 |
|
All
God's children are stillborn. They come spiritually dead into the world. And
dead they continue till they are born again of the Holy Ghost. - Augustus
M.Toplady
(THE WORKS OF AUGUSTUS TOPLADY ... A NEW ED P. 552) |
 |
|
Portrait
of Augustust Toplady
|
As
a former Arminian who now is a Calvinist, I will present this article by
Augustus Toplady who died on this date, August 11, 1778.
Arminianism is The Road to Rome - by Augustus Toplady
The heresy of Arminianism is logically
concluded in returning to Roman Catholicism.
“My sheep, saith Christ, hear my
voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal life,
and they shall never perish. O, most worthy Scriptures! which ought to compel
us to have a faithful remembrance, and to note the tenor thereof; which is, the
sheep of Christ shall never perish.
“Doth Christ mean part of his
elect, or all, think you? I do hold, and affirm, and also faithfully believe,
that he meant all his elect, and not part, as some do full ungodly affirm. I
confess and believe assuredly, that there shall never any of them perish: for I
have good authority so to say; be- cause Christ is my author, and saith, if it
were possible, the very elect should be deceived. Ergo, it is not possible that
they can be so deceived, that they shall ever finally perish, or be damned:
wherefore, whosoever doth affirm that there may be any (i.e. any of the elect)
lost, doth affirm that Christ hath a torn body.”1
The above valuable letter of
recantation is thus inscribed: “A Letter to the Congregation of Free-willers,
by One that had been of that Persuasion, but come off, and now a Prisoner for
Religion:” which superscription will hereafter, in its due place, supply us
with a remark of more than slight importance.
 |
|
Free will is added to the Bible
|
John Wesley, A Friend of Rome?
To occupy the place of argument,
it has been alleged that “Mr. Wesley is an old man;” and the Church of Rome is
still older than he. Is that any reason why the enormities, either of the
mother or the son, should pass unchastised?
It has also been suggested, that
“Mr. Wesley is a very laborious man:” not more laborious, I presume, than a
certain active being, who is said to go to and fro in the earth, and walk up
and down in it:2 nor yet more laborious, I should imagine, than certain ancient
Sectarians, concerning whom it was long ago said, “Woe unto you Scribes,
hypocrites; for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte:”3 nor, by any
means, so usefully laborious, as a certain diligent member of the community,
respecting whose variety of occupations the public have lately received the
following intelligence: “The truth of the following instance of industry may be
depended on: a poor man with a large family, now cries milk, every morning, in
Lothbury, and the neighbourhood of the Royal Exchange; at eleven, he wheels
about a barrow of potatoes; at one, he cleans shoes at the Change; after
dinner, cries milk again; in the evening, sells sprats; and at night, finishes
the measure of his labour as a watchman.”4
 |
|
A
man's free will cannot cure him even of the toothache, or a sore finger; and
yet he madly thinks it is in its power to cure his soul.
[PHOTO
SOURCE: https://www.azquotes.com/quote/542564]
|
The Quarrel is With the Wolf
Mr. Sellon, moreover, reminds me
(p. 128.) that, “while the shepherds are quarrelling, the wolf gets into the
sheep fold;” not impossible: but it so happens, that the present quarrel is not
among “the shepherds,” but with the “wolf” himself; which “quarrel” is
warranted by every maxim of pastoral meekness and fidelity.
I am further told, that, while I
am “berating the Arminians, Rome and the devil laugh in their sleeves.”
Admitting that Mr. Sellon might derive this anecdote from the fountain head,
the parties themselves, yet, as neither they nor he are very conspicuous for
veracity, I construe the intelligence by the rule of reverse, though
authenticated by the deposition of their right trusty and well-beloved cousin
and counsellor.
Once more: I am charged with
“excessive superciliousness, and majesty of pride:” and why not charged with
having seven heads and ten horns, and a tail as long as a bell-rope? After all,
what has my pride, or my humility, to do with the argument in hand? Whether I
am haughty, or meek, is of no more consequence either to that, or to the
public, than whether I am tall or short: however, I am, at this very time,
giving one proof, that my “majesty of pride” can stoop; that even to ventilate
the impertinences of Mr. Sellon.
 |
|
5 points of Arminianism
[PHOTO SOURCE: https://www.facebook.com/DamnableHeresy/photos/a.135170353265390/135178436597915/?type=3&theater]
Proponents of Arminianism teach contra-causal free will, and that salvation is a condition of foreseen faith or disbelief, and an atonement theory that made salvation merely possible—but not actual for anyone. This is why Arminianism is a false gospel. Sadly, there are a lot of cowardly Calvinists that will not excoriate the cheap grace, semi-pelagian lies of Arminianism. Take some time to review some excerpts from the Canons of Dort, to see how Arminianism should be denounced: - For they “deceive” the simple and plainly “contradict Holy Scripture…” - For this is an “invention of the human mind,” “devised apart from the Scriptures,” which “distorts the teaching” concerning election and breaks up this golden chain of salvation… - For by this “pernicious error” the good pleasure of God and the merit of Christ are robbed of their effectiveness and people are drawn away, by “unprofitable inquiries…” - For this “smacks of Pelagius,” and it clearly calls into question the words of the apostle… - By this “gross error” they make God changeable, destroy the comfort of the godly concerning the steadfastness of their election, and “contradict the Holy Scriptures…” - This is a “novel idea” and an “error and has the effect of elevating the power of free choice…” Sonny Hernandez Director, Reforming America Ministries |
Arminianism at Home in Rome
But, however frivolous his
cavils, the principles for which he contends are of the most pernicious nature
and tendency. I must repeat, what already seems to have given him so much
offence, that Arminianism “came from Rome, and leads thither again.” Julian,
bishop of Eclana a contemporary and disciple of Pelagius, was one of those who
endeavoured, with much art, to gild the doctrines of that heresiarch, in order
to render them more sightly and palatable. The Pelagian system, thus varnished
and paliated, soon began to acquire the softer name of Semipelagianism. Let us
take a view of it, as drawn to our hands by the celebrated Mr. Bower, who himself,
in the main, a professed Pelagian, and therefore less likely to present us with
an unfavourable portrait of the system he generally approved. Among the
principles of that sect, this learned writer enumerates the following:
“The notion of election and
reprobation, independent on our merits or demerits, is maintaining a fatal
necessity, is the bane of all virtue, and serves only to render good men remiss
in working out their salvation, and to drive sinners to despair.
“The decrees of election and reprobation
are posterior to, and in consequence of, our good or evil works, as foreseen by
God from all eternity.”5
Is not this too the very language
of modern Arminianism? Do not the partizans of that scheme argue on the same
identical terms? Should it be said, “True, this proves that Arminianism is
Pelagianism revived; but it does not prove, that the doctrines of Arminianism
are originally Popish:” a moment’s cool attention will make it plain that they
are. Let us again hear Mr. Bower, who, after the passage just quoted,
immediately adds, “on these two last propositions, the Jesuits found their
whole system of grace and free-will; agreeing therein with the Semipelagians,
against the Jansenists and St. Augustine.”6 The Jesuits were moulded into a
regular body, towards the middle of the sixteenth century: toward the close of
the same century, Arminius began to infest the Protestant churches. It needs
therefore no great penetration, to discern from what source he drew his poison.
His journey to Rome (though Monsicur Bayle affects to make light of the
inferences which were at that very time deduced from it) was not for nothing.
If, however, any are disposed to believe, that Arminius imbibed his doctrines
from the Socinians in Poland, with whom, it is certain, he was on terms of
intimate friendship, I have no objection to splitting the difference: he might
import some of his tenets from the Racovian brethren, and yet be indebted, for
others, to the disciples of Loyola.
Papists and Predestination
Certain it is, that Arminius
himself was sensible, how greatly the doctrine of predestination widens the
distance between Protestantism and Popery. “There is no point of doctrines
(says he) which the Papists, the Anabaptists, and the (new) Lutherans more
fiercely oppose, nor by means of which they heap more discredit on the reformed
churches, and bring the reformed system itself into more odium; for they (i.e.
the Papists, & etc.) assert, that no fouler blasphemy against God can be
thought or expressed, than is contained in the doctrine of predestination.”7
For which reason, he advises the reformed world to discard predestination from
their creed, in order that they may live on more brotherly terms with the
Papists, the Anabaptists, and such like.
The Arminian writers make no scruple
to seize and retail each other’s arguments, as common property. Hence, Samuel
Hoord copies from Van Harmin the self same observation which I have now cited.
“Predestination (says Samuel) is an opinion odious to the Papists, opening
their foul mouths, against our Church and religion:”8 consequently, our
adopting the opposite doctrines of universal grace and freewill, would, by
bringing us so many degrees nearer to the Papists, conduce to shut their
mouths, and make them regard us, so far at least, as their own orthodox and
dearly beloved brethren: whence it follows, that, as Arminianism came from
Rome, so “it leads thither again.”
The Jesuits and Predestination
If the joint verdict of Arminius
himself, and of his English proselyte Hoord, will not turn the scale, let us
add the testimony of a professed Jesuit, by way of making up full weight. When
archbishop Laud’s papers were exam- ined, a letter was found among them, thus
endorsed with that prelate’s own hand: “March, 1628. A Jesuit’s Letter, sent to
the Rector at Bruxels, about the ensuing Parliament.” The design of this letter
was to give the Superior of the Jesuits, then resident at Brussels, an account
of the posture of civil and ecclesiastical affairs in England; an extract from
it I shall here subjoin: “Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize
upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine and unexpected
calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted
that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants
from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the
better prevention of the Puritanes, the Arminians have already locked up the
Duke’s (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which
stand continually at the Duke’s chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot
be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported
with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as
lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine
fabricke:–OUR FOUNDATION IS ARMINIANISME. The Arminians and projectors, as it
appeares in the premises, affect mutation. This we second and enforce by
probable arguments.”9
 |
|
Augustus Toplady
|
The Sovereign Drug Arminianism
The “Sovereign drug,
Arminianism,” which said the Jesuit, “we (i.e. we Papists) have planted” in
England, did indeed bid fair “to purge our Protestant Church effectually. How
merrily Popery and Arminianism, at that time, danced hand in hand, may be learned
from Tindal: “The churches were adorned with paintings, images, altar-pieces,
& etc. and, instead of communion tables, alters were set up, and bowings to
them and the sacramental elements enjoined. The predestinarian doctrines were
forbid, not only to be preached, but to be printed; and the Arminian sense of
the Articles was encouraged and propagated.”10 The Jesuit, therefore, did not
exult without cause. The “sovereign drug,” so lately “planted,” did indeed take
deep root downward, and bring forth fruit upward, under the cherishing auspices
of Charles and Laud. Heylyn, too, acknowledges, that the state of things was
truly described by another Jesuit of that age, who wrote: “Protestantism waxeth
weary of itself. The doctrine (by the Arminians, who then sat at the helm) is
altered in many things, for which their progenitors forsook the Church of Rome:
as limbus patrum; prayer for the dead, and possibility of keeping God’s com-
mandments; and the accounting of Calvinism to be heresy at least, if not treason.”11
Arminianism From the Pit
The maintaining of these
positions, by the Court divines, was an “alteration” indeed; which the
abandoned Heylyn ascribes to “the ingenuity and moderation found in some
professors of our religion.” If we sum up the evidence that has been given, we
shall find its amount to be, that Arminianism came from the Church of Rome, and
leads back again to the pit whence it was digged.
 |
|
“If we sum up the evidence that has been given, we shall
find its amount to be, that Arminianism came from the Church of Rome, and leads
back again to the pit where it was digged.” - Augustus
Toplady
|
Augustus Montague Toplady /ˈtɒpləˌdiː/ (4 November 1740 – 11
August 1778) was an Anglican cleric and hymn
writer. He was a major Calvinist opponent of John
Wesley. He is best remembered as the author of the hymn "Rock of Ages". Three of
his other hymns – "A Debtor to Mercy Alone", "Deathless
Principle, Arise" and "Object of My First Desire" – are still
occasionally sung today.
OTHER
LINKS:
No comments:
Post a Comment