Separation from Inability
The two objects of a Confession are to disclaim and confirm—to cast off error and to confirm saints in truth. By this edification we are lifted from the mire of inability. Ability is the consequence of knowing truth and being convinced of what is right. We become able men through understanding and passion. As we worship more in spirit and in truth, and are better disposed to walk in our pre-ordained sphere of usefulness, we come closer to realizing our chief end: ‘to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever,’ as the Westminster Catechism puts it. Revivals of religion are caused by persons who are capable, which capability is filtered through the influence of the Spirit upon the truth that they have been made sure of. Revivals are not full-blown at once; they begin through the Spirit’s use of a few individuals. The persons they begin with are not necessarily men who are well-known. Whoever gains understanding, conviction, and ability may be the next agent of spiritual change and moral reform. Revivals are not forwarded through persons who are confused, unsure, and incapable. They happen through persons who recognize their inability to make something spiritual happen except by a reliance on the Holy Spirit; but these persons are not ill-informed, uncertain, and inept. Apart from the fact of the Spirit’s own sovereignty to cause revival in his own place and time, what better answer do we have for revivals not happening than the fact that Christian leaders do not believe what they should believe? With few exceptions, the preachers of Great Awakening times were Confessional Christians of the Calvinist persuasion.
The campaigns of our day are not in the same category as the revivals of yesterday. They are, like the booklet authored by Misters Taylor, McClurkin, and Mackay: Arminian efforts. There is a qualitative difference between revivals and campaigns. There is practically no effect on a city after a campaign or a ‘crusade’ has been waged. But historical records (such as those that have been written about the Welsh revival) show that the moral temper of whole towns and regions have been changed on account of revival. The disparity in effect between a campaign and a revival is on account of the one being pushed by man and the other being driven by the Spirit. Besides being saved from sins and their ultimate consequences, the reason for religion is to be spared, as much as possible, from the more immediate consequences of sin. Peaceful living is what God wants from us, with the increase and maintenance of good conduct and piety: the ‘quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty’ (1 Timothy 2.2.) To this we arrive through separation from falsehood, uncertainty, and inability; and this is the way to society becoming decent and civilized. A revival of religion begins with Christians who reform and separate themselves from sin; then the revival of Christians is used by God to convert new sinners who leave off sinning; and then the blessed result from all of this inner peace is the peaceful community. Believing amiss will not begin this widening circle of moral improvement. To be cool in our convictions will not kindle our beliefs. And to be incorrect and unconvinced ensures our infirmity. When sermons from campaigns are compared with sermons used in revivals, the differences that stick out between the two involve about every part and characteristic of a sermon than can be thought of. Compared with revival sermons, campaign sermons exhibit scarcity of aptitude generally; and dearth of artistry, intelligence, and intensity particularly. Without aptitude for the work, a sermon is dead before it begins to be uttered, and goes out from the mouth like an ejected corpse. Without artistry, the sermon is undressed. Without intelligence, the sermon elicits no thought. Without intensity, the sermon arrests no attention. That, in few words, is the condition of a campaign sermon. It is as dead as a corpse. It is dead; it is ugly; it is thoughtless; it is uninteresting. The lack of intelligence, or doctrinal density, in the sermons of our day should not be blamed on the dissimilarity of eras. Preachers are less educated today than they were a century or more ago. But what has time to do with it? The cause of dullness is the belief that dullness should be adequate to produce the effect that a sermon should produce. More material for one’s education is available than ever before. So there is no excuse for being a dullard, no matter what year it is and no matter what seminary a person has graduated from. Between contemporary sermons and the sermons of yore, the difference in intensity is just as noticeable as the intellectual disparity. It is well-known that a sermon on the page is flat compared to the hearing of it; yet, even given that, the sermons on the page from revival days are more noticeably alive than what we hear from the pulpits of our greatest living preachers. If we are more affected from reading a sermon, like one by R. M. M’Cheyne, for example, than by listening to a preacher down the street—if we detect more fervor in the former than in the latter—then today’s ministers must be lacking animation indeed. Men who are more doctrinally correct have, usually, deeper conviction and more success. The Holy Spirit will be more upon the preacher who worships most in spirit and in truth. We lack this presence greatly today. The fire used to burn so hot that men could not but speak, just like it was for the apostles. Such men could be fired up by the gospel in an instant. It makes me think of a potbellied stove that can become too hot to touch within a minute of being lit. By the time you get to your chair, you have to return because the lid is lifting and sparks are shooting out the draft. Having the answers, and knowing that you have them, is a highly combustible mix. This fuel, once lit, may burn itself into ashes; a great preacher’s body, like a burning sun, must consume itself. It is my opinion, from reading accounts of revival, that many preachers have been guilty of overwork. But it is more honorable to burn out than to barely burn. Howell Harris was one such notable preacher. In 1766, Henry Venn, another great preacher, related this about the man:
“Howell Harris is the father of that settlement [Trevecka, in Wales], and the founder. After labouring for fifteen years, more violently than any of the servants of Christ, in this revival, he was so hurt in body as to be confined to his own house for seven years. Upon the beginning of this confinement, first one, and then another, whom the Lord had converted under His word, to the number of near a hundred, came and desired to live with him, and that they would work and get their bread…Of all the people I ever saw, this society seems to be the most advanced in grace. They speak as men and women who feel themselves every moment worthy of eternal punishment, and infinitely base; and yet, at the same time, have such certainty of salvation through the second man, the Lord from heaven, as is indeed delightful to behold” (Henry Venn, The Letters of Henry Venn, pp. 121, 122.)
That is what can happen when we free ourselves from error, when we shake off uncertainty, and when, because of that, the shackles of inability fall off. Howell Harris was certain of what he believed; and his preaching produced likeminded converts. By being correct, and then by deeply believing that we are correct, we can trust our work, we can trust that God will bless it, and we will reap the blessing. If we happen to be correct in our beliefs but have little conviction, who will believe us? If we are convinced of wrong beliefs, our strong believing will mislead others. A Confession can make a man correct; and conviction added to correctness is the way to success in matters ministerial. A man must be right, and he must know that he is right; only then is he fit to present God to men, ethical matters and personal piety taken as granted, for they are not part of my thesis. Holiness has much to do with purity of doctrine. Our beliefs must be as separate from falsehoods as the vessels used by Aaron were kept apart from vessels of the common sort.
When conviction is added to a proper understanding of theology, stability is established, and familiarity with what is believed and understood has a chance to grow. That man is more convincing who can explain a thing from whatever angle the listener needs to hear it from. Do we believe that a man is familiar with a neighborhood if he can’t lead a person from any part of it to any other part of it without hesitation? The best men are those who trace everything back to the neighborhood of God’s will in eternity. They are accused, unfortunately, of believing in a guilty God because they embrace the truth that God’s mercy turns on his discriminating will. Stephen Charnock shows this accusation to be a false one:
“God could, if he would, savingly enlighten the minds of all men in the world, and quicken their hearts with a new life by an invincible grace; but in not doing it, there is no positive act of God, but a cessation of action. We may with as much reason say, that God is the cause of all the sinful actions that are committed by the corporation of devils, since their first rebellion, because he leaves them to themselves, and bestows not a new grace upon them,—as say, God is the cause of the sins of those that he overlooks and leaves in that state of guilt wherein he found them. God did not pass by any without the consideration of sin; so that this act of God is not repugnant to his holiness, but conformable to his justice” (Stephen Charnock, The Existence and Attributes of God.)
Man is born in sin and dead in sin. His heart is hard by nature of who, and what, he is. God is the Creator of all else except himself. He is not obliged to choose, or to have chosen, from eternity, to have mercy on a hardened sinner. Separation from error is a necessary step to success in religion. We are not separate from error until we accept who God is and who man is. To worship God in spirit and in truth must involve liberation from falsehood, knowledge of truth, and certitude regarding the truth we profess. What are faith and practice worth when we knowingly remain in error about fundamental aspects of God’s word? We might find at last that their worth was not enough to gain entry into God’s kingdom. The use of a Confession of Faith will bring about the holy separation from error that is necessary to a proper practice of religion. The value of this use can be measured by how important it is to have impeccable notions about God. Even apart from the help of a Confession or even the Bible, it should be plain that any God worthy of the name must have a full and free right to dispose of his creatures as he sees fit. Man is responsible to repent and believe in spite of his incapacity, by himself, to do so; he is responsible for his sins even if God has not chosen him for salvation any more than he chose Pharaoh. It is God’s prerogative to do what he will with his creatures. “Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus?” (Romans 9.20.) This humiliating verse is good medicine. It is a healthy pill to swallow. Many refuse to swallow it, and do not become good physicians for others who are sick, remaining as they do, willfully sick and disabled themselves. They are addicted to false notions of God and man.
It seems probable that God is worshipped in spirit in proportion to how much he is worshiped in truth. We worship God in truth by humbly accepting what the Bible teaches. We have much to thank God for in giving, not only Truth, but Confessions to explain this Truth, for they help to adroitly expose and overthrow, the falsehoods and heresies of men who would if they could, not let God be God.
No comments:
Post a Comment