Does anglican see the 5 points of Calvinism the correct exposition of the bible? CS Lewis isn't a Calvinist, NT Wright isn't a Calvinist.. the 39 article doesn't affirm double predestination, but Anglican is reformed, hmm I'm confused.
Calvinism is not the only way to be reformed, and I am not sure that John Calvin would be all that comfortable with many who call themselves Calvinist today.
Thirty Nine Articles are of note to some Anglicans more than Others.
Articles 9-12 are a clear indication of the influence of the mind of the Continental Reformation on the English understanding, being Original Sin, Free Will, Justification and Good Works, without an absolute endorsement or subscription. I have attached the relevant Homily for those interested.
XVII. Of Predestination and Election.
Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.
As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.
Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.
I have included the text of Article 17, and whilst the article clearly gives some measure of support to an idea of predestination, that understanding is tempered by some caveats. I think for Cranmer, Parker and others the notion of double predestination robs to gospel of the legitimate sense of urgency that accompanies the declaring of good news.
This issue of the tension between Predestination and Free Will was one of the tense discussion topics between the reformers. Calvin drove a strong line on Predestination and addressed a theology of double predestination whereby some people were predestined to heaven and some were predestined to hell. This embraced a view of God that not everyone was prepared to accept. Post Calvinists and Neo Calvinists have perhaps driven that line still farther, and perhaps not always helpfully.
Arminius and the Arminian position emphasised the free will and response to grace that was enabled by faith, and that salvation is limited to those who trust in Christ, though that free will is emboldened through grace.
Many of us 21st Century Anglicans don’t really get the difference that quite possibly drives to the core of the distinction between Presbyterians and Wesleyan Methodists which most of us have never really understood.
Article XVII takes a positive spin here and commences speaking of predestination to life - which is essentially what God wants, so, even before creation was begun, known to him and not to us, to deliver those he has chosen in Christ and by Christ lead them to salvation.
Those who are so called by the Holy Spirit are by grace obedient and justified freely and made by adoption children of God. They are made in the image of his only begotten Son and walk religiously in good works, and ultimately receive joy.
Of course godly persons are comfortable with this, however for the curious and carnal the idea of eternal damnation before their eyes it is dangerous as it can lead them to fail to aspire to good things, and embrace uncleanness and wretchedness.
Furthermore we must receive God’s promises as set forth in Holy Scripture.
So the article in a real sense acknowledges predestination, however not quite as far as John Calvin took it, because it is secret to us now, so we can not know we have been predestined. We are therefore called to live our lives as persons of free will, to do that which we believe God has called us to do, accepting the promises made to us in scripture.
The trick of course is that it can not be the good that we have done, the free will that we have chosen to exercise that brings about our salvation, for such would lead us to Pelagianism which is exactly what the Arminians were accused of espousing. This complication is probably one of the reasons why the article is as long and seemingly complex as it is.
I once held the view that I should act as if I had free will now, because it is attested to in scripture, I can embrace it and it is what I can work with now. If in heaven I discover I was predestined, that will be a bonus, but for now I can’t know that, so whilst we acknowledge the idea of predestination, we live as children of free will, knowing that ultimately life and eternal life are a gift, and not our own doing.
I don’t know that that is any clearer than the article, but I think that is what I am working with for now. I am conscious that this could enflame a reformation debate all over again. I see this article as one of those places where Anglicanism has tried to steer the middle way.
In practical terms I normally don’t raise the subject of predestination as it seems to suggest that there is no point in trying. Conversations on the subject are normally lengthy, hard to follow and generally result in all the participants being no clearer than when the discussion began. It was a topic that raised a lot of heat during the continental reformation, and no doubt in part contributed to the fragmentation of the reformation.
I think Article XVII’s last word is sage.
Furthermore we must receive God’s promises as set forth in Holy Scripture. It is quite wrong to take an argument about predestination and use it against the words we find in Scripture.
Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away; John 6:37
In a sense predestination is mostly about the nature of God, all powerful, and all knowing, and not about our life as a manipulated game where our free will is only an illusion. One has the feeling that those who write the articles are alerting us to the danger of taking this discussion too far.