Despite the many good things that
Owen has written, I am afraid that his influence within the churches has
been pernicious rather than helpful. Owenism cuts the umbilical cord
of biblical evangelism. It could be argued that this is because these
men have not understood the essence of Owen's theology; or it might also
be that they have, and it is now like a noose around their necks with
the attendant fear that the non-elect might be saved under Gospel
preaching! How ridiculous can things become! I think also that Owenism
is so focussed on predestination and election that there is really no
need for Gospel preaching at all!
I am also convinced that only
those who adopt an Owenite position on matters relating to the Gospel
will be welcome to preach to many of their congregations. I think
Owenism allows unbelievers to remain undetected within the church as
visible and only the spiritually discerning can identify this.
That is why I love John Calvin,
the reformed evangelist, so much. He yearns for souls to be saved,
longs to see sinners come to Christ and pleads with them to leave their
life of sin and trust the only Saviour of the world. He knows the
Gospel so well, and refuses to complicate it with the clogging
influences of medieval scholasticism. He allows the Scripture to speak
out its own plain message to the perishing world. He holds out the only
life-line there is to all the world, begging them to come in. Owenites
appear to believe that the Gospel and Gospel preaching is unnecessary -
as some of your people have told you, and the same impression is given
by many ministers. The Owenite Gospel is essentially 'another Gospel,'
(Gal.1:6, 7), which is not another. If we are to return anywhere, it
must be to the Gospel as preached by Calvin and Baxter, and the faithful
followers of Christ.
Maybe I am rambling here, but do you see any merit in what I am saying? Will a return to authentic Calvinism save the churches and the Gospel in the churches? I am convinced it will! And how we need such a return, and need it urgently!
I leave these few rambling thoughts with you for your consideration and to be reflected upon. If we can see what our theology is doing, and the negative effect it has had on the churches, then I think we may have hit upon the one thing that will improve the spiritual condition of many within the church and the whole church as well; it will re-focus our minds and hearts on true and rigorous evangelism; it will lead to the conversion of 'covenant children;' and it will be instrumental in the reformation and reviving of the church as she is today.
May God bless you all abundantly in all you do in His holy service.
For further examples of Calvin's Gospel preaching, please visit here. This paper was delivered at the 2011 Amyraldian Association Conference in Attleborough, NORFOLK. It expounds Calvin's evangelistic approach and the content of the Gospel he so powerfully declared. Here is authentic Calvinistic evangelistic preaching.
3 comments:
Having read your article and as you ask for comment, my initial reponse is to suggest what one Australian Christian leader suggested recently - namely in such situations it is probably better to:
1. Either implement root and branch reform of the pastoral ministry, or failing that,
2. Close down such churches entirely until such time as true believers in any given area can meet and re-form on a simple New Testament basis.
I suggest that "more preaching" is most certainly not the answer to the church's ills, and certainly not a reversion to dead end medieval theologies.
As a brother pointed out in his excellent little summary of the early church pattern :
The early church had:
No buildings. No denominations.
No fixed organisation. No New Testament. No dogmatic 'system',(whether traditional 'Calvinism', Owenism, or any other man centered tradition) and
No Sabbath Rest (In the Gentile World).
However, what it DID have was :
1. An experience and store of teaching from Christ.
2. The essential Gospel (salvation through grace and faith in Christ alone)
3. The Holy Spirit.
('When The Church Was Young' by Ernest Loosley.)
The question arises - are these last three provisions of Christ for his church - sufficient for the founding, establishment, and government of churches today?.
Answer: Indeed they are.
Graham, you have completely misunderstood biblical Christianity, I am sorry to say; and you have completely misunderstood my position, whether wittingly or unwittingly. You certainly do not understand Calvin, as is evident from your posted comment. If what you said can be said about any man, it cannot be said about John Calvin. His theology is theocentric, not man-centred as you so constantly and wrongly assert. In addition, his theology is well-balanced biblically, unlike yours and Zens. Unless these conversations are going to be spiritually and theologically productive to both of us, and to the readers, there is no point in continuing with them.
Hazlett. I do not misunderstand
biblical Christianity for a moment, on the contrary like yourself I am deeply concerned to maintain and establish it.
I am well aware too of the theologies of past worthies such as Calvin, Owen and many others, but my post was not critical of them as such.
The point I am making is that we live in the 21st century, not the 16th or 17th, and that whilst such theologies may have historical interest, it is the responsibility of each generation of Christians to formulate and express their OWN grasp of the NT message for today, and to apply reform where necessary.
The thrust of my post is to do with church reform, which appeared to be the central concern of your original post? For that to take place we do not need to go back to the traditions or doctrines of men, however enlightened past worthies may have been, but rather to apply NT principles to our situations now.
We learn from these men of the past but we must not centre our theology upon men, but we must demonstrate that we rely solely on the biblical revelation alone - in line incidentally with the Reformers 'Sola Scriptura.
That is my position, and which prompted my closing three points about both the example of the early church and its dependency on that simple theology.
OK, you may not agree, but I would be interested to learn what you suggest as being positive answers to the problems and sad situations of the churches in NI or elsewhere that you yourself raise.
Presumably you agree that the NT is suggestive of specific steps towards reform? If so what are they - perhaps it would be a better approach to identify these and discuss them?
If as you suggest "another Gospel" is supplanting the true Gospel of Christ in those situations what is your own answer?
There is plenty of historical precedent for true believers in Christ to leave such situations in order to remain true to the "faith once delivered to the saints", and for their own spiritual welfare.
Graham
Post a Comment