Tags
Arminianism, biography, calvinism, Charles Simeon, christianity, church history, John Piper, John Wesley, paradox, reformed theology, Religion and Spirituality, theology
Was Charles Simeon a Calvinist? Your answer probably depends on what you know about Simeon and your own theological perspective. I’m not sure how Simeon himself would have answered that question, but we may be able to find some clues in his writings.
Without a doubt, Simeon was and still is considered a Calvinist by most, although he himself eschewed the label. His goal was to be faithful to Scripture, without any concern for whether that made him sound like a Calvinist or an Arminian. In truth, Simeon did not appear to believe that Scripture could, in the end, be reduced to or fully comprehended by either system:
It were well, if, instead of contending for human systems, and especially those of Calvin and Arminius, we were content to receive the Scriptures with the simplicity of little children: for, after all that has been said or written in support of those two most prominent systems, it is impossible to reduce the Holy Scriptures either to the one or to the other of them: for, on both hypotheses, there are difficulties which can never be surmounted, and contrarieties which man can never reconcile. It is by attempting to be wise above what is written, that we involve ourselves in all these difficulties. If we would be content to take the Scriptures as they are, and to leave the reconciling of them unto God, by whose inspiration they were written, we should find them all admirably calculated to produce the ends for which they were designed. (via Calvin and Calvinism)
I probably don’t have to tell you that Simeon’s position isn’t very popular today. Many people want to put themselves (and everyone else) squarely in one camp or the other; a few seem utterly compelled to constantly take pot shots at the opposite camp. Thankfully, not everyone wants to be so combative. Simeon himself provides a famous example of setting labels aside and seeking common ground in his famous exchange with John Wesley:
Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?
Yes, I do indeed.
And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?
Yes, solely through Christ.
But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?
No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.
Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?
No.
What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother’s arms?
Yes, altogether.
And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?
Yes, I have no hope but in Him.
Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election, my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things wherein we agree.
John Piper tells that story (and many others) in his biographical sketch of Simeon. I highly recommend it, and will provide the link to it in a moment. First, though, I think I should say something else.
I’m not merely recommending a biography. I’m recommending an attitude of heart, exemplified in Simeon’s life. He wasn’t perfect; no one is (yours truly least of all). But in this regard, Simeon’s faith is worthy of imitation. (Here’s the link.)
Great post, Barry!
Charles Simeon – and the other Charles (Mr. Spurgeon) – set worthy examples for us. Both were undeniably Calvinists. Both were undeniably believers in theological paradox. Both admittedly imperfect. Both sinners saved by grace and clinging to the cross!
Blessings,
Derek
Hey, Derek. Hope you had a refreshing vacation and wonderful time with your family!
Simeon is intriguing to me. I find his apparent reluctance to identify himself as a Calvinist, and his recognition that both Calvinism and Arminianism have difficulties which can’t be resolved, refreshing.
Pingback: Christian Carnival 346 | Beyond Belief
I find his proof that Wesley was a closet Calvinist quite interesting. Charles Wesley probably was closer to Calvinism than his brother, judging by a number of his hymns. I suspect what John Wesley was affirming wasn’t in all cases the same proposition that Charles Simeon was affirming when he said that’s all his Calvinism consists of.
I agree with your suspicion about what John affirmed, as well as with your assessment of Charles’ theology. Many of his hymns are favorites of mine, precisely because of their lofty view of God and His sovereign grace.
I’ll say again that the thing that intrigues me most about Simeon is his apparent UN-willingness to contend for Calvinism (as reflected in the first quote above. I don’t think I’m making too much of that. He says similar things elsewhere). Even in his exchange with John Wesley, he’s not contending for Calvinism, per se, but rather for basic biblical truths. Or so it seems to me.
Jeremy,
I agree. Simeon’s phrase, “as I hold it,” is questionable if we want to be really precise. On the other hand, if we don’t get into the nuances and underlying explanations, and just state the doctrines plainly, there are many statements that moderate Arminians and moderate Calvinists can agree upon – exactly as they are stated. Go a step further, though, and the fireworks are sure to start.
I think Simeon’s hand was well played, yet this will never amount to the be-all-end-all of Calvinist/Arminian discussions. Only in heaven will we ever have that. Then we’ll all be Calvinists (ha ha ha).
I’m sure you’ve heard the old adage that Wesley was “just a confused Calvinist.” LOL
Thanks for the insightful comments.
Blessings,
Derek
Right on track. Count me as a Simeonite.
Hi, Dennis. Thanks for visiting and commenting. I always appreciate your tweets.
I wish that all believers would work harder at embracing this paradox than entrenching themselves in one camp of the other. I’ve posted a few other things on the subject. One I recommend, if you haven’t see it, is Randy Alcorn on embracing biblical paradox.
Have a great weekend!
Thanks for the Alcorn link. Spurgeon is one of my favorites, of course! We should resist the extremes of neglecting theology in diluting doctrine to its lowest common denominator–in the name of unity or elevating a theological system to the level of infallibility which becomes idolatry. There is a ditch on either side of the road and Satan doesn’t care which we run off into–a Sadducee or Pharisee. The road of paradox is narrow but where we would expect to find the Ultimate Paradox–one eternal God and a mortal who died. Paul said, “Great is the mystery of godliness” the Infinite becoming an infant; omnipresence confined to a womb; omniscience growing in knowledge; omnipotence hungry & thirsty! My heart exults as my head spins!