Learning from Martyn Lloyd-Jones: a Biblical synthesis of Reformed and Charismatic faith for today?

Over the next few months, en will be running a series of articles written by Adam Ramsey, of Liberti Church, Gold Coast, Australia, exploring what we can learn from Martyn Lloyd-Jones today about the questions set out in the headline. The essays, of which there are five in total, need to be taken together. They are taken from original, yet-to-be published research undertaken by Ramsey for his Doctor of Philosophy thesis. They also, we hope, represent something of the generous-hearted, thoughtful, Biblical approach that en was founded 40 years ago in 1986 to embody.

Introduction

During the 20th century, it was no secret that Calvinists and Charismatics frequently viewed one another with mutual suspicion. Rarely would those who affirmed a high view of God’s sovereignty in salvation in the Reformed tradition, and those with a high experiential expectation of the Holy Spirit’s direct and supernatural activity, find themselves worshipping in the same church. Or, for that matter, even cooperating outside of their respective churches.

Those who held to a broadly Reformed theology during this period of time were largely cessationist in their orientation toward the more supernatural elements of Christianity, being pneumatologically-shaped by B.B. Warfield’s assertion that, while miraculous expressions of Christianity were still possible (since God can do as He pleases), spiritual gifts and supernatural phenomena, however, were confined to the Apostolic Era of the church as a foundational and unrepeatable authentication of the apostolic witness.¹

Conversely, adherents of Charismatic theology² who emphasised a more experiential view of the Holy Spirit’s activity in their lives, upheld a belief in the continuation of spiritual gifts beyond the first century for the edification of God’s people until the return of Christ.³ These Charismatics tended to align with an Arminian soteriological framework that accentuates the role of personal responsibility and human free will in salvation, rather than a work of sovereign grace. Tensions abounded between the two streams across the 20th century, with one Reformed leader declaring that, “by the standards of historic orthodoxy, Pentecostalism is not simply an error. It is a heresy, fundamentally anti-trinitarian and legalistic,”⁴ while a well-known Pentecostal leader accused Reformed theology of creating “a monster of theology that dampens the place of our passion and partnership with God.”⁵

Yet in the midst of these ecclesiastical tensions (and others) that marked that century, there appeared the distinctive and widely-respected ministry of David Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Affectionately known as “the Doctor”, Lloyd-Jones transitioned from his medical practice in South London in 1927 to become a “physician of souls” at Bethlehem Forward Movement Church in Sandfields, Wales. A little over a decade later, he succeeded G. Campbell Morgan in the pulpit of Westminster Chapel in London, preaching multiple times a week until his retirement in 1968, three decades later. His ministry catalysed a resurgence of interest in Reformed theology, the writings of the Puritans, and the subject of revival;⁶ first in Great Britain and then subsequently on a global scale. Yet despite his prominence as a Reformed preacher – widely regarded as one of the most influential of his generation, and arguably the most significant British evangelical leader of the entire 20th century ⁷ – Lloyd-Jones also held to an experiential pneumatology, that, at times closely resembled certain distinctives of the Charismatic movement. It was this advocacy of genuine spiritual experience and openness to the work of the Spirit that made him atypical of the Reformed tradition⁸ as it was predominantly expressed in the 20th century.

It would constitute a category error to label Lloyd-Jones as either “Pentecostal” or “Charismatic”, according to the connotations that those terms carried during the time of his ministry. Such classifications fail to encapsulate the nuances of Lloyd-Jones’ theological positions and his distinct approach to the work of the Holy Spirit as one who was shaped primarily through the influence of the Welsh-Calvinistic Methodists; a movement in his homeland of Wales, whose passionate, warm, praising, thankful, prayerful, “experiential Calvinism” he regarded as the truest and best version of his own Reformed tradition.⁹ The substance of his pneumatology was meticulously derived from a thorough exegesis of the Scriptures, and carefully filtered through a broad understanding of church history through the centuries, before being applied into his own experience. Thus, contrary to some modern portrayals, a closet-Pentecostal the Doctor was not.

Yet neither was he a Cessationist, at least certainly not in the Warfieldian sense. On the contrary, Lloyd-Jones rejected such a view in the strongest terms, as “inconsistent, and contradictory – indeed, there is only one word to describe such a view, it is nonsense.”¹⁰ One of his pastoral protégés, Peter Lewis, who became close with Lloyd-Jones during the final decade of his life and was given the honour of preaching his memorial service in 1981,¹¹ wrote that “Lloyd-Jones had refused to write off the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements as so many other Reformed theologians had done because of his ‘loyalty to Scripture, his sense of history, his breadth of reading and his profound humility before the things of God’.”¹² His position represented a unique convergence of Reformed orthodoxy with a dependence upon authentic spiritual power, along with an openness to supernatural phenomena – particularly in times of revival – as the greatest need of the church in every age.

Part 1: The Historical Roots and Experiential Calvinism of Martyn Lloyd-Jones

Arising simultaneously yet independently of Methodism in England, Lloyd-Jones dates the beginnings of Welsh Methodism to 1735 with the spiritual awakenings experienced by Howell Harris and Daniel Rowland. The beginnings of English Methodism were historically located slightly later in the “mighty experience through which Whitefield passed in 1736, and through which the Wesley brothers passed in May 1738.”¹ According to David Ceri Jones, these awakenings in Harris and Rowland that took place independently of one another, “set in motion two religious awakenings, [that] fused together a couple of years later to create the Welsh Methodist movement.”²

The 18th-century leaders of the awakenings during this time – men like Howell Harris, Daniel Rowland, William Williams, and others – combined a high view of God’s sovereignty with a posture towards the work of the Holy Spirit that was powerfully experiential. These leaders sought to recover the experiential dimensions of Christianity, while remaining firmly rooted in the doctrines of grace as articulated by the Reformed tradition.

A. Why Methodism needs Calvinism

Lloyd-Jones was aware of the scepticism surrounding the term “Calvinistic Methodism” – a label often regarded as self-contradictory by both Arminians and Calvinists alike.³ Yet in contrast to what some considered incompatible or oxymoronic, Lloyd Jones believed such a convergence to be the truest representation of both frameworks. He argued that this synthesis, as uniquely expressed in 18th-century Wales, exemplified the most faithful expressions of both traditions, transcending the limitations of each movement when taken in isolation. Why did he regard Calvinistic Methodism to be true Methodism, and Calvinistic Methodism to be true Calvinism? Without the vibrancy of Methodism, Calvinism tends to devolve into intellectualism, while Methodism absent of Calvinism often drifts into experiential aberrations that are more akin to Spiritism than to New Testament Christianity. It was the harmony of head and heart, doctrine and experience, truth and passion, that served as the guiding vision for Lloyd-Jones’s own convictions. Of course, today much Methodism is sadly bankrupt of the gospel in its theologically liberal forms. However, in its original form, it had much in common with today’s Charismatic movement — particularly its experiential emphasis —  which is what makes Lloyd-Jones’s thinking still so relevant.

He gives three reasons as to why Calvinistic Methodism is the “only ‘true’ Methodism”⁴ by contrasting it with the more widely known Methodism of later generations which drew primarily upon the Arminian convictions of John Wesley. Lloyd-Jones argues that the latter is inconsistent within itself on three important doctrines: salvation by grace alone, regeneration that is effectual, and assurance. First, because Arminian Methodism begins with an emphasis upon “grace”, but then introduces works again with their notion of free will and the role in which a person plays in their own salvation.⁵ Second, Arminian Methodism emphasises regeneration as the work of God, yet goes on to deny it by insisting such rebirth can be undone or lost.⁶ Third, in light of the point above, true assurance of salvation is lost in Arminian Methodism. As Lloyd-Jones points out, “If your persistence in grace and in salvation is dependent upon you, where is your assurance? … Would any man be eventually saved it if were left to us to persevere in grace? It is not a doctrine of assurance. It leaves it all back with me, and I am in all the uncertainty that I was in before.”⁷

He adds to these three primary reasons that an advantage of Calvinistic Methodism is that it keeps Methodism from degenerating into doctrineless mysticism, which has been a temptation for the more “experientially-inclined” believers within the church across the centuries. “Here, you have got the doctrines, but in addition you have got this other element, the ‘felt’ element; it is a perfect combination of both. Not only does it guarantee our doctrinal correctness, it also saves us in the realm of experience itself from many aberrations.”⁸

B. Why Calvinism needs Methodism

Additionally, in Lloyd-Jones’s view, Calvinistic Methodism is not only true Methodism. It’s also true Calvinism, and he lists the following dangers for Calvinistic theology when it is absent of the experiential, grounding, power of Methodism.

The first danger of Calvinism that is absent of a corresponding experience of God is that it has a tendency to settle for a cerebral faith. According to Lloyd-Jones, “Calvinism without Methodism tends to lead to intellectualism and scholasticism – that is its peculiar temptation. The result is that men talk more about ‘the Truth we hold’, rather than about ‘the Truth that holds us’.”⁹ When Calvinism takes hold only of the mind of a person rather than their entire life, Christianity is often diminished to a set of theological propositions, that replace a lived encounter with the risen Christ. Thus, for Lloyd-Jones, doctrine that becomes an end in itself depersonalises Christianity of Christ Himself, with those who fall into this dichotomic danger often mistaking theological precision for spiritual maturity or intimacy.

Second, Calvinism without Methodism is often in danger of elevating the Confessions of Faith to something that is functionally on par with Scripture, rather than subordinate to Scripture. He clarifies that this is not a given or definite danger, but a “tendency”.¹⁰ The Calvinistic Methodists committed to only preaching the Scriptures, not Catechisms or Confessions. To do otherwise was to court the danger of a subtle but significant shift in the locus of authority, that moved from the living word of God itself to historical summations of that word. This was the driving reason for which Lloyd-Jones referred to himself as a “Bible Calvinist” rather than a “system Calvinist”.¹¹

A third danger of Calvinism unhitched from Methodism is its tendency to discourage prayer. To Lloyd-Jones, “Calvinists who did not pray, were not Calvinists at all.”¹² Lloyd-Jones laments Calvinistic churches that have no prayer meetings at all, contrasting them with the Calvinistic Methodists who “were great men of prayer, and their churches were characterised by prayer meetings – warm, moving prayer meetings, which would sometimes last for hours and where great experiences would come to people.”¹³

This leads to a fourth danger of Calvinism without Methodism: joylessness. The tendency of churches that possess the former without the latter is that they often produce what Lloyd-Jones describes as a lifeless, harsh, and cold type of religion.¹⁴ And dead Calvinism is not true Calvinism at all. As he went on to assert, it is merely a caricature of the real thing; “a philosophy using Calvinistic terms”.¹⁵ On the contrary, he argues that true Calvinism possesses something of the fire of Methodism; true Calvinism “leads to feeling, to passion, to warmth, to praise, to thanksgiving”.¹⁶ True Calvinism emphasises the necessity of God the Holy Spirit – His actions and activity over and against the actions and activity of man; not our work for God, but His work for us and to us and in us; not our grasp upon Him, but His firm grasp upon us.¹⁷ Lloyd-Jones called people toward a spiritual tangibility of experience with God, which Reformed theology is meant to lead people into, writing: “So Calvinism of necessity leads to experiences, and to great emphasis upon experience; and these men, and all these older Calvinists were constantly talking about ‘visitations’, how the Lord had appeared to them, how the Lord had spoken to them … When have you last spoken about a ‘visitation’ from the Spirit of God? When did Christ last make Himself ‘real’ to you?”¹⁸

Lest one should mistakenly conclude that he advocated for a spirituality or mysticism unanchored from Scripture, Lloyd-Jones immediately reminds believers that the assurance of experiencing the real-time benefits of their status as a child of God – in which there is now a desire to commune with Him, speak to Him, and to truly know Him – must by necessity drive a person into a deeper love for God’s word.

“This is true Calvinism. And that, of course, leads to a love of His word. You meet Him in the word. The word instructs you as to how to find Him; it helps you to understand the visitations and the withdrawings. You live on the word. Nothing so drives a man to the word of God as true Calvinism.”¹⁹

The necessity of Biblical convergence

Herein is the cyclical nature of the convergence between the word and the Spirit; between doctrine and experience; between true Calvinism and true Methodism: the one understood fully and rightly, by necessity, leads to the other in perpetuity. This was the tension Lloyd-Jones saw in the Scriptures and the apostolic example, and in the examples of the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists. In fact, he saw little difference between the two, arguing that “the first Christians were the most typical Calvinistic Methodists of all”! ²⁰ In both the towering spirituality of the great apostles, as well as the ordinary Christianity of believers from all walks of life, he saw a people who were “dominated by a sense of the glory of God”, who were simultaneously known for “joy and rejoicing, praising God and thanking Him always ‘from house to house’ as they ate their bread together”. ²¹ A people of whom Peter could say: “Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory” (1 Peter 1v8 ESV). As far as Lloyd-Jones was concerned: “That is first-century Christianity! It is also the very essence of Calvinistic Methodism.”²²

The issue lay in the separation of two realities that Lloyd-Jones saw as belonging together in Scripture, and thus belonging together in the experience of believers. To him, something was gravely amiss when “people have emphasised either experience or doctrine at the expense of the other, and indeed they have been guilty, and still are, of putting up as contrasts things which clearly are meant to be complementary.”²³ Contrary to the claims of those who demand a hard dichotomy between the two, and as these essays will show, Lloyd-Jones demonstrates that experiencing the Holy Spirit and openness to the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit is thoroughly compatible with Reformed theology, and strengthens the church in both its witness and mission.

INTRODUCTION FOOTNOTES

1. B.B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles (London: Banner of Truth, 1972), 21.
2. For the purposes of this dissertation, the term “Charismatics” is used to cover “First Wave” Pentecostalism, “Second Wave” Charismatic Renewal, and “Third Wave” expressions of continuationism.
3. D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1987), 65-68.
4. Donald Macleod, “The Lloyd-Jones Legacy”, Monthly Record of the Free Church of Scotland (October 1983), 209.
5. Tim Stafford, “The Pentecostal Gold Standard”, Christianity Today 49:7 (July 2005), 26.
6. David W. Bebbington, “Lloyd-Jones and Interwar Calvinist Resurgence”, in Andrew Atherstone and David Ceri Jones (eds.), Engaging with Martyn Lloyd-Jones, (Nottingham, UK: Apollos, 2011), 58.
7. Vaughan S. Roberts, “Martyn Lloyd-Jones: A God-Glorifying Ministry”, Churchman 129:3 (Autumn 2015), 227. “Along with John Stott, Martyn Lloyd-Jones did more to shape British Evangelicalism in the twentieth century than anyone else.”
8. William K. Kay, “Martyn Lloyd-Jones’s Influence on Pentecostalism and Neo-Pentecostalism in the UK”, Journal of Pentecostal Theology 22:2 (Oct. 2013), 276.
9. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans: Their Origins and Successors, (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1987), 212.
10. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Prove All Things: The Sovereign Work of the Holy Spirit (Eastbourne: Kingsway, 1985), 33.
11. Andrew Atherstone, David Ceri Jones, and William K. Kay, “Lloyd-Jones and the Charismatic Controversy”, in Andrew Atherstone and David Ceri Jones (eds.), Engaging with Martyn Lloyd-Jones, (Nottingham, UK: Apollos, 2011), 132.
12. Peter Lewis, “Lessons for a Weak Church”, Renewal 115 (February–March 1985), as quoted in Ibid, 132.

PART ONE FOOTNOTES

1. Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans, 194.
2. David Ceri Jones, “A Glorious Morn? Methodism and the Rise of Evangelicalism in Wales, 1735-1762”, in Mark Smith (Ed.), British Evangelical Identities Past and Present: Aspects of the History and Sociology of Evangelicalism in Britain and Ireland, vol. 1, (Carlisle, UK: Paternoster Press), 98.
3. Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans, 193.
4. Ibid, 207.
5. Ibid. “I have never found an Arminian who can satisfactorily interpret 1 Corinthians 2:14: ‘The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, for they are spiritually discerned.’”
6. Ibid, 207-208.
7. Ibid, 208.
8. Ibid, 208-209.
9. Ibid, 209.
10. Ibid.
11. Christopher Catherwood, Martyn Lloyd-Jones: His Life and Relevance for the 21st Century, (IVP, 2015), 31.
12. Ibid, 211
13. Ibid, 210.
14. Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans, 210.
15. Ibid. “My argument is, that cold, sad, mournful, depressing Calvinism is not Calvinism at all. It is a caricature; something has gone wrong somewhere. It is mere intellectualism and philosophy. Calvinism leads to feeling, to passion, to warmth, to praise, to thanksgiving.”
16. Ibid, 212.
17. Ibid, 210.
18. Ibid, 210-211.
19. Ibid, 211.
20. Ibid, 213.
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Life in Christ: Studies in 1 John. The Original Five Volumes in One (Wheaton: Crossway, 2002), 400.