By Archdeacon Farrar
A cutting from a paper, which I judge to be the Christian World, with the above heading, is duly received. It is an able exposure of the thinly disguised Romanism of England. But is not the rationalism of the article as dangerous as the ritualism it combats? The writer says: “We may lay it down as an eternal truth, which no casuistry can modify, no priest-craft sophisticate, no system over-ride, that what that Supreme and sacred majesty requires of us is innocence alone.” And again: “The lesson I would urge is not meant to be polemical, but practical. It is to insist upon the truth which lies at the heart of all the revelation of Christ, that we shall be saved neither by our opinions, nor by our observances, but simply and solely by our character, and by our life, justice, humility, purity, the love of truth, the fruits of the Spirit—these are worth more than burnt-offering and sacrifice.”
And is this the man, and this the doctrine, which this religious world delighteth to honor? It only proves what we have ever found, and shall find, that the man who denies the eternity of the punishment of the wicked, who finally rejects Christ, will sooner or later reject the atoning death of the Lord Jesus, the sacrifice offered for our sins as the only means of man’s salvation. And what does F. W. Farrar give us in its place? “What that supreme and sacred majesty requires of us is innocence.” That we shall be saved solely by our character, and by our life justice, humility, purity, &c. Now if there be any meaning m words, salvation to F. W. Farrar is impossible. And if he continues to reject the death of Christ as the sacrifice for our sins, he will certainly find salvation to him is impossible. To hold this creed, he must set aside the whole word of God; he must deny that man is a guilty sinner. For unquestionably the plain teaching of God’s word is, that all have sinned, that all are guilty,” That there is none righteous.” He might have said, but I am an exception; but the word says, “No, not one.” If then all are guilty, how can there be one found “innocence.” And yet, according to F. W. F., this alone is what God requires. He thus makes God as ignorant as himself, to require what does not and cannot exist! For by no means can the same person be both guilty and innocent.
Could innocence be found in the dying thief? Yet, believing in Jesus, he went straight to paradise.
What kind of a gospel of glad tidings would it be to twenty men all proved guilty of some capital crime, under sentence of death, for the judge to declare that what the majesty of the English law demands is innocence—innocence or hanging? Truly that is law, the very principle of law; but would there be a particle of gospel in that demand for innocence?
And are we to give up the blessed glad tidings of free forgiveness through the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus, for this no-gospel of innocence of F. W. Farrar? Which is most suited to you, reader, as a guilty sinner—pardon, or the demand for what you never can have, innocence? Is it the “love of truth” to teach and trust in absolute falsehood? For it is utterly false to say that we shall be saved solely by our character, works, purity, &c. Read Titus 2:11-14, and 3:4-8. The plain teaching of these infallible words is this, salvation first, and works as fruit afterward. “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us.” “This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works.” No such a thought is there in scripture as poor guilty man returning to the impossible, to innocence. Free justification there is, but not through our works, or innocence; but “through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 3:10-28.) Could God speak plainer than this? And could man more distinctly contradict God, than does this article?
This is a question of eternal importance to millions; and we do not understand (or if it is supposed we misrepresent) this “different gospel” of F. W. Farrar—-salvation by innocence, and good works—let him, lest he sends souls to hell by it, tell us how a guilty sinner is to be made innocent, or how he is to have eternal salvation, and know it. And let not this be his mere opinion, but show it us from the word of God. The law was what God required; the gospel declares what God gives. The more we know God the giver, and the gift, the more we shall delight to serve Him. The importance of the subject is our apology for the plain words we use. What is the use of objecting to the mere idolatry of the ritualists, and at the same time teaching this soul-destroying error of salvation by works? Only ignore the infinite value of the one atoning sacrifice of Christ, by which the worshipper is forever perfected, and Satan does not care what you put in its place. Alas, nothing will please men better than their supposed innocence and good works. But we never met a man yet that was quite sure he had eternal salvation on such false grounds.
God grant, should the reader have been allured by these wandering stars, that he may be restored by the plain teaching of the word of God. We can say after enjoying it through a long life, it is more precious every day. And, believing “on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead: who was delivered for our offenses, and was raised again for our justification,” we have this blessed assurance of being through Him accounted righteous before God: “ Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through [not our own innocence, or character, or good works, but through] our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Rom. 4:24, 25; 5:1.) Thankful should we be if F. W. Farrar is ever able to say the same.
C.S.