Without further comment, let me present these extracts from the sermon (all bolded emphasis is mine).
“A Persuasive to Unity in Things Indifferent”
Phil. 3:15, “As many as be perfect, be thus minded; and if in anything ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.”
I now come to the other part of the text [this is his second sermon on this verse]: —
1. As many as be perfect be thus minded: touto froneite, think the same thing with me–that is, forsaking all other confidences, cleave to Christ alone, whatever it cost you. Mind this, take care of this, be thus affected; let us actually perform that to which circumcision was designed; let us worship God in a spiritual manner, trusting Christ as the substance of all these ceremonial shadows, depending upon him for his renewing and reconciling grace, and adhering to pure Christianity, without mingling with it the rudiments of Moses.
2. If in anything ye be otherwise minded, know not the abolition of the ceremonies through weakness of faith, or an affected ignorance; yet having knowledge of so many saving truths, we hope in time God will reclaim you from your error. Well then–
[1.] Here is a difference or dissent supposed: “thus minded,” and “otherwise minded.”
[2.] Lenity [that is, leniency] expressed toward the dissenters: “If in anything ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this to you.”
Doct. That when God’s people are divided in opinion, all lenity and mutual forbearance should be used to prevent things from coming to an open rupture.
So sweet and mild was the discipline in the apostle’s days, that he would not compel men to do whatever he or others did conceive to be good, or to forbear what they did conceive to be evil, but, without force, leave them to God’s direction and illumination….
1. What lenity and forbearance should be used. Let us state it in these considerations: —
[1.] There may be, and often are, differences of opinion about lesser things in the church; partly because of different degrees of light. All barks that sail to heaven draw not a like depth of water. And partly because of the remainders of corruption in all. Inordinate self-love is not in all alike broken and mortified, and so their particular interests have an influence upon their opinions. And partly because of the accidental prejudices of education and converse, etc.
[2.] When these differences arise, we should take care they come not to a rupture and open breach. This is the course the apostle taketh here; he doth not by and by despair of the dissenters, and reject them as heretics, but beareth with them, hoping in charity God will at length reveal their error to them by the ministry of his servants, through the powerful operation of his Spirit, and not suffer them to run on in dividing courses from the rest of his people. So should we do in like cases. Partly because when these differences of opinion breed division and separations, the church is destroyed: Gal. 5:15, “For if ye bite and devour one another, take heed ye be not consumed one of another.”… Partly because the whole is scandalised: John 17:21, “That they may all be one, that the world may believe that thou has sent me.” Divisions in the church breed atheism in the world…. And partly because when men give themselves up to separating and narrow principles, the power of godliness is lost, and all their zeal is laid out upon their petty and private opinions, and so religion is turned into a disputacity. That is the reason why the apostle doth so often tell them, Gal. 6:15, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature;” and gal. 5:6, “For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith that worketh by love;” and 1 Cor. 7:19, “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping the commandments of God.” Observe it where you will, and you shall find that separation and distance from the rest of believers, doth not befriend godliness, but undermine it. A regiment fighting apart from the rest of the army of Christ, is always lost through their own peevishness; at least, they lose great advantages of promoting the kingdom of Christ.
[3.] To prevent this open rupture, there must be all lenity used and mutual forbearance. We must not rigourously obtrude our conceits upon others, either by church-power, or private censure….
…for want of right stating of things, men fight with their friends in the dark; some think all things should be suffered; some nothing wherein to bear with our brethren. The one sort of Christians is for imposing on their brethren all things that have gotten the vogue and the favour of authority, and that not only on their practice, but their judgments too; and this in matters not fundamental or destructive to faith or worship, but in things controversial or doubtful among godly and peaceable men. But if it should not go so high, contending about every difference of opinion, and urging our brethren with everything we conceive to be right, is a breach of Christian love, and destroyeth the use of those differing gifts which Christ hath given to the church, and crosseth his mind in the frame of the scriptures, which are clear in soul-saving matters; in other things, especially matters of discipline and order, more dark and obscure. It is also contrary to the mild and gentle government of the apostles, who press in lesser matters a forbearance; as Paul, Rom. 14:1, “The weak in faith receive, but not to doubtful disputations;” receive him, own him, but do not cast him out of the church, nor trouble him for doubtful things, but let him come to himself, for men will sooner be led than drawn.
The other extreme is of them that will have all things to be tolerated, even blasphemy and fundamental errors, as if the scriptures were uncertain in all things. No; in things absolutely necessary to salvation, it is clear, open, and plain: “The law is a lamp, and a light,” Prov. 6:23 and Ps. 119:105. And in such a case we are not to “bid him God-speed,” 2 Jn. 10. In such cases of damnable heresy, the law of Christian lenity [the state or quality of being lenient] holdeth not; but if we agree in the principal articles of faith, let us embrace one another with mutual love, though we differ from one another in variety of rites and ceremonies and discipline ecclesiastical. If we agree in the substantials of worship, let us go by the same rule, do the same thing: though in circumstantials there be a difference, these are matters of less moment than separation, or the other division of the church….
…If you will not own yourselves weak, do the part of the strong meekly, hold forth your light, produce your reasons to convince others; but if you have nothing to produce but your obstinacy and ignorance, surely you are not only a weak, but a perverse brother. But what are the weak to do? Not to rend and cut off themselves from the rest of Christians, or be strange to them upon every lesser dissent, nor to raise troubles by your censures, but to be humble, teachable, diligent in the use of means, to lay aside obstinate prejudices, to examine how it cometh to pass that the rest of the godly and you differ; to leave room still for the discovery of God’s mind where your grounds are not clear and certain, and to count it no shame to retract that former practice which a future conviction disproveth.…
[After discussing the many ways the church is “one” listed in Eph. 4, he continues:] He is the common Father of all believers, through Jesus Christ. Some are weak, some strong, some rich, some poor, but they have all an equal interest in God. Now, for us, who are so many ways one, to be rent in pieces, how sad is that! All these places, and many more, show how every Christian should, as far as it is possible, be an esteemer and promoter of unity among brethren, and not only make conscience of purity, but of unity also, which, next to purity, is the great badge of Christianity….
…A grounded Christian beareth with the infirmities he seeth in others, and pitieth and helpeth them, and prayeth for them more than the weak, who are usually most censorious and addicted to the interest of their party and faction in the world, and make a bustle about opinions rather than solid godliness; but the grown Christian is most under the power of love and a heavenly mind, and so loveth God and his neighbour, is most sensible of his own frailty, hath a greater zeal for the welfare of his church and interest in the world, and seeth farther than others do….
…Consider how dangerous it is to reject any whom Christ will own for his. Will Christ admit him to heaven, and will you think him unfit for your communion here upon earth? Despise not the weak brother, for god hath received him, Rom. 14:3….
…Our endeavours after unity among the professors of Christianity ought to be earnest and constant: Eph 4:3, “Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” I add this partly because many make fair pretences of peace and union, which their practice contradicteth; all cry out of the divisions, but every one keepeth them up; and partly, because when it is endeavoured we shall find difficulties and disappointments, but we must not rest in some careless endeavours, nor grow weary though we meet not with present success; and partly because the instruments of so great a good are usually sacrificed to the wrath of both parties. We must be content to digest affronts, reproaches, censures, and injuries, and love them that hate us: 2 Cor. 12:15, “Though the more abundantly I love you, the less I am beloved of you.”
After quoting Luke 13:1-5 in his book The Holiness of God, R.C. Sproul addresses the question “Why do innocent people suffer?” In light of the death of my friend Larry, and of Steven Curtis Chapman’s 5-year-old daughter, I thought perhaps now would be a good time to give an excerpt from this great book I’ve recently finished reading.
Despite what many have said or heard, Calvinism does not negate or downplay evangelism. Charles Spurgeon, George Whitefield, William Carey, and Adoniram Judson were not exceptions to the rule. Rather, they are simply some noteworthy examples of evangelists and preachers who were both Calvinistic in theology and evangelistic in practice.
In light of