C H Spurgeon’s Downgrade Controversy

The following post was copied and pasted from The Spurgeon Center for biblical preaching at Midwestern Seminary:  https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/blog-entries/what-was-the-downgrade-controversy-actually-all-about/

I’m posting the article because in the next post I am doing from the MLJ sermon series, Great Biblical Doctrines, as MLJ provided an overview of chapters 8-11 of Revelation, he emphasized that those events were examples of God punishing the men who had persecuted His people.

In the process, MLJ, noted that he believed that the 20th century contained many examples of this same punishment / judgment from God, because men had turned from God in the prior century.

I wanted to provide some specific examples of men turning from God in the 19th and 20th centuries; in these instances, this turning from God occurred in the mainstream church.

[MLJ was born in 1899 and died in 1981; to add some context to his remarks; therefore, he knew more than we do about the devastation of the world wars, but regarding the judgments of God that have been unfolding since the 1960’s, he only saw the beginning of that. MacArthur points out that all the movements that have unfolded in since the 1960’s are the result of God giving men over their own depravity.]

C H Spurgeon was one preacher that stood against that movement in his day wherein men began to turn from God by watering down Christian doctrine with secular ideas, AKA, modernism.

The article of this post speaks about that. Before I conclude this introduction, I also wanted to note 3 other men who have stood for the biblical gospel since Spurgeon.

Closest in time to Spurgeon, was in the 1920’s, J Gresham Machen. He wrote against church leaders that wanted to do away with the supernatural aspects of the Bible, Theological Liberals.  In his book, Christianity and Liberalism; he defined Theological Liberals as another religion altogether, a religion that used re-defined Christian terms; but they were definitely NOT Christian.

In the 1990’s, John MacArthur wrote against pragmatism in his book:  Ashamed of the Gospel: When the Church Becomes Like the World

MacArthur’s book basically confronted preachers for discarding the Bible and for believing that truth was defined by what worked [in evangelism]. Those men invented ways to expand the church that were based on the secular market-place model.

A pragmatic church, for example, will hold a concert to draw new “unchurched” people to the church. They believe that once they have created a new convert, their job is done. They see their purpose as making converts. I have heard Steven Furtick say that very thing. He is in a line of ‘unqualified’ pastors that goes back to Spurgeon’s day, still busy corrupting the biblical gospel.

The biblical model of a church is that it should provide spiritual food that promotes conversion, and for those already born again, to feast upon, facilitating growth in grace. In such a church, believers seek God, by hearing His word preached; by private and corporate prayer…. Regarding new converts, they ask God for those, they don’t make the church worldly such that potential converts will be attracted to the “new” church.

In the book of Acts, there are a half-dozen examples of the following verse:

Acts, 2:47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number daily those who were being saved. That is, God builds His church, not men.

R C Sproul speaks to these matters in his series, The Consequence of Ideas. How ideas from the Enlightment period, led men to think they did not need God and that they could create a utopia on earth by themselves: scientific discoveries, especially in the field of medicine contributed much to such thinking.

The theory of Marxism arose during that time…. Thereafter, the world wars proved that men could not create their own utopia, though Marxism is still alive in the world, pretending to be concerned with such things; it has always resulted in totalitarian regimes wherein a few oppress the many, resulting in millions of deaths via starvation, firing squad, war….

[Look at the CCP, that is the model the globalists intend to install in America when a sufficient amount of “useful idiots” support their efforts. See link to post on Useful Idiots below.]

Sproul noted that philosophies like those of Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Paul Sartre became popular because they explained how men came to see the world after the horrors of the world wars, the Nazi death camps, the millions slain in wars…. That is, after men knew that creating a utopia on earth was far beyond them (despite all their sophistication and education).

Many of those who turned from God apparently did not believe that returning to Him was an alternative for them; instead, they developed philosophies like Existentialism.

Sproul also spoke of the following as factors in this movement from God: the industrial revolution, with new scientific discoveries, belief in the theory of evolution….

According to MLJ, such things were unfolding in 20th century history due to man turning from God in the 19th; furthermore, MLJ pointed out another piece of the puzzel that is easier for us to testify to: when God judges unregenerate man, he becomes enraged, not repentant (the movements noted just below, are at least, in part, an expression of men’s rage against God).

It seems to me that the case could be made that God’s punishment has become more severe as apparent in movements that I’ve heard MacArthur address, especially when he preaches on Romans 1: the hippy drug movement; the free-love movement; the women’s movement; the homosexual movement; and the transexual movement. MacArthur noted that he always wondered what the reprobate mind would look like, he presently believes that it is manifested in a man’s statement that he is a woman.

Linked at the end of this post are other posts from this blog wherein MacArthur spoke on Spurgeon’s Downgrade Controversy in an 11-minute description of the problems Spurgeon was addressing; he went on to speak on pragmatism also and noted the impact of each upon the church.

Also linked is a post on Machen’s efforts to defend orthodox Christianity; also, a post on the Christian Worldview, from my notes on R C Sproul’s series on that topic.

Begin article of this post on Spurgeon’s Downgrade Controversy:

What Was the Downgrade Controversy Actually All About?

Alex DiPrima January 17, 2022

“For my part, I am quite willing to be eaten of dogs for the next fifty years; but the more distant future shall vindicate me.”[1] Spurgeon spoke these fateful words at the conclusion of his presidential address at the Annual College Conference, a gathering of current and former students of the Pastors’ College. He voiced them in the midst of the greatest conflict of his life, often referred to as the Downgrade Controversy. He was tired, discouraged, and disillusioned, yet also calm, resolute, and certain. He had made his stand for the truth, and he felt sure he could endure whatever opposition would come, confident in the knowledge that he had his Lord’s approval.

Most people familiar with Spurgeon’s story have at least a working knowledge of the Downgrade Controversy, which in many ways defined the final years of Spurgeon’s life. But if you ask people to identify the exact issues that were under debate, few would be able to name them. So what was the Downgrade all about after all?

In the famous controversy, Spurgeon had four main grievances with the men of his denomination, the Baptist Union. He summarizes them in one of the early articles that precipitated the Downgrade Controversy, “We cannot hold the inspiration of the Word, and yet reject it; we cannot believe in the atonement and deny it;… we cannot recognize the punishment of the impenitent and yet indulge the ‘larger hope.’ One way or the other we must go. Decision is the virtue of the hour.”[2]

Here we see that Spurgeon was concerned that some within the denomination were either flirting with, or in some cases openly promoting the following errors:

  1. The denial of the infallibility of Scripture.
  2. The denial of the necessity and substitutionary nature of Christ’s atonement.
  3. The denial of the existence and eternality of hell.
  4. The affirmation of universalism.[3]

Whatever one may notice about the above list, at least two things should stand out.

First, all four of these issues are doctrinal issues. Second, not only are they doctrinal, but they are matters of basic Christian orthodoxy, of first importance, and have to do with doctrines that have been universally affirmed by the church throughout its history. The infallibility of Scripture, the necessity and substitutionary nature of the atonement, the existence of an eternal hell, and the doctrine of divine wrath for all those who do not possess true saving faith in Christ are doctrines as old as Christianity itself. To deny them is to deny some of the most basic tenets of the Christian faith. In other words, Spurgeon’s stand in the Downgrade Controversy, simply put, was about defending matters of basic Christian orthodoxy. These were the only issues that would lead him to withdraw from his denomination in the autumn of 1887.

That last line is important. It might be asked, why was Spurgeon content to remain so long in the Baptist Union? Someone might answer that he must not have had disagreements with members of his denomination prior to the Downgrade Controversy. But that would of course be wrong, spectacularly so. The truth is Spurgeon maintained many disagreements with men in his denomination on a wide range of other issues for decades before the Downgrade Controversy.

Most of these issues fell under two main categories. First, Spurgeon disagreed with others in the Baptist Union over secondary doctrinal issues. For example, Spurgeon, a vocal proponent of Calvinism, remained in fellowship with men of Arminian persuasion. He disagreed with such men passionately and publicly, yet he continued to associate with them, completely content in doing so. He disagreed with men over the use of instruments in worship, whether or not communion should be open or closed, and how evangelism should be conducted. These and a host of other disagreements over second-tier doctrinal matters could be enumerated, and yet none of them ever suggested to Spurgeon that he should divide from men in his denomination.

The second category of disagreement between Spurgeon and others of his colleagues in the Baptist Union was differences over social, political, and cultural issues. Spurgeon held disagreements with some of the men in his denomination over whether or not ministers should frequent the theater, over the relative use of public schools, and over which political candidates should be supported. He disagreed with others on the temperance movement, the question of Irish Home Rule, the role of state paternalism in economic affairs, British foreign policy, and the best methods for relieving the poor. Many of these disagreements with his peers in the Baptist Union over social and political issues were often private, though sometimes public. At times they came to represent deep personal differences, yet none of these matters ever precipitated a serious division or schism between Spurgeon and his denomination. Spurgeon simply would not allow it to be so.

In light of these simple, yet important historical observations, I draw the following three conclusions:

  1. The Downgrade Controversy was about doctrinal matters that went to the very heart of Christian orthodoxy. Spurgeon would allow only such matters to become the grounds for separation and schism between him and his denomination.
  2. Spurgeon was comfortable being in denominational fellowship with men with whom he held numerous disagreements on second-tier doctrinal matters and on social, political, and cultural issues, as long as he shared basic agreement with them on matters that were essential to evangelical orthodoxy.
  3. Spurgeon believed that in order for true gospel unity to be authentic, there had to be a basic foundation of agreement on matters of primary doctrinal importance, particularly on those doctrines that were at the heart of the gospel itself. However, agreement on secondary doctrinal issues, or still further, agreement on social and political matters, were not necessary for true unity in the gospel to exist. Indeed, to insist on unity in such matters would be to require something more than unity in the gospel for fellowship and partnership.

Many in our day style themselves as modern Spurgeons standing against what they perceive as the various downgrades of today. Yet if they are to resemble Spurgeon himself and his original stand against downgrade in his own denomination, such stands will be on matters of primary doctrinal significance, not matters of legitimate disagreement between brothers and sisters who share the same orthodox doctrine, and in some cases, even the same confession of faith. The fact is Spurgeon was not willing to be eaten of dogs over his views regarding politics or second-order doctrines. Nor did he boast of the distant future’s verdict in these matters. However, with respect to issues of basic Christian orthodoxy, he beckoned the dogs to come, and he looked to Judgment Day for vindication.

[1] C. H. Spurgeon, An All-Round Ministry: Direction, Wisdom, and Encouragement for Preachers and Pastors, (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2018), 281.

[2] C. H. Spurgeon, The Sword and the Trowel (London: Passmore and Alabaster, September 1887): 465.

[3] For more information on the Downgrade Controversy, see Mark Hopkins, Nonconformity’s Romantic Generation: Evangelical and Liberal Theologies in Victorian England (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2006), 193–248.

Alex DiPrima is the Senior Pastor of Emmanuel Church in Winston Salem, NC. He holds a Ph.D. from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in historical theology with an emphasis on the ministry of Charles Spurgeon.

LINKS TO OTHER STUDIES ON SPURGEON’S DOWNGRADE; MACHEN’S FIGHT AGAINST THEOLOGICAL LIBERALISM AND MACARTHUR’S PRAGMATISM: 

THE DOWNGRADE CONTROVERSY: WHAT IS IT; ITS IMPACT ON THE CURRENT CHURCH: PART 1

The following 11-minute video by John MacArthur explains C.H. Spurgeon’s downgrade concept. Dr. MacArthur explains how it parallels the problem the current church has with pragmatism.

https://sheeplywolves.com/the-downgrade-controversy-what-is-it-its-impact-on-the-current-church-part-1/

THE DECLINE OF PROTESTANT CHRISTIANITY IN THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY HAS IMPACTED YOU TODAY [Machen’s struggle against Theological Liberalism]

This post is a crash-course in the decline of the Christian church since the late 19th century. The purpose herein is to help you assess the quality of your own faith as you come to understand what Christian Liberalism is and how it is harming Christendom.

https://sheeplywolves.com/the-decline-of-protestant-christianity-in-the-early-20th-century-has-impacted-you-today/

GRESHAM MACHEN’S CLASSIC BOOK CHRISTIANITY AND LIBERALISM – LIGONIER MINISTRIES

This post contains two short videos about J Gresham Machen; the first is on his book Christianity and Liberalism. Therein, Stephen Nichols explains the controversy which led Machen to write his book.

https://sheeplywolves.com/j-gresham-machens-classic-book-christianity-and-liberalism-ligonier-ministries/

R C SPROUL’S CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW DVD SUMMARIZED FROM MY NOTES

I made very brief notes on Sproul’s Worldview DVD as I listened. I knew I wouldn’t be able to remember all those different philosophies that exist in our culture presently, so I created some ‘nutshell’ definitions for my own reference.

I think Christians would benefit from hearing Sproul’s DVD on the various philosophical belief systems alive in our culture, hopefully, this will whet some Christian’s appetites for studying Sproul. One would certainly come away with a fuller understanding by listening to Sproul’s lectures.

https://sheeplywolves.com/r-c-sprouls-christian-worldview-dvd-summarized-from-my-notes/

VLADIMIR LENIN CALLED THEM “USEFUL IDIOTS:”

https://sheeplywolves.com/vladimir-lenin-called-them-useful-idiots/

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.