Testing the Resonance⤒🔗

In this book we have used the expression 'sound and resonance' metaphorically. We mentioned in this connection a violin which, because of the resonance of its soundboard, produces its sonority and refinement of tone. The quality of its sound and resonance de­pends primarily on the craftsmanship of the builder. This much should be unquestionable. The God of all life is the builder of the human soul, is He not? He sees to it that the heart beats and the conscience speaks.

But man is not a product of passivity nor a lifeless mechanism. Originally he was adorned with tremendous capabilities (cf. The Canons of Dort, III/IV, 1). God created a world that had the potential of breaking forth in a magnifi­cent, multiple-voiced harmony; that is, eter­nally praising the Almighty God.

We recognize that for many centuries God has worked on restoring the human instrument. The potentialities of creation became the objectives of that restoration. But man's apos­tasy generated innumerable distortions of the sounds. The resulting sound production became dismally discordant. On this earth it resulted in one huge, deafening clamour, a chaotic generation of sounds that surrounds our planet like a filthy contagion. This was the first and also the most serious environmental pollution.

We are now living in times of restoration. Ever so gradually we learn to tune in to the sounds of God's good Word and to resonate with it. Together we are at work to learn the hymn of praise anew. God the Holy Spirit works in us to recapture the proper resonance. This activity represents not only the privilege that is related to the history of our lives but also its relentless struggle.

During this ongoing (restoration) process, our human responsibility has its own position and function. God grants us faith which will enable us to tune in to His voice and respond to it in obedience, each in his own particular fashion.

At the same time God requires that we have faith and make progress in our walk of faith. The claim to our obedience of faith is an instrument the Holy Spirit employs to grant and strengthen our faith. This is one of the mysteries of the covenant. The very obedience to God's demand is a glorious demonstration of deliverance that is granted to us as well as a restored humanity. It is in this manner that our responsibility receives its own position and function.

Part of this human responsibility is to test the resonance. Is there any resonance at all? And does it, indeed, reproduce the sound properly? Is there any distressing dissonance? Can one discern the sound of God's promise in our resonance? Is the quality of our resonance reliable or must it be drastically rectified? How and when does the 'tuning' of the sound take place? And when does it become necessary that we become again 'attuned' to the sound of the message?

We know that God tests our lives: our activi­ties, thoughts and hearts. But God has made man such a wondrous work that he is able to test himself as well. Man is able to do it, is allowed to do it, and must do it.

This specific activity is called self-examination; it is the human response to God's testing of our lives. The human heart is engaged herein in the presence of God. The light of God's commandments and promises will penetrate into our life and perform there its action of bring­ing to light what was hidden. Having arrived at this point, we accept the challenge of paying closer attention to this activity of faith within the framework of our theme.

Self-examination is Difficult but Indispensable←⤒🔗

Here we are entering the area of self-examina­tion: man considering himself together with his faith; expectations and the way he spends his life. One may assume there will be hardly anyone who would consider introspection an unnecessary activity. But at the same time most of us will recognise the fact that here we are venturing out in a difficult field. The subject is a sensitive one, and the pitfalls are numerous. We are well aware of our limita­tions as well as the tenacious power of our cunning hearts that enables us to prolong our self-deception.

The longer we think about this, the more we become aware of our being perplexed by numerous questions and problems, since an intrinsic part of self-examination requires that we take a close look at ourselves. This is always difficult and dangerous work. If we are not careful, we can maneuver ourselves into unhealthy situations. In this event we may fall victim to introversion, or else we may be tempted to use self-examination as an excuse for being en­grossed in secretive soul-searching. For lengthy periods man is quite able to put his trust in these self-made excuses. Being preoc­cupied with oneself may lead to (or stem from) complacency and may contribute to false self-assurance.

But man, in his introspection, could end up just as well somewhere else. It is possible that he becomes disgusted with himself, which can lead to self-rejection, self-negation, and in the worst scenario, self-destruction. All kinds of psychological breakdowns may be induced this way. How often do Christians not paint themselves into a corner during their self-examination? Oftentimes the call for self-examination will merely boost an unhealthy preoccupation with oneself, camouflaged by religious terminology.

One person will emerge from his self-examina­tion, swollen with pride and self-satisfaction. In his search he managed to uncover the marks of grace in his own religiosity. And from here on he will use his findings as a license to sit in judgement on his fellow believers.

Another person, as a result of his self-examina­tion, was cast down into deepest despair. While delving into his own conscience and tampering with his motivation for living, he ran into an endless number of conflicts with his conscience. An immense weariness, brought about by a never-ending attempt to live scrupulously, could (like dark clouds) for years on end intercept the sunlight which God in His grace shines upon the lives of His people.

For each of God's promises, a "yes, but..." response was kept in readiness. In his attempt to lead a conscientious life, man with all his groaning and sighing, may well spend more attention on himself than on his relationship with God. A super-conscience is ultimately a form of pretentiousness.  And such a vain glorious display of finickiness does not exactly testify to the freedom to which Christ has delivered us. Although much more could be said along these lines, the above should suffice to convince us of the troubles and dangers associated with introspection.

But we should add that the neglect of self-examination is at least as dangerous. If we were to avoid self-examination or reject it explicitly, we would oppose God's clear commandment (cf. Lam 3:40; Gal 6:4; 1 Cor 11:28-­31; 2 Cor 13:5; also Mat 7:3; 1 Jn 3:20, 21). He who opposes the commandment of God makes it difficult for himself. For this commandment delivers us from ourselves and instructs us to look outside of ourselves. And so it points out the way which God's people may walk, onwards to the day of Christ.

There are many people who, driven by their anxieties, always run away from themselves. They do not have the courage to look at themselves in the mirror of self-examination. They are afraid of the silences in their lives and try to silence the voice of their conscience by means of compulsive and restless activities. Life will then become one great hoax which, in fact, lacks the 'fear of the Lord.' For this 'fear of the Lord' includes also respecting and honouring the Father, Who "judges each man's work impartially" (1 Pet 1:17). In this case the refusal of self-examination demonstrates the restless­ness of a life on the run. Or else it illustrates the spiritual apathy of living superficial lives. At any rate, unfounded peace of mind, pseudo-assurance, and compulsive activism are as disastrous for the style of living before God as the incidence of pathological anxiety or religious pride would be. Briefly then, there are all kinds of valid reasons to reflect on the difficult and indispensable issue of self-examination.

Making Clear Distinc­tions is Necessary←⤒🔗

In his self-examination the child of God tests the quality of his faith. This could also be stated as: he examines his faith for its being 'true'. In this connection we can say that the trustworthiness of faith shows three aspects. To distinguish between them appears to be (as so many other distinctions) somewhat artificial. In regular life the boundaries be­tween them tend to overlap.

Despite all this, it is useful to begin by putting the distinctions up front. They can help us in our search for clarity in the difficult subject matter we are about to discuss.

The trustworthiness of faith confronts us with the reality of:

1. a faith that is counterfeit
2. a faith that is illusory
3. a faith that is dead.

1. There is a true faith which is worked in our hearts by the (proclaimed) Word of God's truth, thanks to the life-giving working of the Holy Spirit (cf. The Heidelberg Catechism, Answer 20; Question and Answer 21). This true faith stands over against a counterfeit faith, caused by short-changing the teachings of Christ, twisting the Word, and false proph­esy.
   
   What we are talking about here is, therefore, the substance of faith. The world proclaims theories that are completely unreliable. The images that played a role in the worship services of years past were the work of man's hands. Likewise, there are at the present time ideas in circulation that have been produced by people and devils, ideas that are presented to the public to be worshipped. In our world the Church has to fight at this level for the preservation of true faith (cf. Jude 3vv).
   
   Self-examination is concerned with the trust­worthiness of one's faith with reference to its substance. The child of God examines whether he possesses in his life true knowledge of God in Christ. He asks himself whether in his life he truly trusts in the Lord and His faithful promises. For he lives trusting that he shall never be deceived in God's promises. After all, this is the living God, Truth personified (cf. Jer 10:10). God's child has the privilege of having a living, personal bond with this God. Thus he tests himself to find out whether he, indeed, possesses a true, reliable knowledge of God, and also what in his life should be identified as areas of neglected upkeep.
    
2. 'Truth' is not exclusively a matter of being 'genuine' but certainly also of being upright. In the life of a believer there should be no false appearances, no self-deception, nor deceiving God or one's neighbour. Whoever subscribes to the truth should do so wholeheartedly (cf. Ps 15:2). In this case we are concerned with resisting activities which (from a distance) appear to be activities of faith, but are not in reality.
   
   When the Church regularly warns against the powers of custom (e.g. in the form for Baptism which mentions "custom or superstition") the routine habit that is being referred to is viewed as the opposite of an 'upright faith'.
   
   In the poorly illuminated corners of their lives, believers are able to detect contrasts in their self-examination. In their lives the 'illusion' of faith can display itself in all kinds of different forms and proportions, although in this case we do not have to resort to using the loaded word 'hypocrisy'. But before God and man it is possible that certain elements of hypocrisy, nonetheless, persist so that they will taint the transparent truth of faith. The decisive factor here is that, in our faith activities, both up­rightness and purity of heart will together be tested for their truthfulness.
    
3. The Scriptures speak to us about the danger of a 'dead' faith, specifically in James 2:14-26. True faith is "expressing itself through love" (Gal 5:6), and proves thereby its strength. And in this context 'truth' stands over against emptiness. The meaning of 'truth' is here, moreover, that the claim of being genuine will indeed be verified as such. Here, the connota­tions of the word 'truth' point towards activity, constancy, reliability and efficacy. 'Truth' is the element that will never let us down. This is why it is possible for us to enact the truth (cf. 1 Jn 1:6; 2:4vv.; 3:18).
   
   If in the practice of our lives no fruit of faith ever becomes visible, then this unproductive­ness would reveal that the root is unhealthy. Should fruit be found, however, this would prove that our faith is viable. Faith will be tried and shows itself as having been tried,¹ fore­most by way of self-examination. The evidence of faith that has been tried (the capability of bearing up under the test) will generate hope and increase our assurance of faith. This is what the formulation of Answer 86 of The Heidelberg Catechism points out, namely "that we ourselves may be assured of our faith by its fruits."

So far, we have looked, from three different angles, at our thoughts on self-examination. To put it somewhat academically, we might say that in doing so we simultaneously investigate the trustworthiness of faith

1. that we believe in
2. with which we give praise
3. that works through love.

The usefulness of these fairly theoretical distinctions lies in an attempt to improve the clarity of our thinking about these matters. Our thinking and speaking about these things have often been confused, because proper distinctions were not made. Frequently, the arguments got mixed up or bypassed each other, since those involved in the debate were actually not discussing the same subject matter. The great debate about 'self-examina­tion' dating back to the latter years of the Thirties offers sufficient proof for this. But even though nobody contested the need for self-examination (or self-trial),² there was in the debates on this subject still a considerable amount of talk about this subject, though on different wave lengths. This can be illustrated by a substantial example.

C. Veenhof, a prominent participant in the debate of those years, declared one day that it is unnatural and unhealthy to be preoccupied with the function of the eye when one is seeing beautiful things. The object observed makes us forget about the seeing organ itself, as it were. The very fact that one is able to see so many beautiful things makes (in many cases) an examination of the eye rather redundant. Faith is much like an eye that looks outward and not inward.

This view was countered by referring to Answer 86 of The Heidelberg Catechism as well as the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper, both of which explicitly oblige us to examine ourselves.

What has, so far, been the outcome of this and similar debates?

1. Veenhof was concerned with testing the trustwor­thiness of faith with which one believes (we refer to our distinction made under 2, above).
    
2. Veenhof was keenly aware of the unhealthy character of various kinds of introspection. It is possible to be so preoccupied with the eye's condi­tion that there is no time left to really see things, while so much remains to be seen. The more the radiance of God's promises is warming the heart, the more assured man becomes of God's salvation. In this case there is no need to talk lengthily about the 'seeing organ.
    
3. At face value this reasoning appears to be valid, but at the same time it is incomplete. To put it in our own terminology: it can be seen that the argument attacks the necessity of our distinction (under) 2 with the arguments offered under distinc­tion 1. Of course, there are occasions on which one should take a look at one's eyes, or have them professionally examined. The organ might be defective. A person is able to imagine that he truly sees accurately, whereas in reality he is merely turning around within his own little world. His eye does not truly observe what is shown to him; rather it projects his own pre-conceived ideas into the observed object. Despite all this, there remains a justifiable self-examination of faith.
    
4. Veenhof pointed out correctly — as did D. van Dijk, for instance — that it is futile to dig up certain attributes of faith by means of self-analysis, and then use them as a basis for assurance of faith.
   
   Assurance of faith lies anchored in the truth of God's promises. This dogma has always been advanced in the struggle against all sorts and varieties of pietistic soul-searching.
   
   For whoever wants to fight against misgivings concerning the trustworthiness of his faith, or else the uncertainty regarding the truth of his faith, and tries to do this with the marks one has uncovered in himself, will in the end have to repeat this process all over again. This is because he will now have to fight against his misgivings (respectively the same uncertainty) regarding the trustworthiness of the very marks that were uncovered. For even in this process a man can hoodwink himself. A cunning heart is unable to deliver itself from its own crafti­ness. What happens here is that self-examination threatens to become a vicious circle. This circle can only be broken through by the sound doctrine of the covenant. In this case, self-examination takes as its point of departure the promise which God has given us; i.e. God has adopted us as His children and heirs. Genuine, sound self-examination is concerned with the question whether we, in the practice of our daily living, are conducting ourselves as children of God. This much for the train of thought of (amongst others) Veenhof and van Dijk.
    
5. The series of arguments that were advanced, presented us with a good number of sound and healthful observations. Even so, we detect here a merging of different subjects, and the ensuing confusion can be readily cleared up with the assistance of the distinctions we made above.

Members of the congregation whose pattern of living closely resembles the description in The Canons of Dort, I, 16, are usually not particularly impressed by these arguments. The difficulties regarding the 'truth' under point 2 were once more fought with arguments regarding the 'truth' as defined under 1 and 3. For there will always be people "who do not yet clearly discern in themselves a living faith in Christ, an assured confidence of heart, peace of conscience, a zeal for childlike obedience, and a glorying in God through Christ."

Then there are "others (who) seriously desire to be converted to God ... Yet they cannot reach that point on the way of godliness and faith" before the Lord "which they would like." In this part of our Re­formed confession these people are not advised to disregard self-examination (but should "clearly discern in themselves").

Together with their self-examination they are to use the means of grace faithfully (cf. The Canons of Dort, III/IV, 17), and meanwhile, in all reverence and humility, they should "fervently desire a time of more abundant grace."

Although the trustworthiness of God's promise implies the trustworthiness of faith (considered normatively), yet we find that in every-day life, this faith will experience its own measured growth process towards assurance. This, too, is the work of God's grace, and therefore it merits special attention during the self-examination of God's child.

The debate of the late 'Thirties' served a useful purpose as the first major confrontation with our own Reformed tradition concerning self-examina­tion. But it is precisely for this reason that the debate should be consid­ered as an inception of the dialogue, not as its final conclusion.

Those who fight against subjectivism are pursuing a worthy cause. But at the same time they should arm themselves against objectivism. When this course of action is ignored, a specific question may be solved while at the same time and other one will be brought up. This procedure, too, sets up a vicious circle. Briefly, this reality provides ample reason for us to further reflect on these subjects.

Self-examination while preparing for the Lord's Supper←⤒🔗

In accordance with The Canons of Dort's line of reasoning on the use of the means of grace, we affirm that it is specifically the Lord's Supper that comes to our aid on this issue. The Scrip­tures tell us this in 1 Corinthians 11:28-31, and the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper expounds the subject of self-examina­tion rather extensively.

The instructional part of this form holds forth two subjects: a. our self-examination and b. the remembrance of Christ. It will become self-evident that in our approach to this subject we must pay close attention to this instruction.

Throughout the centuries the Reformed churches have raised the matter of self-exami­nation (in all its various aspects) as it relates to the celebration of the Lord's Supper. While preparing for the Lord's Supper we are con­fronted with the need for self-examination.

The first question that arises in this context is: why specifically at that particular time? The form tells us that we, according to Scripture, must examine ourselves beforehand, as we can read in 1 Corinthians 11:28 ("A man ought to examine himself"). In this connection we speak about 'preparation' for the Lord's Supper. And for centuries it has been customary to use the term 'preparatory sermon' the Sunday before the celebration.³

The question can be asked whether this attention (or rather this expression of attention) preceding the celebration of the Lord's Supper is, indeed, warranted. In the past this question was raised as well, and more than once it was answered in the negative. Most often the argu­ment that is put forward will go along these lines: it takes exception to the 'different' treatment accorded to the Sunday of the Lord's Supper. Next, the question is asked: Why must the congregation be called upon to examine itself specifically for the Lord's Supper? Do we not each Sunday again appear in the presence of the Lord? Consequently, each Sunday calls for self-examination as referred to in Psalm 15. Admittedly, there is some truth in this objec­tion, but it does not give us the whole truth.

Should Israel not be happy every day because God had delivered them from the power of the archenemy, Egypt? Still, Pascha was celebrated only once a year, with all the traditional festive activities that came with it. Besides, are we not giving thanks every morning anew for life we received out of God's hand? Yet, we celebrate our birthday only once a year, dress up for the occasion and treat our guests. The point is that if each day were a festive day, we would never celebrate. We are simply unable to bring this off; moreover, life is not like that at all.

Every day we enjoy our national freedom. But on the fifth day of May (i.e. in the Netherlands) we hang out the flag. It is rather unnecessary to inquire why May 5 is more important than all the other 364 days of the year. Without the other 364 days the celebration on May 5 would be pointless. But without the Fifth of May celebrations we would lose sight of our privi­leged circumstances and just rush headlong each one of us on his own business. In this event, even though we would still have our freedom, we are no longer celebrating it. And then we will neither ask ourselves the ques­tion: what have we actually done with our freedom?

As a result, all the other days of the year, too, are robbed of their lustre. In the Old Testament we find that the Lord gave numerous statutes and observances to Israel: laws, rituals, and feasts. In this way life was taking on depth and perspective, and thus it resisted becoming superficial. At the same time, as long as this clearly defined situation was sustained, it provided a means of discipline to walk in godliness. On more than one occasion we can read in a similar context: "so that they (the people) may learn to revere me (all the days) and not forget the things their eyes have seen (cf. Deut 4:9, 10; 6:24; 10:12-20; 14:23). A remembrance feast ought to renew both thankfulness and expectation. When this happens, it is as if the instruments are being tuned again.

The celebration helps us likewise by having us engage in holy exercises of godliness. Thus our Sunday observance takes place within the framework of the seven weekdays, and the celebration of the Lord's Supper within the framework of our Sundays. Of course, it is possible that a person (because of complacency or self-justification) does neither participate in the worship services on those Sundays-with­out-celebration. Yet, also in this instance one will have to face God.

Still, the Sunday of the celebration of the Lord's Supper has something extra to offer. God comes to us in His Word, in the bread and the wine. Christ presents Himself and gives Himself in a special manner. We, too, become more active ourselves, renew our profession of faith and, together with our brothers and sisters join at the table of the Son of God. Those who pay respect to their Host and the guests, will dress up for the occasion (cf. the 'wedding clothes' of Matthew 22:11).

Since the Israelites prepared for Pascha with the big spring clean-up (removal of any trace of old leaven from their homes) so will we examine ourselves in preparation for the — Lord's Supper. This is not to say that we, otherwise, would never have done this. But on this particular occasion we do it very consciously (and collectively) with a view to that specific meeting with Christ and one another at the table which He instituted "on the night when He was betrayed."

The meaning of the celebration of the Lord's Supper is that we steadfastly look upon Christ. We commemorate how He sacrificed Himself for our sake. But, looking upon Christ is evidently a powerful motivation for taking a deliberate look at ourselves. The Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper addresses us directly and asks of us that we remember, believe, search our hearts, examine our conscience, consider our sins and shortcomings. At the very moment that we are thankful for and amazed by God's love in Christ, we are called upon to become involved with ourselves and to exam­ine ourselves on various vital points. The question arises how a person should go about this and for what purpose. Further, whether he needs no help, or is unable to get any help. With a view to these questions it would not only be useful but also appropriate to pay attention to what history teaches us.

The Lesson of History←⤒🔗

In the days when the Church was still a cap­tive of Roman rites and practices, the clergy provided specific guidance to prepare people for 'communion' or the 'eucharist'. This communion was as a rule the one that was held on Easter Sunday. This was preceded by the compulsory 'sacrament' of the confessional during the weeks before.⁴ The confessional provided contact between a member of the congregation and his church official (the father confessor). During this meeting it was not only sins and trespasses that were talked about but also the atonement and satisfaction made for these sins. To serve as a guide there were confessional books in circulation which listed all kinds of sins in categories. It is possible to say more about this topic, not only the bad but a few positive things as well.

This is, however, not our intent here. What concerns us now is the question what the Reformation has done with the traditional confessional.

Obviously, in an attempt to get our answers, we should first of all take a look at the elector­ate of the Paltz (Germany). For here originated our old church book (with our present Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper).⁵ In 1563 there appeared in this German electorate a church order where we find the following:

1. the Form for the Baptism of Infants;
2. the Heidelberg Catechism;
3. a treatise on preparing oneself for the Lord's Supper;
4. the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper;
5. the remainder of the forms.⁶

Under point 3 we read the following stipula­tions:

• Whenever the celebration of the Lord's Supper is scheduled to take place, the pastor is to announce this event eight days prior to the celebration. This rule would enable the congregation to prepare itself for the celebration.
   
• Children who are going to celebrate the Lord's Supper for the first time, are to be instructed by their parents.
   
• The Saturday before the celebration, the congregation shall meet to prepare itself. At this time the significance of the Lord's Supper shall be examined in a suitable sermon. Rel­evant portions of the Catechism pertaining to the Lord's Supper should be read, and the procedure for the celebration shall be ex­plained.
   
• Subsequently, those whose intention it is to celebrate the Lord's Supper for the first time are to present themselves to make profession of their faith. An examination is to take place in order to test their knowledge concerning the Apostolicum, the Decalogue, and the Lord's Prayer, as well as the catechism text pertaining to the Lord's Supper.
   
• After this, the entire congregation is to be addressed in an interrogative fashion, the essence of which will be three elaborate questions. The first question deals with the knowledge of one's misery: do you confess that you abhor yourself? The second question concerns the justification through the blood of Christ, as attested to by baptism and the Lord's Supper. The third question probes the desire to live a life of thankfulness before God and in peace with one's neighbour. Each of these questions was to be answered with a collective affirmative.

In closing this service, all the participants kneeled down for the corporate prayer. After­wards, there was opportunity to receive additional instruction or have a private talk.

This is the way it used to be in the Palatinate electorate on Saturdays before the Lord's Supper. No doubt, the reader will have noticed that the three questions follow the pattern of the three parts of The Heidelberg Catechism (i.e. our misery, deliverance, and thankfulness). The same tripartite approach can be found in the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper, which the Dutch churches adopted from the Palatinate version.⁷

This was the procedure of the churches in the cities of the Palatinate, once every month (as well as on the feast days of Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas). Confessing the congregation's debt, its faith, and its love was done corpo­rately as was praying. It should be apparent by now that in this way each member possessed now an outline for self-examination. Though in the Reformed churches the confessional with the father confessor was discontinued, other significant things took its place.

The Dutch churches did not follow the exam­ple of the Palatinate tradition regarding the Saturday preparation.⁸ In this context we notice a different line that made its way into the Netherlands: i. e the line from Geneva. In that city the confessional was replaced by the personal talk of the office bearers with the members of the congregation. This discussion did not take place in the church building but at the home of the members. And so it came about that we (still) call it a home visit.

But from its very beginning the focus of the home visit was on the celebration of the Lord's Supper. And for that reason the format of the visit dealt with knowledge of our unworthiness and God's grace, and a Christian style of living in thankfulness.

When we say: home visit, the elder comes into view. And rightly so, for he functions in particular on the way of God's people to the Lord's Supper. From 1568 to 1978 our Church Order (the Netherlands) stated that the work of the elders during their home visits is characterized by its being directed towards the celebration of the Lord's Supper. From this we may conclude that the Reformed churches aimed to give guidance to self-examination as well (within the context of the celebration of the Lord's Supper), and to this by means of preaching, preparation,⁹ in addition to the home visits and formal discipli­nary calls. Altogether, this provides a frame­work within which personal self-examination (as indicated in the Form for the Celebration for the Lord's Supper) is able to find its right­ful place.

The Function of Self-examination as set forth in the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper←⤒🔗

The very fact that self-examination is pertinent to the celebration of the Lord's Supper¹⁰ excludes beforehand any idea as though the object would be to submerge ourselves in soul searching, or to revolve around ourselves. As we all know, the Lord's Supper is about our meeting with the Son of God, the Christ of Golgotha.

The act of descending into oneself, or intro­spection, does not in inherently link it with Christian faith. The self-knowledge one tries to gain in this manner can lead to complacence or self-denial, pride or desperation. But in both cases this road to self-knowledge has nothing to do with Christian faith in the presence of God.¹¹

First of all, self-examination in the context of the celebration of the Lord's Supper signifies that we take a look at ourselves, while standing before the crucified Christ. In this event we are dealing with self-knowl­edge that is founded in the knowledge of God. Someone who does not know God the Father of Jesus Christ the crucified, has no self-knowledge either. But the correlative is also true: he who does not know himself as an incapacitated debtor, is unable to truly love God, the Father of the crucified Christ. Both manifestations of knowl­edge are correlated. When one of them lan­guishes, both of them will waste away. This is a profound mystery in a Christian's life before the face of God.

The believer, then, examines his heart while standing before the crucified Christ. This means that he sees the Man of Sorrows, Who died a "bitter and shameful death on the cross." He looks at the exhausted, utterly spent form of the Man of Sorrows and in Him he sees himself. From Golgotha the call comes down to him: "Ecce Homo", i.e. "See the Man." Strictly speaking, the exhortation reaching us from Calvary's cross is "See yourself"

Do you really see the tortured, condemned man, forsaken by God? It is our sicknesses, our sins, and our sorrows which He bears. This is the terrifying deficit on the balance sheet of our lives. This is the bottom line of the worth of our lives: total bankruptcy. This is what we must contemplate, because this is the wrath of God on our sins: this is the 'condemnation'. At that very moment we shall realise our oneness with humanity. For God's wrath rests upon the sins of the whole human race.

We must not search for something that we just might have overlooked here, or some shortcoming there, as so often happened during the fragmentary practice of the confessional. Together we acknowledge that we are worthy to stand condemned before God, since we have been sold under sin, its power and dominion (cf Rom 7:14 KJV).

Christ broke that power by His indescribable and unfailing love and obedience. He was willing to take our place and bear the wrath of God. God did not spare His Son, quite the contrary. But in Christ's sufferings we discern our existence before God's face. In this way the Lord's Supper trains us in the fear of the Lord. Everything that comes our way in terms of life and future, Christ merited for us on Golgotha. From such great distress we were delivered and led out into the light, we who dwell in the midst of death (cf. 1 Pet 18, 19). It is the light of God's Law that makes us discover our misery to its very details and makes us understand what happened on Golgotha. At the Lord's Supper we feel ourselves deeply humiliated, and from this condition arises the deep tone that will characterize both our lives and hymns of praise before God.

When the sonorous bass notes of our response are missing, life will deteriorate into superfici­ality, complacency, and pride. It is precisely self-examination which keeps us from getting trapped in the absurdity of 'cheap grace'.

In the second place, there is still more to be considered in the matter of self-examination. The Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper specifies that "everyone (should) search his heart whether he also believes the sure promise of God that all his sins are forgiven him only for the sake of the suffering and death of Jesus Christ and that the perfect righteousness of Christ is freely given him as his own, as if he himself had fulfilled all righteousness."

We are not asked to examine whether our faith is the best it can possibly be. For quite often faith is a challenged matter, in that it resembles a flickering candle light rather than a steadily burning light.¹² We are asked whether we have seen and accepted God's most benevolent promises in our lives. Justification, acquittal, the obedience of Christ and the sufficiency of His righteousness — all these are included in God's promise in which God desires to be God-for-us.¹³

Our God is a consuming fire: no better place to see this than on Golgotha. Yet, notwith­standing this blaze He wants to be our God. The God of justice is also the God of love, and this is and remains the essence of the gospel. While looking upon Christ, we are to exam­ine ourselves and bring to light whether or not the promise is the be-all and the end-all in our life and death. Over against all opposing voices and temptations, we must converge thought and heart on that very gospel and learn to look beyond our­selves so that we will put our trust in the gospel. And so room is made for the hymn of praise for the Lamb of God, that takes away the sins of the world.

In the third place, standing before Christ, everyone should ask himself if he is willing and longing with all his being to serve God and walk all his days uprightly before His face. This is the language of the covenant as found in Genesis 17:1, which spells out how to walk before the Lord. As certain as the promise of Genesis 17 lies firmly anchored in the reconcil­ing work of Christ and is fulfilled by the Holy Spirit, so certain is also our 'walking before God's face' which conduct, since the event on Golgotha, has become a life in the light of God's love, which in Christ has been revealed to its full extent (Jn 13:1).

In using this formulation, the Form for the Celebration of the Lord's Supper has warded off the danger of having the celebration turn into a rite outside the bounds of every-day life. We are asked whether the knowledge of Christ renews our love to serve God. We are to question ourselves whether we find within us a heartfelt joy in the Law of God (our 'con­science'). This question concerns the specific resonance of our heart.

The Form makes everything even more spe­cific and plain by obliging us to investigate whether we wish to live with our neighbour "in true love and unity" and lay aside "all enmity, hatred and envy."

Thus we are confronted with the two great commandments of God's Law. And so we are given the privilege of living as renewed people of God in the midst of our society. On more than one occasion we have paid our solemn vow in answer to these questions, for instance during our public profession of faith. But at each celebration of the Lord's Supper we renew this vow.

When we are thus enabled to discern the function of self-examination before partaking of the Lord's Supper, it will become apparent just how much this mode of preparation will purify our lives. The foundation of faith becomes visible again and all sorts of hinder­ing encrustations (such as routine, habit, misunderstanding and doubt) will be re­moved. Advancing towards us from that single cross are the three parts of doctrine (cf. The Heidelberg Catechism, Question and Answer 2):

• in ourselves we are unable to live before God;
• in spite of this we may live with God;
• and, in truth, we wish again to live for God, although we do stumble but rise up again. And we shall continue to do so, until it be­comes second nature for all of us to love God and our neighbour. This second nature will then become our own nature, and so is achieved the full resonance.

Some Conclusions←⤒🔗

The object of self-examination is to test faith for its trustworthiness. The concern here is about the content, the activity, and the effectuality of faith. By now it should have become evident that self-examination is not possible with one's back turned towards God. It is unthinkable that this self-examination can be performed in isolation or with the help of a neutral agent.

The examination takes place while we stand before and look upon Christ. It removes useless ideas from our faith. It purifies our heart from its inclination toward hypocrisy, and it frees us from lingering laxity in our service to God and man.

Psycho-analysis of faith activity (involved in uncovering marks of trustworthiness) is therefore as fruitless and meaningless as would be self-analysis with reference to the one and only 'love', when one is not even acquainted with the beloved one, and one is even less able to envisage her. Similarly, abstract faith does not exist and can therefore not be analyzed.¹⁴ At issue here is, specifically, faith in Christ, the crucified and exalted Lord.

A husband who always doubts whether he really loves his wife, cannot be cured by referring him to the marriage vows or the obligation that comes with marriage. Before taking a good look at himself, he had better take a good look at his wife. Doing this, he will readily find out whether he is trapped in self-love or has been unfaithful to his wife, or whether his emotional life is unhealthy.¹⁵

Theories about objective characteristics are of no help here. Nor would it be helpful if self-examination were to furnish positive proof that one possesses a strong faith. Irrespective of the question how the validity of a diagnosis is arrived at, it should be pointed out that it is not the vigor of our act of faith that provides the trust, assurance, and makes us persevere in faith. It is only the trustworthiness of God's promise that provides our lives with stability. Our faith does nothing else but receiving this promise and making room for it in our lives.

Faith that believes in itself is a lonely and fruitless affair. Besides, it is an egocentric and illicit happening. Furthermore, hypocrisy is not cured by self-examination but by conver­sion. He who does not fear God, will neither honour Him by means of self-examination. And he who spurns self-examination, does not fear God.