Return to Main Page
Site Index

Trouble with drop box click here for help     Printing Instructions for Articles
Back to Index to Gillespie Discussion

Discussion of George Gillespie's Wholesome Severity Reconciled with Christian Liberty
Re: WF: GWS-3 to GWS-6 Questions for Thought 
Subject: Re: WF: GWS-3 to GWS-6 Questions for Thought
From: Tomas Dombrowsky 
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 19:22:54 -0600 (CST)

Subject: Re: WF: GWS-3 to GWS-6 Questions for Thought
>>
>>GWS-5:
>>>	On what basis does Calvin distinguish three sorts of error?
>>>Does GG seem to approve or disapprove this distinction?
>>>
>> some to be tolerated with a spirit 
>>of meekness, and such as ought not to 
>>separate brethren; others not to be tolerated, 
>>but to be suppressed with a certain degree of 
>>severity; a third sort so abominable and 
>>pestiferous, that they are to be cut off by the 
>>highest punishment?
>>
>>     Calvin teaches that the first duty of the magistrate is to promote
correct religion and worship
>>(Institutes IV,20-9). However the locus of responsibility is on the
magistrate himself. He is responsible before God for the promotion of true
religion among his subjects. A Christian magistrate must form his conscience
on the basis of God's Word and act accordingly.
>>     The discussion of the toleration of error in nonessentials comes in
the discussion of the true church and the duty of cultivating unity with her
(Insitutes IV,1,8-12)."Wherever we see the word of God sincerely preached
and heard, wherever we see the sacraments administered according to the
institution of Christ, there we cannot have any doubt that the Church of God
has some existence, since his promise cannot fail," He further states that
wherever we find the true church it is our duty to cultivate unity with her
and not separate ourselves lightly. We must tolerate many faults before
having recourse to separation.
>>     In Book IV,Chapter I, Sec.12 he states "For all the heads of doctrine
are not in the same position. Some are so necesary to be known , that all
must hold them to be fixed and undoubted as the proper esentials of
religion: for instance, that God is one, that Christ is God, and the Son of
God, that our salvation depends on the mercy of God, and the like. Others
again, which are the subject of controversy among the churches, do not
destroy the unity of the faith; for why should it be regarded as a ground of
dissension between churches, if one, without any spirit of contention or
perverseness in dogmatising, hold that the soul on quitting the body flies
to heaven, and another, without venturing to speak positively as to the
abode, holds it for certain that it lives with the Lord?"
>>     Thus we have two extremes: Errors on points so minor that they should
be tolerated and on the other hand errors that completely destroy the
Christian faith. Intermediate to the extremes we have errors which tend to
more serious errors but still have borne their full fruit: i.e.
dispensationalism or arminianism in an otherwise orthodox theologian. 
>>
>