Orthodoxy is essential. When Priscilla and Aquila heard Apollos speak in Ephesus there was much he said that delighted them. But there were some matters in which he was mistaken, so they 'took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately' (Acts 18:26). From the very beginning, there was this awareness that followers of Jesus Christ had been entrusted with a divine deposit of truth that they were to proclaim and guard.

The antithesis to orthodoxy is heresy. A heretic is not a Christian who makes a doctrinal or practical mistake. People like Apollos, who may have an inadequate grasp of the gospel, were treated very gently by Aquila and Priscilla, as well as by Jesus (John 4) and by Paul (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8-10). A heretic is a person who challenges the gospel at its core (Galatians 1:6-9; 1 John 4:2ff), and who is intent on winning the rest of the church to his position.

There are core beliefs which are non-negotiable.

William G. T Shedd could state: the Christian religion contains certain truths that are so indisputably taught in the Christian Scriptures that their acceptance is necessary in order to be a Christian in the sense in which the first Christians were so called at Antioch.Calvinism: Pure and Mixed, p. 148

Whoever disparages the doctrines of orthodox Christianity undermines not only truth but goodness also, for one's beliefs determine one's conduct. Does not Scripture tell us that God gave the heathen up unto 'vile affections' for this reason, that they 'changed the truth of God into a lie' (Romans 1:25, 26)? And did not Jesus say: 'Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free' (John 8:32)? He had in mind freedom from sin. Depreciation of truth leads inevitably to rejection of truth. There is a fine line between indifference to doctrine and theological liberalism.

Of course we live in a day when such a stance shocks some religious people. We pick up their magazines, or we hear them speak on the radio, and meet such protestations as these: 'We must not talk as though we've got all the answers'. But why not?

As Harry Blamires protests, What is our Christianity if not to make plain that in the Christian faith the gravest doubts and worries of men are richly answered? What do these prevaricators mean? Have we not got the answers in their eyes? Is our Lord untrustworthy, the Church founded upon an eternal question-mark, the faith a fog? It will be time enough to put this new slogan on our banners when we have heard a dying martyr proclaim it as the surety of his hope. The scene is worth picturing. The flames gather around the stake, but the martyr's eyes are ablaze only with faith. I die gladly. I die at peace with God. My last message to you is this: We must not talk as though we've got all the answers.A Defence of Dogmatism, p. 7

What do we understand by orthodoxy? We mean that the Bible is the supernaturally-inspired self-revelation of God. Its human authors were so controlled by the Holy Spirit that, not as mere automata but as individuals, each with his own background and personality, they recorded the very thoughts and words which God wanted them to record. Therefore the Bible is inerrant in its original manuscripts, the 'autographs', and by a wonderful providence God watched over his revelation as it passed through the hands of numerous fallible copyists. So we can say as we hold the Bible in our hands today that this is the Word of God, the one and only infallible rule for faith and conduct.

We believe one thing more when we speak of orthodoxy. We mean that the message of that Bible has been considered and clarified by teachers in the church down to the present day. It would be foolish for anyone to try to build his own beliefs from the ground up, as it were, while seeking to ignore all past evangelists, confessions and preachers. Men who have tried to do this have ended up by substituting one set of preconceptions for another. Indeed, what they have done is to substitute their own half-baked, ill-conceived preconceptions for the mature thought of godly teachers. To attempt to start totally afresh ('just me and my Bible'), as many cultists have sought to do, is an act of disobedience and pride. Christian orthodoxy has been defined in the great controversies with heresy that have marked the history of the church. Its careful clarifications found in the great creeds, articles of faith and confessions of the Christian church are like marks on a wall which show the growing up of a child until it approaches maturity. The children of God are always being taught by the Father.

We understand the faith of Protestantism to be the most complete expression of orthodoxy. Its heart is the doctrine of salvation by the sovereign grace of the triune God through the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is 'that sight of the majesty of God that pervades all of life and all of experience'. That is the core of Scripture and of the Reformed faith alike. Precisely this is the glory of Calvinism. It is merely consistent orthodoxy, and to embrace it is Christian obedience.

Yet, in itself this is not enough.

When, then, is orthodoxy not enough?

1. When it is Not Joined to a Cheerful and Sympathetic Manner⤒🔗

We are told that Jesus grew in favour with man. There was a certain esteem in which he was held: men spoke well of his kindness and graciousness. How ugly is an affectation of seriousness.

Ministers there are who are so solemn you never see a smile, or a pleasant expression upon their countenance; they are absolutely fearful. There is no piety in this.The Power of the Pulpit, Gardiner Spring, p. 158

When such a manner is allied to an inability to manifest family affection, a disciplinarianism and a self-imposed martyr's complex ('No one understands or sympathises with me') the resulting unfeeling orthodoxy repels sympathy.

2. When it is Not Accompanied by Sustained Dependence upon Jesus Christ the Saviour←⤒🔗

There is a faith that is wrongly focused upon the system of orthodox religion. System faith is perfectly proper in its place. For example, it is exercised when a man boards a plane without knowing the pilot, or when a woman purchases medicine from an unknown pharmacist. They are unconsciously trusting a wise social and legal system which is protecting them from the devices of charlatans. But what is acceptable in our relationships with men is unacceptable when dealing with Almighty God. Even unbelieving Agrippa believed what the prophets had written (Acts 26:27), and the devils believe the divine encyclopaedia of theology (James 2:19). Such acknowledgment of the revealed system of the Christian religion is not saving faith.

George Philip says, There are many people who believe exactly what I believe who are not Christians ... they will not allow the truth to lay its rightful claim to their souls and to their lives, to all they are and all they have.Fundamentals of the Faith, p. 9

One can grasp orthodox religion while having no grasp of the Saviour.

J. C. Ryle says, The day of controversy is always a day of spiritual peril. Men are apt to confound orthodoxy with conversion, and to fancy that they must go to heaven if they know how to answer Papists. Yet mere earnestness without knowledge, and mere head-knowledge of Protestantism, alike save none. Let us never forget this.Warnings to the Churches, p. 91

3. When it has become Static and Doctrinally Complacent←⤒🔗

A church must never suppose that it has exhausted the Word of God. Out of that treasure it must ever bring forth old things, to be sure, but also new (Matthew 13:52).

R. B. Kuiper says: It is extremely important that a church be conservative. It must by all means hold fast that which it has in order that no many may take its crown (Revelation 3:11). It is not less important that a church be progressive. Abiding upon the Word of God, it must keep building upon that foundation. Failure to do the former spells destruction. Failure to do the latter can only result in petrifaction.To Be Or Not To Be Reformed, p. 33

John Frame has pointed out the progress that Reformed theology has made from the time of the Reformation in understanding the Bible. Lutheran theology has not changed very much since the 17th century, nor has Arminian theology.

But, Calvinism has developed new understandings of the covenants, of redemptive history, of biblical inerrancy, of apologetics, and of the relationships of Christianity to politics, economics, education, the arts, literature, history, science, and law. That progress has come about because belief in the sovereignty of God sets the Calvinist free to explore the fulness of God's revelation in Scripture and creation.The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, p. 308

4. When All the Elements of Orthodoxy are Forced into Every Message←⤒🔗

John Murray taught that the message of God's counsel is multiform and the particular needs of men are varied.

So he said that great care should be exercised that the truths presented and the manner of presentation should be chosen and framed so as to make the most direct and effective impact upon those who are the recipients of the message.Collected Writings, Volume I, 'The Message of Evangelism', p. 126

There are times when one has to refrain from presenting certain orthodox truths because a proper foundation has not been laid for them. There are other times when it would be sinful not to present those same truths. Some effort, and prayerful dependence upon the Lord, is indispensable to being a faithful servant of orthodox Christianity.

5. When a Sense of Personal Dependence Upon Grace is Absent from Christian Service←⤒🔗

The most orthodox and exegetically correct sermons in all the world are yet dependent upon a grace men cannot command, nor pour into the channels of their ingenuity. Of course, there must be devoted and sustained study to which the Spirit adds his confirmation, but there must be the Spirit's power attendant in the proclamation of the Word. The preaching of orthodoxy is impotent without the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven.

John Murray says, If we are sensitive, discerning, and zealous, we soon discover in ourselves and in the ministrations of others the absence of what is the channel of the Holy Spirit's power ... It would be improper to omit the necessity of prayer as the complement of our dependence and of our proclamation, an exercise that demands intense application of heart, mind, and will. It is likewise the channel. "Before they call, I will answer"(Isaiah 65:24).                                                    op. cit., 'The Power of the Holy Spirit, pp. 140, 141

6. When Our Responsibility Towards Fellow Members of the Church is Ignored←⤒🔗

'By one Spirit we were all baptised into one body'. There was no New Testament Christian who was not a church member. The concept of a freelance disciple would have been inconceivable to them.

John R. de Witt says, It is a very prostitution of the life of faith to regard the Christian as a private person, living to himself alone, as though he could fulfil his duty to God without viewing all things as subject to the Lordship of Jesus Christ.What is the Reformed Faith?, p. 16

What would be the effect of an orthodox believer living in disaffiliation from God's church? If it were right for one to remain aloof and non­committal, then why not two? And if two, why not three; and if three, why not everyone? Then where would be the witness to orthodoxy within the church? The Holy Spirit does not only make us sound in doctrine, he transforms us from a collection of selfish individuals into a community of self-denying brothers and sisters. The local church is the normal context in which he does this (cf. Daniel Wray's The Importance of the Local Church).

7. When a Consistent Prayerfulness is Absent←⤒🔗

There is always a danger that evangelical theological students become academically sound, but spiritually weaker than when they arrived in seminary. Dr J. I. Packer recently said, 'The most crucial problem I have found in these communities over the years is how to make our theology serve our godliness; to make theological education advance our Christian discipleship' (quoted by Douglas Kelly in If God Already Knows Why Pray?, p. 4).

Al Martin asks: What is prayer in the last analysis? It is a conscious spreading out of my helplessness before God. The true Calvinist is the man who confesses with his lips that grace must not only awaken him, regenerate him, but that grace must preserve him, and he Amens his confession by his prayer when on his knees he cries out, "Lead me not into temptation but deliver me from evil."The Practical Implications of Calvinism, p. 21

Therefore, orthodoxy is not enough without such graces as these. But we cannot emphasise too strongly that orthodoxy is still indispensable.

J. C. Ryle says, It is cheap and easy work to sneer at "dogmatic theology" and old-fashioned creeds and modes of faith, as if they were effete and worn-out things, unfit for this enlightened century. But after all, what are the fruits of modern philosophy, and the teaching of cold abstractions, compared to the fruits of the despised dogmas of distinctive Christianity?The Upper Room, p. 61