Edward Feser is a popular Roman Catholic professor of philosophy and an Analytical Thomist, who has made a forcible, chapter long argument (worthy of a professional philosopher) that using contraceptives is immoral.

In response Fentiman delves into natural law, with some metaphysics, in arguing the opposite, with 13 counter-arguments.  He also goes into pleasure not being wholly subordinate to procreation, the effects of Adam’s curse on nature and our bodies, the ethics of the greater good, partial fulfillment, natural and artifical contraceptives provided of nature and the issues of temptation, self-denial and how Christ denied Himself continually (quoting reformed theologians).

Herein you will also find intriguing material on the philosophy of sex and family.  Enjoy and increase in “the unity of the Faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” (Eph. 4:12-13)  Below the link are some of the article’s conclusions:

Fentiman, Travis – ‘Using Contraceptives may be in Accord with Natural Law & Scripture: a Response to Feser’  (RBO, 2025)

“(1)…  Even if conception be contravened in certain instances, this is not necessarily contra-acting the design of one’s faculty and intention for procreation generally.

(2) Numerous counter-examples prove Feser’s syllogism invalid, including counter-acting deliberately chosen, essential bodily functions for some greater good.
…

(4) Feser’s (right) allowance for destroying and surgically removing one’s organs for a higher good, from the greater to the lesser, allows contra-acting them in the realization of their natural ends, which hence is not inherently wrong.
…

(8)…  Hence, so contra-acting, which is not inherently wrong, is right when it results in greater human flourishing, which could not occur (or would not best occur) except through this means…
…

(10) Aiming at a higher good and partially fulfilling it so far as one morally can (though it necessarily involve a partial counter-acting of an essential, facultative end) is good and is not an immoral deficiency.

(11)…  God set Adam in the garden to improve even pure-nature itself.
…

(13) Feser’s syllogism, while true for God, yet, it appears, cannot account for: (1) how simultaneous natural and positive laws differently bear upon man, (2) temptation or (3) self-denial, (4) including with respect to our Christ.”

Looking for some Christian guidance on birth control?

Is it wrong for a married couple to ever seek to prevent conception or to use contraceptives?  The quality resources on this new page argue ‘No’ on both counts, and give good general guidance.

The birth control pill is often thought to cause abortions some of the time, as an influential booklet by Randy Alcorn argues; hence many Christians will not use it.  However, a less well-known article by four pro-life OBGYNs lays out the persuasive medical evidence, contra Alcorn, that it does not.  This article has been recommended by the conservative Free Reformed Churches of North America.

A section also delves into the ethics of tying one’s tubes and vasectomies.  Even if you have no great interest in birth control, you can learn a lot about ethics in looking the page over.  May you honor the Lord in all your ways in these matters.

On the Ethics of Birth Control

.

“The heart of the prudent gets knowledge; and
the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.”

Prov. 18:15

The moderate puritans are often looked upon as compromisers in partially conforming to things not wholly right in the Church (and State); yet their reasons for this are little known.

This newly edited book from the archives is a one of a kind jewel.  Written by a group of unnamed English reformed ministers (in the trajectory of divine-right presbyterianism), they defend their outlook from the Scriptures while arguing against both the Conformists and Separatists, while preserving the Church as one (Jn. 17:20–23) in the fundamentals of the Faith, without sacrificing principles.

The Extended Introduction by Travis Fentiman (MDiv) sets forth the Scriptural case for principled partial conformity in worship and Church government, against George Gillespie.  It also documents that most of the Westminster divines were conformists to some degree under pain of ministerial deprivation, and shows how partial conformity is consistent with the Westminster standards.  The surprising breadth of Westminster’s parameters on worship is historically brought to light in consideration of its original intent.

The fascinating untold story of the indulged covenanting ministers in Scotland during 1669-1688, those who partially conformed to the undue impositions of the civil government, is narrated and defended from Scripture, especially against the arguments of that ultra non-conformist, John Brown of Wamphray.  The civil dethroning principles of the 1680’s Scottish Cameronians are shown to be erroneous and contrary to the reformed, puritan and covenanting tradition as especially summed up in Samuel Rutherford’s Lex Rex (1644).

An honest and not simplistic view of the Solemn League and Covenant (1643) is surveyed, drawing on some of the latest historical research, supporting the partial conforming trajectory.

Lastly, the Extended Intro drives against denominationalism and the wrong-headedness of erecting denominational white towers, seeking the unifying of Christ’s Church through the catholic principles of Scripture, Westminster, the Scots and the London presbyterians.  Church union in (at least) Christianity’s fundamentals will be seen to oblige from God’s Word, as many of the reformed, the London presbyterians and the Scottish covenanter James Durham taught.  Separation for secondary matters that do not tend to overturn the fundamentals is seen to be schism (notwithstanding your denomination’s constitution, vows, covenants, etc.).

See the first several pages of the Extended Intro for what other things are treated of and argued in the book.  Theological treasures are yours for the reaping; take up and read!

English Puritans – A Refutation of the Errors of Separatists  (1604; 1644; RBO, 2025)  300 pp.  with an Extended Intro by Travis Fentiman: “Defending the Lawfulness of Partial-Conformity in Worship & Church Government (including under Civil Impositions) from Scripture, Westminster & the Scottish Indulgence Controversy, contra George Gillespie, while Driving against Denominationalism, for the Unifying of Christ’s Church”

Separatism is often heralded as the height of Christian virtue, that one must separate from nearly every church or worship error.  Many Christians who would not go that far, may yet have latent separatistic tendencies.  Richard Baxter, in this newly cleaned up piece, demolishes the principles of Separatism.

His opponent?  John Owen.  Owen had written a tract arguing for separation, at least for those who had “engaged unto reformation,” from ever attending the Anglican liturgy.  In it Owen uses principles that may sound like the height of righteousness, but are separatist.  Baxter (rightly) convicts him of 42 errors.

The article has an editor’s Introduction.  If you have interest in worship issues, you will learn a lot.  May it humble us and cause us to more greatly love the Lord, his worship and his people.

Baxter, Richard – Richard Baxter on Worship & Catholicity against Separatism & John Owen  (RBO, 2024)  87 pp.

Our last article (pp. 10-16) introduced, expounded and documented the dominant view of the Reformed Orthodox of the mid- and late-1600’s on the timing of ensoulment in the womb, namely that not until the fetus takes on essential human characteristics of four limbs, movement, a heart-beat, sensation, having brain-waves and being in principle capable of rationality (namely at around 42 days after conception) is a soul infused into it by God.

This has brought up the question for some what the Westminster standards say, which do speak of conception in numerous places.

So Travis Fentiman, MDiv. has written a brief article demonstrating that the language of the Westminster documents is consistent with the three main views of ensoulment in that era.  As is documented and argued, part of the original, historic intent of Westminster was to allow for the majority Reformed Orthodox view that humans become ensouled persons at around 42 days after conception, which was the time of the personal union of Christ’s two natures.

‘On Westminster & Ensoulment’  at ‘On the Timing of Ensoulment in the Womb, including with respect to Christ’s Incarnation & Gestation’ (RBO)

It is exciting to read the seventeenth century reformed Dutch theologian Peter van Mastricht’s Theoretical-Practical Theology (RHB), the best systematic theology existent in English.  Volume 4 is out, on Christ’s Person, filled with wonderful material.

Three topics in the volume, however, may occasion some head scratching:

(1) His extended treatment of Christ’s human nature as being impersonal,
(2) That human life and the soul only start at around 42 days after conception; and so it was with Christ’s personal union of his natures in the Incarnation; and
(3) That Mary probably remained a perpetual virgin throughout her life.

A new readable but scholarly article by Travis Fentiman, MDiv, introduces and contextualizes these issues and shows:

(1) Mastricht’s view on Christ’s impersonal human nature was largely representative of Reformed Orthodoxy, and is right;
(2) The coherency and plausibility of life starting at around 42 days after conception, philosophically and Scripturally, as was the common view of Mastricht’s era; and it
(3) Documents that Mary’s de facto perpetual virginity as a historical belief, in contrast to Romanism holding it to be formally of the faith itself, was the near-universal view of Protestantism in that era, and the article shows the ethical and Scriptural coherence of this view.

You will learn more about the metaphysics of Christ’s Person than you ever have, and that is just the beginning.  See what you think and may it whet your taste for reading more of Mastricht!

Fentiman, Travis – ‘An Introduction to Peter van Mastricht on Christ’s Human Nature as Non-Personal, the Time of Ensoulment in the Womb & the Perpetual Virginity of Mary’  (RBO, 2024)  21 pp.

.

.

“Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.”

Prov. 9:9

Hebrews 1:3 says God is “upholding all things by the word of his power.”  If this is true then it should be for all created things that their existence and continuance has no sufficient explanation in their own natures, but is due only to God willing them to exist.

Can this be proven from investigating the nature of things from nature’s light?  It in fact can.

Aristotle’s argument for God from change was developed through Thomas Aquinas and more recently by Edward Feser.  Travis Fentiman has restylized it in a popular way in a new article.

See what you think, if God has been proven to exist!  If so share it with people that need the Lord and Christians whom it would build up in the Faith.

A Proof for God’s Existence

God has created beauty into so much that is around us.  In some respect it is an end in itself: that something is beautiful is the only justification one needs to look at it, receiving pleasure in doing so.

Yet what is beauty?  What is that which is common between a beautiful sight and beautiful music, or a beautiful math theorem.  If a collage of many items can be beautiful, then beauty is not simply a characteristic of objects, but is transcendental.  How much do you know about beauty?

Scripture says, “One thing have I desired…  all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord.” (Ps. 27:4)  Our God not only reveals Himself with extraordinary beauty, but is Himself beautiful, the last, most perfect and final end of unlimited pleasure for all rational creatures.

Explore beauty with our new webpage that has collected the wisdom of ancients and moderns:

On Beauty

We ought to love God’s worship, but what about when we face impurities in it?  Questions abound: Ought one to abstain from every impurity, or may some be participated in?  Must one separate from the whole service? (No)

Our new page goes indepth into these questions and many more, answering them from the Scriptures, Westminster and the puritans.

Some churches teach, “Sincerity cannot make unscriptural worship acceptable to God.”  This is plainly contrary to the Word (1 Kings 8:18-19; 22:42-43; 2 Kings 12:2-3; 2 Chron. 15:15-18; Ps. 51:17; Rom. 14:1-8, etc.), Westminster and the puritans, as is demonstrated in the webpage’s section: ‘God May Graciously Accept Impure Worship’.  A new article defends this from the account of Nadab, Abihu and Aaron in Lev. 10.

Other sections distinguish between impurities and literal idolatry, that impure worship ordinances may be valid, that we have necessary duties in worship though others sin, and that some impurities may be, and may need to be, personally performed.  In addition, attending externally impure worship may be better than attending a church with externally purer worship, due to many circumstances and reasons.

Navigating impurities in worship can be complex, so we put together detailed principles from solid theologians on how to go about such.  The page also gives guidance on what to do when impurities cannot be reformed.

A section to be read slowly and deeply is that all worship, even of glorified saints and angels, is impure before God’s uncreated being and infinite perfections, forever.

The webpage includes an Intro to the issues (with answers):

On Impurities in Worship

Praise the Lord for so much light from our fathers on the subject, and may He lighten your path.  “The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.” Ps. 119:30

We are glad to announce the Loeb Classical Library is now online at RBO.  It provides translations of classic Greek and Roman authors from antiquity with the original Greek or Latin on facing pages with the English.  Some works are only found in this series.

The Loeb Classical Library Online

429 of its 558 volumes (76%) are available.  Other collections online are less complete or less convenient and easy to use.

We hope this resource will prove a blessing to many.

Where can you find all the councils of Church history in their original languages?  On this new page:

The Councils of Church History in Greek & Latin

To find not just some excerpts of the councils, but all their creeds, canons, acts and documents can be quite challenging, until now.

For ease of use, a section of resources putting an English translation next to the Greek and Latin is provided for the most important passages from the most important of these councils.

But if you want all 53 volumes plus of the councils in Latin (every Greek passage has a Latin translation) up through 1902, in a digestible format, you have found the mother lode.

The Medieval Peter Lombard (†1160) was the fountainhead of systematic theology in the Church’s Western tradition.  His Four Books of Sentences, or theological judgments, has likely been the most influential book of theology ever.

Through the 1500’s throughout Europe, to gain a doctorate one had to give a commentary on the Master’s Sentences.  Hence, every Medieval theologian of prominence wrote a commentary.  Over 1,700 such commentaries have survived through history.  Yet the Sentences were only translated into English in 2007, and are not easy to access in Latin online, till now.

Lombard’s work is devoutly pious, is a gateway to the earlier fathers, and, despite it containing some of the errors of his age, is historically aware and full of legitimate (and edifying), detailed theology, much more so in fact than many contemporary systematic theologies.

Our new webpage has translated the Sentences‘ detailed table of contents, with links provided, so you can see what is in the work.  We have also collected over 80 Sentence commentaries (almost all are in Latin), forming a corpus of the most prominent Medieval theologians and some of the most detailed theology across the theological gamut ever written in Church history.  The Reformed often resourced the Medievals, for good reasons.

For the commentaries of John Duns Scotus, Gregory of Rimini (a favorite of the Reformed), Martin Luther (yes, the Protestant reformer) and the reformed theologian Lambert Daneau, we have translated their detailed tables of contents and provided links.

Lombard’s Sentences, Commentaries on Them, etc.

Resources are also linked on the Lombard’s life, his theology and Sentences and their commentaries.  May this collection be helpful to you and others in further looking into and understanding our Lord’s things and the deveolopment of Christ’s Church.

Patrologia Graeca and Patrologia Latina are the standard, older, massive series of volumes of the writings of the early and medieval Church fathers, all online.  We have put them all on one webpage.  This webpage is the easiest and most convenient way to access and use them on the net.

As almost all the Greek writings have a Latin translation on the facing column, if you are able to learn and read Latin, you can read almost all the fathers throughout Church history.  The Reformed Orthodox regularly reference the fathers; here is where you can find them.

Many helpful links are provided, such as to where the series have been digitized and are fully searchable.  The indices on the page allow one to find for a topic of interest (whether theological, Scriptural, historical, etc.) all the places in the early and medieval Church where it is addressed, making this an invaluable resource.

The Fathers in Greek & Latin: Patrologia Graeca & Latina

If this page be a blessing to you, bless God through it.  “For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things: to whom be glory forever.” (Rom. 11:36)

Where did the Reformed in her classical era agree and disagree with Aquinas?

In light of the resurgence of Protestant interest in Aquinas, this new webpage with an Intro is a large reference list, going through the whole gamut of theology, juxtaposing Aquinas with Reformed Orthodox theologians on each theological point, listing and documenting their agreements and then disagreements.

Contrary to a popular belief, the Reformed did disagree with Aquinas on aspects of his doctrine of God, the Trinity, Christ, Predestination and Natural Law, as well as about everything else.

Some Protestants reading Aquinas have begun to imbibe some of his Romanist doctrines.  Others, wholly write him off as a bad influence, and miss out on the tremendous profit that can be gleaned from him.

While we do not recommend that new Christians, or the uninformed, read Aquinas, yet Reformed theologians in the Post-Reformation critically appropriated Aquinas, benefiting from him where they could. This webpage lays it out in front of you, taking out the mystery.  If you have interest in beginning to read Aquinas, this is a great place to start.

You will learn A LOT of some of the most precious and detailed theology about our Lord, his Christ, and our salvation, nearly nowhere else to be easily found, just by reading through this page:

‘Where Reformed Orthodox Writers Agreed & Disagreed with Aquinas’

We have also collected resources ‘On the Reception of Aquinas in Church History’.

.

“For inquire, I pray you, of the former age, and prepare yourself to the search of their fathers
(for we are but of yesterday and know nothing, because our days upon earth are a shadow).

Shall not they teach you and tell you, and utter words out of their heart?”

Job 8:8-11