“The Teaching of Perseverance Is Harmful to Godliness” — The Rejection of Errors, Fifth Head of Doctrine, Canons of Dort (6)

Having set forth the orthodox teaching, the Synod rejects the errors of those

Who teach that the teaching of the assurance of perseverance and of salvation is by its very nature and character an opiate of the flesh and is harmful to godliness, good morals, prayer, and other holy exercises, but that, on the contrary, to have doubt about this is praiseworthy.

For these people show that they do not know the effective operation of God’s grace and the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit, and they contradict the apostle John, who asserts the opposite in plain words: “Dear friends, now we are children of God, but what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he is made known, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure” (1 John 3:2–3). Moreover, they are refuted by the examples of the saints in both the Old and the New Testament, who though assured of their perseverance and salvation yet were constant in prayer and other exercises of godliness.

__________________________________________________

Repeating much of what has been said previously (Articles One–Fifteen of the Fifth Head of Doctrine and much of what was set forth in the previous rejections of five specific Arminian errors), which made the biblical case for the Reformed doctrine of final perseverance, the matter addressed here is the claim that the teaching of final perseverance supposedly removes all incentive for godly living. This objection, as we have seen, was a longstanding concern of Pelagians and semi-Pelagians in response to Augustine’s teaching. Debated throughout the medieval period, it was then revisited by semi-Pelagians following the Protestant Reformation and the recovery of a monergistic view of salvation—that it is God who sovereignly saves those who are dead in sin and can do nothing to save themselves. The Arminian objection recounted here—“the teaching of the assurance of perseverance and of salvation is by its very nature and character an opiate of the flesh and is harmful to godliness, good morals, prayer, and other holy exercises, but that, on the contrary, to have doubt about this is praiseworthy”—raises the same concerns and advances the same arguments that semi-Pelagians have championed for centuries. The claim is simple and, at first glance, appears to be a matter of common sense: “If you teach that people are saved from the guilt and power of sin solely by God’s action, then what room does that leave for human freedom?”

But the Bible does not teach what Arminians claim it does. The Reformed ground their understanding of the perseverance of the saints on the biblical teaching that, since people are dead in sin (e.g., Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13; Romans 8:6–7), God must grant them life so that they come to faith in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17; Ephesians 2:4–6, 10; Colossians 2:13–14). Once he grants such life and people are made alive (regenerated), God will preserve his people in faith until the end of their lives (Romans 8:28–30). The Reformed understanding of perseverance is tied to its view of salvation as the work of a gracious and sovereign God from beginning to end. His work is an “unbreakable chain.”

Once alive in Christ, Christians desire to obey the commandments of God and will bear the fruit of the Spirit (Romans 8:14; Galatians 5:16–26). The Arminian objections make no sense whatsoever and are easily dismissed if one is a monergist (i.e., one who believes that God saves sinners from beginning to end). If God grants someone new life, that person comes to faith in Christ and is indwelt by the Holy Spirit. That person will now desire to please God—something he or she would never otherwise do. The very idea that the motivation for living the Christian life is, as John Wesley put it, “fear of punishment, and hope of reward” is unthinkable to the authors of the Canons, who simply cite the words of 1 John 3:2–3 in response to the Arminian challenge:

“Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.”