Exposition of the Doctrines of Gracenos. 385-88. Thursday, April 11th, 1861.
he proceedings were commenced by singing the 21st Hymn
The law's tremendous curse, We'll now the sacred song begin Where God began with us.
We'll sing the vast unmeasured grace
The basis of eternal love
Sing, O ye sinners bought with blood,
Ne'er had ye felt the guilt of sin,
O what a sweet exalted son The Rev. George Wyard, of Deptford, offered prayer.
he REV. C. H. Spurgeon in opening the proceedings said, we have met
together beneath this roof already to set forth most of those truths
in which consists the peculiarity of this Church. Last evening we
endeavoured to show to the world, that we heartily recognised the
essential union of the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. And now, this
afternoon and evening, it is our intention, through the lips of our
brethren, to set forth those things which are verily received among
us, and especially those great points which have been so often
attacked, but which are still upheld and maintained,truths which we
have proved in our experience to be full of grace and truth. My only
business upon this occasion is to introduce the brethren who shall
address you, and I shall do so as briefly as possible, making what I
shall say a preface to their remarks.
"Lord, I despair myself to heal:
'Tis thine a heart of flesh to give;
With simple faith on thee I call, HYMN 133, verse 4.
"Thy golden sceptre from above This is very like election.
"I cannot rest, till in thy blood
From sin, the guilt, the power, the pain,
I too, with thee, shall walk in white; Brethren, is not this somewhat like final perseverance? and what is meant by the next quotation, if people of God can perish at all?
"Who, who shall in thy presence stand,
Sworn to destroy, let earth assail; The following is remarkably strong, especially in the expression "force." I give it in full:
"O my God, what must I do?
Take away my darling sin,
Jesus, mighty to renew,
Arm of God, thy strength put on; HYMN 206, verses 1, 2.
"What am I, O thou glorious God!
Me in my blood the love pass'd by,
Nor are these all, for such good things as these abound, and they
constrain me to say, that in attacking Arminianism we have no
hostility towards the men who bear the name rather than the nature of
that error, and we are opposed not to any body of men, but to the
notions which they have espoused.
The family above." "Toplady, one of the keenest of Calvinists, was of this number. "In my remarks," says he, "on Dr. Nowell, I testified my firm belief that the souls of all departed infants are with God in glory; that in the decree of predestination to life, God hath included all whom he decreed to take away in infancy, and that the decree of reprobation hath nothing to do with them." Nay, he proceeds farther, and asks, with reason, how the anti-Calvinistic system of conditional salvation and election, or good works foreseen, will suit with the salvation of infants? It is plain that Arminians and Pelagians must introduce a new principle of election; and in so far as the salvation of infants is concerned, become Calvinists. Is it not an argument in behalf of Calvinism, that its principle is uniform throughout, and that no change is needed on the ground on which man is saved, whether young or old? John Newton, of London, the friend of Cowper, noted for his Calvinism, holds that the children in heaven exceed its adult inhabitants in all their multitudinous array. Gill, a very champion of Calvinism, held the doctrine, that all dying in infancy are saved. An intelligent modern writer, (Dr. Russell, of Dundee,) also a Calvinist, maintains the same views; and when it is considered that nearly one-half of the human race die in early years, it is easy to see what a vast accession must be daily and hourly making to the blessed population of heaven." A more common charge, brought by more decent people,for I must say that the last charge is never brought, except by disreputable persons,a more common charge is, that we hold clear fatalism. Now, there may be Calvinists who are fatalists, but Calvinism and fatalism are two distinct things. Do not most Christians hold the doctrine of the providence of God? Do not all Christians, do not all believers in a God hold the doctrine of his foreknowledge? All the difficulties which are laid against the doctrine of predestination might, with equal force, be laid against that of Divine foreknowledge. We believe that God hath predestinated all things from the beginning, but there is a difference between the predestination of an intelligent, all-wise, all-bounteous God, and that blind fatalism which simple says, "It is because it is to be." Between the predestination of Scripture and the fate of the Koran, every sensible man must perceive a difference of the most essential character. We do not deny that the thing is so ordained that it must be, but why is it to be, but that the Father, God, whose name is love, ordained it; not because of any necessity in circumstances that such and such a thing should take place. Though the wheels of providence revolve with rigid exactness, yet not without purpose and wisdom. The wheels are full of eyes, and everything ordained is so ordained that it shall conduce to the grandest of all ends, the glory of God, and the next to that the good of his creatures. But we are next met by some who tell us that we preach the wicked and horrible doctrine of sovereign and unmerited reprobation. "Oh," say they, "you teach that men are damned because God made them to be damned, and that they go to hell, not because of sin, not because of unbelief, but because of some dark decree with which God has stamped their destiny." Brethren, this is an unfair charge again. Election does not involve reprobation. There may be some who hold unconditional reprobation. I stand not here as their defender, let them defend themselves as best they can; I hold God's election, but I testify just as clearly that if any man be lost he is lost for sin; and this has been the uniform statement of Calvinistic ministers. I might refer you to our standards, such as "The Westminster Assembly's Catechism," and to all our Confession, for they all distinctly state that man is lost for sin, and that there is no punishment put on any man except that which he richly and righteously deserves. If any of you have ever uttered that libel against us, do it not again, for we are as guiltless of that as you are yourselves. I am speaking personallyand I think in this I would command the suffrages of my brethrenI do know that the appointment of God extendeth to all things; but I stand not in this pulpit, nor in any other, to lay the damnation of any man anywhere but upon himself. If he be lost, damnation is all of man; but, if he be saved, still salvation is all of God. To state this important point yet more clearly and explicitly, I shall quote at large from an able Presbyterian divine: "The pious Methodist is taught that the Calvinist represents God as creating men in order to destroy them. He is taught that Calvinists hold that men are lost, not because they sin, but because they are nonelected. Believing this to be a true statement, it is not wonderful that the Methodist stops short, and declares himself, if not an Arminian, at least an AntiPredestinarian. But no statement can be more scandalously untrue. It is the uniform doctrine of Calvinism, that God creates all for his own glory; that he is infinitely righteous and benignant, and that where men perish it is only for their sins. In speaking of suffering, whether in this world or in the world to come; whether it respects angels or men, the Westminster standards (which may be considered as the most authoritative modern statement of the system) invariably connect the punishment with previous sin, and sin only. "As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God as a righteous judge FOR FORMER SINS doth blind and harden, from them he not only withholdeth his grace, whereby they might have been enlightened in their understandings and wrought upon in their hearts, but sometimes also with draweth the gifts which they had, and exposeth them to such objects as their corruption makes occasion of sin; and withal gives them over to their own lusts, the temptations of the world, and the power of Satan, whereby it comes to pass that they harden themselves even under those means which God useth for the softening of others." The Larger Catechism, speaking of the unsaved among angels and men, says, "God according to his Sovereign power and the unsearchable counsel of his own will (whereby he extendeth or withholdeth favour as he pleaseth) hath passed by and fore-ordained the rest to dishonour and wrath, to be for their sin inflicted, to the praise of the glory of his justice." Again, "the end of God appointing this day (of the last judgment) is for the manifestation of the glory of his mercy, in the eternal salvation of the elect, and of his justice in the damnation of the reprobate who are wicked and disobedient." This is no more than what the Methodist and all other Evangelical bodies acknowledgethat where men perish it is in consequence of their sin. If it be asked, why sin which destroys, is permitted to enter the world, that is a question which bears not only on the Calvinist, but equally on all other parties. They are as much concerned and bound to answer it as he; nay, the question in not confined to Christians. All who believe in the existence of Godin his righteous character and perfect providence, are equally under obligation to answer it. Whatever may be the reply of others, that of the Calvinist may be regarded as given in the statement of the Confession of Faith, which declares that God's providence extendeth itself even to the first fall, and other sins of angels and men, &c.; "yet so as the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from the creature, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin." It is difficult to see what more could be said upon the subject; and if such be the undoubted sentiments of Calvinists, then what misrepresentation can be more gross than that which describes them as holding that sinners perish irrespective of their sin, or that God is the author of their sin? What is the declaration of Calvin? "Every soul departs (at death) to that place which it has prepared for itself while in this world." It is hard to be charged with holding as sacred truth what one abhors as horrid blasphemy, and yet this is the treatment which has been perseveringly meted out to Calvinists in spite of the most solemn and indignant disclaimers. Against nothing have they more stoutly protested than the thought that the infinitely holy, and righteous, and amiable Jehovah is the author of sin; and yet how often do the supporters of rival systems charge them with this as an article of faith? A yet further charge against us is, that we dare not preach the gospel to the unregenerate, that, in fact, our theology is so narrow and cramped that we cannot preach to sinners. Gentlemen, if you dare to say this, I would take you to any library in the world where the old Puritan fathers are stored up, and I would let you take down any one volume and tell me if you ever read more telling exhortations and addresses to sinners in any of your own books. Did not Bunyan plead with sinners, and whoever classed him with any but the Calvinist? Did not Charnock, Goodwin, and Howe agonise for souls, and what were they but Calvinist? Did not Jonathan Edwards preach to sinners, and who more clear and explicit on these doctrinal matters. The works of our innumerable divines teem with passionate appeals to the unconverted. Oh, sirs, if I should begin the list, time should fail me. It is an indisputable fact that we have laboured more than they all for the winning of souls. Was George Whitfield any the less seraphic? Did his eyes weep the fewer tears or his bowels move with the less compassion because he believed in God's electing love and preached the sovereignty of the Most High? It is an unfounded calumny. Our souls are not stony; our bowels are not withdrawn the compassion which we ought to feel for our fellowmen; we can hold all our views firmly, and yet can weep as Christ did over a Jerusalem which was certainly to be destroyed. Again, I must say, I am not defending certain brethren who have exaggerated Calvinism. I speak of Calvinism proper, not that which has run to seed, and outgrown its beauty and verdure. I speak of it as I find it in Calvin's Institutes, and especially in his Expositions. I have read them carefully. I take not my views of Calvinism from common repute but from his books. Nor do I, in this speaking, even vindicate Calvinism as if I cared for the name, but I mean that glorious system which teaches that salvation is of grace from first to last. And again, then, I say it is an utterly unfounded charge that we dare not preach to sinners. And then further, that I may clear up these points and leave the less rubbish for my brethren to wheel away, we have sometimes heard it said, but those who say it ought to go to school to read the first book of history, that we who hold Calvinistic views are the enemies of revivals. Why, sirs, in the history of the Church, with but few exceptions, you could not find a revival at all that was not produced by the orthodox faith. What was the great work which was done by Augustine, when the Church suddenly woke up from the pestiferous and deadly sleep into which Pelagian doctrine had cast it? What was the Reformation itself but the waking up of men's minds to those old truths? However far modern Lutherans may have turned aside from their ancient doctrines, and I must confess some of them would not agree with what I now say, yet, at any rate, Luther and Calvin had no dispute about Predestination. Their views were identical, and Luther, "On the bondage of the will," is as strong a book upon the free grace of God as Calvin himself could have written. Hear that great thunderer while he cries in that book, "Let the Christian reader know then, that God foresees nothing in a contingent manner; but that he foresees, proposes, and acts, from his eternal and unchangeable will. This is the thunder stroke which breaks and overturns Free Will." Need I mention to you better names than Huss, Jerome of Prague, Farrel, John Knox, Wickliffe, Wishart, and Bradford? Need I do more than say that these held the same views, and that in their day anything like an Arminian revival was utterly unheard of and undreamed of. And then, to come to more modern times, there is the great exception, that wondrous revival under Mr. Wesley, in which the Wesleyan Methodists had so large a share; but permit me to say, that the strength of the doctrine of Wesleyan Methodism lay in its Calvinism. The great body of the Methodists disclaimed Palagianism, in whole and in part. They contended for man's entire depravity, the necessity of the direct agency of the Holy Spirit, and that the first step in the change proceeds not from the sinner, but from God. They denied at the time that they were Pelagians. Does not the Methodist hold as firmly as ever we do, that man is saved by the operation of the holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost alone? And are not many of Mr. Wesley's sermons full of that great truth, that the Holy Ghost is necessary to regeneration? Whatever mistakes he may have made, he continually preached the absolute necessity of the new birth by the Holy Ghost, and there are some other points of exceedingly close agreement; for instance, even that of human inability. It matters not how some may abuse us, when we say man could not of himself repent or believe; yet, the old Arminian standards said the same. True, they affirm that God has given grace to every man, but they do not dispute the fact, that apart from that grace there was no ability in man to do that which was good in his own salvation. And then, let me say, if you turn to the continent of America, how gross the falsehood, that Calvinistic doctrine is unfavourable to revivals. Look at that wondrous shaking under Jonathan Edwards, and others which we might quote. Or turn to Scotlandwhat shall we say of M'Cheyne? What shall we say of those renowned Calvinists, Dr. Chalmers, Dr. Wardlow, and before them Livingstone, Haldane, Erskine, and the like? What shall we say of the men of their school, but that, while they held and preached unflinchingly the great truths which we would propound to-day, yet God owned their word, and multitudes were saved. And if it were not perhaps too much like boasting of one's own work under God, I might say, personally I have never found the preaching of these doctrines lull this Church to sleep, but ever while they have loved to maintain these truths, they have agonised for the souls of men, and the 1600 or more of whom I have myself baptized, upon profession of their faith, are living testimonies that these old truths in modern times have not lost their power to promote a revival of religion. I have thus cleared away these allegations at the outset; I shall now need a few minutes more to say, with regard to the Calvinistic system, that there are some things to be said in its favour, to which of course I attach but little comparative importance, but they ought not to be ignored. It is a fact that the system of doctrines called the Calvinistic, is so exceedingly simple and so readily learned, that as a system of Divinity it is more easily taught and more easily grasped by unlettered minds than any other. The poor have the Gospel preached to them in a style which assists their memories and commends itself to their judgments. It is a system which was practically acknowledged an high philosophic grounds by such men as Bacon, Leibnitz, and Newton, and yet it can charm the soul of a child and expand the intellect of a peasant. And then it has another virtue. I take it that the last is no mean one, but it has anotherthat when it is preached there is a something in it which excites thought. A man may hear sermons upon the other theory which shall glance over him as the swallow's wing gently sweeps the brook, but these old doctrines either make a man so angry that he goes home and cannot sleep for very hatred, or else they bring him down into lowliness of thought, feeling the immensity of the things which he has heard. Either way it excites and stirs him up not temporarily, but in a most lasting manner. These doctrines haunt him, he kicks against the pricks, and full often the word forces a way into his soul. And I think this is no small thing for any doctrine to do, in an age given to slumber, and with human hearts so indifferent to the truth of God. I know that many men have gained more good by being made angry under a sermon than by being pleased by it, for being angry they have turned the truth over and over again, and at last the truth has burned its way right into their hearts. They have played with edge-tools, but they have cut themselves at last. It has this singular virtue alsoit is so coherent in all its parts. You cannot vanquish a Calvinist. You may think you can, but you cannot. The stones of the great doctrines so fit into each other, that the more pressure there is applied to remove them the more strenuously do they adhere. And you may mark, that you cannot receive one of these doctrines without believing all. Hold for instance that man is utterly depraved, and you draw the inference then that certainly if God has such a creature to deal with salvation must come from God alone, and if from him, the offended one, to an offending creature, then he has a right to give or withhold his mercy as he wills; you are this forced upon election, and when you have gotten that you have all: the others must follow. Some by putting the strain upon their judgments may manage to hold two or three points and not the rest, but sound logic I take it requires a man to hold the whole or reject the whole; the doctrines stand like soldiers in a square, presenting on every side a line of defence which it is hazardous to attack, but easy to maintain. And mark you, in these times when error is so rife and neology strives to be so rampant, it is no little thing to put into the hands of a young man a weapon which can slay his foe, which he can easily learn to handle, which he may grasp tenaciously, wield readily, and carry without fatigue; a weapon, I may add, which no rust can corrode and no blows can break, trenchant, and well annealed, a true Jerusalem blade of a temper fit for deeds of renown. The coherency of the parts, though it be of course but a trifle in comparison with other things, is not unimportant. And then, I add,but this is the point my brethren will take upit has this excellency, that it is scriptural, and that it is consistent with the experience of believers. Men generally grow more Calvinistic as they advance in years. Is not that a sign that the doctrine is right. As they are growing riper for heaven, as they are getting nearer to the rest that remaineth for the people of God, the soul longs to feed on the finest of the wheat, and abhors chaff and husks. And then, I addand, in so doing, I would refute a calumny that has sometimes been urged,this glorious truth has this excellency, that it produces the holiest of men. We can look back through all our annals, and say, to those who oppose us, you can mention no names of men more holy, more devoted, more loving, more generous than those which we can mention. The saints of our calendar, though uncanonized by Rome, rank first in the book of life. The names of Puritan needs only to be heard to constrain our reverence. Holiness had reached a height among them which is rare indeed, and well it might for they loved and lived the truth. And if you say that our doctrine is inimical to human liberty, we point you to Oliver Cromwell and to his brave Ironsides, Calvinists to a man. If you say, it leads to inaction, we point you to the Pilgrim Fathers and the wildernesses they subdued. We can put our finger upon every spot of land, the wide world o'er, and say, "Here was something done by a man who believed in God's decrees; and, inasmuch as he did this, it is proof it did not make him inactive, it did not lull him to sloth." The better way, however of proving this point is for each of us who hold these truths, to be more prayerful, more watchful, more holy, more active than we have ever been before, and by so doing, we shall put to silence the gainsaying of foolish men. A living argument, is an argument which tells upon every man; we cannot deny what we see and feel. Be it ours, if aspersed and calumniated, to disprove it by a blameless life, and it shall yet come to pass, that our Church and its sentiments too shall come forth "Fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners."
ELECTIONBY THERev. JOHN BLOOMFIELD,OF MEARD'S COURT, SOHO.
My dear Christian friends, those who
best know my cast of mind and ministry will readily believe me when I
say I would rather have spoken on the majesty and mystery of the
person of Christ, or I would rather have spoken on the perfection and
intrinsic worth of the mediation of Christ, or on the great
attraction of Christ as a gracious and omnipotent Saviour, than on
the subject that has been assigned to me. The subject that has been
given me is that of the doctrine of eternal and personal election; I
have to prove that the doctrine of election is a scriptural truth;
and, at the commencement of my few remarks on this profound subject,
allow me to say that I hold and firmly believe the Bible to be
revelation from God, that the revelations of God's mind are
essentially and infallibly true, that its ancient historical records
are of the greatest value, that its prophecies are to be studied and
to be venerated, that the doctrines of the Bible are in harmony with
the majesty, wisdom, holiness and goodness of their Author. Now it
should not be a point with us whether a doctrine is like or disliked,
whether it is believed or disbelieved, but whether it is a doctrine
according to godliness, whether it is the doctrine of the Word of
God. Truth has never been popular in this world: Jesus Christ when on
earth was by no means popular. Truth never will be popular in this
world while men are influenced by sin, and enmity against God.
Perhaps no doctrine has met with such bitter opposition as the
doctrine on which I have to speak. It has been fearfully
misunderstood for a want of prayerful and independent study of the
Holy Scriptures, or perhaps from the miserable misrepresentations
that have been given of it by some public men. It is a truth which
has been bitterly opposed; we may oppose a doctrine which we cannot
with all our puny efforts depose. We may dispute in our blindness and
enmity a doctrine which we cannot refute. We believe firmly that the
doctrine of election to salvation in Jesus Christ is a doctrine of
the Scriptures. We believe in sovereign love, but not in sovereign
hatred. We believe in salvation by the grace of God without works,
but not in damnation without sin. We believe firmly in election to
salvation by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, but we discard from our
creed the miserable, wretched doctrine of reprobation without sin. Is
the doctrine of election a Scriptural doctrine? Can we prove it from
the word of God? It is one thing to believe it to be a doctrine of
Divine revelation, and it is another thing to have the sanctifying
grace and power of it in our hearts. The election we read of in the
Scriptures is inseparably connected with holiness, and we believe in
no election to salvation without faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. He
who has appointed salvation as an end has appointed the methods by
which that end shall be accomplished. Perhaps no man possessed of his
reasoning powers questions the truth that God has predestinated
harvest as long as this world shall continue. But without sowing of
seed, without the agricultural labour that is given to the land, we
should have no harvest, because he who predestinated harvest
predestinated the sowing of the seed as much. And God has appointed
us not unto wrath, but to obtain salvation through Jesus Christ. I
shall endeavour now to prove, from the quotation of a few Scriptures,
that the doctrine of eternal and personal election is a Scriptural
and Divine truth. Jesus Christ himself was said to be "chosen of God
and precious." He is God's elect, for Jehovah himself says, "Behold
my servant, mine elect in whom my soul delighteth." Angels that
continue in their unfallen dignity and felicity are termed elect
angels. Elect angels are employed as ministering spirits to those
that shall be heirs of salvation. Elect angels will be employed in
the gathering of God's elect into the heavenly world. The Jewish
nation was a chosen nation, and as such they were privileged with the
oracles of God, and stood as a representative people. They were
chosen not because of their personal worth, they were chosen not
because of their goodness, but they were chosen to be a separated
people, a people that should be God's peculiar treasure, and should
be holiness unto the Lord; of them it was said, "For thou art a holy
people unto the Lord thy Godthe Lord hath chosen thee to be a
special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face
of the earth." Jesus Christ himself, in the 24th chapter of Matthew,
speaks of certain days being shortened because of God's elect. The
Psalmist craved to be remembered with the favour that God was pleased
to bear towards his people, that he might see the good of his chosen.
And Jesus Christ himself said to his disciples, "Ye have not chose
me, but I have chosen you." And the Apostle Paul very often in his
writings has brought out this great and profound doctrine. He says,
"There is a remnant according to the election of grace." He speaks to
the Ephesian Church, and says, "Ye are chosen in Christ before the
foundation of the world that ye may be holy, and that ye may stand
before God without blame in love." God hath in the exercise of his
sovereignty chosen a people in Christ to salvation before time
beganit was before the foundation of the world, here is its
antiquityit is in Christ according to the riches of God's grace,
and it is to holiness and salvation. He, in his addresses to the
Church at Thessalonica, said he could but thank God "that they were
chosen to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and the
belief of the truth." Peter speaks of the people of God as a chosen
generation and a royal priesthood. He wrote to the elect according to
the foreknowledge of God the Father. More Scriptures might be given
upon this subject, but I think they would be unnecessary. If we would
only give our attention to the simple teachings of the Spirit of God
by the prophets, by the Psalmist, by Christ, and by the Apostles, we
could not have one moment's doubt as to the doctrine of Divine
election being a Scriptural truth. |