Search This Web Site:

Craig L's Blog

Commonplace Holiness

Category: Church History

  • More Proof I Could Never Be a Calvinist

    More Proof I Could Never Be a Calvinist

    John Calvin (1509-1564)

    In this passage John Calvin says that God sends people to Hell for no other reason than that God wishes to do so:

    “Many professing a desire to defend the Deity from an invidious charge admit the doctrine of election, but deny that any one is reprobated…. This they do ignorantly and childishly since there could be no election without its opposite reprobation. God is said to set apart those whom he adopts for salvation. It were most absurd to say, that he admits others fortuitously, or that they by their industry acquire what election alone confers on a few. Those, therefore, whom God passes by he reprobates, and that for no other cause but because he is pleased to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines to his children.”

    — John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (translated by Henry Beveridge), Book 3, Chapter 23

    You can find the definition of “reprobation” here at thefreedictionary.com: “(Theology) Christianity: condemnation to eternal punishment in hell; rejection by God.”

    I find the doctrine of Calvinistic predestination — which Calvin himself says includes the idea of reprobation — i.e. that God sends people to Hell by God’s own choice and design — deeply distasteful.

    John Wesley was also horrified by it:

    John Wesley (1703-1791)

    This is the blasphemy for which (however I love the persons who assert it) I abhor the doctrine of predestination, a doctrine, upon the supposition of which, if one could possibly suppose it for a moment, (call it election, reprobation, or what you please, for all comes to the same thing) one might say to our adversary, the devil, “Thou fool, why dost thou roar about any longer? Thy lying in wait for souls is as needless and useless as our preaching. Hearest thou not, that God hath taken thy work out of thy hands; and that he doeth it much more effectually? Thou, with all thy principalities and powers, canst only so assault that we may resist thee; but He can irresistibly destroy both body and soul in hell! Thou canst only entice; but his unchangeable decrees, to leave thousands of souls in death, compels them to continue in sin, till they drop into everlasting burnings. Thou temptest; He forceth us to be damned; for we cannot resist his will. Thou fool, why goest thou about any longer, seeking whom thou mayest devour? Hearest thou not that God is the devouring lion, the destroyer of souls, the murderer of men? Moloch caused only children to pass though the fire: and that fire was soon quenched; or, the corruptible body being consumed, its torment was at an end; but God, thou are told, by his eternal decree, fixed before they had done good or evil, causes, not only children of a span long, but the parents also, to pass through the fire of hell, the ‘fire which never shall be quenched; and the body which is cast thereinto, being now incorruptible and immortal, will be ever consuming and never consumed, but ‘the smoke of their torment,’ because it is God’s good pleasure, ‘ascendeth up for ever and ever.’ “

    I occasionally get push back on this. Like this message, which I received several years ago:

    Those who come will be accepted. You cite that like God will exclude any who come. Faith in the finished works of Christ (active and passive obedience) and repentance are the appointed means to salvation. faith and repentance as well as regeneration are the work of the Spirit (God) in us to point us to Christ (God-man), and it’s by grace from Abba Father (God).

    I do not mean to deny salvation by grace. This person’s comment tries to put the best foot forward and ignore the chilling realities of Calvin’s doctrine. But, to “reprobate” people means that God has chosen to send them to hell “for no other cause but because he is pleased to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines to his children.” They did not come because God had determined beforehand that they could not come.

    This next correspondent was much more angry with me, he’s a little inarticulate, but he was probably so angry it was hard to type:

    Sir,

    God’s holiness, justice and righteousness is beyond anyone’s mind to measure, they did not come because they are determined to walk away and hate God. God left them condemned already in their own weight. Christ (the word who is God became flesh) came to the rescue of many appointed to salvation and the Holy Spirit intervenes, changed their inner being and to enable them to follow Him willingly this was to show His grace, mercy and love beyond measure, and off the chart of anyone’s capacity to comprehend.

    Now, who is responsible for the damnation of the reprobates: is it God? Yes, because he is just to punish them, is God responsible for their committed crimes? no, it is not He who created sin in them, He did not. He made the decree of man’s disobedience but allowed it to happen because of man’s independent rebellion.

    God is just to send all humanity to hell but by His sovereign electing grace chose a definite people for Himself and set them apart to express His mercy and love. This is the revelation of His attributes and He cannot abandon one attribute for the sake another and that’s what Christ did to satisfy justice and appeased wrath through His death on the cross and can now be still holy, just, righteous, gracious, merciful, and loving. You should have considered this.

    Let me also explain this quote “God sends people to Hell for no other reason than that God wishes to do so” He has all the reason and God wishes to do so because of their sin, yet He is willing to save some for the praise of His glorious grace and that’s good news! Calvin simply wanted to refute the error of those who admit the doctrine of election, but deny that any one is reprobate which is illogical. reprobate is a ‘sinner’ who is not of the elect and is predestined to damnation and again, God did not predestined them to commit sin nor predestined anyone to commit suicide yet allowed it to happen anyway out of their own weight and predestined them into condemnation and there’s no need the power of God to make them reprobate but only out of their own weight. He is not surprised because He upholds everything from eternity past to eternal future.

    Again God did not manipulate sin to enter but simply allows it to take place for a greater purpose and that includes the revelation of Himself to His creation through His redemptive acts recorded is Scripture.

    Well, while I appreciate his rushing to the defense of Mr. Calvin, this is all gobbledygook to me. While this is not well written, the writer has stated the Calvinistic line pretty well (from what I know of it). But, it still doesn’t make any sense to me.

    However, the “love” and “justice” of the Creator he describes is not either “love” or “justice” in any really meaningful sense. The love and justice of the Creator that he posits are contrary to love and justice as we would understand them.

    Since we are spiritually shaped by the God we serve, this type of theology seems to me to be morally and spiritually toxic. It undermines the meaning of both love and justice. I know many very good Christians — and there have been many throughout Christian history — who subscribe to this type of theology but whose lives rise above it and I am thankful for that — and for them. Certainly God is faithful and sometimes overlooks our faults and misconceptions. Certainly there are many things about God that we will never understand fully because our minds are incapable of conceiving of God as God truly is. I believe all forms of determinism — this would include the Calvinistic theology to which this correspondent subscribes, but would also include naive forms of universalism, and atheistic forms of determinism — undermine the notion of moral responsibility and trivialize human action.

    It does not exalt the sovereignty of God to make God a deterministic monster. I believe that the God revealed to us in Jesus Christ is a God of universal grace and love. I believe of Christ that: “in him was life, and the life was the light of all people.” (John 1:4 NRSV).

    I believe that salvation is offered to all — not as a ruse, but as a reality.

    John Wesley (1703-1791).

    “I appeal to every impartial mind… whether the mercy of God would not be far less gloriously displayed, in saving a few by his irresistible power, and leaving all the rest without help, without hope, to perish everlastingly, than in offering salvation to every creature, actually saving all that consent thereto, and doing for the rest all that infinite wisdom, almighty power, and boundless love can do, without forcing them to be saved.”

    — John Wesley, “Predestination Calmly Considered.”

    P. S. Actually, there are some forms of Reformed theology to which I have little or no real substantive objection. And, while I often quote Calvin unflatteringly, he said and taught many good things — and at times, seems less strict in his “Calvinism” than many of his followers are.

  • Ash Wednesday

    Ash Wednesday

    Tomorrow is Ash Wednesday. 

    This begins the important Church season of Lent.

    Ash Wednesday services are important to me — when I can attend. Sometimes, since my retirement, I’ve had to kind of search around for a nearby church that was holding such a service — this is not generally advertised on the church signs or on the church web sites.

    I feel like something is missing if Ash Wednesday isn’t part of my Lent. But, I haven’t always felt that way about it. I think the Weidman United Methodist Church was the first church I served that insisted on having a “real” Ash Wednesday Service — I mean with ashes and all.

    Prior to that time, Ash Wednesday had never been a big deal for me. I don’t remember attending an Ash Wednesday service as a child or as a young adult. I was brought into the faith more in the revivalistic & holiness tradition than in the liturgical tradition. I was taught to scorn “empty ritual.” So, a tradition like Ash Wednesday would mean little to me. What’s the point? And ritual and form were always suspect.

    Furthermore, Ash Wednesday doesn’t even commemorate anything in the Bible or the life of Christ. It only marks the beginning of Lent, which is a season in the Church Year. So, from that point of view, it was a little hard to even connect with it.

    Many of the churches that I served in the early part of my pastoral career didn’t seem to care about Ash Wednesday any more than I did. I vaguely recall one pastoral charge where we held Ash Wednesday services. But, it was a preaching service: no ashes. I think we had communion.

    However, being in the ministry did acquaint me with the Church Year, which can be a helpful way of presenting the different aspects of the faith, through preaching and through worship. So, I became accustomed to the season of Lent. And, when the Weidman Church said they had Ash Wednesday services, I said fine. And, do you have the imposition of ashes during the service? Yes, they said. We do. Oh, I see. I hadn’t done that before.

    A colleague in the area gave some ashes to use — from palms she had burned the previous year. She had plenty. And, so we had a real Ash Wednesday Service. It was nothing new to the people who came to the service. But, it was something new to me!

    I followed the directions in one of the official United Methodist worship books. It said this was not a communion service. That was a surprise — but I could see the reasoning behind what they were saying. I followed the liturgy in the book and the directions they gave. I preached on one of the Ash Wednesday texts (in the lectionary, they are always the same, every year).

    Then came the Imposition of Ashes. It was actually the first time I had ever been to a service where this happened. And, stranger than that, I was the one conducting this service. It felt strange to me. It was like the complete opposite of offering Holy Communion. Offering communion has always felt to me like offering life and salvation and hope. But, now I was offering death.

    “Dust you are, and to dust you shall return.”

    Mortality. It’s something we rarely think about. It something most of us don’t want to think about. But, it’s true: we are all going to die. Our time on earth is brief.

    At first it felt strange to be doing this. In fact, at first, I didn’t want to do it. Yet, as I did, I found the reminder of mortality strangely comforting — and bonding. I had spent far too long ignoring the fact of death. There is a strange comfort that comes from remembering we are dust.

    Several years ago,  I read these thoughts from an Episcopal priest named Donald Schell. (I believe this is no longer on the Internet.) In writing about his experience of Lent, and he says:

    Later one Ash Wednesday, as I was nearing forty, I had another small breakthrough. That morning of marking each person’s forehead with ashes and saying the Prayer Book’s words, ‘Remember you are dust and to dust you shall return,’ I felt God’s mercy in those stark words and a wave of tenderness for our fragile humanity. l was blessing the finitude of people God loved beyond measure. I’ve looked forward to Ash Wednesday ever since.

    Though all Lent after I first learned that it was a mercy to remember we are dust, I thought and prayed into this sense that our mortality wasn’t only tragic. I couldn’t explain just how our God-given finitude (including our boundaries of birth and death) was a gracious gift, but since then, I’ve always heard “remember you are dust,” as genuine Good News.

    I guess you either know what he’s talking about — or not. I do.

    One year after the Ash Wednesday service in Weidman, Robin and I had to stop at the store. We forgot the sign of the cross was still on our foreheads in ashes. And, it was a pleasant experience. At the store, we saw other people whose foreheads were also marked by the sign of the cross. And, we felt a bond with them. So, now, when I know it’s Ash Wednesday — and I don’t have any other commitments for that day — I want to find a church that has a “real” Ash Wednesday service.

    I do it to join with others in the community of faith. I do it to remind myself that I am dust, and to dust I shall return.

  • Lent: Then and Now

    Lent: Then and Now

    “Even now,’ declares the LORD, return to me with all your heart, with fasting and weeping and mourning. Rend your hearts and not Your garments. Return to the LORD your God, for he is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love, and he relents from sending calamity.”

    — Joel 2:12, 13

     The season of Lent begins this week on Wednesday. It is Ash Wednesday that begins the season of the Church Year called Lent.

    Historically, the season of Lent is one of the most important seasons of the church year. The season of Lent moves toward Holy Week: the time when we remember the crucifixion. Lent looks toward the Cross — and then beyond it to the miracle of Easter and the resurrection of Jesus. Ash Wednesday arrives this week: Wednesday March 5. The history of the season of Lent is interesting for us today. Though we do not celebrate it as people did in the past, a look at the history of Lent can give meaning to this season of the Church year.

    (more…)
  • John Wesley Did Not Burn His Old Sermons (And Other Things He Never Said)

    John Wesley Did Not Burn His Old Sermons (And Other Things He Never Said)

    Here is an alleged John Wesley quote frequently encountered on Social Media and on Internet quote sites: Did John Wesley say (as it is claimed, for example here):

    Once in seven years I burn all my sermons; for it is a shame if I cannot write better sermons now than I did seven years ago.

    NO! He quoted someone else (“a good man” he says) who said this — and then said that he disagreed with this idea! Now, look. It’s just not reasonable that he advocated burning his old sermons. He published many of his sermons — even ones he no longer fully endorsed! How could he do that if he burned them? He didn’t burn them, and it’s not reasonable to think he advocated doing so! Here is the relevant entry from John Wesley’s Journal: September 1, 1778:

    (more…)
  • How John Wesley Spent the New Year in 1785.

    How John Wesley Spent the New Year in 1785.

    From the Journal of John Wesley:

    (more…)