(Continued from page 248.)
AS has been pointed out in our former article, the two works of Calvin included under the general title, “Calvin’s Calvinism,” were first translated in 1855. They were not included in the edition of Calvin’s Works issued by the Calvin Translation Society, and the Sovereign Grace Union deserves the thanks of all admirers of the great Reformer in thus re-issuing these treatises in a neatly got up and well printed volume. All who wish to know Calvin’s real views on predestination and his answers to his opponent will do well to procure and study this volume.
The prominence given to the doctrine of Predestination by Calvin has been used by ill-informed critics to bring an accusation against a doctrine they hate by asserting that it is only Calvin’s view. But the plain facts of the case are that Calvin’s Predestinarianism is Augustine’s Augustinianism, which in its turn is the doctrine taught by our Lord and His Apostles—especially by Paul. The doctrine is so plainly taught in Scripture that one marvels how any fair-minded person can read the Bible and yet deny that predestination is plainly taught there. It is not our intention at present to bring forward the formidable and convincing array of texts in proof of the doctrine that might be easily adduced. These texts will be found in any edition of the Westminster Confession of Faith. In its third chapter we have as fine a presentation and as sane a statement of the doctrine as there is in any or all of the Reformed symbols.
Modern theologians, in an effort to improve certain sections in this chapter, as was indicated in the recent articles on the Declaratory Act in our pages, destroyed the fine balance and careful statement of the doctrine as presented by the divines. These moderns, accustomed as they were to wade in shallow waters, lost not only their footing but their heads when they got into the deep waters of theology. The great divines who drew up the Confession approached this august and awe-inspiring doctrine with becoming humility and Christian caution, as witness what they say in Section VIII.:—”The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation, to all that sincerely obey the Gospel.”
With the opening words of this section in our mind we proceed to state the doctrine of Predestination as received by the Reformed Church which accepted it on the ground that it was most surely taught in God’s Word. By predestination theologians generally understand the whole of God’s decrees or purposes, His determinations, with respect to the ultimate destiny, the eternal condition of mankind. Under this general head are embraced election and reprobation. Election comprehends God’s decree in regard to those that are to be saved, while reprobation is commonly used as a designation for His decree in passing by the rest of mankind. The Confessional statements as to election may be quoted here:—”By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life . . . These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or diminished. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was made, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and
love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace. As God hath appointed the elect into glory, so hath He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto.” From these statements the Westminster divines taught (1) that God in His choice acted according to the counsel of His will; (2) that it was not because of any good in the objects of His choice or that He foresaw they would do any good that the choice was made; (3) that all His people were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world; and (4) that God foreordained all the means whereby His chosen would be brought to glory.
In regard to Reprobation, the Confession, while not using the word, certainly teaches the doctrine, as the following statements show:—”By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. The rest of mankind was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by, and ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.” If only some are chosen, then it follows as a necessary consequence that the rest are passed by, and if none of the chosen had any claim on God’s favour, neither can any of those “passed by” in justice say that they have been unrighteously dealt with. None is condemned to dishonour and wrath for being passed by, but for their sin (Sec. VII.).
A point of some importance may be noticed here, though it is more generally dealt with by theologians under the doctrine of the extent of the atonement than under the doctrine of the divine decree. It was stated by Pighius that, inasmuch as the Redeemer commanded the Gospel to be preached to all men without distinction, he could not believe in special election. This is the old problem of the free offer of the Gospel with which those who hold firmly the doctrine of election and a definite atonement are confronted. It is interesting to notice Calvin’s answer to Pighius. Here it is:—”If we see
and acknowledge, therefore, the principle on which the doctrine of the Gospel offers salvation to all, the whole sacred matter is settled at once. That the Gospel is, in its nature, able to save all I by no means deny. But the great question lies here: Did the Lord by His eternal counsel ordain salvation for all men? It is quite manifest that all men, without difference or distinction, are outwardly called or invited to repentance and faith. It is equally evident the same Mediator is set forth before all, as He who alone can reconcile them to the Father. But it is as fully well known that none of these things can be understood or perceived but by faith, in fulfilment of the Apostle Paul’s declaration that ‘the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth’; then what can it be to others but the ‘savour of death unto death?’ as the same Apostle elsewhere powerfully expresses it. And further, as it is undeniably manifest that out of the multitudes whom God calls by His outward voice in the Gospel, very few believe, if I prove that the greater part of these multitudes remain unbelieving (for God deems none worthy of His illumination but whom He will), I obtain thereby the next conclusion, that the mercy of God is offered equally to those who believe and to those who believe not, so that those who are not divinely taught within are only rendered inexcusable, not saved” (Calvin’s Calvinism, pp. 94, 95). Calvin was so accustomed stressing the free offer of the Gospel that his opponents made a bad use of it and charged him with holding a universal atonement, as is clearly pointed out in an extract on another page from Dr Cunningham’s “Reformers and Theology of the Reformation.” Following in his train, the great Scottish preachers, such as Rutherford, Gray, Binning, Boston, Halyburton, the Erskines, Robert Murray MacCheyne, Dr Kennedy, etc., while holding firmly the doctrines of election and a definite atonement, made a free offer of the Gospel in their preaching. They did so because they believed they had full warrant from the Scriptures for doing so, and they certainly had the greatest theologians of the Reformed Church on their side.
I am at entire enmity with God, when I am at enmity with His holy law.—Rowland Hill.
Bad is never the better, because some persons called good have been found to promote it.—Rowland Hill.
Notes of Sermons.
BY THE REV. KENNETH BAYNE.
Preached in the Gaelic Chapel, Greenock, on the
24th September and 8th October, 1820.
II.
(Continued from p. 253.)
“Quench not the Spirit” (I. Thess. v., 19).
[HE proposed first to show what the sanctifying and saving influences of the Spirit were. And after a recapitulation of his former discourse, he observed that the first of these saving influences was divine illumination.] This illumination had a respect to what was past, what was present, and what was future.
I. It had reference both to this and the other world. The person enlightened had new views of God, of himself, of heaven, and hell such as he never had before.
II. There was a thorough conviction of the intrinsic evil of sin in itself, in its own nature, and of one’s own personal sinfulness and guilt, and a mourning over and loathing of one’s self for it and a beginning to forsake it.
III. Faith in Jesus Christ was a saving grace of the spirit. [Here he mentioned many Scriptures that spoke of faith as of vast importance in the Christian life.]
IV. Conversion or a thorough change of heart and life. [He mentioned many Scriptures here also, as to the first quickening of the soul dead in trespasses and sins, and as to the gradual change in heart and life which he called active conversion.]
V. Another influence of the Spirit was assistance in duty. This assistance included in it (1) a right knowledge of the matter of duty, of what was really duty; (2) knowledge or sense of the principles, motives, and ends of duty; (3) excitations to engage and persevere in duty; and (4) a removal of the hindrances to and obstructions in duty, as in the case of Moses when he could not speak.
VI. Support under trials and afflictions is another work of the Spirit. This implies (1) the testimony of conscience. “This is our rejoicing,” says the Apostle (II. Cor. i., 12); (2) a sense of pardon and reconciliation with God. This was a great support even where there
*
was some doubtings; (3) the hope of eternal life in glory; and (4) the Spirit gave them physical help in supporting their bodies under their afflictions and trials (Ps. lxxiii., 15).
VII. The sanctified use of afflictions was another saving work of the Spirit. This implied (1) further discoveries of sin as an evil, (2) discoveries of the sin or sins which were the cause of present trials; (3) patience wrought in the soul and other things as mentioned in Romans v.; (4) weanedness from the world, heavenly mindedness, love to God, and hope of glory; [here he shortly explained the verses at the beginning of Romans v., and added: “some of the godly were chastised, some of them were scourged, and often the holiest were most chastised.”]
VIII. Mortification of sin. [Here he spoke of the power of sin being broken in regeneration, and though the root of it still remained and was often raising up its head, yet the believer got victories, and its power and operation were gradually weakened.]
IX. Establishment in grace and perseverance therein was another work of the Spirit.
X. Preparation for heaven was also the work of the Holy Spirit. This consisted (1) in active virtue and (2) in contemplation, or in other words, in having our loins girt. This is heavenly contemplation on spiritual and divine glories. And having our lights burning, that is being actively employed in the temporal and spiritual duties of our station. “Letting our light shine before men” (Matt. v., 16).
Application.—(1) Let us examine ourselves. What do we know experimentally about the saving influences of the Spirit? (2) Let those who have experience of them adore and praise God for His sovereign free grace. (3) Such as have no experimental knowledge of any of these things cannot possibly get to heaven.
8th October, 1820.—After a brief recapitulation of his former discourses he came to his second head, which was to show in what manner men quenched the Spirit, or how or in what various ways both converted and unconverted persons did quench the Holy Spirit. To quench the Holy Spirit meant in general any ways in which His influence and operations might be opposed, or hindered, or prevented from being effectual to the sanctification and final salvation of men. He then said that he would first show in a general way how mankind, both good and bad,
quenched the Spirit, and then, secondly, show more particularly and closely how we, professors of religion, quenched the Spirit.
- Mankind and professors of religion in general quenched the Spirit when they denied His personality, His influences, and operations. 2. When they ascribed His influence and operations to other causes, such as diabolical influence, melancholy, enthusiasm, fanaticism, and hypocrisy. 3. When they did not duly consider and meditate on His works of creation, providence, and redemption. 4. Men quenched the Spirit by disregarding and disbelieving the Word of God, of which the Spirit was the author. This they did (1) when they did not consider and examine the evidences of Christianity; (2) when they did not submit themselves to the authority of the Word after being satisfied with the evidence of its truth; and (3) especially when they did not believe the testimony of God concerning Jesus Christ as revealed in the Gospel. 5. Men in general quenched the Spirit when they spoke evil of His person or His influences and operations.
(To be continued.)
The Observance of Christmas.
YEAR after year Presbyterian Scotland is gradually but surely adopting the customs and religious festival days of her more powerful neighbour in the South. Some of these customs may be innocent enough, but it is quite different with others, such as a loose view of the sanctity of the Lord’s Day. Alongside this there is an extraordinary readiness on the part of Presbyterians to adopt such festival days as Christmas and Easter. These have a place in the Church calendar, and are more or less devoutly observed by many, but by the great bulk these days are set aside for pleasure and amusement. Presbyterian Scotland at the First and the Second Reforms set its face sternly against the observance of these so-called holy days.
In the First Book of Discipline the Scottish Reformers, under the first head of Doctrine, say:—“Seeing that Jesus Christ is He whom the Father has commanded only to be heard, and followed of His sheep,
we urge it necessary that the Evangel be truly and openly preached in every Kirk and Assembly of this Realm; and that all doctrine repugnant to the same be utterly suppressed as damnable to man’s salvation.” They then state what they mean by preaching this Evangel and what they understand by the contrary doctrine, viz.:—”Whatsoever men, by laws, counsels, or constitutions, have imposed upon the consciences of men, without the expressed commandment of God’s Word; such as the vows of chastity . . . keeping of holy days of certain saints commanded by man, such as be all those that the Papists have invented, as the Feasts (as they term them) of Apostles, Martyrs, Virgins, Christmas, Circumcision, Epiphany, Purification, and other fond feasts of Our Lady” (Knox’s Works, II., 185-6). At their 17th session the famous Glasgow Assembly (1638) confirmed this view, and decreed that these Feasts “be utterly abolished, because they are neither commanded nor warranted by Scripture.” In their Act reference is made to Assembly decisions on these Festivals (Acts of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, p. 19). In 1566 (25th December) the General Assembly, while giving its approval to the Second Helvetic Confession, disapproved of “days dedicated to Christ.” In the letter sent to Beza it is not only said that such festivals as Christmas, Circumcision, Good Friday, Easter, Ascension, and Pentecost, that they “at the present time obtain no place among us,” but that they “dare not religiously celebrate any other feast day than what the divine oracles have prescribed.” In the Directory for Public Worship, in the Appendix touching Days and Places for Public Worship, it is laid down as a rule:—”There is no day commanded in Scripture to be kept holy under the Gospel but the Lord’s Day, which is the Christian Sabbath. Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days, having no warrant in the Word of God, are not to be continued.” The General Assembly in 1645 passed a stringent “Act for censuring the observers of Yule-day and other superstitious days, especially if they be scholars,” giving as their reason “the manifold abuses, profanity and superstitions,” committed on these days. So great was the opposition to the observance of Christmas in Scotland in the 18th century that when a law was passed in Queen Anne’s time repealing a law which forbade the Court of Session a “Yule vacance,” it raised quite a storm of indignation.
We believe our forefathers acted rightly in this matter. And those who are again introducing the observance of Christmas into Scotland have neither Scripture nor history on their side. One will search the New Testament in vain for a command to keep the birthday of the Lord Jesus Christ sacred. It was certainly a momentous day for the world, but His advent, wonderful though it was, would not have saved sinners. It is His death and resurrection that brought everlasting hope to sinners, and the Church of God has her holy day in the Christian Sabbath as commemorative of His resurrection from the dead. If God asked men to observe Christmas and Easter they would flout His command just as they are doing with the Sabbath, but because He has not asked them to do so they become a law unto themselves. The manner in which Christmas is observed in England, with its religious services, followed too often by revelry and the observance of customs handed down from pagan times, ought to make serious-minded Scottish Presbyterians ponder as to whether such a way of observing this Church festival commends itself to them as in accordance with the fitness of things.
Dr Maclean, Bishop of Caithness and Moray, an authority on the early Church festivals, says that Christmas was probably unknown until nearly A.D. 300. That admission by a Scottish Episcopalian prelate is of great significance. This opinion is confirmed by Professor Kirsopp Lake in his article in Hastings’s Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (III., 601). As to the two dates, 25th December and 6th January, on which Christmas was observed, Duchesne suggests that the former date was observed by the Western or Latin Church, while the latter was observed by the Eastern or Greek Church. Why was the 25th December chosen as the date for this festival? Sir William Ramsay has shown that the birth of the Redeemer could scarcely be on the 25th December, as it was not a time suitable for the shepherds to be out with their flocks in the fields. Apart from this, the Gospels throw no light on the day or month of the Redeemer’s birth. Why, then, was the 25th December fixed on? Professor Kirsopp Lake quite candidly admits that it was owing to the Church wishing to distract the attention of Christians from the old heathen festivals that December 25th, the dies natalis solis invicti (birthday of the unconquerable sun) was fixed on. Our
author, while making this admission, maintains that the commonly accepted view that Christmas was intended to replace the Roman “Saturnalia” is not tenable. This feast was celebrated on 17th-24th December. Some of the customs are thus described:—”Gambling with dice, at other times illegal, was now permitted and practised. All classes exchanged gifts, the commonest being wax tapers and clay dolls. These dolls were especially given to children.” It must, therefore, be conceded that if the “Saturnalia” were not replaced by Christmas, that it certainly took over with its observance a great deal of the pagan tomfoolery that characterised the “Saturnalia.” This accounts for many of the customs observed at Christmas. Many of the other customs observed in England are traceable to distinctly pagan Norse influences.
The observance of Christmas as a religious festival, then, has (1) no warrant from Scripture. (2) There is no warrant for the 25th December being the birthday of the Redeemer. (3) Its observance was not known until the 4th century. (4) It replaced a heathen festival and retains in many of its customs its connection with the day following the Roman “Saturnalia.” Why Presbyterians should be so keen to observe such a day, therefore, can only be accounted for on the ground that men are always determined to add something in religious observances that God never asked for nor commanded.
A Half-way Profession.
A half-way profession is perfectly prohibited in the Word of God. Thanks be to God for those who are decided. The world expects nothing from you; if they have given you up, all the better. Keep yourselves from all those who are burning with the fever of corruption and sin. Some are in a happy state; they live high, they are spiritually minded. God occupies their minds; they sit in heavenly places. God so send you into this paradise, that you may have too far to go to coalesce with the world! These are they who live above the world. What shall I do with the people who are half for Baal, and half for God? They know so much of religion that they are spoiled for the world; such can’t go clean into the world as others can. They don’t go very often to the play-house—only now and then as a rarity. God keep me from the devil’s rarities.