Dr. James White
Next on "The Council of Orange" Dr. White wrote further in his reply (here) to Dr. David Allen (emphasis mine):
"Dr. Allen also stated that the Council of Orange (529 AD) did not argue that regeneration preceded faith. But let’s look at a few statements in the Canons. In Canon 5, specifically, we read the affirmation that the Holy Spirit has already begun to ensure that our regeneration and faith will happen because of the actions taking place to allow us to have faith."
If the men who were assembled in the Council of Orange believed as Sproul and White, why did they simply not say "regeneration precedes faith"? Caesarius of Arles (c. 469–542 AD), Bishop of Arles, led the council and he was a man who believed as Augustine. He, like Augustine, believed that people are not saved until baptism. From one of his sermons he said: "Indeed, before our baptism we were sanctuaries of the devil; but after our baptism we merited the privilege of being temples of Christ." (As cited here; emphasis mine) So, White cannot read into what the canons of the council say about the works and graces of God that precede faith and baptism to equate with the tenet that regeneration precedes faith.
Surely White, like most "Reformed" or Calvinist theologians, believe not only in common grace but in common operations of the Spirit. If so, then his argumentation is invalid. Simply because the canons of the Council spoke of grace preceding and the Spirit operating on dead sinners does not equate to them believing that regeneration precedes faith. So we read where Stephen in his preaching said the following to such sinners: “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you." (Acts 7: 51 nkjv) We also read where they "rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit." (Isa. 63: 10 nkjv) We also read where God's spirit was "striving with" unregenerate sinners of the antediluvian age. (Gen. 6: 3)
Professor A. A. Hodge (1823-1886) of Princeton University in "The Westminster Confession: A Commentary" (1870) wrote: "3. That the sole agent in this effectual calling is the Holy Ghost; that He uses Gospel truth as His instrument; and that, while all sinners are active in resisting the common influences of grace before regeneration..." (pp. 170–171, emphasis mine) You can find this citation available on Monergism.com, a web page dedicated to promoting the born again before faith view.
Certainly God the Father draws and teaches sinners before they come to Jesus for life and salvation. (John 6: 44-45) It is also the gracious granting of the Father that is the cause of sinners coming to Christ in faith. (vs. 65) So, one can believe that the drawing, teaching, gifting, illuminating of the Father precedes coming to Christ or before regeneration. Augustine, as I have stated, believed in prevenient grace, and like the Puritan Calvinists believed that there were preparations that preceded a sinner being born again.
As I have said, those who put regeneration before faith push the experience of regeneration back too far and this has created many theological problems. For instance, they must say that conviction of sin must follow regeneration rather than precede it. If they admit that conviction of sin and realization of need for salvation through Christ precedes regeneration, then they overthrow their idea that whatever act God first does towards saving a sinner = regeneration. In chapter four of this series I cited from Stephen Charnock (1628-1680) who said: "The soul must be beaten down by conviction before it be raised up by regeneration; There must be some apprehensions of the necessity of it." John Owen also has said the same. In "Pneumatologia" (1674) he wrote (emphasis mine):
"First, in reference to the work of regeneration itself, positively considered, we may observe that ordinarily there are certain previous and preparatory works, or workings in and upon the souls of men, that are antecedent and dispositive to regeneration. Yet regeneration does not consist in them, nor can it be educed out of them."
That is what the canons of the Council of Orange was saying and for White to interpret them as affirming that they believed that the first operation of the Spirit upon the hearts of sinners = regeneration is a case of his reading into their words his own theology. If the attendees of the Council really believed as White, they would have simply said "regeneration precedes faith."
White wrote further:
"The Council of Orange made a firm stand that we cannot even begin to have faith without “infusion” or “inspiration” of the Holy Spirit. This is not merely some type of prevenient grace – it is effective."
To this comment I repeat what I have already said. You cannot say that a person believes in regeneration before faith by that person believing that the Spirit operates on the hearts of dead alien sinners. Where do the canons say that every person who has the Spirit operating on them is immediately regenerated by that operation? The scriptures I cited above show this idea is false. Further, the Council was echoing the views of Augustine who did believe in prevenient grace, which grace is effective in the case of the elect but not so in the case of those not chosen to salvation.
White wrote further:
"In Canon 3, we read that it’s God’s grace which makes us pray."
Yes, but all grace is not saving grace. Grace does precede regeneration. The first Calvinists of the Reformation all taught this. The Puritans, men such as William Ames, William Perkins, John Owen, Stephen Charnock, all believed in preparations leading up to being saved or regenerated. They believed in a Calvinistic paradigm of prevenient grace. Also, the words "God's grace makes us pray" does not equal "God's grace makes us regenerate and then makes us pray."
White wrote further:
"Canon 4 says that our will to be cleansed from sin comes from the Holy Spirit."
That statement is true, but how does that mean that the several canons were intended to mean regeneration precedes faith? Again, that is eisegesis. Who is the "our"? If it is saved people, then it cannot be used as proof of the born again before faith view. If it is unsaved people, then it cannot mean that the people desiring cleansing were already regenerated, for regeneration involves cleansing ("the washing of regeneration") and why would they pray for such cleansing if they were already clean?
White wrote further:
"Finally, Canon 7 is basically the definition of total depravity – man cannot “make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life” unless through the infusion of the Holy Spirit our hearts are illuminated."
Notice White's saying "is basically." I have already called attention to how White, in citing from the words of the Council would say "in other words" Augustine taught that regeneration precedes faith. This is White's attempt to misrepresent or misinterpret the words of Augustine and the authors of the Canons of the Council of Orange. The above words cannot be interpreted to mean that the authors believed that regeneration precedes faith. First of all, they put making the right choice as an act of the sinner which occurs before salvation. But, White believes that regeneration involves no acts of the sinner, no choice to be saved or to obtain eternal life. That is not what the above canon states.
Does illumination precede regeneration or follow it? Is a sinner totally passive in being illuminated? Do we define illumination (or enlightenment) by the cause (the Spirit or word of God) to the exclusion of the effect? If we do then we have a person illuminated before he is actually illuminated, which is nonsense.
White wrote further:
"And lest we wish to accuse The Council of Orange of universalism, they stated that the Holy Spirit “makes all men gladly assent to and believe in the truth”. In other words, “all men” who have been illumined by the Holy Spirit will then have faith. This, my friends, is regeneration."
When White says "this, my friends, is regeneration" and "in other words" he is again reading his views into the text of the canon. Further, I don't think that it is a Bible teaching that only saved people have been illuminated. I believe that White, like Sproul, believes that those described in Hebrews 6: 4-6 were not ever truly regenerated believers and yet one of the things said of them is that they were "enlightened" and "made partakers of the Holy Ghost." So, that overthrows what he said above. Every saved person has been enlightened but not every enlightened person has been saved. In describing false Christians in Hebrews chapter ten we read: "For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins." (vs. 26) Peter in his second epistle speaks of the same false brethren as having "escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" and who "have known the way of righteousness" (vs. 20-21). I feel certain that what the canon cited simply says is that all those who have been illuminated by the Holy Spirit can credit the Lord for it.
White wrote further citing the following canons and made few comments on them but simply put in bold letters the parts he believed taught that regeneration precedes faith:
"CANON 5. If anyone says that not only the increase of faith but also its beginning and the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who justifies the ungodly and comes to the regeneration of holy baptism-if anyone says that this belongs to us by nature and not by a gift of grace, that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amending our will and turning it from unbelief to faith and from godlessness to godliness, it is proof that he is opposed to the teaching of the Apostles..."
"CANON 7. If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, as is expedient for us, or that we can be saved, that is, assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who makes all men gladly assent to and believe in the truth, he is led astray by a heretical spirit…"
How can White say that the canons teach that regeneration precedes faith when in Canon five they plainly say "the regeneration of holy baptism"? Any honest person should see that the canons affirmed that both faith and baptism precedes regeneration. Canon seven also speaks of eternal life coming as a result of making the right choice. They say salvation is a result of choosing to be saved by Christ. Most Christians agree and is why they sing - "Oh happy day that fixed my choice on thee my Savior and my God!" "Happy Happy Day when Jesus washed my sins away!" Yes, we can only credit God and his gracious working for our thus choosing, as Paul said - "for it is God who works in you to will and to do of his good pleasure." (Phil. 2:13)
White then makes this conclusion:
"It is very common for Dr. Allen to assert that a historical figure or document said one thing but then to find out that it’s actually condemning Allen’s belief."
I find that highly ironic and comical because it is White, like Sproul, who does what he accuses Allen of doing!
In the next chapter we will finish our look at Dr. White's proof that Aquinas believed that regeneration precedes faith. After that we will proceed to examine the several problems that arise from asserting that regeneration is distinct from evangelical conversion, problems that I enumerated in the first chapter of this series.
No comments:
Post a Comment