A.G. Fairchild on What Presbyterians Believe

(Receive our blog posts in your email by clicking here. If the author links in this post are broken, please visit our Free PDF Library and click on the author’s page directly.)

For a good basic introduction to some of the major distinctive tenets of 19th century American Presbyterianism, Ashbel Green Fairchild has what you are seeking. In a tract titled “What Presbyterians Believe” he sketches, in opposition to certain caricatures, an outline of what Presbyterians truly affirm that the Bible teaches.

For example, Presbyterians believe that all who are saved are saved by the sovereign grace of God, not of works on the part of believers. Fairchild takes great pains to make clear the plan of salvation, as understood by his church and taught by the Scriptures and the Westminster Confession of Faith.

The Scriptures often make mention of a people as “given to Christ,” as “chosen in him before the foundation of the world,” and as “predestinated unto the adoption of children.” These, and many similar declarations, we regard as intended to teach one of tin most cheering doctrines of the Bible, viz:

THE ELECTION OF GRACE, OR GRATUITOUS ELECTION

After explaining the nature of the fall of man, and how all men, being completely wedded to their sins are totally averse to coming to God, Fairchild shows that God’s mercy toward mankind is immense, purposing from the beginning not to leave all to justly perish, but willing to save some from their sins, despite the unwillingness of any on their own to be saved.

… this determination of the Father, to make a people willing to come to Christ, including in it the means to secure the end, is what we style the election of grace. It was truly a purpose of grace, because its objects were not chosen on account of any goodness foreseen in them. On the contrary, God beheld them as sinners, who but for the interposition of electing love, would never be anything but sinners. He chose them to salvation as the end, and to faith and holiness as the means, and thus their election originated from his own spontaneous mercy.

Speaking further of the plan of salvation, Fairchild addresses a common concern that if God has pre-determined who receives saving grace, such is incompatible with a free offer of the gospel.

Such is the election of grace as it is held in our branch of the Church, and we may see that it perfectly harmonizes with the free unlimited offer of salvation. All are hidden to the gospel feast, because it is the duty of all to come, — because all are alike needy — because there is enough for all, and because all are to be left without excuse. When all refuse the invitation, God interposes to save a “remnant according to' the election of grace.”

Nor is there any force in the objection, “that if a man is elected, he will be saved, do what he may.” For we have seen that the elect are chosen to be saved, not from the punishment of sin merely, but from sin itself. They are chosen to be holy. The objection, then, amounts to this: that if a man is to be saved from sin, he will be saved, whether he be saved from sin or not!

Other objections are addressed by Fairchild:

  • The doctrine of election makes God to be partial (showing favoritism);

  • If election is true, there is no point in making use of the means of grace;

  • If God is sovereign over all, prayer is useless.

With Scripture Fairchild shows that far from these objections having merit, the doctrine of election confirms that God’s mercy is not the outworking of partiality, that God ordains the means of grace as well as the end of salvation, that prayer is part of God’s plan of salvation and has immense importance and purpose.

Fairchild goes on to speak of the perseverance of the saints in holiness. Those whom God has decreed to save will be kept from falling by not being left to their own strength. What a comfort this doctrine is! Our strength will fail, but God’s power to keep his saints, “through faith unto salvation” (1 Pet. 1:5), means that God will be glorified not only by granting us a potential to be saved, but in actually seeing our salvation through until it is finally and fully accomplished.

Then Fairchild affirms another article of the Presbyterian creed — the definite, vicarious atonement of Jesus Christ. That atonement was not sufficient for all, but efficient for none. On the contrary, it is sufficient for all, and efficient for those for whom Christ’s saving work was intended.

It has been said that, on this subject, the point of difference between us and others is, whether Christ died for all? But this is not a. fair statement. We do, indeed deny that Christ died for all, in the sense in which that expression is understood by Arminians; but our Church has always maintained that in respect of the sufliciency and applicability of the Saviour’s sufferings, he may be said to have died for the whole world. The real ground of controversy among those who agree as to the nature of the atonement is, What is its ultimate design? Had the Lord Jesus no definite purpose to save any one? or did he suffer with the intention of saving all men?

We cannot think that Christ had no definite purpose in regard to the objects of his interposition. The Scriptures represent him as coming into the world with a positive intention to save sinners, not merely to render their salvation possible. Nor can we imagine that an all-wise Being would enter upon a work of such unexampled labour and suflering without a precise object to be attained. On the other hand, if we say that Christ intended to save all men, at once the question will arise, Why, then, are not all saved? It will not do to answer by saying, that the divine purpose has been defeated by the unbelief of man. For if God cannot hinder man’s unbelief, the prayers of Christians, and the labours of ministers, are alike useless. If God cannot make sinners willing to come to Christ, who can?

Presbyterians, therefore, deem it safest to conclude that the atonement accomplishes the design of its author, and saves all whom God intended it to save. And this doctrine, so far from being adapted to perplex inquiring sinners, has a most encouraging tendency; for if they are willing to be saved on the terms of the gospel, there must, of necessity, be a divine intention to save them — these two things being connected together in God’s decree. But if they stay away from Christ till they first ascertain what he intends to do with them, they will never come at all.

Besides the unwillingness of mankind to come to God, the inability of man to keep God’s law or to do anything that could accomplish their salvation is another key doctrine of which Fairchild speaks. And here he affirms that man’s inability does not lessen his culpability before God, nor does this doctrine present man as chained down and unable to come to God though desirous to do so. God is glorified in the true state of things wherein though man is unable to save himself or to do any good, God nevertheless enables sinners to come to Christ by faith and implants the desire to do so. “He that worketh in them to will, will not withhold the ability to do. Philip. ii.13.”

Fairchild goes on to address another theological concern - the salvation of those dying in infancy.

Presbyterians are of opinion that those dying in infancy are elect unto salvation. As they are involved in the guilt and misery of the fall, they are appropriate subjects of the divine mercy; and their election secures to them an application of atoning blood, and the renewing influences of the Spirit. Thus, when the Lord Jesus shall “gather his elect from the four winds,” infants will not be left behind.

Our doctrinal opponents dislike this view of the subject, because, if all who die in infancy are elect, then, as they could not have been elected on account of foreseen faith and works, it will follow that fully a third part of our species are saved by unconditional election.

When we speak of infants dying in infancy as elect, we mean that they are chosen out of the whole mass of human beings. Our use of the term, therefore, does not imply that any who die at that tender age are not elected. So when John, addressing the “elect lady,” speaks of her “elect sister” (2 John 13), we do not infer that she had non-elect sisters. In the exercise of his electing love, God had before him the whole race of mankind, not a particular class, age, or sex. And in the opinion of Presbyterians all who die in infancy were included in his purpose of mercy, and selected, along with others, out of the whole family of Adam.

Finally, Fairchild addresses God’s sovereignty over all things, including the evil that happens in this world. Affirming along with the Confession that God is not the author of sin, Fairchild yet explains that the Scriptures do indeed teach that nothing is outside the government of God, even sin. And that this doctrine, which he terms “divine appointment,” stands in contrast to “the gloomy notion of fate” and offers great consolation to believers in the midst of the trials of life.

Indeed, it is a prime principle with Presbyterians, that all the good in the universe proceeds from God; and all the evil from creatures, who act from their own free choice, uninfluenced by any compulsory decree.

We believe that the purposes of God do extend to all events, but not that they extend to all in the same manner. Some things God has purposed to bring to pass by his own agency, and other things, as sinful acts, he has purposed to permit, or suffer to be done by others. And the things which he does by his own agency, and those which he suffers to be done by others, include all that ever come to pass. We may add that this distinction between determinations to do on the part of God, and determinations to suffer sinful acts to be done by others, not only exists in our Confession, but has been taught by all Presbyterian divines from the earliest period.

This tract concludes with an extended quote from Thomas Scott, the English Bible commentator, on the sovereignty of God. It is fitting because the sovereignty of God is at the heart of the doctrines of grace, upon which Fairchild expounds. This distinctive teaching of the Presbyterian Church, based upon the Scriptures, is calculated to humble the pride of man and to exalt the glory of God in all matters, including that of salvation. It is a tract that is well worth the time to read and prayerfully consider.

A Dialogue Between D.L. Moody and W.S. Plumer - In Two Acts

(Receive our blog posts in your email by clicking here. If the author links in this post are broken, please visit our Free PDF Library and click on the author’s page directly.)

In 1875 and 1876, on two separate occasions, a young Dwight L. Moody and an elderly William Swan Plumer, took the stage together to dialogue about questions concerning salvation. In these dialogues, or colloquies, it was Moody who, in the role of an anxious inquirer, posed questions which Dr. Plumer answered, as crowds listened attentively.

The first event took place at Wannamaker’s Grand Depot in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on December 31, 1875. Moody had already preached to an audience of twelve thousand on the text: “How long halt yet between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him” (1 Kings 18:21). As was his custom, Moody followed his sermon with an inquiry meeting. But this meeting was special because of its format and the guest speaker involved.

Dwight L. Moody (c. 1870).

Dwight L. Moody (c. 1870).

To set the stage further, as it were, we turn first to William R. Moody’s The Life of Dwight L. Moody, pp. 269-270, in which he quotes Dr. Henry Clay Trumbull thus:

The central figure on the platform that New Year’s eve was one whose appearance and bearing were most impressive. The Rev. Dr. William S. Plumer, then a professor of the Columbia Theological Seminary in South Carolina, and who nearly forty years before was moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, was a figure that would compel reverence and regard in any gathering. Massive in frame, towering in stature, venerable in appearance, with snowy hair and flowing beard, he suggested Michael Angelo’s Moses.

Mr. Moody was on this occasion represented, not at the teacher, but as the inquirer. Dr. Plumer stood out as the teacher, to whom the younger Moody came with his questionings of heart. Few men, if any, in the world better knew the anxious cravings and doubts of the inquiring soul than Moody, as he had met with them in his varied evangelistic labors. Few trained theologians could have more wisely and simply answered those inquirers than the large-brained, large-hearted, large-framed, venerable patriarch before whom Moody stood.

The whole scene evidenced the simplicity of trust in God as the sinner came to him through Jesus Christ, in his need and in his confidence. The theologian could give the answer that the anxious soul longed for. Mr. Moody and Dr. Plumer were at one in this interview.

Moody then introduced his friend and partner in this endeavor to the audience at nearly midnight with these words:

Here is the Rev. Dr. Plumer, of South Carolina. He is seventy-four years old. He has been living on borrowed time for four years. For fifty-five years he has been sitting at the feet of Jesus. I’m going to put him on the witness-stand, and question him before you all. Dr. Plumer, will you take the pulpit?

Dr. William Swan Plumer

Dr. William Swan Plumer

We have a transcript of this and a subsequent “colloquy,” and the text shows a back-and-forth dialogue that left a deep impression on its hearers. We are told that “It was a most impressive service. Many a soul seemed to feel himself the questioner, and to listen as for his life to the answer.”

Act 1 begins:

Dr. Plumer — I was to give a year-text to this assembly. It is from the 73d Psalm: “Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire besides thee.”

Mr. Moody — Dr. Plumer, we often speak of “conviction.” What is conviction?

Dr. Plumer — Conviction is a clear persuasion that a thing is true. Religious conviction is a clear, settled persuasion of five things: First, That I am ignorant, and need instruction. Second, That I am guilty, and deserve wrath, and need pardon. Third. That my heart is vile, and must be renewed. Fourth. That my condition is miserable; I am “wretched and miserable and poor.” Fifth. That I am helpless; I am without strength; I can not save myself; I can not think a good thought without divine grace."

Mr. Moody — What is the use of conviction?

Dr. Plumer — The use of conviction is not to punish a man for his sins; nor is it to make him any better. The devils in hell have been under awful conviction for a long time, and not one of them is any better. The sole object of conviction is to shut up the soul to the faith of Jesus. The sole object of conviction is to bring the sinner to accept salvation by atoning blood.

Mr. Moody — Is any given amount of distress necessary to genuine conviction?

Dr. Plumer — Lydia seems to have had no dis tress; we read of none. God opened her heart, and she attended to the things spoken of Paul; but the jailer of Philippi would probably not have accepted Christ without some alarm. If you will accept the Son of God, you need have no trouble; there is nothing in mere trouble that sanctifies the soul.

Mr. Moody — Well, doctor, what is conversion?

Dr. Plumer — Glory be to God! there is such a thing as conversion. If there was not, everlasting chains and darkness would be our doom. To be converted is to turn from self, self-will, self-righteousness, all self confidence, and from sin in every shape, and to be turned to Christ. The turning-point in a man's conversion is his acceptance of Jesus Christ; then he closes in with Christ and gives Him all his confidence.

Mr. Moody — Why must a sinner come to Christ for salvation ?

Dr. Pumer — Because there is salvation in none else. All the angels in heaven and all the saints in heaven and earth can not save one sinner. He must come to the Saviour. I will tell you why. Here are quintillions of tons of atmospheric air: why does not that support life without your respir ing it? You must breathe it or you die. For the same reason you must make Christ yours, or you perish notwithstanding what He has done. The sight of a river will never quench thirst, and the sight of food will never satisfy hunger. You must come to Christ, and make His salvation yours.

Mr. Moody — Can a man be saved here to-night, before twelve o'clock — saved all at once?

Dr. Plumer — Why not? In my Bible I read of three thousand men gathered together one morning — all of them murderers, their hands stained with the blood of the Son of God. They met in the morning, and before night they were all baptized members of Christ. God added to the church in those days such as should be saved. If you are ever saved, there must be a moment when you accept Christ and renounce the world.

Mr. Moody — What is repentance?

Dr. Plumer — It is turning to God with abhorrence of sin and cleaving to Christ with purpose pf obedience. A man truly repents of his sins when he does not commit the sins he has repented of; therefore saving repentance always terminates in purity of life and in reformation. A thorough change of heart is followed by a thorough change of character.

Mr. Moody — How can I know that I am saved?

Dr. Plumer — By the fact that God is true. “Let God be true, but every man a liar.” If I accept Jesus Christ, it is not Mr. Moody's word, nor Mr. Sankey's, nor Dr. Newton's; it is the Word of the living God, whose name is Amen. “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life.”

Mr. Moody — What if I haven't got faith enough?

Dr. Plumer — Glory be to God! if I can touch the hem of my Saviour's garment I shall be saved. A little faith is as truly faith as a great deal of faith. A little coal of fire in the ashes is as truly fire as the glowing heat of the furnace. Jesus says not, If you have great faith you will be saved, but “He that believeth shall be saved.” Oh! come and trust Him fully! Give Him all your confidence, and if your faith is not as strong as it ought to be, cry as the disciples did, “Lord, increase our faith.”

Interior view of the Roman Hippodrome in New York City.

Interior view of the Roman Hippodrome in New York City.

A subsequent event took place on March 30, 1876 at P.T. Barnum’s Great Roman Hippodrome in New York City, the precursor to Madison Square Garden. Act 2 commences at 8 pm, following the conclusion of a convention.

At eight o’clock the house was filled, every seat being occupied, and hundreds standing. Mr. Moody, followed by Dr. Plumer, of South Carolina, entered. The usual devotional exercises were held. Mr. Moody then arose, and said: “The exercises of this evening will vary from those commonly had at this hour. I shall not preach, but shall call on Dr. Plumer to answer many questions of great importance; these questions relate to the way of life. Dr. Plumer has long been studying the Word of God. He will please take the stand.

Mr. Moody — Dr. Plumer, I am living in the world, with eternity before me. I am accountable to God; I have broken His law. What must I do to be saved?

Dr. Plumer — There is but one safe answer to that question. It sounds out from the jail at Philippi: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” Acts xvi. 31. That is the substance of all the Scriptures on this subject summed up in a few words.

Mr. Moody — Is faith in Christ essential to salvation?

Dr. Plumer — So says the Lord Jesus Christ: “He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” John iii. 18.

Mr. Moody — Many in the inquiry-room tell us that we are making too much of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Dr. Plumer — If they mean that we are making too much of the Lord Jesus Christ himself, that cannot be so; for He is All in All; the First and the Last; the Author and Finisher of Salvation; the one Mediator between God and man; the Prophet, Priest, and King of His Church. If they mean that we are making too much of faith itself, that cannot be so, unless we go beyond the Scriptures. The words faith and believe occur in the New Testament about five hundred times; and in a large number of cases salvation is clearly connected with believing. Jesus taught us this when asked, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” He answered, “This is the work of God that ye believe on the name of Him whom He hath sent,” and, “If ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins.” John vi. 29; viii. 24.

Mr. Moody — Does our faith, or our want of faith, decide our relations to God the Father?

Dr. Plumer — The Scriptures so affirm: “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father;” “He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath the Father and the Son;” “He that hateth me, hateth my Father also.” I John ii. 23; 2 John 9; John xv. 23. No man can refuse to confess that Christ, the Son of God, is come in the flesh, without denying and dishonoring God the Father.

Mr. Moody — Is true faith wrought in the heart by the Holy Ghost alone?

Dr. Plumer — Paul says: “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,” and so on; and, “No man can say that Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” Galatians v. 22; I Cor. xii. 3. Elsewhere he says, “Faith is of the operation of God;" and John says, “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God.”

Mr. Moody — Is there no substitute for faith in Christ Jesus?

Dr. Plumer — None whatever. The want of faith mars everything. I remember John Calvin thus puts it: “The annihilation of faith is the abolition of the promises.” Many Scriptures justify this remark. In the great commission given by Christ to the preachers of His Gospel, He says: “He that believeth not shall be damned.” Mark xvi. 16. These words are awſul, and they are true: “He that believeth not shall be damned;” so says the Son of God, our final Judge.

With many other questions, on both occasions, did Moody draw out from Plumer the “way of life,” that is, a gospel understanding of repentance and faith and salvation, as given to us in the Scriptures. The rest of the dialogue is given in Great Questions Answered: Two Colloquies Between D.L. Moody and Wm. S. Plumer (1876), available to read here. The drama of these two men, in the roles of anxious inquirer and wise teacher, in two different locations, is played out in that remarkable volume, and is well worth the read. Plumer acquitted himself with distinction in giving Moody and his 19th century hearers sound Biblical answers to questions of great importance, and readers of the 21st century will profit too by consideration of these dialogues.