Letter to John Wesley on Free Grace

Introduction

Reverend and very dear brother, God only knows what unspeakable sorrow of heart I have felt on your account since I left England last. Did Jonah go with more reluctance against Nineveh than I now take pen in hand to write against you? Was nature to speak, I'd rather die than do it — and yet if I am faithful to God and to my own and others' souls, I must not stand neutral any longer.

I am very apprehensive that our common adversaries will rejoice to see us differing among ourselves. But the children of God are in danger of falling into error, and a number have been misled whom God has been pleased to work upon by my ministry. I must therefore show that I know no man after the flesh, and that I have no respect to persons any further than is consistent with my duty to my Lord and Master, Jesus Christ. This letter no doubt will lose me many friends — and for this cause perhaps God has laid this difficult task upon me, to see whether I am willing to forsake all for him or not.

For some time before, and especially since my last departure from England, both in public and private, by preaching and printing, you have been propagating the doctrine of universal redemption. When I remember how Paul reproved Peter for his dissimulation, I fear I have been sinfully silent too long. Well then, be not angry with me, dear and honoured sir, if now I deliver my soul by telling you that I think in this you greatly err.

On the Lot and the Obligation to Print

I am a son that always thought you were quite mistaken in drawing a lot to determine whether to preach and print against election. A due exercise of religious prudence, without a lot, would have directed you. Besides, I never heard that you inquired of God whether election was a gospel doctrine — but took it for granted it was not, and only inquired whether you should be silent or preach against it. The lot came out, Preach and print. I am apt to think one reason God suffered you to be thus deceived was that a special obligation might thereby be laid upon me faithfully to declare the scriptural doctrine of election.

On the Choice of Text

As you have been unhappy in printing at all upon such a warrant, so you have been as unhappy in the choice of your text. Honoured sir, how could it enter into your heart to choose a text to disprove the doctrine of election out of the eighth of Romans — where this doctrine is so plainly asserted that a Quaker of my acquaintance, having no other way of evading the force of the Apostle's assertion, said plainly: I believe Paul was in the wrong. It is plain beyond all contradiction that Paul, through the whole eighth of Romans, is speaking of the privileges of those only who are really in Christ. And the latter part of the very text you chose plainly proves what you will by no means grant — namely, the final perseverance of the children of God.

Answering the Main Objections

1. “All preaching is vain if there be an election.” What kind of reasoning is this? Has not God who appointed salvation for a certain number also appointed preaching as the means to bring them to it? Does anyone hold election in any other sense? Since we know not who are elect and who are reprobate, we are to preach promiscuously to all. For the word may be useful even to the non-elect in restraining them from wickedness. And who, attending with reverence and care, can tell but he may be found among that happy number?

2. “This doctrine destroys holiness.” I should have thought that one who carries perfection to such an exalted pitch as dear Mr. Wesley does would know that a true lover of Christ strives to be holy for the sake of holiness itself — out of love and gratitude, without mere regard to the rewards of heaven. But passing even this by — whoever preached any election but what the apostle preached when he said, Chosen through sanctification of the Spirit? Is not holiness made a mark of election by all who preach it? How then can the doctrine destroy holiness?

3. “This doctrine destroys the comforts of religion.” But dear sir, how does Mr. Wesley know this, who has never believed election? Those who have experienced it will agree with our seventeenth article, that the godly consideration of predestination and election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, unspeakable comfort to godly persons. For my own part, this doctrine is my daily support. I should utterly sink under a dread of my impending trials were I not firmly persuaded that God has chosen me in Christ from before the foundation of the world.

4. “Thousands and millions were doomed without any fault of their own.” But whoever asserted that? Do not they who believe God's dooming men to everlasting burnings also believe that God looked upon them as men fallen in Adam? The decree which ordained a punishment first regarded the crime by which it was deserved. If God might justly impute Adam's sin to all, and might justly pass by all without sending a Saviour, then he might justly pass by some. Turn on the right hand or the left, you are reduced to an inextricable dilemma: you must either give up the doctrine of the imputation of Adam's sin, or receive the doctrine of election with a holy and righteous reprobation as its consequent.

5. “This doctrine overthrows the whole Christian religion.” By no means. It is only by the Christian revelation that we are acquainted with God's design of saving his Church through the death of his Son. And it is settled in the everlasting covenant that this salvation shall be applied to the elect through faith in him: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many (Isaiah 53:11). God's absolute purpose of saving his chosen does not preclude the necessity of the gospel revelation, nor any of the means through which he has determined his decree shall take effect.

On Universal Redemption and the Blood of Christ

I would hint further that you unjustly charge the doctrine of reprobation with blasphemy, whereas the doctrine of universal redemption as you set it forth is really the highest reproach upon the dignity of the Son of God and the merit of his blood. Consider whether it be not rather blasphemy to say, as you do, that Christ died also for those that perish. Without holding — as a Moravian brother lately frankly confessed — that all the damned souls would hereafter be brought out of hell, I cannot see how universal redemption in the literal sense can be maintained. For how can all be universally redeemed if all are not finally saved?

Dear sir, for Jesus Christ's sake, consider how you dishonour God by denying election. You plainly make salvation depend not on God's free grace but on man's free will. Blessed be God, our Lord knew for whom he died. There was an eternal compact between the Father and the Son. A certain number was then given him as the purchase and reward of his obedience and death. For these he prayed in John 17 — not for the world — and for these only he is now interceding.

Closing

I purposely omit making further particular remarks on the several last passages of your sermon. Indeed, had not your name, dear sir, been prefixed to it, I could not have been so uncharitable as to think you were the author of such sophistry.

Dear, dear sir — oh, be not offended. For Christ's sake, be not rash. Give yourself to reading. Study the covenant of grace. Down with your carnal reasonings. Be a little child — and then, instead of pawning your salvation as you have done in the late hymn book, instead of talking of sinless perfection as you have done in its preface, and making man's salvation depend on his own free will as you have done in this sermon — you will adore and praise sovereign distinguishing love.

God knows my heart — as I told you before, so I declare again — nothing but a single regard to the honour of Christ has forced me to write this letter. I love and honour you for his sake, and when I come to judgment will thank you before men and angels for what you have under God done for my soul. I am often filled with pleasure to think how I shall behold you then casting your crown down at the feet of the Lamb, filled with a holy blushing for opposing the divine sovereignty in the manner you have done. But I hope the Lord will show you this before you go hence.

Oh, how do I long for that day!

If the Lord should be pleased to make use of this letter for that purpose, it would abundantly rejoice the heart of, dear and honoured sir, your affectionate, though unworthy brother and servant in Christ,

George Whitefield