“To Glorify Christ”: The Goal of Spurgeon’s Preaching

In one important respect C. H. Spurgeon is a great model for today’s preacher in that he consistently sought to make his sermons Christ-centred and Christ-exalting. Throughout his preaching ministry, Spurgeon was faithful to the intentions that he declared when the Metropolitan Tabernacle first opened in 1861. The various meetings and services that accompanied the opening of the Tabernacle went on for a month and Spurgeon knew that they would be widely attended and reported. As Timothy Albert McCoy has rightly noted [“The Evangelistic Ministry of C. H. Spurgeon: Implications for a Contemporary Model for Pastoral Evangelism” (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1989), 132], the words that he spoke in his first sermon in the new home for his congregation’s worship were therefore carefully chosen. “I would propose that the subject of the ministry in this house, as long as this platform shall stand, & as long as this house shall be frequented by worshippers, shall be the person of Jesus Christ. I am never ashamed to avow myself a Calvinist; I do not hesitate to take the name of Baptist; but if I am asked what is my creed, I reply, “It is Jesus Christ.” My venerated predecessor, Dr. Gill, has left a body of divinity, admirable & excellent in its way; but the body of divinity to which I would pin & bind myself for ever, God helping me, is not his system, or any other human treatise; but Jesus Christ, who is the sum & substance of the gospel, who is in himself all theology, the incarnation of every precious truth, the all-glorious personal embodiment of the way, the truth, & the life.” [C.H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, compiled Susannah Spurgeon and J.W. Harrald (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1899), III, 1].

We find the same emphases in a sermon which he preached on April 24, 1891, to graduates of his College who had gathered for the annual conference which took place under the auspices of the Tabernacle. “Ah, brothers! the Holy Ghost never comes to glorify us, or to glorify a denomination, or, I think, even to glorify a systematic arrangement of doctrines. He comes to glorify Christ. If we want to be in accord with him, we must preach in order to glorify Christ.”[“Honey in the Mouth!”, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 37:381.].

Spurgeon was conscious that devotion to the doctrines of grace and dedication to Baptist principles can well exist without the all-essential heart of Christianity, namely, devotion to the Lord Jesus. He was determined that when he preached it would be the Lord Jesus who was pre-eminently exalted in his sermons. As Nigel Lacey, an English Baptist pastor, has observed, Spurgeon detested any preaching ministry that did not centre upon the Saviour [“Spurgeon—The Preacher”, Grace Magazine (January 1992), 6].

At the same time it should be understood that he never sought to conceal his doctrinal convictions as a Calvinistic Baptist. In a remarkable address which he gave at the Tabernacle on August 19, 1861 in honour of the centenary of the birth of William Carey (1761-1834), he declared to a packed auditorium of 6,000 that Carey’s theology was profoundly influenced by what he called “the noblest type of divinity that ever blessed the world,” that is, the theological convictions of Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), the great eighteenth-century American theologian.

He then went on to emphasize that “Carey was the living model of Edwards’ theology, or rather of pure Christianity. His was not a theology which left out the backbone and strength of religion—not a theology, on the other hand, all bones and skeleton, a lifeless thing without a soul: his theology was full-orbed Calvinism, high as you please, but practical godliness so low that many called it legal.” Moreover, Spurgeon stated that he admired “Carey all the more for being a Baptist: he had none of that false charity which might prompt some to conceal their belief for fear of offending others; but at the same time he was a man who loved all who loved the Lord Jesus Christ.” [“C.H. Spurgeon’s tribute to William Carey”, Supplement to the Baptist Times, (16 April, 1992), 1].

Alexander Whyte, a “Specialist in the Study of Sin”

Although there are certain problem areas about the theological perspective of the Scottish preacher and author Alexander Whyte (1836-1921), he was right on when it came to his emphasis on the pervasiveness and odious deceitfulness of sin. In a very real sense he sought to be what he called a “specialist in the study of sin.” [“Preface” to Lord, Teach Us to Pray. Sermons on Prayer (New York: George H. Doran Co., [1923]), xi.] As he commented on one occasion: “I know quite well that some of you think me little short of a monomaniac about sin. But I am not the first that has been so thought of and so spoken about. I am in good company and I am content to be in it. Yes, you are quite right in that. For I most profoundly feel that I have been separated first to the personal experience of sin, and then to the experimental preaching of sin, above and beyond all my contemporaries in the pulpit of our day.” [Bunyan Characters, Fourth Series (Edinburgh/London: Oliphant Anderson and Ferrier, [1908]), 195].

Late Victorian British society, with its overly romantic view of the Christian life and its faith in a God who was more a doting Father than the awesome Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, presented real temptations to Whyte to focus on things less morbid. Yet he steadfastly refused to change his ways.

Little wonder his assistant John Kelman stated in his funeral sermon that Whyte was “a Puritan risen from the dead, and prophesying in pagan times to a later generation,” who had “no respect whatever for those who thought lightly of sin” [“Whyte of St. George’s” in Ralph G. Turnbull, ed., The Treasury of Alexander Whyte (Westwood, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1953), 25, 26-27.].

On one occasion Whyte was walking with a friend in the Pass of Killiecrankie and the name of Henry Drummond (1851-1897) came up. Drummond was a popular author and essayist, whose thought was an eclectic blend of Darwinism and Christianity. “The trouble with Hen-a-ry,” Whyte told his companion, “is that he doesna ken [know] onything aboot sin.” [Cited Alexander Gammie, Preachers I Have Heard (London: Pickering & Inglis, Ltd., 1945), 12].

Nor was this preoccupation with sin simply a Pharisaic focus on the sins of others. Whyte was very conscious of his own sinfulness, failings, and shortcomings. “Blessed are we…if we know our sin,” he could say honestly (Bunyan Characters, Fourth Series, 124).

As he recalled when fifty years of age: “The first text I ever heard a sermon from was that great text in Zechariah, ‘Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?’ ‘It is I, Lord,’ my young heart answered; and my heart is making the same answer here to-day.” [G. F. Barbour, The Life of Alexander Whyte (7th ed.; New York: George H. Doran Co., 1925), 305].

Whyte told an astonished audience on one occasion that he had discovered the name of the wickedest man in Edinburgh. “His name,” he told them in whispered tones, “is Alexander Whyte” (Kelman, “Whyte of St. George’s”, 29). It was, therefore, in all honesty that he could state, “I would rather take my degree in [sin] than in all the other subjects set for a sinner’s examination on earth or in heaven. For to know myself, and especially, as the wise man says, to know the plague of my own heart, is the true and the only key to all other true knowledge.” [Bunyan Characters, First Series (2nd ed.; Edinburgh/London: Oliphant, Anderson and Ferrier, 1895), 57-58].

This concern to plumb the depths of the human heart is well captured by a Latin phrase that Whyte loved to quote: generalia non pungunt, “generalities do not pierce deep” (Barbour, Alexander Whyte, 305).

Pauline Chronology

Here is a helpful chronology for the study of the Apostle Paul’s life and ministry: “A Chronology of the Apostle Paul” @ Novum Testamentum. A more extensive chronology by the author, Brandon Wason, can be found here: Paul's Chronology.

Devotion to the Lord Jesus

Can a person love the Lord Jesus too much? Is there any limit to one’s heart-devotion to This Person? A discerning reader of the New Testament can answer both of these questions quite easily: absolutely not. The New Testament is filled from start to finish with ardent devotion to Jesus Christ. He is declared to be the fountain of all knowledge and wisdom (Col 2:3), the One who sustains every particle of the universe and every fibre of our being (Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:3). He is set forth as the supreme reason for living (2 Cor 5:9). Gazing into his face one can see perfectly and without the slightest distortion the very glory of God (Heb 1:3). He owns angels (Mt 24:31) and they know well their Master and are not afraid to bow in worship before Him (Heb 1:6). To Him belongs the incredible privilege of bestowing the Spirit of God upon He wishes (Acts 2:33). And His Name is supremely precious, because by no other Name can sinners be saved (Acts 4:12).

Due to all this Jesus is worthy to be worshipped in the identical manner as God the Father (Rev 5). No praise, no depth of adoration is too much to give him. He is worthy of all of our being’s devotion for He is God, the great God come to earth to lay down his life for sinners (Jn 1:1, 14; Rom 9:5; Titus 2:13).

Not to love him thus and to be devoted him without reservation is to dishonour God. It is the Father’s great delight that all honour the Son in this way. Little wonder that as Paul wraps up his great letter to the churches in Ephesus, he can declare: “Grace be with all who love our Lord Jesus Christ with love incorruptible” (Eph 6:24, ESV).

Outside of Scripture such extravagant love for Christ is well captured in the nineteenth-century hymn, “Jesus, Wondrous Saviour.” Its author, D.A. MacGrgeor (d.1890), was the Principal of Toronto Baptist College when he wrote it, and it came from a heart aflame with devotion for the Saviour:

“Jesus, wondrous Saviour! Christ of kings the King! Angels fall before Thee, prostrate, worshipping. Fairest they confess Thee in the Heaven above, We would sing Thee fairest here in hymns of love.”

“Jesus all perfections rise and end in Thee; Brightness of God’s glory Thou, eternally. Favour’d beyond measure They Thy face who see; May we, gracious Saviour, share this ecstasy.”

Discernment about Justification in the Fathers

It is a commonplace to argue that the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith alone was immediately lost to the church at the end of the Apostolic era. Such is not the case, though. Listen, for instance, to the following passage from Clement of Rome’s letter to the Corinthians, which was written near the end of the first century A.D. Upon the patriarchs and the kings that ruled Israel, he says, “great honour and renown were bestowed; yet not for their own sakes, or because of their own achievements, or for the good works they did, but by the will of God. Similarly we also, who by his will have been called in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves or our own wisdom or understanding or godliness, nor by such deeds as we have done in holiness of heart, but by that faith through which alone Almighty God has justified all men since the beginning of time. Glory be to him for ever and ever, Amen” (1 Corinthians 22).

Or ponder the rich Pauline themes in this passage from the late second-century writing known as the Letter to Diognetus: “God…gave his own Son a ransom for us, the holy for the lawless, the pure for the evil, the righteous one for the unrighteous, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the mortal. For what else but his righteousness could have covered our sins? In whom was it possible for us who are ungodly and lawless to have been justified except in the Son of God alone? Oh the sweet exchange!…Oh, the unexpected benefits! That the iniquity of many should be hidden in the One Righteous Man and that the righteousness of one should justify many who are godless!” (Letter to Diognetus 9).

There is nothing in either of these texts in which the Apostle Paul would not have rejoiced. They are accurate renditions of the doctrine of justification by faith alone as he taught it.

There is evidence, however, that there were some early Christian authors who did not adequately grasp or express the biblical position found in these two statements. A key reason for this is the fact that Christian writers and authors of the first three centuries after the end of the Apostolic era were basically wrestling with the doctrines of the Trinity and the person of Christ. And they focused upon these areas of theology because of controversies that had arisen with regard to them. When they did discuss issues relating to salvation, it was more in terms of the forgiveness of sins and the nature of eternal life, not justification. “Justification was simply not a theological issue in the pre-Augustinian tradition.” The lack of controversy about this issue also seems to have contributed to the ill-defined nature of patristic teaching on justification. See Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia Dei. A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), I, 19, 23; Bruce Demarest, The Cross and Salvation (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1997), 358.

In the fifth century, however, such a controversy did occur and the main protagonists were Augustine and Pelagius. For Augustine, redemption is possible only as a divine gift. It is not something that we can achieve ourselves. Rather, it is something that has to be done for us. Augustine thus emphasizes that the resources of salvation are located outside of humanity, in God himself. It is God who initiates the process of salvation, not men or women. Thus, when Augustine discusses the meaning of justification by faith, he emphasizes that “justification is without antecedent merits and that works before faith are useless” with regard to salvation [C.P. Bammel, “Justification by Faith in Augustine and Origen”, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 47 (1996), 231. See also McGrath, Iustitia Dei, I, 23-36].

In one area, though, Augustine’s doctrine of justification and salvation may be faulted. This has to do with his understanding of the precise meaning of justification. Augustine understood this term to mean “to make righteous,” not “to declare/count as righteous.” Thus, for Augustine, justification is a process and not something that takes place at the moment of conversion (Bammel, “Justification by Faith”, 232-234). Despite his correct emphasis on the sovereign grace of God, Augustine’s interpretation of the phrase “to justify” is incorrect.

And it is Augustine’s incorrect rendering of the concept of justification that dominates the mediæval view of this term. His view of the sovereignty of God’s grace in the salvation of the sinner, though, was largely ignored in the mediæval period. In the words of Philip Edgcumbe Hughes: “Mediæval theology as a whole tended to be semi-Pelagian in character—that is, in expression, it avoided the extremes of Pelagianism proper; it regarded man as partially capable, as sick rather than dead because of sin, and thus as able in some measure to help towards his own salvation. But in practice the mediæval Church walked along the edge of the Pelagian precipice. Its members were taught to go about to establish their own righteousness” [“Justification by Faith: Distortions of the Doctrine”, The Evangelical Quarterly, 24 (1952), 88].

PS The above reflection assumes, of course, the traditional Reformed view of justification.

A Lover of Words

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1); “The word of our God will stand forever” (Isaiah 40:8); “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). The true and living God loves words. As the Genesis text affirms: the universe—all that we can see and feel and hear and know and much more besides—came to be through his words. Not by silent fiat did he create. But by him speaking, all of it came into existence. And not like human words are these words of his. We humans speak, the air moves, and sometimes lives and history change, but these words are the product of time and eventually their impact will fade. But his words “will stand forever.”

No wonder he has his servant John call his dear Son, Jesus Christ, “the Word.” This One, the Word, is eternal, expresses all that is in the heart and mind of God and what he wishes to communicate with his rational creation. And it is this divine Word who brings new life and what he has accomplished through his words will stand forever.

And we who are believers in him are called to speak—not to keep silence, but to speak the “oracles of God” (1 Peter 4:11) that are encapsulated in the written revelation of the Scriptures. Calling on all and sundry, in the words of Augustine of Hippo (354-430), tolle lege, “pick up and read.”

Long before I became a Christian I loved words. Their sound and timbre, their mystery and allusions, their look on a page delighted me. I confess it: I am a logophile from way back! Becoming a Christian not only gave eternal meaning to this love but showed me why I loved words. God first loved words and I was a mere imitator.

And loving words I loved their print container—books. There is no doubt in this regard that I am a product of the Gutenberg world. Then came word processing. No problem here for a Gutenberg man, since I regularly convert processed word into hard copy, and now have mounds of it waiting to be filed!

But then came the blog and blogging. Though the words which describe these activities intrigued me, the prospect of having my words primarily on the screen and not in hand dismayed me. A day or so ago, Hugh Hewitt’s Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation that’s Changing Your World (Thomas Nelson, 2005), recommended by a good friend, Clint Humfrey, convinced me otherwise.

May I blog for the glory of the Triune God and for the sake of his Word.