Extracts: This letter is a request from the Council of the Protestant Truth Society to end the lockdown on Christian churches…Britain is, constitutionally and historically, a Christian country. Our churches have played a vital part in our national story…Our country has a long and vital tradition of civil and religious liberty. Those liberties are precious. They should not be curtailed unnecessarily…This nation’s welfare ultimately depends on God. Our country desperately needs the public prayers of believing Christians. We would therefore urge you to permit the reopening of our churches.
We are delighted that you have recovered from your Covid-19 infection. Clearly many prayers for you have been answered. Our lives are in God’s hands and you have been given a new lease of life. We are also glad to hear of the safe birth of your son.
This letter is a request from the Council of the Protestant Truth Society to end the lockdown on Christian churches.
We know that this new virus has been a major challenge for your government. Many, particularly among the elderly and vulnerable, have died. There is strong evidence that the virus is now past its peak. Many businesses, deemed essential, are continuing to function. Many more businesses will reopen this month.
Britain is, constitutionally and historically, a Christian country. Our churches have played a vital part in our national story. They were not closed for the vastly more lethal Spanish Flu. They were not shut for the Blitz. In May 1940 George VI ordered a national day of prayer. God heard the nation’s prayers. Churchill’s political position was secured. The British Army, through a miraculous combination of circumstances, was almost entirely delivered at Dunkirk.
Christians are law-abiding people. We fully understand the need for hand washing and social distancing. There is no reason why churches cannot be permitted to meet, observing sensible precautions. Our country has a long and vital tradition of civil and religious liberty. Those liberties are precious. They should not be curtailed unnecessarily. If B & Q can open then so should the church.
You have said that you will be guided by Cicero’s dictum Salus populi suprema lex esto. There is wisdom in this if the word salus is rightly understood. The motto of Oxford University is Dominus illuminatio mea, the opening words of the Latin translation of Psalm 27. The verse continues et salus mea. ‘The Lord is my light and my salvation.’ This nation’s welfare ultimately depends on God. Our country desperately needs the public prayers of believing Christians. We would therefore urge you to permit the reopening of our churches.
The Rt Rev. Dominic Stockford – on behalf of the PTS Council
A message from the Chairman of PTS Council, Dominic Stockford:
In one of his many examples, in which Jesus primarily explains how we should approach the cost of following Christ, Jesus also gives us a salutary tale as to how we should approach many other challenging situations: “
What king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.
(Luke 14:31-2) ”
In the words above we are asked to consider that a king going out against a foe would first make the sensible step of counting the cost of what he is about to do, before he engages in any fight. And, it is clear, he would do this because of the chances of such a battle being far more costly in lives than any peace that he might successfully sue for. The cost of engaging in a fight, we are shown, will frequently outweigh the rather more prosaic ‘doing nothing’.
It is this simple teaching which seems to many of us not to have been absorbed by those who have gone about issuing instructions to lock down anything that moves – and specifically, from the Christian perspective, to close down Christian churches. There are many harms being done to this country, and therefore to the people within it, by the actions that have been taken. People have lost jobs – which they are unlikely to get back again, because many of the firms they work for are unlikely to survive. People will lose income, and in the long term will therefore lose their homes. People will and are losing their businesses, and therefore losing their ability to employ people in the future. And not only are they losing the ability to provide for themselves and their families, many will lose the will to do so again in the future. I read today of the fact that the car finance crisis is going to fuelled even further by this lock down – yet another cause of even more trouble and distress.
There are, of course, many more harmful matters which are now occurring, and many more which will occur in the future. The GDP of the UK will drop significantly, which will affect society’s ability to care for the ill, the underprivileged, and the vulnerable in the future. The NHS might be doing well at the moment (or rather, the front-line staff are doing well), but it will be significantly damaged by what is happening to our economy each and every day of the continued lockdown. And so on. Such real harms, occurring now and in the future, should be properly balanced against the apparent harm which this virus may do. And it does not appear that this is so. One number alone (I do not propose to delve further into statistics) should highlight what seems to be a gross over-reaction. Today’s cumulative total of all who have tested positive for coronavirus in Richmond upon Thames is 235. The population of Richmond upon Thames is, according to current figures, 196,904. This gives us, as a percentage of the population who have had this virus badly enough to come to the authorities’ attention, 0.12% of all those living in this area in London. A city which has, we are told, been extremely badly affected by it. And for that we have basically closed down the borough. Entirely.
Amidst all this harm being done, practically and socially, another great harm is being done. Spiritual harm. The NHS has long employed chaplains in its hospitals because it knows well the healing and helping power of prayer, and of faith in Christ Jesus. This is why every time someone such as the National Secular Society suggests getting rid of them they are simply ignored. Spiritual comfort, prayer, and the coming into the presence of God, which can only be done ‘where two or three are gathered together in My name’,are vital components in health, healing, and wholeness. I know this for a fact – in the past I was a hospital chaplain in a major hospital for three years.
Which brings us on to another great harm that is therefore being done in our society at this time. Our churches have been closed, by law. And it is worth noting here and now, that the President of Brazil has specifically not gone this way, standing out from the crowd by insisting that they remain open and accessible, and that people must be allowed to gather there ‘to render thanks for the great benefits that we have received at [God’s] hands, to set forth his most worthy praise, to hear his most holy Word, and to ask those things that are requisite and necessary, as well for the body as the soul.’
The harm being done by the closure of places where people can place their trust in the Lord God, their Almighty Creator, provider, and sustainer, is not to be underestimated. And yet it is one further damage being done to our nation.
No one is suggesting that we encourage great heaving masses of humanity to gather together, packed and crowded into our churches – most free churches don’t have that problem anyway. I know that my congregation, and many, many others could meet quite successfully, quite safely, taking all reasonable precautions necessary, and worship together each and every Sunday. We could also hold our churches open during the week, with similar precautions, so that people could come into them and join together in turning to God for prayer. But this government seems to have no time for God, no concept of what it should mean in practice to be a Christian country, and no time for any other way through what they tell us we are facing except ‘their way’.
The Bible has clear words for these people, and for all who have lobbied to ensure that churches must remain closed for the duration, during the very time people should need them even more:
Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.
And their faces and their minds are clearly completely and resolutely set against the encouraging injunction from God to His people found in the book of Deuteronomy:
When you go out to battle against your enemies, and see horses and chariots and people more numerous than you, do not be afraid of them; for the LORD your God is with you.
They have chosen their way, and I say here and now, clearly, it is the wrong way. It is wrong because it demonstrates no fear of God – Peter tells us in his second letter to honour the Emperor, but to fear God. These men and women have taken us down a path where not only is there no fear of God (that being replaced by fear of a virus), but there is not even any respect for God; nor respect for the desire of many to turn to God, and to join together as we are mandated to do by God’s Word, and place this current situation into his hands through our sole mediator with God, the Lord Jesus Christ.
I call on them to think again.
 I accept that some people may have had the virus at home, and various other caveats – but untested as they are (and the tests themselves are not reliable) we cannot possibly know this to be a fact.
A message from the Chairman of PTS Council, Dominic Stockford :
We are threatened, it seems, with a global pandemic of a nasty virus which is easily caught, and which has an unusually high fatality rate. The UK is already struggling with this, and as I write I have just learnt that when my wife sang in a concert on Saturday she sat next to someone for three hours who has now tested positive for Covid19. It is real, it is nearby, it is personal. However, we must be careful not to lose the balance we should have. We should not over-spiritualize our response and thus ignore the practical ramifications of our actions, nor should we “over-practicalize” our response and ignore the reality of our all-powerful Sovereign God and His place in the events of our lives.
Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you. (1 Peter 5:6-7)
It would be easy to read this verse and think that our physical needs, which appear to be under so great a threat in the current circumstances, will be filled by God. We should not forget that of course He cares, for God personally knows and understands, through the sufferings of Jesus Christ, how terrible human suffering is. It is worth, however, stopping for a moment and considering the context in which Peter wrote these words – a warning about the assaults of the devil upon our spiritual equilibrium. At this time it would be all too easy for us to become petulant with those around us. It would not be difficult to be cross with those who are stripping the shelves of food and other commodities in London and elsewhere. It might also be easy to get angry with our pastor and elders for either closing the church on Sundays, or strongly discouraging over 70s from attendance. However, we have to remember that temptations in such directions would indeed be the work of the devil.
As Christians we need to give a faithful and consistent witness to the work of Christ in our lives, and we need to do this now, almost more than ever. So many around us are panicking, are indulging in criticism of the behaviour of others, and are doing everything but the one thing that really would help – which is to hold trust in God and in His Sovereign work and will. We need to demonstrate that trust by our calm and thoughtful actions. We should seek to show that we respect our government (Romans 13:1), and seek to follow their advice (they have the medical experts, we do not), and yet still seek to reach out with care and compassion to those around us.
It is more than disappointing that we do not expect anyone in Government to call for a Day of Prayer – even though it would have to be held in our homes. However, our response should firstly be in prayer – turning to our Father and placing the situation before Him. We should seek to know how it is we can best serve Him in whatever situation we find ourselves. And while we should not fail to take sensible precautions against catching or transmitting the virus, we should not forget that man’s days are numbered by the Lord, and whenever He is to call us to Himself, then so be it.
Our secondary response must be to consider how best we can seek to share the peace that we have through our faith in Christ:
Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. (John 14:27)
Because we know that in Christ there is a sure and certain hope of the resurrection to eternal life, we have a peace that we can at the moment see is so visibly lacking in the lives of most of those around us. We know that in the end this world is not the be-all and the end-all, but that there is an eternity in God’s presence lying ahead of us. Whilst we should not deliberately seek to put ourselves at physical risk, the danger of death is not a matter about which we ought to be panicking. Instead, as Christians, we should hope to find a way in which we can share the eternal hope that we have in Christ with those who are panicking. And many are.
Ligonier Ministries put out a tweet today (March 17) saying that “The world is fearful and anxious, but it is fearful and anxious about the wrong things. The world is fearful about the economy, and the world is fearful of diseases like the coronavirus. The world, however, is not fearful of God.” There is our challenge, to help those around us to understand that those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ have nothing to fear from man, or from anything else for that matter. Thus, not only do we seek to act in accordance with our faith towards those around us, but we also pray for those around us, pray for those in authority, pray for the church, pray for repentance and a renewal of true faith within this nation, and do so remembering the one in whom we trust.
He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty. I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust. Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence. (Psalm 91:1-3)
Chairman of PTS Council, Dominic Stockford writes,
In the aftermath of a General Election there are a number of ways to view the results. We could look to our local result, and concentrate on that – in my case that picture is very sad. We now have a local MP who claims to be Christian, and yet supports both abortion and the variety of so-called ‘re-assigning of gender’, as well as same-sex ‘marriage’. This from a person who attends what claims to be an evangelical Anglican congregation. I have had contact with other clergy who had ‘near misses’ in their constituency, but avoided such a terrible message being presented about the true gospel, and God’s true picture for mankind and Creation.
We could also be saddened that some individual Christians were not returned to parliament – for instance, David Burrowes was standing once again, but was not elected in Enfield. Or we could give thanks to God that some Christian MPs were re-elected, Fiona Bruce, for instance.
We could, on the other hand, look at the overall picture, which is, let us be honest, if not perfect, a far better result for Christians than was possible. If the current opposition parties had held sway instead we would have had a Parliament that would have brought in the most liberal and ungodly laws on a whole variety of moral issues – abortion, euthanasia, ‘gender identification’, and so on. And although no one would claim that the winning party is either stuffed full of conscientious Christians, or that it is going to stand up for Christian principles, it does at least allow for conscience votes on such matters.
The LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD. (Job 1:21)
In the end, as Christians, we should finish our ruminations on election results not with celebrations, or with mourning, but with a remembrance that no matter what the result, God is Sovereign – and whatever we might face we should therefore seek God’s will in it.
Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture. (Psalm 100:3)
On October 17 the PTS Chairman, The Rt Rev. Dominic Stockford, wrote as shown below to the Bishop of Oxford, The Rt Rev. Dr Steven Croft, with concern over the invitation to a Muslim imam to preach at a service of Holy Eucharist.
Dear Bishop Croft,
I am sure that you are aware that Canon Law B18.2 states that “the sermon in Anglican worship shall be preached by a minister, deaconess, reader or lay worker duly authorized in accordance with Canon Law. At the invitation of the minister having the cure of souls another person may preach with the permission of the bishop of the diocese given either in relation to the particular occasion or in accordance with diocesan directions.”
It is reported that a Muslim imam has been invited to preach at the Service of Holy Eucharist at the University Church of St Mary, Oxford, this Sunday morning next, at 10.30 am. Can you please confirm that you have given a non-Christian religious teacher permission to preach at this act of Christian worship, in contravention of the Canon Law of the Church of England? If you have given no such permission, can you please enlighten us as to the steps you are taking to prevent this blasphemy?
Rt Rev Dominic F Stockford
Protestant Truth Society
This elicited the following Statement in response:
Statement from the Diocese of Oxford published 17 October 2018
Monawar Hussain MBE DL will deliver the University Sermon following the Eucharist at St Mary’s this Sunday. He is most welcome. Founder of the Oxford Foundation and the Muslim Tutor at Eton College, Monawar is well known to many in Oxford and he joins a long list of those invited to preach the University Sermon by the Vice Chancellor. Monawar is not the first person from another faith community to be invited to preach the University Sermon, his presence on Sunday reflects the strong commitment of the Church, University and other faith communities to interfaith engagement.
Earlier this year the UK Supreme Court heard the case of Ashers Baking Company, who were appealing against a ruling which stated that it broke the law by declining to fulfil an order to decorate a cake with a campaign slogan promoting ‘marriage’ between homosexuals, which was deeply offensive to the management who are sincere Christians. The ruling, handed down on 10 October 2018, saw the judges unanimously vindicate the bakery.
The Rt Rev. Dominic Stockford, Chairman of the PTS Council remarked:
It is a victory for freedom of expression. This means it is a victory for the freedom to express our faith, and to live by that faith – competing ideologies notwithstanding.
The factual background as expressed in the Judgment of the Supreme Court on October 10, 2018 in Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and others  UKSC 49 is as follows:
On 8 or 9 May 2014, Mr Lee went into the shop and placed an order for a cake to be iced with his design, a coloured picture of cartoon-like characters “Bert and Ernie”, the QueerSpace logo, and the headline “Support Gay Marriage”. Mrs McArthur took the order but raised no objection at the time because she wished to consider how to explain her objection and to spare Mr Lee any embarrassment. Mr Lee paid for the cake. Over the following weekend, the McArthurs decided that they could not in conscience produce a cake with that slogan and so should not fulfil the order. On Monday 12 May 2014, Mrs McArthur telephoned Mr Lee and explained that his order could not be fulfilled because they were a Christian business and could not print the slogan requested. She apologised to Mr Lee and he was later given a full refund and the image was returned to him.
In a statement outside the Supreme Court, Daniel McArthur, General Manager of Ashers Baking Company declared:
I want to start by thanking God. He has been with us during the challenges of the last four years. Through the Bible and the support of Christians, He has comforted us and sustained us. He is our rock and all His ways are just.
We’re delighted and relieved at today’s ruling. We always knew we hadn’t done anything wrong in turning down this order. After more than four years, the Supreme Court has now recognised that and we’re very grateful. Grateful to the judges and especially grateful to God.
We’re particularly pleased the Supreme Court emphatically accepted what we’ve said all along – we did not turn down this order because of the person who made it, but because of the message itself.
The judges have given a clear signal today. In fact it couldn’t be clearer. Family businesses like ours are free to focus on giving all their customers the best service they can – without being forced to promote other people’s campaigns.
The Council of the Protestant Truth Society register their deep disappointment and dismay at the appointment of the Most Rev Bishop Michael Curry, Primate of the Episcopal Church in the USA as preacher for the wedding of His Royal Highness Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on the 19th day of this month.
Whilst wishing Prince Harry and Meghan a long and happy marriage, imbued with the blessings of God, we cannot withhold the deep spiritual concern we have that it should begin at a service which will have a preacher who does not hold to the Biblical view of marriage so beautifully expressed in the Service of the Solemnization of Matrimony in the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England.
With great concern we note that despite being invited to preach at this high-profile wedding he does not believe in Biblical marriage (Genesis 2:24 “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh”). At this of all weddings, taking place in the United Kingdom, involving the 6th in line to the throne, whose monarch (the groom’s grandmother) promised at her coronation that she would: “…to the utmost of [my] power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel. [And] to the utmost of [my] power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law.”
The Episcopal Church, Bishop Curry’s denomination, has acted contrary to the Bible and to the “Protestant Reformed Religion” by accepting so called ‘same-sex-marriage’, for which it has been suspended from full participation in the Anglican Communion (the world-wide Church of England). The suspension is specifically because these views on, and actions over, marriage are “a fundamental departure from the faith”.
This abrogation of Biblical truth by the denomination that he oversees, and his personal views on the matter, make him utterly unsuitable as a preacher at this occasion. It is beyond credibility that the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York would not know of the liberal and unbiblical views he holds as it was they who were the prime movers in this suspension of the ECUSA from the Anglican Communion.
We therefore request that his invitation be withdrawn and that a suitable preacher who holds to the Gospel as it is written, and to the “faith once delivered unto the saints”, be appointed forthwith.
How important is the Protestant Reformation to you? Five hundred years have passed since Martin Luther published his 95 Theses. Our modern age considers events that old to be of no relevance; we have a very short-sighted view of both the past and the future. Students of history will know that what resulted from the Martin Luther’s challenge is of lasting importance.
In the first place, the Protestant Reformation was a revival of true religion. The way of salvation had been lost, and the worship of the triune God had been replaced with a ritual that had very little to do with biblical worship. Rather than teaching that sinners are justified by faith, as the Apostle Paul taught in, for instance, the Epistle to the Romans, the Church prior to the Reformation taught that salvation is to be had by doing what the Church teaches. In particular, submission to baptism, confession and penance, and attendance at the mass, conferred grace on the individual. Application could be made to the saints, and to the treasury of merit, to make up any shortfall in the amount of grace needed to counterbalance the sins a person had committed. Worship was therefore not a matter of giving praise to our Lord Jesus Christ for saving us from our sins, but of engaging in a ritual that had form but lacked content.
In the second place, the Protestant Reformation was a rediscovery of the true text of the Bible. Before the Reformation the Church believed that the Latin Bible was the pure and unadulterated Word of God. In 1581 Theodore Beza gave Cambridge University a manuscript of part of the New Testament. It is known as Codex Beza Cantabrigiensis, or Codex D. It consists of most of the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and 3 John. Even these parts are not complete, due to the ravages of age. Beza gave the manuscript because religious wars in Europe posed a real danger to the survival of much of the source material for the Reformation. Codex D is not a particularly valuable manuscript, in that it differs from the standard text in too many places. Its real interest lies in the fact that it is a diglot, consisting of pages of Greek beside pages of Latin. Neither is a translation of the other, but both are independent. In other words, two different Bibles were in existence from an early time: scholars date the beginning of the manuscript to around ad 250. (It has had a somewhat chequered history, with indications of around a dozen different hands making corrections to if over a long period.) The Latin is a form of the Old Latin which preceded Jerome’s translation, known as the Vulgate. That was the version used in the Western Church, with all its errors. When Greek-speaking scholars began to migrate to the West, following the sack of Constantinople in 1203, they brought their manuscripts with them. Among them were copies of the New Testament in Greek. When Erasmus began to study them he was moved to produce an edition of the Greek text, which he published alongside his new Latin translation in 1516. Over the next two decades he revised the Greek, and others continued the work into the seventeenth century, culminating in the Received Text of 1633. All the Reformation Bibles, in English, German, Dutch, Italian, French and other languages, came about because a reliable text was available, and because scholars had the skills to translate from Greek and Hebrew accurately.
In the third place, the Protestant Reformation was a restoration of biblical practices. We find within the pages of the New Testament certain warnings concerning the troubles that would arise in the Church. See, for instance, Acts 20:28–31, where Paul warned the Ephesian elders of ‘grievous wolves’ who would enter in from outside, and that ‘of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things’. The subsequent history of the Church shows that warning to have been entirely accurate. Heresy broke out in place after place, and time after time. The legacy of the early ecumenical councils, and of the creeds they formulated, stands as a testimony to the hard-fought and hard-won battle for orthodoxy. Orthodoxy began to lose ground to practices that arose during the early centuries, which, in time, became the new orthodoxy. Any who challenged transubstantiation, purgatory, the invocation of saints, and the adoration of relics was liable to severe punishment, including death. But when the Protestant Reformation arrived, people began to see that the Bible did not support these beliefs. In fact, the Bible contradicted and condemned them.
In the fourth place, the Protestant Reformation was a revival of expository preaching. The Church had never ceased to preach, though what passed for preaching during the late mediaeval period was nothing like the preaching that would become standard. Then, preaching consisted of stories with morals, aimed at either frightening people away from sinful behaviour, or encouraging them to acts of charity from the examples of the saints. Priests and friars would make up stories if they could not find a true one that fitted the point they wished to make. Many of the stories included fantastic elements, such as talking horses. When the Protestant Reformation came, men began to preach with a new-found fervour. There was now a sense of urgency. Preachers understood the grave danger in which people lived without the knowledge of the truth, and public preaching, as well as the more regular preaching in churches, became a feature of the Reformation times. The Bible was their source, salvation was their theme, and the glorifying of Christ their aim. Sermons that have survived from the period put much modern preaching to shame. There was genuine conviction, and confidence in the grace and power of God to perform a work of grace in the hearts and lives of hearers. Preaching was seen to be the means by which the gospel is to be declared, and the men who were called to preach trusted that the Lord would use the means he had given.
In the fifth place, the Protestant Reformation was the means of overthrowing the gasping power of the Pope. Rome has claimed the primacy for her bishop over all the other bishops (however we understand that word). The Bishop of Rome believes he is the universal father, He claims to be the heir to Peter, to whom, Rome teaches, was given the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whoever sits on Peter’s chair is therefore the representative of Christ on earth. All authority in the Church derives from this office, so that all bishops, cardinals, priests and so on act as representatives of the Pope. He has power over all the people on earth, from the lowliest commoner to the most majestic monarch. All must bow before him. The Protestant Reformers, and some who preceded them, saw in the papacy the fulfilment of Paul’s warnings in 2 Thessalonians 2, concerning the man of sin ‘who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God’ (v.4). The greatest exposition of this passage was made by Bishop Christopher Wordsworth in his treatise, Is the papacy predicted by St Paul? It is a masterly treatment of the Greek text, and he proves that the Pope is the great enemy of Christ. The Reformers all took this view, and delighted that the light of the gospel, as rediscovered in the true text of the Bible, was the instrument by which the pope’s pretended power could be dispersed, and men and women, as well as nations, could be freed from his malevolent influence and superstitious teaching. Why so many so-called Protestant churches are in thrall to the Bishop of Rome today is a mystery—or would be, were it not for Paul’s warnings of the failings within the church, as we saw in Acts 20.
Our debt to the Protestant Reformation is enormous. There was a time when these things were well know.n. They are hardly known at all today, but they should be. Let us be clear as to the benefits and blessing we enjoy because of the Protestant Reformation. Let us ever give thanks to God for them.