The Doctrine of Election - Part 1

ITS IMPORTANCE AND RELEVANCE FOR THE CHURCH TODAY

BY DAVID SAMUEL

In the New Testament we see the church under two aspects – the temporal and the eternal, the visible and the invisible. The visible church is recognised in its gospel, sacraments and professing members. The invisible church is known only to God, and is composed of those who are truly regenerate and predestined to everlasting life by the eternal decree of God the Father. Thus we have those two statements held in juxtaposition: As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Gal. 3:27) and, Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his (II Tim. 2:19).

The visible church, according to this teaching, includes all who have been baptized and have made an open profession of faith. It includes Judas, Ananias and Sapphira, Demas, Simon Magus, and Hymenaeus and Philetus. The invisible church includes none but those who are truly faithful and endure to eternal life.

Thus the church is represented not by one circle, but by an ellipse of two different foci. The visible and the invisible church, the outward professors of Christian religion and the elect, are not commensurable. These two aspects and representations of the church have to be held in tension, and must never be separated. It is the invisible church – the New Testament concept of God’s elect – that governs and controls our understanding of the visible church, its sacraments, its membership and all its outward manifestations.

For example, when Paul speaks of the efficacy of the Word and the sacraments, it is never divorced from this understanding of election. The Word is only efficacious in God’s elect. But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: in whom the god of this world hath blinded the eyes of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them (2 Cor. 4:3, 4). Likewise, baptism is only efficacious in the elect. It cannot be otherwise. And, by the same token, God’s decree to save is not limited to the general means God has provided. He can disclose his saving purpose to Cornelius, a Gentile outside the church, and the baptism that follows is but the confirmation of the saving grace that has already been communicated.

So, then, we find that the eternal decree and purpose of God is the controlling factor which governs every other consideration in the teaching, activity and orientation of apostolic Christianity. To leave out election and predestination is not merely to leave out something that is incidental or peripheral to it, but to deprive it of its fundamental axiom. It is like Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark.

In any properly balanced doctrine of the church this element has always been present. Because we are dealing with the overlapping of two circles, as it were, it gives the doctrine a double-sided and paradoxical appearance, which to the minds of some amounts to a contradiction. Paradox, however, is inescapable when we are dealing with the penetration of time by eternity. The phenomenon of the visible church is both continuous and discontinuous with that of the invisible. Like a stick broken in water, the visible church gives the appearance of discontinuity with the visible. Yet there is a real and essential relationship which must be maintained, though the membership of the one is not commensurable with the other.

This paradoxical character of the church has been reflected in every truly great Christian theologian. They have never tried to resolve the paradox by eliminating one side of it, and they have never neglected or rejected the doctrine of election. Where the doctrine of election has been lost sight of the church has invariably fallen into error. An over-emphasis upon the doctrine of election is, if anything, safer than its neglect. But the soundest and best position is that where the Biblical balance and proportion is held.

SAINT AUGUSTINE’S TEACHING OF THE CHURCH

I shall take two examples from church history. First we find in Augustine (354-430) this double aspect of the church brought out. In his controversy with the Donatists, who had separated from the rest of the church over the question of whether those who had lapsed under persecution should be readmitted, the question he sought to answer was Ubi ecclesia? Where is the church? He answered it in two ways. First, he sees the church as the universal institution which embraces all faithful Christians, and is led to the conclusion, “It is the sure judgment of the whole world that they are not good who cut themselves off from the whole world”. He attaches such a high importance to the visible, institutional church as to assert in his anti-Donatist treatise on baptism, that there is “no salvation outside the church”.

Yet those who think this is Augustine’s final word on the church are mistaken, as are those who interpret him one-sidedly. Augustine was too great a man and too profound a theologian to be so limited and circumscribed. This was the mistake of Cardinal Wiseman, who wrote in 1829, that the great Augustine (by his words on schism) was condemning Anglicans in advance.

Augustine has something else to say in answer to the question, Where is the church? which Cardinal Wiseman did not mention. It is found in the key word ‘predestination’, which Augustine derived from St. Paul, and which he hands on to his great disciple John Calvin.

The true Biblical complexity of Augustine’s understanding of the church is seen in his recognition of the fact that the church does not consist merely of the visible institution and its members, but in the company of the elect, the unknown company of the predestinated.

On the one side of the church is a visible society, an identifiable homogenous institution girdling the whole world as a unity, the only church of God’s redeeming grace, the one ark above the flood. On the other side the church is invisible, save to the eyes of God alone, and its true members the unpredictable monuments of his sovereign grace. Job, the great outsider from Idumea, is for Augustine, the type of the elect, for he reminds the empirical church as it strides the centuries, that, according to the predestination of God, there are many sheep outside the fold and many wolves inside.

It is this double-sidedness that preserves the balance in Augustine’s teaching and prevents him from descending into error. He never resolves the antinomy of the church which is both visible and invisible. For him, as for Calvin, God’s sovereign grace presupposes all the institutions of the church as its means, and they are ultimately of no significance without it.

Had Augustine succumbed to the temptation to eliminate one side of the paradox, i.e. either election or the institutional church, he would not have been the seminal influence upon subsequent theological thought which he afterwards became, but would have lapsed either into mysticism or sectarianism. This latter was the mistake of Augustine’s contemporaries, who in the controversy with the Donatists appealed to the authority of Rome “…Rome has spoken, the matter is settled”. This famous epigram, falsely attributed to Augustine, misrepresents his position. In his anti-Donatist treatise The Unity of the Church there is not a single reference to the Roman see as the divinely ordered centre of Christian unity, or to Rome’s Petrine claims.

Let me here try to illustrate what I mean by error arising from the elimination of one side of the paradox. If, for example, you have undue emphasis upon predestination to the neglect of the visible institution, then you lapse into mysticism regarding the church and the errors commonly associated with it. Some time ago I was at Speakers Corner, in Hyde Park. A large, burly man had set up his stand with the words on it ‘The Invisible Church’. A voice from the crowd said, “And that must be the invisible man”. At which everyone roared with laughter. Throughout the history of the church there have been those who, because of their insistence upon the invisible church, have been led to disparage the visible institution, and in consequence have failed to treat with the seriousness it deserves its ministry, sacraments and discipline.

Likewise, where you have an unqualified emphasis upon the visible church to the neglect of its mystical and transcendent nature, you have a narrow and exclusive sectarianism. Whatever appeal may be made to numbers, the Church of Rome is in fact the Roman sect. Newman argued against this in his Apologia, in an attempt to rebut the charge. He argues but does not convince. Rome exalts the institution and eliminates the invisible church by equating it with the visible – indeed eliminates Christ by making him interchangeable with the hierarchy, and so makes the institutional church fantastic and blasphemous in its claims.

As Bishop Ryle observed in his tract on The Church,

And Bishop Ryle continues,

His words need to be weighed very carefully in these ecumenical and spiritually perilous days, as well as the wise words of Hooker on the subject. “For the lack of the diligent observing of the difference … between the church of God mystical and visible … the oversights are neither few nor light that have been committed”.

WYCLIFFE’S VIEW OF ELECTION AND THE CHURCH

I come to Wycliffe, the second example I have chosen of a great man who discerned the antinomy or paradox of the nature of the church, and used the doctrine of predestination and the invisible church of God’s elect to oppose the excessive claims of the papacy and the institutional church of his time. Great man though he was we would not endorse everything he said. His teaching must be seen as corrective, and not as a norm to be followed. His position pushed to its extreme would tend to dissolve the institutional church altogether. However, he did not press his doctrine that far, and his emphasis was necessary at the time to offset the evil in the church, and quicken men’s minds to a higher concept of the true church and its spiritual nature.

There is no doubt as to the importance of predestination in his teaching. David Hume wrote in his History of England that Wycliffe asserted that everything was subject to fate and destiny, and that all men are predestined either to eternal salvation or reprobation. Wycliffe’s quarrel with the papacy and the hierarchy was over the powers which they had arrogated to themselves over men’s souls, and over their lives and property. Their power was universal and unchallenged. People went in superstitious dread of the Papal curse, and of excommunication. To be denied the sacraments and membership of the institutional church was to be denied salvation.

How could such overweening confidence on the part of the hierarchy, and such narrow exclusiveness in the visible church be combated, but by affirming the character of the invisible church, which consists of all God’s elect people? Membership of that church does not depend on the diktat of the pope and hierarchy, but upon the decree and command of Almighty God. Set in such a context the place and importance of the institutional church is properly understood. The doctrine of election must at all times be the controlling doctrine of the church.

This Wycliffe showed in his tracts and sermons. On the Lord’s Prayer Wycliffe wrote, “When we say, Thy kingdom come, we mean, that all men and women living in this world that shall be saved … come to the bliss of heaven … for all men and women that shall be saved be God’s kingdom and holy church”. None, he said, is a member of holy mother church, who is not a predestined person.

Thus, at a stroke, by the recovery of the Biblical doctrine of election, Wycliffe freed men from the tyranny of an overbearing institutional church, by teaching them that if they were God’s elect and saved by grace, then none could exclude them from the privileges of salvation, or from membership of the true church, whatever pretensions they might make to do so.

Concerning the decree of Innocent III making auricular confession to a priest binding for the forgiveness of sins, Wycliffe argues,

We should note here that the doctrine of predestination is seen in its practical application to a pastoral problem. “Christ had made his servants free, but antichrist had made them bound again”. The doctrine was not treated in a merely speculative manner, but related and applied to the Christian experience of freedom in Christ – the liberty of the Christian man – and it was seen to be indispensable to that end.

Today, many treat the doctrine of election as something purely speculative and irrelevant to the pastoral and practical side of Christianity. When this happens we should be on our guard, for we can be sure that something of the fulness of our salvation in Christ is being lost. The doctrines of Scripture are not given us to afford us academic pastimes and speculative indulgence. They have practical relevance for the Christian’s experience and life. None is superfluous. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works (II Tim. 3:16).

What part of Christian freedom is being lost today by the neglect of, or even contempt for, the doctrine of predestination? I shall return to this. I cannot do better than to sum up this section in the words of Professor Whale:

This doctrine of predestination in the hands of its exponents is fatal not only to hierarchical and sacerdotal, but also to all ecclesiastical pretensions and arrogance: indeed, to all human assumptions of superiority.

Dare we affect to ignore it, or despise such teaching in the church today? If we do so, we do it at our peril. 

Forasmuch as man, being not borne to ease and rest, but to labour and travail, is by corruption of nature through sin, so far degenerated and grown out of kind, that he taketh idleness to be no evil at all, but rather a commendable thing, seemly for those that be wealthy, and therefore is greedily embraced of most part of men, as agreeable to their sensual affection, and all labour and travail is diligently avoided, as a thing painful and repugnant to the pleasure of the flesh: It is necessary to be declared unto you, that by the ordinance of God, which he hath set in the nature of man, every one ought, in his lawful vocation and calling, to give himself to labour: and that idleness, being repugnant to the same ordinance, is a grievous sin, and also, for the great inconveniences and mischiefs which spring thereof, an intolerable evil: to the intent that when ye understand the same, ye may diligently flee from it, and on the other part earnestly apply yourselves, every man in his vocation, to honest labour and business, which as it is enjoined unto man by God’s appointment, so it wanteth not his manifold blessings and sundry benefits.

In what points the true ornaments of the Church or Temple of God do consist and stand, hath been declared in the two last Homilies, entreating of the right use of the Temple or house of God, and of the due reverence that all true Christian people are bound to give unto the same. The sum whereof is, that the Church or house of God, is a place appointed by the holy Scriptures, where the lively word of God ought to be read, taught, and heard, the Lords holy name called upon by public prayer, hearty thanks given to his Majesty for his infinite and unspeakable benefits bestowed upon us, his holy Sacraments duly and reverently ministered, and that therefore all that be godly indeed, ought both with diligence at times appointed, to repair together to the said Church, and there with all reverence to use and behave themselves before the Lord. And that the said Church thus godly used by the servants of the Lord, in the Lords true service, for the effectual presence of God’s grace, wherewith he doeth by his holy word and promises, endue his people there present and assembled, to the attainment, as well of commodities worldly, necessary for us, as also of all heavenly gifts, and life everlasting, is called by the word of God (as it is indeed) the Temple of the Lord, and the house of God, and that therefore the due reverence thereof, is stirred up in the hearts of the godly, by the consideration of these true ornaments of the said house of God, and not by any outward ceremonies or costly and glorious decking of the said house or Temple of the Lord, contrary to the which most manifest doctrine of the Scriptures, and contrary to the usage of the Primitive Church, which was most pure and incorrupt, and contrary to the sentences and judgements of the most ancient, learned and godly Doctors of the Church (as hereafter shall appear) the corruption of these latter days, hath brought into the Church infinite multitudes of images, and the same, with other parts of the Temple also, have decked with gold and silver, painted with colours, set them with stone and pearl, clothed them with silks and precious vestures, fancying untruly that to be the chief decking and adorning of the Temple or house of God, and that all people should be the more moved to the due reverence of the same, if all corners thereof were glorious, and glistering with gold and precious stones. Whereas indeed they by the said images, and such glorious decking of the Temple, have no thing at all profited such as were wise and of understanding: but have thereby greatly hurt the simple and unwise, occasioning them thereby to commit most horrible idolatry. And the covetous persons, by the same occasion, seeming to worship, and peradventure worshipping indeed, not only the images, but also the matter of them, gold and silver, as that vice is of all others in the Scriptures peculiarly called idolatry or worshipping of images. (Eph 5, Col 3) Against the which foul abuses and great enormities shall be alleged unto you: First, the authority of God’s holy word, as well out of the old Testament, as of the new. And secondly, the testimonies of the holy and ancient learned Fathers and Doctors, out of their own works and ancient histories Ecclesiastical, both that you may at once know their judgements, and withal understand what manner of ornaments were in the Temples in the Primitive Church in those times, which were most pure and sincere. Thirdly, the reasons and arguments made for the defence of images or idols, and the outrageous decking of Temples and Churches, with gold, silver, pearl, and precious stone, shall be confuted, and so this whole matter concluded. But lest any should take occasion by the way, of doubting by words or names, it is thought good here to note first of all, that although in common speech we use to call the likeness or similitude of men or other things images, and not idols: yet the Scriptures use the said two words (idols and images) indifferently for one thing always. They be words of divers tongues and sounds, but one in sense and signification in the Scriptures. The one is taken of the Greek word Ei¶dwlon; an Idol, and the other of the Latin word Imago, and Image, and so both used as English terms in the translating of Scriptures indifferently, according as the Septuagint have in their translation in Greek Ei¶dwla, and St. Jerome in his translation of the same places in Latin hath Simulachra, in English, Images. And in the new Testament, that which St. John calleth Ei¶dwlon (1 Jn 5), St. Ierome likewise translateth Simulachrum, as in all other like places of Scripture usually he doeth so translate. And Tertullian , a most ancient Doctor, and well learned in both the tongues, Greek and Latin, interpreting this place of St. John , Beware of Idols, that is to say (saith Tertullian ) of the images themselves: the Latin words which he useth, be Effigies and Imago, to say, an Image (Lib. de corona militis). And therefore it skilleth not, whether in this process wee use the one term or the other, or both together, seeing they both (though not in common English speech, yet in Scripture) signify one thing. And though some to blind men’s eyes, have heretofore craftily gone about to make them to be taken for words of divers signification in matters of Religion, and have therefore usually named the likeness or similitude of a thing set up amongst the Heathen in their Temples or other places to be worshipped, an Idol. But the like similitude with us, set up in the Church, the place of worshipping, they call an Image, as though these two words (Idol and Image) in Scripture, did differ in propriety and sense, which as is afore said) differ only in sound and language, and in meaning be in deed all one, specially in the Scriptures and matters of Religion. And our Images also have been, and be, and if they be publicly suffered in Churches and Temples, ever will be also worshipped, and so Idolatry committed to them, as in the last part of this Homily shall at large be declared and proved. Wherefore our Images in Tem ples and Churches, be in deed none other but Idols, as unto the which Idolatry hath been, is, and ever will be committed.

Almighty GOD, to the intent his most holy Name should be had in honour, and evermore be magnified of the people, commandeth that no man should take his Name vainly in his mouth, threatening punishment unto him that irreverently abuseth it by swearing, forswearing, andblasphemy. To the intent therefore that this commandment may be the better known and kept, it shall bee declared unto you, both how it is lawful for Christian people to swear, and also what peril and danger it is vainly to swear, or to be forsworn.

Unto a Christian man, there can be nothing either more necessary or profitable, than the knowledge of Holy Scripture; forasmuch as in it is contained God’s true word, setting forth his glory, and also man’s duty. And there is no truth nor doctrine, necessary for our justification and everlasting salvation, but that is, or may be, drawn out of that fountain and well of truth. Therefore, as many as be desirous to enter into the right and perfect way unto God, must apply their minds to know Holy Scripture; without the which, they can neither sufficiently known God and his will, neither their office and duty. And as drink is pleasant to them that be dry, and meat to them that be hungry; so is the reading, hearing, searching, and studying of Holy Scripture, to them that be desirous to know God, or themselves, and to do his will. And their stomachs only do loathe and abhor the heavenly knowledge and food of God’s word, that be so drowned in worldly vanities, that they neither saviour God, nor any godliness: for that is the cause why they desire such vanities, rather than the true knowledge of God. As they that are sick of an ague, whatsoever they eat and drink, though it be never so pleasant, yet it is as bitter to them as wormwood; not for the bitterness of the meat, but for the corrupt and bitter humour that is in their own tongue and mouth; even is the sweetness of God’s word bitter, not of itself, but only unto them that have their minds corrupted with long custom of sin and love of this world.

Of all things that be good to be taught unto Christian people, there is nothing more necessary to be spoken of, and daily called upon, then charity: as well for that all manner of works of righteousness be contained in it, as also that the decay thereof is the ruin or fall of the world, the banishment of virtue, and the cause of all vice. And for so much as almost every man, maketh and frameth to himself charity after his own appetite, and how detestable soever his life be, both unto God and man, yet he persuadeth himself still that he hath charity: therefore you shall hear now a true and plain description or setting forth of charity, not of men’s imagination, but of the very words and example of our Saviour Jesus Christ. In which description or setting forth, every man (as it were in a glass) may consider himself, and see plainly without error, whether he be in the true charity, or not.

Among all the creatures that God made in the beginning of the world most excellent and wonderful in their kind, there was none (as the Scripture beareth witness) to be compared almost in any point unto man, who as well in body and soul exceeded all other no less, then the Sun in brightness and light exceedeth every small and little star in the firmament. He was made according to the image and similitude of God, he was endued with all kind of heavenly gifts, he had no spot of uncleanness in him, he was found and perfect in all parts, both outwardly and inwardly, his reason was incorrupt, his understanding was pure and good, his will was obedient and godly, he was made altogether like unto God, in righteousness, in holiness, in wisdom, in truth, to be short in all kind of perfection.

In the last Sermon was declared unto you, what the lively and true faith of a Christian man is, that it causeth not a man to be idle, but to be occupied in bringing forth good works, as occasion serveth.

Of our going from God, the wise man saith, that pride was the first beginning: for by it mans heart was turned from God his maker. For pride (saith he) is the fountain of all sin: he that hath it, shall be full of cursings, and at the end it shall overthrow him. (Ecclus 10) And as by pride and sin we go from God, so shall God and all goodness with him go from us. And the Prophet Hosea doth plainly affirm (Hos 5), that they which go a way still from God by vicious living, and yet would go about to pacify him otherwise by sacrifice, and entertain him thereby, they labour in vain. For, notwithstanding all their sacrifice, yet he goeth still away from them. For so much (saith the Prophet) as they do not apply their minds to return to God, although they go about with whole flocks and herds to seek the Lord, yet they shall not find him: for he is gone away from them.

A Sermon of the Misery of all Mankind and of his Condemnation to Death Everlasting, by his own Sin.

Because all men be sinners and offenders against God, and breakers of his law and commandments, therefore can no man by his own acts, works, and deeds (seem they never so good) be justified, and made righteous before God: but every man of necessity is constrained to seek for another righteousness or justification, to be received at God’s own hands, that is to say, the forgiveness of his sins and trespasses, in such things as he hath offended. And this justification or righteousness, which we so receive of God’s mercy and Christ’s merits. embraced by faith, is taken, accepted and allowed of God, for our perfect and full justification.