Letter to the Unsaved

Posted on by
Reply

lostsheepLetter to the Unsaved by Rev James Smith (1802-1862)

Dear unsaved friend, and then sign it — if you agree to it.

I am resolved to persevere in sin, and follow the maxims and customs of those around me — though it costs me the loss of my soul, and exposes me to everlasting damnation.

I am resolved to reject the Son of God — I will not embrace Him as my Saviour, or have Him reign over me. I am resolved that I will not accept the pardon which God presents to me in the gospel, though it cost Jesus His life to procure it — and I know I must eternally perish without it. I am determined not to submit to God’s way of salvation, and I consent to be lost forever! I have made up my mind, that I will never consent to receive a free salvation by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ — I will not have it!

I am resolved . . .to reject God’s message, to dare His justice, to defy His power, to refuse His mercy, to brave His threatened wrath, and to harden myself against all His invitations, expostulations, exhortations, and promises!

I am resolved that I will not . . . bow to His authority, yield to His entreaties, believe on His Son, repent of my sins, love His name, or obey His precepts!

I am determined that there shall never be joy in Heaven among the angels of God — on account of my conversion.

I will never . . . desert the ranks of Satan, give up my sinful practices, ask for mercy at God’s hands, or take up my cross and follow Christ!

I am resolved . . . to keep on in my old wicked course, to persevere in my present sinful path, to associate with my carnal companions — and if it secures my eternal damnation — then let it do so!

I will not receive salvation on God’s terms, I will not stoop to be saved by grace alone, I will not take the yoke of Christ upon me, and engage to be His subject and servant — even though Heaven and all the glories of eternity would be secured by it.

If I cannot escape the wrath of God — but by faith, repentance, and holiness — why, I am determined go to Hell, for I am resolved not to yield to any such terms!

It is of no use for the preacher to spend His breath upon me! My mind is made up, I will be my own master, I will take my own course! No one has any right to interfere with me — for I shall injure no one but myself!

I have no objection to going to church, or to attending to some religious forms — but to give my heart to God, to be crucified to the present world, and to make God’s glory the end of life — will never do for me; therefore I gladly take the consequences.

If this is required of those who would be true Christians — then you must stop urging me — for I will not yield! You must stop all attempts to convert me, for my mind is made up! I have heard hundreds of sermons, I have read the Bible myself — but I have hardened myself against the whole, and I am not going to yield now!

Tell me no more of the Saviour’s love, tell me no more of the pleasures of holiness, tell me no more of the terrors of death, tell me no more of the dreadful judgment, tell me no more of the joys of Heaven, tell me no more of the agonies of Hell — for you will never induce me to yield myself unto God, and seek the salvation of my soul. For my mind is made up, and my daily conduct is enough to convince you of it, if anything would. I am resolved not to yield — let the consequences be what they may!

I will go on just as I have done! I will not be Christ’s servant! I will not be God’s child! I will obey only Satan! I will follow the course of this evil world! I will serve my lusts and pleasures!

In proof thereof, witness my signature, ____________.

Will you now sign your name? Will you now solemnly put your seal to this statement? Why are you so afraid?

Do not your actions speak louder than your words? Is not your daily practice stronger proof — than just putting your name to a statement once? If you do not say the above in words — yet if you do so in your actions — then where is the difference? Does not God read the language of your life? If you say it in your daily practice — then why not boldly take the pen and openly sign your name?

Soon the judgment shall be set, and the books shall be opened — and your criminality and folly shall be published before assembled worlds!

Well, will you sign the above? Why not? Is it true of you — or is it not?

The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification: A Curtain on the Reformation?

Posted on by
Reply

judge-gavel2Leonardo De Chirico of the Reformanda Initiative interviews Prof. Michael Reeves, UK. Author of books such as The Unquenchable Flame: Discovering the Heart of the Reformation (2010) and (with Tim Chester), Why The Reformation Still Matters (2016).

On October 31, 1999, the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed ‘The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification’ (JDDJ), claiming that they were ‘now able to articulate a common understanding of our justification by God’s grace through faith in Christ.’[1] This has led many since to think that the fundamental theological differences of the Reformation have now been resolved, and that there remains little or nothing of real theological substance to prevent evangelical-Catholic unity. Professor Mark Noll, for instance, boldly declared,

If it is true, as once was repeated frequently by Protestants conscious of their anchorage in Martin Luther or John Calvin that iustificatio articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae (justification is the article on which the church stands or falls), then the Reformation is over.[2]

Let’s start here: what should we make of the JDDJ?

Michael Reeves: The JDDJ itself was rather less sanguine about what had been achieved, and stated explicitly that it ‘does not cover all that either church teaches about justification.’[3] Nevertheless, it did claim to be a ‘decisive step forward on the way to overcoming the division of the church’ in that it managed to express ‘a consensus on basic truths of the doctrine of justification and shows that the remaining differences in its explication are no longer the occasion for doctrinal condemnations.’[4] This itself, though, was a considerable claim. Those ‘doctrinal condemnations’ it professed to avoid include the binding anathemas of the Council of Trent (1545-63), such as:

CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.

CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.

CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.[5]

Is this a failure of the JDDJ?

Since the JDDJ expressly sought to avoid those condemnations, its understanding of justification cannot be that sinners are saved by faith alone without works by the sole remission of sins and the sole imputation of the righteousness of Christ.[6] It cannot then amount to the evangelical understanding of justification that the Council of Trent sought so carefully to define and oppose. And since it does not encompass the evangelical understanding of justification, it cannot be a decisive step forward to overcoming the theological differences between evangelicals and the Roman Catholic Church.

How does the JDDJ define justification then?

When it first sets out to define the biblical message of justification, various aspects of salvation are listed alongside each other. Continue reading →