that they follow through. That’s obedience from the outside in. The external pressure of parental eyes drives the obedience (often to the exasperation of both parent and child).

“Christian obedience is an obedience from the inside out, not from the outside in.”

What parents want is obedience from the heart, from the inside out. We want to be able to say, like Paul, “You always obey, not only in my presence but much more in my absence.” We don’t just want our children to meet the standard with their actions; we want them to love the standard from the heart. We want God to work in our kids to will and to work for his good pleasure. That’s an obedience that shines like the stars, that makes parents proud and God happy.

And of course, this special kind of Christian obedience isn’t just for kids, but for all Christians. Christian obedience has a double vision — we look to the interests of others, and we look for the approval of God. We don’t put ourselves first. We don’t turn our desires into demands. We seek the good of other people. We aim to bless them and to bring them joy. And we do so because we’re always in God’s presence, animated by his Spirit, and we want to please him by working out what he is working in.

I want to begin by giving you a peek at where we’re headed this morning. At the end, I hope to talk practically and concretely about what kind of habits we might cultivate in our lives to know and enjoy God, and feed our souls on his word. I have in mind a matrix of four categories: direct and indirect, and alone and together, as you’ll see.

I often summarize God’s appointed means of grace for our Christian lives as (1) hear his voice (in his word), (2) have his hear (in prayer), and (3) belong to his body (in the covenant fellowship of the local church). Our focus in this message is the first — hearing God’s voice in his word, which is God’s primary, or first and foremost, means of grace (his “chief” means, as Jonathan Edwards called it, or the “soul” of the means).

Both prayer and fellowship (which we’ll focus on in later sessions) are secondary, in a sense, to God’s word. First comes his word. First he speaks. Then our prayers come in response to his word. And his word creates the body of fellow believers called the church. The church does not create itself, and the church does not create Scripture, but the church is a “creature of the word.”

To focus in this message on God’s word as his chief means of grace, we turn to the book of Hebrews, where I’d like to linger over two central truths about God’s word, and then finish with some ideas on the kinds of habits we might cultivate in our lives to position ourselves to go on receiving, and enjoying, God’s word, and through his word to know and enjoy Jesus. So then, let’s turn to the first truth about God’s word from the book of Hebrews, from its first two verses.

1. God has spoken.

Do you realize how massive, how significant, this seemingly simple, basic truth is for the very nature of reality and our world and our lives? God did not have to speak to humanity. He could have just created the world — embedded his truth and justice, as it were, in the world through the principles and laws of nature. He might have chosen to reveal himself only through creation, rather than human words.

But wonder upon wonder, God has spoken. Our Father, in all his majesty, has stooped to speak to us in human words. The God who made everything, including you, has spoken — and that changes everything.

Look at the first four verses of Hebrews, and we’ll focus for now on just the first two:

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

So, in the past, God spoke (verse 1). And in these last days, God has spoken (verse 2). This is the kind of God he is. He is a speaking God, a communicative God. We might say God is talkative. In verses 1–2, God’s speaking is cast into two eras: “long ago” and “in these last days” — a past era, an old era, and then a later era, a new era.

Related to these two eras, then, two sets of recipients are mentioned. In the past there were “our fathers” — for Jews, their biological ancestors, and for Christians, our spiritual ancestors. Then, in the new era, there’s “us.” That’s an amazing phrase in verse 2: “to us.” Hebrews doesn’t say God spoke “to them,” meaning the apostles, or the first generation of Christians, but he says “to us,” to his readers in the first century, which includes us in this same church age, in these same last days, some twenty centuries later.

Hebrews also mentions two agents of God’s speaking: In the past they had the prophets. In these last days we have his Son. (And with the mention of the Son, then follows a cascade of sevenfold glory, which we’ll come back to.)

In Many Ways

Focus with me on the past era, when God spoke “at many times and in many ways” (literally, “in many parts and many manners”). The speaking God not only spoke once, or a few times, but many times, in many parts, in many ways, and through multiple (plural) prophets. The God who is is a talker.

First, he spoke to create the world. Again and again in Genesis 1, some twelve times, we hear, “And God said . . . and God called” (verses 3, 5–6, 8–11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28; interestingly, God speaks to create on all six days, but he calls or names only on days 1–3 and leaves the naming of the plants, stars, and animals to man).

And our speaking God not only spoke to create, but he continues to speak in creation. Psalm 19:1–4 tells us,

The heavens declare the glory of God,     and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.Day to day pours out speech,     and night to night reveals knowledge.There is no speech, nor are there words,     whose voice is not heard.Their voice goes out through all the earth,     and their words to the end of the world.

So, God spoke to create, and he keeps speaking through creation. Then, as we’ve seen, God spoke in human words through his prophets. Psalm 19:7–8 (and all of Psalm 119!) says,

The law of the Lord is perfect,     reviving the soul;the testimony of the Lord is sure,     making wise the simple;the precepts of the Lord are right,     rejoicing the heart;the commandment of the Lord is pure,     enlightening the eyes.

So, not only has he spoken, say, on an occasion or two, but he is a speaking God; he’s prone to speak; he likes to speak. He’s a talker, in the highest and most holy of senses, as he speaks many times, in many parts and manners, through many prophets.

In the Word

Coming back to Hebrews 1, what’s the implied pairing with “many” for the new era? In the old era, to the fathers, through the prophets, he spoke in many parts and ways. Now, in the new era, to us, in his Son — how does he speak? One part, one way, one manner. God has spoken so fully and so richly and so decisively in one particular person — not just through him but in him — that we call him “the Word,” with a capital W.

And so, the Gospel of John begins,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. (John 1:1–3)

And then John 1:14–18 says,

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. . . . For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

God has most fully made himself known in his Word.

Manifold Speech

Consider then the nature of God’s word, from the idea of God speaking to its various expressions:

First is God’s word as concept. God speaks. He reveals himself. He’s communicative and talkative, speaking to create, through creation, and particularly through his prophets.
Second, then, his word, spoken through prophets, is written down to preserve it, called Scripture.
Third is his Word incarnate, his Word personal, in the person of his Son. Jesus is the Word of God. If God had one word, one message, so to speak, to reveal, to say to us, it’s Jesus. It’s “my Son” — hear him, see him, consider him, and believe in him.
Finally, we might also talk about the word preached, or spoken — the gospel word about Jesus. This is the most common referent of the word word in the New Testament — the message about Jesus through which Jesus himself comes to us, through faith and by his Spirit.

So, God has spoken. He’s spoken through his prophets. He’s spoken climactically in his Son, the Word. He’s spoken through the gospel, the word about his Son. And God has seen to it that his words have been written down — that is, Scripture.

God Gave Us a Book

How often do you pause to ponder how stunning it is that we have this Book? A record of God’s words through the prophets before the coming of his Son. And the inspired record of the life and sacrifice and triumph of his Son in the four Gospels. And the inspired story of the early church and God-breathed letters from his apostles to the church.

Brothers and sisters, we actually have the words of God. This is almost too good to be true. And yet how often are we so accustomed to this reality — one of the greatest wonders in all the universe — that it barely moves us to handle the Bible with care (and awe), or at least to access his words with the frequency and wonder they deserve?

One of the greatest facts in all of history is that God gave us a Book. He gave us his words! He has spoken. Think of the lengths God went to, and with what patience, to make himself known to us here in the twenty-first century.

For centuries, God’s word was copied by hand and preserved with the utmost diligence and care. Then, for the last five hundred years of the printing press, God’s word has gone far and wide like never before. Some men gave their lives, upsetting the apple carts of man-made religion, to translate the words of God into the heart-language of their people. And now, in the digital age, access to God’s own words has exploded exponentially again, and yet — and yet — in such abundance, do we marvel at what we have? And do we, as individuals and as churches, make the most of what infinite riches we have in such access to the Scriptures?

It’s wonder enough that God has spoken. But as we continue reading Hebrews, it gets even better. Not only did our speaking God speak in the past through the prophets, and not only did he speak to us in the Son, but he continues to speak.

2. God is speaking.

God’s speech is a central emphasis in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews, God speaks, says, testifies, proclaims, calls, promises, vows, warns, reproves, and declares. Again and again, Hebrews refers to God’s word, his promise, his oath, his spoken word, and his voice.

Something that’s amazing to track in Hebrews is who speaks to whom. First, Father speaks to Son in chapter 1, and Son speaks to Father in chapter 2 (and 10). But then, the Son also speaks to us. And the Spirit speaks to us. And the Father speaks to us.

The Spirit speaks to us through Psalm 95 in chapters 3–4.
God speaks Proverbs 3:11–12 to us, as his children, in chapter 12.
God speaks to us, corporately and individually, in the words of Joshua 1:5 in chapter 13.

Hebrews’s burden is to show that Scripture is not just a collection of ancient texts from the past, but Scripture is the voice of the living God, speaking right now. It’s implicit throughout, but Hebrews makes it explicit, as we’ve seen already in chapter 1, and now will see elsewhere, across its chapters.

Living Words

First, consider Hebrews 3:7–8:

As the Holy Spirit says [quoting Psalm 95], “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.”

Psalm 95 is not only what the Spirit said in the past, but what the Spirit continues to speak when we read or hear the words of Psalm 95. Then added to this is the emphasis on “today” in the quote from Psalm 95. That “today” was first for hearers in David’s day. Now, that “today” is for hearers in Hebrews’s day, because the Spirit not only said Scripture, but says Scripture. This is what it means for Scripture to be “living and active.” That’s the famous passage in Hebrews 4:12–13:

The word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

Psalm 95, as the Spirit’s ongoing speech to believers, in the past as well as the present, is the immediate referent of Hebrews 4:12. When Hebrews says “the word of God is living and active,” he’s talking first about Psalm 95, but it’s not as though Psalm 95 is unique in this respect. This is applicable to all of Scripture as God’s speaking. When God speaks in Scripture, he does not speak only in the moment and move on, but he continues to speak to his people through his word by his Spirit.

Which might then lead us to reflect on the closeness of God and his word. Think about this with me: there is no separation between God himself and the word he breathes out. Humans may err in their speech; they may misspeak and later try to “distance themselves” from what they said. God never misspeaks, and he never miscalculates the reception of his words. And God never changes. He never says, “Well, I said that a long time ago, but I don’t say it anymore.” There is no disconnect between God and his words. To encounter the words of the living God is to encounter God himself — his sight and his eyes, as Hebrews 4:13 says.

Active Warnings

Let’s go to Hebrews 12:25, the final warning of Hebrews:

See that you do not refuse him who is speaking. For if they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape if we reject him who warns from heaven.

So, through his letter, Hebrews has spoken the written words of Scripture to the church as living words from God by the Spirit. And now, in this final warning, he speaks of God as “him who warns from heaven” and as “him who is speaking.” Our God not only has warned, but he warns. He not only has spoken, but he is speaking. And how does he do that? By the Spirit and the word. Word and Spirit. The Holy Spirit works by and with the word to speak in the present to the people of God.

And lest we think this is unique to Hebrews — that all of Scripture should be applied to, spoken to, new-covenant Christians as the very present-moment speaking of God — the apostle Paul speaks similarly at least three times:

“Whatever was written in former days [in the past, to the fathers] was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope” (Romans 15:4).
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). Not “was breathed out,” but “is.” Not “was . . . profitable,” but “is.” Is, not was.
“Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. . . . Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Corinthians 10:6, 11).

Not only has God spoken in this Book we call “the Bible,” but he is speaking.

And so, to conclude, we ask one question.

3. Will you listen — and how?

Unavoidably, a very personal and practical question confronts us in this moment, having rehearsed how much God has spoken, and that he still speaks, and that we have no excuse not to hear him. Do you listen to him? How? In what ways? And how often?

Let me end with some encouragements about “habits of grace” as they relate to saturating our lives in the word of God.

First, note I say habits plural, not habit. We need multiple habits in our lives for accessing God’s ongoing speaking in the Bible. Think of this like an hourglass, going back to Hebrews 1 and then forward into our habits of life: in Jesus, the many (prophets) become one (Son); in our lives, the one (Son) becomes many (habits).

Then, in thinking of habits plural, we might think in the matrix of four categories I mentioned at the beginning: direct and indirect, and alone and together. Direct engagement alone would be our own reading, listening, studying, and meditating on Scripture. God’s word, as the chief and soul of the means of grace, is worth your direct engagement. Here are some recommendations for your consideration.

For direct engagement, alone:

Read daily, in some form or manner.
Read first thing in the morning if possible.
Slow down; perhaps even read a paper Bible.
Don’t try to do too much, but instead “gather a day’s portion.”
Consider various gears or modes: read, study, and meditate.
“Begin with Bible, move to meditation, and polish with prayer,” as I like to say.

One way we might sum it up would be this: Treat God’s word differently from all others — when you access it, the priority you give it, the way you hear it. Make his word the standard by which you judge all other words. And don’t only read; consider hearing his word. Use a smartphone app to sit attentively under the reading of the Bible.

For indirect engagement, alone:

Read Christian books, devotionals, and substantive articles.
Listen to audiobooks, sermons and other monologues, and faithful podcasts.

For direct engagement, together:

Gather under preaching in corporate worship, which is the re-revealing of God’s word in the gathering of God’s people.
Engage in family devotions.
Participate in Bible studies.

For indirect engagement, together:

Seek Christian conversation and interaction; heed Christian counsel.
Speak truth into each other’s lives.

Consider Christ

Finally, contemplate and enjoy the person of Jesus through Scripture. He is God’s Word embodied, the Word personalized, the Word made flesh — and divine words lead to an encounter with God himself in Christ.

So, let’s close with Christ’s sevenfold greatness in Hebrews 1:1–4. Jesus is the end of the means — of prayer, of fellowship, of Scripture. He is Grace incarnate (Titus 2:11), his person, his work, his exaltation:

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

The God of all grace has spoken, and he is speaking. And what one word, if it were only one word, is he saying? Jesus.

Oh, find your many times, your life-giving habits, for knowing and enjoying and getting this one Word into your soul.