Christian Denominations 3: Presbyterian Church
Publish on February 20,2011홍삼열
Presbyterian
Church (Romans 8:28-30)
Today we continue the denominations of Christianity
series. For the last two Sundays, we considered the Roman Catholic Church and
the Lutheran Church as the first Protestant denomination. Today we will
consider the Presbyterian Church, the church that follows the lead of John
Calvin.
First let us consider the word presbyterian.
This word presbyterian came from the Greek word presbuteros
(πρεσβύτερος), which means “elder.” In the early church, the office of elder
and the office of bishop were identical and weren’t differentiated until later.
The fact that the early church operated based on the plurality of elders or
bishops is the basis upon which the Presbyterian Church has developed its
distinctive system of church government, i.e., the elder system, as opposed to
the bishop system of the Catholic Church. According to this Presbyterian form
of government, elders are chosen by the people and ordained for special
services. One interesting fact about this system is that not only pastors but
also lay people are elected and ordained as elders. So in the Presbyterian
Church, we see two kinds of elders: 1) teaching elders who are the ministers of
the Word and Sacrament, and 2) ruling elders who representing the laity of a
local church, exercise leadership, government, and discipline, and have
responsibilities for the life of the church.
Now let us talk about Calvin, the founder of the
Presbyterian tradition. Like the case of Luther who began the Lutheran Church,
Calvin was the one who provided the specific DNA for the Presbyterian Church.
It is quite interesting to compare Calvin and Luther, because their differences
determined in considerable part the future differences that would exist between
the Lutheran Church and the Presbyterian Church. To speak of Luther, the best
description of him would be that he was a first generation reformer. He started
new things when such things were non-existent. He boldly changed some Catholic
practices when the majority of Christians saw no problems in them. And of
course, creating this kind of new culture required a strong character, and in
Luther’s case, the character of an effective demagogue. His words were straightforward
and inflammatory. People who read or listened to him were almost forced into
agreeing with him and following his reform movement, or they were angered in
such a way to attack him back.
But Calvin, a second generation reformer, had a
different character. As a humanist scholar himself, he always valued reason and
common sense. His strength was to think clearly and to arrange the new
Protestant thoughts and practices in such a way to create a complete
theological system. One good example was his master piece, Institutes of the Christian Religion. This book was written when he
was 26 years old and included all possible aspects of the Protestant theology.
And due to its coherent and complete nature, it has become the authority for
all Presbyterian and Reformed churches.
Another important thing about Calvin is that Calvin’s
reform program far exceeded Luther’s. From the perspective of Calvin, Luther’s
program was incomplete for he was seen not progressive enough. Of course, when
Luther started his reform movement, it was already a great novelty in the
Catholic Church because nobody had seen or experienced what Luther was doing.
So it would be too harsh or even anachronistic for later people to say that
Luther should have gone farther. But that was what the second generation
reformers felt anyway about Luther. They felt that Luther was too conservative,
that he compromised on so many things against his original spirit of
reformation. The case in point was the use of an organ. Luther’s position was
that if any aspect of church practice did not contradict the scriptures, we
should value tradition and continue to use it, and so he continued to use
organs in his churches. But Calvin and other reformers did not agree. Since
they believed that they should reject any Catholic tradition not explicitly
commanded in the Bible—and of course there is no mention of an organ in the
Bible—they banned it from their churches. This is how Lutheran churches came to
preserve more of a Catholic “look and feel” while their Presbyterian
counterparts became quite different from the Catholic Church.
So this is a chart explaining the Presbyterian
position. According to the Presbyterian tradition, Luther started very well; he
was on the right track in the beginning but did not go far enough. So here in
this chart, the Lutheran Church is described as being a little bit out of
track. It is the Reformed or Presbyterian Church that has corrected this error
and put the reformation program back on track.
Now let us consider the distinctive marks of
Presbyterianism. If someone asks me what distinguishes the Presbyterian Church
from others, I would say these two things. First is the elder system, which
we’ve already discussed above. The highest administrative authority resides in
the council of elders, both preaching elders and ruling elders. The second is
their Reformed theology which is conveniently summarized with the acronym
TULIP. Let me explain this.
T stands for total depravity. This doctrine
asserts that, as a consequence of the fall of Adam and Eve, every person born
into the world is totally corrupt and enslaved to the service of sin. Thus, all
people by their own abilities are morally unable to choose to follow God and be
saved. The only hope for them would be a help coming from outside, that is, the
free grace of God. Then we may want to ask this question: “If every person is
totally corrupt and thus unable to choose to follow God, then how can we be
saved?”
This question leads to the next letter of the acronym
U, which stands for unconditional election or predestination.
According to this doctrine, God chooses people to be saved not because He sees
some excellent qualities in them. Rather, He chooses them because of His
mysterious will for them regardless of their good faith or behavior. In fact,
the decision about salvation is made even before their birth, even before the
creation of the world. So there’s nothing that man can change about this
decision. The distinction between the elect and the non-elect are not in
themselves but in God’s divine will, and this is why election is called
unconditional.
The next letter in the acronym is L, limited
atonement, which means that Jesus died only for the elect. This doctrine is
driven by the concept of the sovereignty of God in salvation. If God is all
powerful and He knows everything, especially who will be saved and who will
not, then it doesn’t make any sense that Christ should die for those who will
not be saved. If the price has to be paid for the sins of those in hell, it
should be paid by themselves, not by Christ.
The fourth letter in the acronym is I, and it stands
for irresistible grace. This doctrine asserts that when God gives His
grace to someone and wills to save him, this individual cannot resist it but
has to accept it so that he may finally be saved. But this does not mean that
every influence of God’s Holy Spirit cannot be resisted. Yes, it can often be
resisted. But ultimately, the Holy Spirit is able to overcome all resistance
and make the elect saved. This is what they mean by irresistible grace.
The final letter in the acronym is P, which stands for
perseverance of the saints. This doctrine teaches that once a person has
been elected to be saved by God, he is eternally secure, that is, he cannot
lose his salvation. For God will continue to give him a special grace that will
sustain his faith until the end. Then how should we understand those who first
believed and then apparently fell away from faith? According to Calvin, they
either never had true faith to begin with, or will return before they die.
Now what is the Methodist position about these five
points of Presbyterianism? We Methodists only partially agree with them. We
agree that every human being is too corrupt to achieve salvation of their own.
Without the grace of God, salvation is impossibility for us. But we do not
agree that human beings are totally corrupt, that our ability to seek God is
totally shattered. Instead, we believe that in spite of the fall of Adam, God
still preserved in us an ability to respond to His grace. To use the expression
of John Wesley, we have the prevenient grace with us, the grace that
comes before us to make us prepared and receptive to a further grace of God. So
we have the free will to respond to God’s grace. If we accept this grace and believe
in Jesus Christ, then we are saved. If we resist the grace, then we are not
saved. So as opposed to the Presbyterian doctrines of irresistible grace and
unconditional election, we say we are responsible for our own salvation: it is
we who should accept the offer of salvation; it is we who should believe in
Jesus Christ to be saved.
Again concerning the concepts of limited atonement and
the perseverance of the saints, we Methodists have a different opinion. We
believe that Jesus died literally for all people as 1 Timothy 2:4 says “God
wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth,” and 2
Cor. 5:15, “He died for all, that those who live should no longer live for
themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.” We also believe
that any believer, if he does not continue to strive to follow Jesus, could
fall out of salvation. That is the case of those who made spiritual shipwreck
in 1 Timothy 1:19, “Hold on to faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected
these and so have shipwrecked their faith,” or the case of those branches cut
off from the Olive Tree in Romans 11:20-21, “Do not be arrogant but be afraid.
For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.”
In this way, we do not agree with our Presbyterian
friends. Especially we do not accept their doctrine of unconditional election
or predestination. If by that doctrine they simply mean that God foreknows who
will be saved and who will not, we can gladly accept that. But if they mean that
God predetermines some people for eternal salvation and others for eternal
damnation regardless of their faith, we cannot accept that. For if that is
true, why evangelize? Why make an extra effort to live a holy life?
But please don’t get me wrong here. By saying this, I
do not mean that what they believe is false. Rather, I would say that what they
believe is as true as what we believe, because the Bible supports not only our
Methodist position but the Presbyterian position too. As much as we can quote from
the scriptures to support our position, they can do the same to support theirs.
One good example is the scripture reading for today, Romans 8:28-30, “We know
that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called
according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be
conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn
within a large family. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those
whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also
glorified.”
If the Presbyterian position is as true as ours, then
how should we understand this difference and at the same time hold the
integrity of the Bible? I think part of this difficulty originates in our
fundamental limitation as created beings. As such, we have only a limited
capacity to know the truth, and so one person or one party cannot simply say,
“We know the Bible completely. We have the whole truth. But you don’t!” Rather
I believe we need to take a humble attitude as Paul confessed in 1 Cor. 13:12,
“Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror, but then we will see face to
face. Now I know only in part, but then I will know fully.”
Now to better understand the Presbyterian position and
learn from our friends in that tradition, we need to turn our attention to the
concept of the sovereignty of God. The confession that God is the sovereign of
all is the basis for all Presbyterian theology. For it is the confession that
God is the king of our lives, that God takes care of all things that happen to
us. Especially in relation to our salvation, it is the confession that
salvation is not our own achievement but only the grace of God.
But sometimes it is difficult to accept the
sovereignty of God because we see so many evil things happening in this world,
like the indiscriminate killings in Africa, many children being kidnapped and
raped in this country, huge tsunamis devastating many coastal cities, etc. When
these things happen, we doubt the sovereignty of God; we question if God is
really in control. But in spite of such doubt—this may be the necessary,
inescapable result of our limitation as human beings—there is one thing that we
can be absolutely sure about, which is the redemptive aspect of the sovereignty
of God, in other words, that nothing is beyond the redemptive power of God. By
faith we know that whatever happens to us, it is never outside the power of God
to use it for His good purpose and for our own benefit. God is so powerful and
so sovereign that he can include even many evil things in his work of
salvation. This is the sovereignty of God we confess and believe. And so let us
trust God in all circumstances. Let us have assurance of this great power of
God, the power that can use and change even the worst situations for His glory
and for our own benefit.
Read More