John Allen’s English Translation of Calvin’s Institutes (1813)

Here’s some information on John Allen:

John Allen was a layman like Thomas Norton — a nonconformist school-teacher, born at Truro, in Cornwall, 1771, and for thirty years master of a private school at Hackney, near London, where he died in 1839. . . . He tells us in the Preface to his translation of the “Institutes,” that one of the circumstances which led him to publish it was “the recent controversy respecting Calvinism, commended by Dr. Tomline, the present Bishop of Lincoln.”
. . . The translation is certainly so far successful that it conveys with plain directness the meaning of the original author, and so far, at least as we have observed, never either misses it or obscures it.
- B. B. Warfield, Calvin and Calvinism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2003), 421-22.  

You can find it online here (vol. 1) and here (vol. 2).

(HT: Kyle Scheele for link to vol. 2)

Filed under: Church History , B.B. Warfield, Calvinism, Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Allen, John Calvin, Reformed Theology

Reformed-Baptist: An Oxymoron?

. . . they [Reformed Christians] cannot remain faithful to their theology while ceasing to regard infant baptism as legitimate and scriptural. When we are desired to believe the contrary, and when it is asserted that “some thousands of the Baptist Churches lay claim to Calvinist doctrine, like the Reformed Churches in the United States,” we at once demand that they should read the texts and study closely the confessions of faith, and they will then see whether these churches have remained “Calvinist” and whether their doctrine differs from “Calvinist doctrine” only on the question of baptism. Such assertions are not confirmed by facts. We are sufficiently well placed to know the gulf which separates the doctrines of those who “lay claim to Calvinist doctrine” and this “Calvinist doctrine” taken in its real and precise scientific sense. It is one thing to lay claim to a doctrine, and quite another to profess it!
- Pierre-Charles Marcel, The Biblical Doctrine of Infant Baptism: Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace, trans. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes (Cambridge, England: James Clarke Co., Ltd, 2002), 250-51.

 

Filed under: Ecclesiology, Law and Gospel, Means of Grace, Quotes, Reformed Theology, Word and Sacraments , Calvinism, Covenant Theology, Reformed Baptist, Reformed Theology

Taking Refuge in Our Baptism

Let us esteem highly the testimony which has been granted to us in baptism so that we may be able to oppose every temptation and doubt with which Satan confronts us in order to unsettle our faith. If we are so stupid that we are not conscious of our vices, like people unaware of their own bad breath, so much the worse for us! But when we are roused to the realization that an account has to be rendered to God, that Day and night He reminds us that He is the Judge of the world, and that He cannot neglect this office after we have looked within ourselves to examine our sins, we ought certainly to be overtaken by fear and misgiving; and if we have no remedy for our consolation, we can but be plunged into the depths of despair. But let us take refuge in our baptism, and in the fact that we know that it is not in vain that God has called us to be partakers of the purity of His only Son and that we have been made one with Him; and let us be assured that by this means the blood which He shed will be effective in purging away every spot, so that we shall be able to come boldly before God–not with arrogance like the hypocrites and those who are self-sufficient, but confiding in His inestimable bounty, since He has informed us that everything which belongs to our Lord Jesus Christ is communicated to us. And so, even if we have committed so many offences that we feel the wrath of God to be burning against us, Jesus Christ is there who has offered a sacrifice by which we know that reconciliation has been made between God and us, and thus that God has testified to us of the love which He bears towards us in such a manner that we cannot doubt that He always is at hand when we seek Him with a true faith, that is to say, in a manner so plain that we may by no means doubt that He has no wish to disappoint us when He has shown Himself so generous towards us. This, then, is the way in which we ought to esteem our baptism: we should use it as a shield for repelling all the doubts which overtake us and which would hinder us from praying to God and having our whole refuge in Him, were it not that we had come to Him. Now, it is true that I have within myself so great a number of sins that I am rendered hateful before God: but it is not as though I come to Him in my own person; I renounce myself and my nature in which only shame and confusion are to be found; but I come to Him in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and it is even the case that He comes before me, He gives me as it were His own garment, He speaks for me, and it is in His name that I present myself, just as though I were He Himself, since it has pleased Him to be so gracious as to unite me to Himself. In this way, then, we ought to forget who we are when we come to God, and we ought to lay hold of the person of our Lord Jesus Christ and forget ourselves : not that we are insensible of our faults and are not truly humiliated because of them and deplore them; but it is necessary that we should grasp this persuasion and certitude that God accepts us as coming to Him in the person of His only Son. There are, however, all too few who give thought to this matter!
- John Calvin, taken from: Pierre-Charles Marcel, The Biblical Doctrine of Infant Baptism: Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace, trans. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes (Cambridge, England: James Clarke Co., Ltd, 2002), 171-72. 

 

Filed under: Law and Gospel, Means of Grace, Quotes, Reformed Theology, Word and Sacraments , Baptism, Covenant of Grace, Covenant Theology, John Calvin, Pierre-Charles Marcel, Reformed Theology

The Covenant of Grace and the Impurity of the Church

. . . we are ashamed of the presence of unconverted persons in the Church. The adversary, the world, Christian brothers even, make it a reproach to us. In our weakness as arrogant men we are ashamed of the pitifully weak state of the Church. We wish it could have more effectiveness. We would be proud to belong to a Church composed entirely of true believers, of regenerate persons, a Church in which not only the power of the Word, but that of the kingdom of God were manifested. It is very tempting for us to proclaim that the Church will convert the world and that the world will no longer overwhelm us with insults. We should then be able to life up our heads once more! And it is very tempting for us to draw up plans for changing ecclesiastical disorder into order and an unhealthy Church into a healthy community. But what, then, is the practical import of these pious desires?
In the first place, to what New Testament definition of the sanctity or health of the Church are we to refer? Further, are we sure that if the Church were healthy we, the believers, the pastors, or the theologians, would today have a place in it? Would we not have been excluded completely since there was a time when we were unconverted and unregenerate? And if we had been excluded from it, would the Word of God have reached us to bring about our conversion and to declare our election? Being unable to be disciples, would we have been elect? If the Church today were healthy, are we really sure that we have the right to continue in it? Which men, which ecclesiastical institutions, should, according to the New Testament, guarantee the health of the Church?
Is this not, in certain respects, the business of God? . . . Let us explain our attitude by confessing in faith, in the name of the promises of the covenant, the necessity of this apparent weakness of the Church as a result of the love and patience of God. If contact is to be established with detractors, both without and within, will not the best proclamation be made in this sphere? Let us not blush because of the love and patience of God towards the children of the covenant, the benefits of which we ourselves have enjoyed.
- Pierre-Charles Marcel, The Biblical Doctrine of Infant Baptism: Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace, trans. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes (Cambridge, England: James Clarke Co., Ltd, 2002), 129-31. 

Filed under: Biblical Theology, Ecclesiology, Eschatology, Quotes, Reformed Theology , Baptism, Covenant of Grace, Covenant Theology, Ecclesiology, Pierre-Charles Marcel, Reformed Theology

Which Works Don’t Justify?

It’s good to be reminded of what the Apostle Paul meant when he said that the law does not justify. It’s not uncommon to find those who think that as long as we’re not “pharisaic” in our obedience (which usually means that our obedience is not “half-hearted”) we can contribute, at least somewhat, to our standing before God. The assumption here is often that Christ came to lessen the strictness of the law, making it easier to be obeyed. What is entirely eclipsed in this view is the fact that Christ came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it and certainly not to make it easier. The good news of the gospel is not that we are now able to keep the law, but it is that there is hope for those who struggle (and ultimately fail) to produce even one act of obedience that is not stained by sin:

From what hath been discoursed, these two things are evident in the confirmation of our present argument:–first, That the law intended by the apostle, when he denies that by the works of the law any can be justified, is the entire rule and guide of our obedience unto God, even as unto the whole frame and spiritual constitution of our souls, with all the acts of obedience or duties that he requireth of us; and, secondly, That the works of this law, which he so frequently and plainly excludeth from our justification, and therein opposeth to the grace of God and the blood of Christ, are all the duties of obedience,–internal, supernatural; external, ritual,–however we are or may be enabled to perform them, that God requireth of us. And these things excluded, it is the righteousness of Christ alone, imputed unto us, on the account whereof we are justified before God.
- John Owen, Works, vol. 5, The Doctrine of Justification By Faith, ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh, UK: Banner of Truth, 2007), 289.   

Filed under: Law and Gospel, Quotes, Reformed Theology , Imputation, Justification, Sola Fide, Solus Christus

John Owen on the Republication of the Law at Sinai

It is also true, that God did never formally and absolutely renew or give again this law as a covenant a second time. Nor was there any need that so he should do, unless it were declaratively only, for so it was renewed at Sinai; for the whole of it being an emanation of eternal right and truth, it abides and must abide, in full force for ever. Wherefore, it is only thus far broken as a covenant, that all mankind having sinned against the commands of it, and so, by guilt, with the impotency unto obedience which ensued thereon, defeated themselves of any interest in its promise, and possibility of attaining any such interest, they cannot have any benefit by it. But as unto its power to oblige all mankind unto obedience, and the unchangeable truth of its promises and threatenings, it abideth the same as it was from the beginning.
- John Owen, Works, vol. 5, The Doctrine of Justification By Faith, ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh, UK: Banner of Truth, 2007), 244.  

Filed under: Biblical Theology, Law and Gospel, Quotes, Reformed Theology , Covenant of Works, John Owen, Justification, Republication

Only Hope in Life and in Death: Christ Alone

What is it that they [Christians] betake themselves unto, what is it that they plead with God for the continuance of the pardon of their sins, and the acceptance of their person before him? Is it any thing but sovereign grace and mercy, through the blood of Christ? Are not all arguments which they plead unto this end taken from the topics of the name of God, his mercy, grace, faithfulness, tender compassion, covenant, and promises,–all manifested and exercised in and through the Lord Christ and his mediation alone? Do they not herein place their only trust and confidence, for this end, that their sins may be pardoned, and their persons, though every way unworthy in themselves, be accepted with God? Doth any other thought enter into their hearts? Do they plead their own righteousness, obedience, and duties to this purpose? Do they leave the prayer of the publican, and betake themselves unto that of the Pharisee? And is it not of faith alone? which is that grace whereby they apply themselves unto the mercy or grace of God through the mediation of Christ. It is true that faith herein worketh and acteth itself in and by godly sorrow, repentance, humiliation, self-judging and abhorrency, fervency in prayer and supplications, with an humble waiting for an answer of peace from God, with engagements unto renewed obedience: but it is faith alone that makes applications unto grace in the blood of Christ for the continuation of our justified estate, expressing itself in those other ways and effects mentioned; from none of which a believing soul doth expect the mercy aimed at.
- John Owen, Works, vol. 5, The Doctrine of Justification By Faith, ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh, UK: Banner of Truth, 2007), 148-49.  

Filed under: Law and Gospel, Quotes, Reformed Theology , Imputation, John Owen, Justification

Christ: The Object of Our Faith

While Rome made the object of faith all divine revelation, the Reformers pointed specifically to the person and work of Jesus Christ. For the former, faith was merely intellectual assent; for the latter it was not merely knowledge, but also “a hearty trust” in the Gospel of Christ. By making justification about Christ’s work rather than our own, the Reformers were able to point struggling sinners to the full assurance of forgiveness and reconciliation; not because they had done their part, but because Christ has accomplished everything.

Faith is that act of the soul whereby convinced sinners, ready otherwise to perish, do look unto Christ as he was made a propitiation for their sins; and who so do “shall not perish, but have everlasting life.” [Christ] is, therefore, the object of our faith.
- John Owen, Works, vol. 5, The Doctrine of Justification By Faith, ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh, UK: Banner of Truth, 2007), 91. 

 

Filed under: Church History, Law and Gospel, Reformed Theology , John Owen, Justification, Rome

Calvin’s Legacy Conference @ WSC

Going to the Calvin Conference tonight and tomorrow at Westminster Seminary California.

Follow along via Dr. Scott Clark’s live-blogging here!

Filed under: Church History, Reformed Theology , Conference, John Calvin, R. Scott Clark

Where All Protestants Agreed: Justification

Wherefore, until of late it might be truly said, that the faith and doctrine of all Protestants was in this article entirely the same. For however they differed in the way, manner, and methods of its declaration, and too many private men were addicted unto definitions and descriptions of their own, under pretence of logical accuracy in teaching, which gave an appearance of some contradiction among them; yet in this they generally agreed, that it is the righteousness of Christ, and not our own, on the account whereof we receive the pardon of sin, acceptance with God, are declared righteous by the gospel, and have a right and title unto the heavenly inheritance. Hereon, I say, they were generally agreed, first against the Papists, and afterwards against the Socinians; and where this is granted, I will not contend with any man about his way of declaring the doctrine of it.
- John Owen, Works, vol. 5, The Doctrine of Justification By Faith, ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh, UK: Banner of Truth, 2007), 61. 

Filed under: Church History, Quotes, Reformed Theology , Active Obedience, Imputation, John Owen, Justification, Lutheran, Protestantism, Reformed, Sola Fide