I asked this on a Reformed Christian
Coffeehouse:
What is effectual calling? And what does it
involve, and what is its effect?
Someone gave this answer:
Q. 31. What is effectual calling?
A. Effectual calling is the work of God’s
Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in
the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us
to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the gospel. (Westminster
Shorter Catechism)
I asked further:
"Who are those that are effectually
called, and what was their spiritual state?"
A reformed man gets very uptight with my
question... for what reason I know not what - just proud and cocksure, I think.
What do you think of the answer provided by
the WSC?
Do you agree with what it says?
-----------
PJ Walters
It is lacking. No, I do not agree.
Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit
being sent from the Father and vitally applying the righteousness and the blood
of the Son to an elect.
Yes, effectual calling "renews our
wills" and "enables us to embrace Jesus Christ."
No, effectual calling does not "convince
us of our sin and misery" or "enlighten our minds in the knowledge of
Christ" or "persuade us to embrace Jesus." The gospel call does
these things.
Am I lacking in this? Should I give greater
specificity?
Sing
Thanks for responding.
Why are reformed folks so reluctant to answer simple questions?
What are they fearful of if they have the truth?
So many [not all!] reformed people only know
how to regurgitate what they have been stuffed with...lacking capability to
digest what is fed to them. So they get uptight when queried.
What is effectual calling?
- who makes that calling?
- who are called, and what was their
spiritual state?
- what is the end of that calling?
- what is the efficacy of that calling?
I fear the WSC's answer is confusing the
effectual call and the gospel call, and obviously promoting gospel
regeneration! I will come to that!
Adam Wells
Isn't it called the "effectual"
call in order to distinguish it from the "non-effectual" call?
Jerry Chapin
"So many [not all!] reformed people only
know how to regurgitate what they have been stuffed with...lacking capability
to digest what is fed to them. So they get uptight when queried."
Bro. Sing, your statement reminds me of the
Mormon 'Messengers' and Jehovah's Witnesses when asked a question...one can
almost see the wheels turning...
Sing
Adam Wells, I believe your observation is on
target.
God's calling of an elect OUT OF his native
state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation is ALWAYS effectual, i.e.
always, without exception, accomplishing its end and purpose of the call.
The divine call of an elect out of his native
state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation is the direct and immediate
work of the Spirit of God, THUS always effectual, accomplishing its end. This
divine call is WITHOUT human instrumentality, completely the work of God.
This divine call, which is always effectual,
is distinguished from the gospel call which is ministered through the gospel
ministry, calling the hearers unto faith in Jesus Christ. The former is prior
to the latter, both logically and chronologically. The former makes the latter
possible. The former is solely through the free and sovereign activity of the
Spirit of God, without means, The latter is through the instrument of the
gospel ministry
This gospel call is intended SPECIFICALLY to
call those already effectually called by God to believe the truth of their
salvation. This call is not always effectual... which explains why many of
God's children continue to wallow in lies and fables!
The divine call to grace and salvation, and
the gospel call to faith in Jesus Christ are separate and distinct. But the
reformed people, typically gospel regenerationists, confuse the two and
understand the effectual call as the gospel call made effective to the
regeneration of those dead in trespasses and sins by the Holy Spirit.
Distinction is the essence of sound theology.
Mikal Smith
Humbly disagree with the Reformed answer.
Sing
What is your reason for disagreeing?
