Augustine and Owen On Perseverance

Henry Knapp

Although Augustine wrote two major treatises focusing upon the doctrine of
perseverance and commented on the doctrine in various other works,1 there is a
significant lack of studies examining his thought or its influence on the
development of Christian theology. There are a few notable exceptions which
examine the role of perseverance in Augustine’s overall thought, trace
Augustine’s doctrine through the medieval doctors, and even focus upon the
major treatises themselves.2 Nevertheless, the absence of detailed study on this
aspect of Augustine’s work manifests itself in the confusion evident in the limited
literature which does exist.
Most surveys of perseverance are content to note Augustine as the original
formulator of the doctrine and the parallels of Augustine’s thought with that of the
Reformers and their followers.3 These surveys, as well as other studies,4 are quick
to point out, however, that Augustine’s perseverance doctrine differed
significantly from the Reformers and the Puritans in its subjective effect on the
believer. Whereas Augustine resisted the doctrine’s
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 66
tendency to assure the believer of eternal salvation, for the Reformers and
Puritans certainty of one’s salvation is a main (or the main) function of stressing

Dr. Knapp did his Ph.D. dissertation on Owen at Calvin Theological Seminary (2002), and currently serves
as associate pastor of First Presbyterian Church of Beave, Pennsylvani.

1. De dono perseverantiae; De correptione et gratia; De gratia et libero arbitrio; De praedestinatione

sanctum; In Joannis Evangelium, LIII; De doctrina Christiana, iii:32; De civitate Dei, x.23; xi.12; xii.7;
xx.6.

2. Reinhold Seeberg, Text-book of the History of Doctrines (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1966), 338–50; Henri de
Lubac, Augustinianism and Modern Theology (New York: Herder & Herder, 1969), 92–95; Dennis Martin,
“Popular and Monastic Pastoral Issues in the Later Middle Ages,” Church History 56 (1987) 320-32; Heiko
Oberman, Forerunners of the Reformation: The Shape of Medieval Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1981), 157–60; John Gerstner, “Augustine on Irresistible Grace,” in H. Vander Goot, ed., Life Is Religion
(St. Catharines: Paideia Press, 1981), 135–58; Mary Lesousky, The De Dono Perseverantiae of Saint
Augustine (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1956).

3. Adolf Harnack, History of Dogma, vol. 5 (Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1897); Robert Shank, Life in the
Son: A Study of the Doctrine of Perseverance (Springfield: Westcott, 1975); G. T. Thompson, “Assurance,”
Evangelical Quarterly 14 (1942) 2-8; Louis Berkhof, The Assurance of Faith (Grand Rapids: Smitter Book
Co., 1928); G. C. Berkouwer, Faith and Perseverance (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958); D. A. Carson,
“Reflections on Assurance,” in T. Schreiner and B. Ware, eds., The Grace of God, The Bondage of the Will,
vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 383–412; Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1932).

4. Mark Vanderschaaf, “Predestination and Certainty of Salvation in Augustine and Calvin,” Reformed
Review 30 (1976) 1-8; Perry Miller, The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1939).
 the gift of perseverance.5 However, this assessment is far from universally held;
numerous writers maintain that Augustine did hold a weak doctrine of personal
assurance, implying that if a believer is living faithfully he may assure himself
that he will persevere and hence is part of the elect.6 Others insist that Augustine’s
hesitancy to adopt a doctrine of personal assurance reveals the “curious nature” of
his views on perseverance and that ultimately “Augustine’s doctrine of
perseverance was quite unlike that of the Protestant Reformers.”7
This essay will seek to establish the level of continuity and difference which
exists between Augustine’s understanding of perseverance and that promoted by a
representative theologian from seventeenth-century England, the Puritan John
Owen. After setting the historical context of the relevant writings and a brief
summary of the major argument of the works, the specific formulations of
Augustine and Owen on perseverance will be examined; the similarities of the
two theologians’ thought will be noted and an assessment of what may account
for their differences will be attempted.

I. Augustine’s De correptione et gratia

It appears that Augustine’s comments in his letter to Sixtus on the completely
gratuitous nature of grace as a gift of God and the denial of all human merit
before its reception caused quite a stir in the monastery at Hadrumetum. A
number within the monastery opposed this teaching since it seemed to set aside
their practices of asceticism.8 When questioned by representatives from the abbey,
Augustine wrote a new treatise on grace, De gratia et libero arbitrio. In this work,
Augustine argues for both the doctrine
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 67
of free will under divine influence and the absolute gratuity of grace. However, on
the question of free will, he mainly emphasizes its radical inability to assure the
beginning, continuation of, or perseverance of the saint into eternal life.

5. See detailed studies of assurance in Puritan theology in Joel Beeke, Assurance of Faith: Calvin, English
Puritanism, and the Dutch Second Reformation (New York: Peter Lang, 1991); Richard Hawkes, “The
Logic of Assurance in English Puritan Theology,” Westminster Theological Journal 52 (1990) 247-61;
Philip Hughes, Theology of the English Reformers (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980); Gordon Keddie,
“‘Unfallible Certenty of the Pardon of Sinne and Life Everlasting’: The Doctrine of Assurance in the
Theology of William Perkins,” Evangelical Quarterly 48 (1976) 230-44; David King, “The Affective
Spirituality of John Owen,” Evangelical Quarterly 68 (1996) 223-33; John von Rohr, The Covenant of
Grace in Puritan Thought (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986).

6. Larry Sharp, “The Doctrines of Grace in Calvin and Augustine,” Evangelical Quarterly 52 (1980) 84-96,
esp. 92; J. C. Ryle, Holiness (Grand Rapids: Associated Publishers and Authors, 1971), 216; John Zens,
“The Doctrine of Assurance: A History and an Application,” Baptist Reformation Review 5 (1976) 34-35.

7. Arthur McGiffert, A History of Christian Thought, vol. 2 (New York: Scribner’s, 1954), 96. Cf., Beeke,
Assurance of Faith, 11–13; Henry Robins, The Basis of Assurance in Recent Protestant Theologies (Kansas
City: Charles E. Brown, 1912).

8. Augustine, De gratia et libero arbitrio, 1, in NPNF, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 436–65.
 Abbot Valentinus assured Augustine that De gratia et libero arbitrio was well
received and had reestablished peace in the monastery.9 However, apparently
upon reading Augustine’s work, some within the monastery concluded, since the
continuation and perseverance in grace was a gift of God, that one should not be
corrected or blamed for his faults, backsliding, or spiritual failings. 10 In response
to this new misunderstanding, Augustine wrote De correptione et gratia, where
he explicitly rejects this conclusion and affirms the necessity of correction and
rebuke for fallen believers. The first section of this treatise treats the efficacy of
grace and the importance of discipline and admonition in the Christian life. The
remaining portion of the work concerns the grace of perseverance and the
consequent role of moral living of the believer. In Augustine’s own opinion, De
correptione et gratia is his fullest and best expression of the gratuitous nature of
God’s persevering one to the end.11 He argues here that a believer who loses his
faith bears the sole blame for such a loss, but one who retains faith demonstrates
the gift of persevering grace. He further argues that no one of the elect perishes—
those who in life fall away are, and forever have been, part of the reprobate.12 On
the other hand, if one of the elect were to fall away, God would necessarily insure
that that person will eventually repent and return to the church.13 Augustine does
not try to delve into the mysteries of why God grants perseverance to some and
not to others, but rests upon Paul’s words, “Oh the depth of the riches of the
wisdom and knowledge of God!” ( Rom 11:33 ).14 The core teaching of this
treatise, however, that one’s perseverance to the end is solely a work of grace by
God, is vividly expressed throughout. It was to defend this understanding of the
completely gratuitous nature of persevering grace that led Augustine to write his
final work on perseverance, De dono perseverantiae.

II. Augustine’s De dono perseverantiae

Although the Pelagian heresy, against which Augustine struggled through out
the second decade of the fifth century, was condemned by Pope Zozimus in 418,
there was a remnant of some Pelagian “heirs” who continued to
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 68
resist the Augustinian formulation of grace. To these thinkers, and their historical
counterparts, the name “Semi-pelagians” is now commonly given.15 Against these

9. Augustine, De correptione et gratia, 1, in NPNF, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 468–91.

10. Ibid., 2, 3, 5.

11. Augustine, De dono perseverantiae, 55, in NPNF, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 521–52.

12. De correptione, 5, 12, 16, 23.

13. Ibid., 16, 23.

14. Ibid., 17.

15. While the term Semi-pelagianism is a relatively modern expression—first appearing only in the
sixteenth century—it is clear that the last opponents Augustine lived to write against were those who held
beliefs similar, although not identical, to Pelagius.
 teachers, Augustine wrote his last treatise on grace which has come down to us in
two parts, De praedestinatione sanctorum and De dono perseverantiae.
De dono perseverantiae is addressed to Prosper and Hilary, two supporters of
Augustine in Gaul who were attempting to defend the Augustinian notion of
grace. It appears that the abbot of the monastery of Saint Victor in Marseilles,
John Cassian, doubted the absolute gratuity of grace as described by Augustine in
his writings against Pelagius.16 In doing this, however, Cassian and his followers
denied the teaching of Pelagius that natural man has the ability to obtain eternal
life apart from the internal work of grace. These Semi-pelagians admitted the
necessity of grace for some works and that salvation apart from the merit of Christ
is impossible. With Augustine, they accepted the doctrines of original sin, the
necessity of baptism, and the importance of the internal work of the Holy Spirit.
Nevertheless, they maintained that the beginning of salvation ( initium fidei ) and
the believer’s perseverance in faith ( perseverantis fidei ) to the end depend upon
the man himself. They taught that, through one’s own natural powers, a person
must make a necessary, positive preparation for the reception of God’s grace. By
piously seeking it, the person attains the necessary gift of grace to live in faith.
Similarly, the grace of final perseverance is received when one, without any
special assistance from God, perseveres in the initial grace received. In this
formulation of perseverance—where the focus is not upon the will of God but on
the ability of man—the Semi-pelagians denied the Augustinian concept of
predestination, insisting instead that the term referred to God’s foreknowledge of
those who would of their own accord believe. “The error of the Massilians”
resulted from the failure of these men to explain satisfactorily the harmony of two
truths—the absolute gratuity of grace and yet the necessity of moral living.
Consequently, they concluded that either all grace is not completely gracious, or
that man’s efforts in holiness are useless. Unwilling to concede the latter,
numerous monks in Gaul maintained that both the beginning and end of faith are
not gifts of God, but reside in man’s power; God does not orient the mind and will
of a person to believe and continue in belief, but he grants other graces when
asked for in faith. Christ’s work is necessary, but no man’s will is so depraved
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 69
or destroyed that it cannot will to be cured. Consequently, these teachers seek “to
assure us that we have faith itself of ourselves, but that its increase is of God; as if
faith were not given to us by Him, but were only increased in us by Him, on the
ground of the merit of its having begun from us.”17
In the first portion of his treatise, De praedestinatione sanctorum, Augustine
seeks to demonstrate that the initial act of grace in a believer is not the result of
one’s own natural state or merit, but dependent solely upon God. In opposition to

16. Much of the history and background to Semi-pelagianism and Augustine’s response to the movement
can be found in Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo (London: Faber, 1967), 340–407; Lesousky, The De
Dono Perseverantiae of Saint Augustine, 1–101; Richard Kyle, “Semi-Pelagianism” in Walter Elwell, ed.,
Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 1000–1001; Seeberg, Text-book, 368–
82; Johannes Quasten, Patrology, vol. IV (Allen: Christian Classics, n.d.), 433–45.

17. De praedestinatione sanctum, 3, in NPNF, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 493–519. Cf., 39,
40, 43.
 the semi-pelagians, Augustine taught that the initium fidei is completely a gift of
God. In De dono perseverantiae, Augustine turns to the semi-pelagians’ second
error concerning perseverance: “Now, however, I am arguing not concerning the
beginning of faith, of which, I have already spoken much in the former book, but
of that perseverance which must be had even to the end,—which assuredly even
the saints, who do the will of God, seek when they say in prayer, ‘Thy will be
done.’”18
Augustine demonstrates that perseverance is a gracious gift of God by
examining the testimony of the Scriptures, his own previous writings, and the
teaching of the church. The bulk of Augustine’s argument, however, centers on
the observation that believers daily pray to God for perseverance—if perseverance
was not a gift of God, the church would not pray for it. If we pray for
perseverance, then we believe that God can grant the perseverance, and hence we
demonstrate that it is a gift. If we do not believe this, then our prayers are
perfunctory.19 Along the way, Augustine confronts a number of theological
concerns about perseverance. Thus, a bulk of his treatise is taken up with the
question of predestination which naturally undergirds his doctrine of
perseverance. As before, Augustine also confronts the question of God’s motive
in choosing some for salvation and passing over others; he answers, “how
inscrutable are God’s judgements!”20 Augustine is also not unaware of the
pastoral implication of what he is teaching. Thus, he asserts the necessity of
teaching perseverance as well as the cautionary nature of one’s presentation of the
doctrine in the final sections of the treatise.21

III. The Saints’ Perseverance in Seventeenth-century England

In rejecting the Reformed formulations of the perseverance of the saints early
in the seventeenth century, the Remonstrants in Holland had asserted that “true
believers can fall from true faith and can fall into such sins as cannot be consistent
with true and justifying faith; not only is it possible
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 70
for this to happen, but it even happens frequently.”22 In England, in the middle of
the seventeenth-century, similar arguments were used by devout Puritans who
were afraid that the doctrine of perseverance would lead to carnal security, a
mind-set detrimental to piety and holiness.23

18. Ibid., 6.

19. De perseverantiae, 3–9, 63.

20. Ibid., 18-33.

21. Ibid., 57-62.

22. Sententiae Remonstrantium, J. N. Bakhuizen Vanden Brink, De Nederlandsche Belijenisgeschriften

(Amsterdam, 1940), V.iii, 287.

23. Dewey Wallace, Puritans and Predestination (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982),
130–44, discusses the rise of a pietistic Arminianism in England.
 One such Puritan was John Goodwin. Goodwin (1593–1665) was one of the
foremost of the sectarian Arminians—those who separated from the Church of
England, retaining much of its Laudian Arminianism, yet sharing the Puritan
notions of piety, spirituality and ecclesiastical reform. Goodwin “was one of the
most extraordinary men of the age. He was an Arminian and a republican; a man
of violence both in politics and religion and whose controversial powers were of
the highest order.”24 He lived his life “estranged, by singular idiosyncrasy of
opinions, from all the leading parties of his time” and placed himself “against
every man, and had almost every man against him.”25
His major work, Redemption Redeemed, discusses two points of the conflict
between Arminians and Calvinists, universal redemption and the perseverance of
the saints; the latter naturally arising out of the former when Goodwin attempted
to demonstrate that Christ died for some who ultimately perish, even though for a
while they appeared as part of the elect. Goodwin objected to the inconsistency
between the promises of perseverance and the exhortations used by the Scriptures
and its expositors whereby perseverance may be assured.26 He was further
concerned with the moral consequences of the kind of Calvinism promoted by the
more orthodox Puritans. This was especially true of the doctrine of eternal
perseverance which he claimed led to a false confidence and moral declension in
Christians. “That doctrine which asserteth a possibility even of a final defection
from faith, in true believers, well understood, riseth up in the cause of godliness
with a far higher hand, than the common opinion about their perseverance.”27
Consequently, the middle third of Goodwin’s Redemption Redeemed is a lengthy
critique of the Reformed doctrine of perseverance, and promotes instead “the
possibility of the saints’ declining even to destruction.”28 Following an
introduction to the Reformed belief and the counter position, Goodwin spends
most of his efforts demonstrating from Scripture the fallibility of the Reformed
formulation, and his own biblical grounds for
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 71
asserting the real potential of the final apostasy of true, elect Christians. In
Redemption Redeemed, Goodwin’s attack on perseverance was, according to one
critic, “plausible and imposing, but more showy than solid,” and “like most
Arminian writers, he caricatures Calvinism in order to expose it to the dislike of
his readers.”29

24. William Orme, Life of the Reverend John Owen (Choteau, MT: Gospel Mission, 1981), 91.
25. John Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance Explained and Confirmed, in The Works of John
Owen, Vol. XI (Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1991), 2. For further biographical information on
Goodwin, see Wallace, Puritans and Predestination, 108, 130–33; Orme, Life of John Owen, 90–92; L.
Stephen and S. Lee, eds., Dictionary of National Biography (London: University Press, 1986), Vol. XXII:
145–48.
26. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance, 461.
27. John Goodwin, Apolytrosis Apolytroseos, or Redemption Redeemed (London, 1651), 364.
28. Ibid., 226.
29. Orme, Life of John Owen, 91.
 IV. John Owen’s The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance
Goodwin’s Redemption Redeemed generated numerous responses from the
Reformed camp in England,30 but by far the most prolific and extensive was
produced by John Owen (1616–1683). Owen is widely regarded as the greatest
English Puritan theologian. He wrote extensively on theological and pastoral
issues and served as the vice-chancellor of Oxford University during Cromwell’s
Protectorate.31 Having already dealt with the notion of universal redemption in his
treatise, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, Owen discusses the orthodox
understanding of perseverance in The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance. Of
this work, Joel Beeke claims, “for sheer profundity of thought, thoroughness of
exposition, and consistent rigor of application, none in the Reformed camp
writing on perseverance and assurance have surpassed Owen’s magisterial pen.”32
A massive work, Owen’s The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance is a
systematic rebuttal of Goodwin’s rejection of the doctrine. Owen refutes both the
individual arguments contained within Redemption Redeemed and the overall
assumptions of the author. He quickly concedes the presence of backsliders and
apostates within the visible church. However, Owen asserts that the Arminian
classification of all professors of religion as true, genuine believers is both
unscriptural and inaccurate; he demonstrates that the scriptural references to those
who fall away refer to those who were never truly elect in the first place. 33 In a
positive direction, Owen grounds the doctrine of perseverance in the immutability
of the nature of God, his promises, covenant, and eternal purposes. The salvation
of God’s elect is sure because it is linked ultimately to the unchangeable nature of
God
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 72
himself.34 What most inflamed Owen was not his opponent’s opposition to the
saints’ perseverance, but his distortion of the Reformed doctrine. Goodwin
portrayed the notion of believer’s security as undermining the Christian’s
motivation to strive for holiness and godliness. He maintained that the doctrine of
perseverance naturally gives rise to lawlessness and disregard for morality, and
denied the significance of Scripture’s exhortations and commands. Owen,
however, points out that God perseveres his saints in holiness, not despite its

30. Richard Resbury, Some Stop to the Gangrene of Arminianism Lately Promoted by M. John Goodwin
(London, 1651); Richard Resbury, The Lightless-Starre, or, Mr. John Goodwin Discovered a Pelagio-
Socinian (London, 1652); George Kendall, Theokratia, or, A Vindication of the Doctrine Commonly
Received in the Reformed Churches Concerning Gods Intentions of Special Grace and Favour to His Elect
in the Death of Christ (London, 1653); George Kendall, Sancti Sanciti, or, The Common Doctrine of the
Perseverance of the Saints (London, 1654); Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance.

31. Further biographical information on Owen can be found in Peter Toon, God’s Statesman: The Life and
Work of John Owen (Exeter: Paternoster, 1971); Sinclair Ferguson, John Owen on the Christian Life
(Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1987); Orme, Life of John Owen .

32. Beeke, Assurance of Faith , 214.

33. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 79–107.

34. Ibid., chapters II-IX.

 absence. Justification is infallibly linked to sancti fication, stimulating love and
obedience to God. In Owen’s opinion, Goodwin had distorted the orthodox
understanding by saying it teaches preservation without perseverance. This
frustrated Owen who pointed out the comple mentary truths of the Reformed
doctrine: perseverance of the saints coupled with continuing belief, love for God,
and the living of godly lives.35 For Owen, the promise of eternal security went
hand in hand with the call to persevere in faithfulness.
In addition to his Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance, Owen also dealt with
the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints in two other works; in his exegetical
comments on Heb 6:4–6 in his major An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
and a treatise on apostasy entitled The Nature of Apostasy from the Profession of
the Gospel. The latter work was published at a time when Owen was concerned
about the decline in religion, and reflects his pastoral concerns. In it he sought “an
inquiry into the nature, causes, and occasions of the present defection that is in the
world from the truth, holiness, and worship of the Gospel.”36 Except for a few
introductory comments, the first chapter of this work is simply a word for word
rendition of his exegesis of Heb 6:4–6 as laid out in An Exposition of Hebrews.37
The work is a painstaking exposition in which his skills as an exegete and an
orthodox theologian coincide.

V. The Doctrine of Perseverance for Augustine and Owen

The following five points demonstrate the level of correlation and distinction
between Augustine’s and Owen’s formulation of the doctrine of perseverance.
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 73

1. Perseverance as a Free Gift of God

The completely gratuitous nature of the gift of perseverance obviously
underlies all of Augustine’s De dono perseverantiae. In the treatise he is
attempting to correct the “Semi-pelagian” notion that, while grace is freely given
from God when a believer requests it, the responsibility for persevering in faith to
the end rests firmly with the believer himself. This goal is plainly stated in the
first chapter—“I assert, therefore, that the perseverance by which we persevere in

35. Robert Peterson, “Christian Assurance: Its Possibility and Foundations,” Presbyterion 18 (1992) 10.

36. John Owen, The Nature of Apostasy from the Profession of the Gospel and the Punishment of Apostates
Declared , in The Works of John Owen , Vol. VII (Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1991), 11.

37. John Owen, An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews , in The Works of John Owen , Vol. XXI
(Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1991). In the Goold Works edition, pages 11–40 of volume VII correspond
directly to pages 67–91 of volume XXI. For convenience, the pagination from the Hebrews commentary
will be followed below. Although the treatise on apostasy was published before the third Hebrews volume
(which contains the 6:4–6 pericope), from the style of writing, etc., it is most likely that Owen had first
completed his exegetical work in the commentary before authoring The Nature of Apostasy . See also, John
Owen, A Practical Exposition Upon Psalm CXXX , vol. VI: 324–648; Two Short Catechisms , vol. I: 464–
94, and Communion with God , vol. II: 2–275.
 Christ even to the end is the gift of God”—and is frequently reiterated thereafter.
For instance,

it is shown with sufficient clearness that the grace of God, which

both begins a man’s faith and which enables it to persevere unto
the end, is not given according to our merits, but is given according
to His own most secret and at the same time most righteous, wise,
and beneficent will; since those whom He predestinated, them He
also called. 38

The proof Augustine offers in this work was mentioned above; however, it is
worth reemphasizing his main point: by praying for perseverance, as
demonstrated through the Lord’s Prayer, Christians show that perseverance is a
gift; if it was not a gift, there would be no purpose in praying for it—“for if the
Church actually asks these gifts from God, but thinks they are given to her
because of herself, she offers not true, but perfunctory (perfunctorias), prayers.”39
Augustine labors here to exalt the grace of God in the whole economy of
salvation, from beginning (as stressed in the prior De praedestinatione
sanctorum) to end. As Mary Lesousky has summarized: “Augustine wrote the De
dono perseverantiae to defend God’s rights: His right to man’s acknowledging
Him as the One Who gives grace, and consequently, His right to man’s
petitioning Him for graces needed, and thanking Him for graces received.” 40
The gratuitous nature of perseverance is also a latent theme in Augustine’s De
correptione et gratia. While perseverance as a gift of God is not the main thrust of
the treatise, this concept is what initiated the monks’ questioning concerning the
necessity of pastoral admonitions. These monks reasoned that, if a believer
perseveres solely on account of God’s granting to them a free and unmerited gift,
then there was no reason for one human to rebuke or correct another’s moral or
spiritual failings. Though Augustine spends much of the opening chapters of this
book on defining correptione, he never relinquishes his insistence on the gracious
character of perseverance. “To this indeed, we are not able to deny, that
perseverance in good,
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 74
progressing even to the end, is also a great gift of God; and that it exists not save
it come from Him of whom it is written, ‘Every best gift and every perfect gift is
from above, coming down from the Father of lights.’”41 For Augustine, the key
aspect of the whole discussion was the centrality of God’s grace operating in the

38. De perseverantiae , 33.

39. Ibid., 63; Augustine, In Joannis Evangelium , 8, in NPNF , vol. 7 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 7-
452.

40. Lesousky, The De Dono Perseverantiae of Saint Augustine , Cf., De praedestinatione , 9–10.

41. De correptione , 10. See also, 6; 9; 17; 19; 38.

 salvation of men; this theme controls his formulation and expression of the
doctrine of perseverance.42
In The Saints’ Perseverance, John Owen has a different, though related
controlling theme. He tackles those who want to argue that genuine believers can
and do fall away totally from grace. Owen assumes that perseverance is part of
the gift of salvation which is incurred on believers’ behalf by Jesus Christ. While
not a central part of his discussion, this gratuitous character of perseverance is
nevertheless a foundational assumption in Owen’s argumentation. Thus, Owen
explicitly mentions Augustine and affirms his opinion that perseverance should be
rendered “as a gift superadded to faith and love.”43 Further, Owen recounts the
historical occasion of Augustine’s De dono perseverantiae, of his combat with the
semi-pelagians, and notes that his struggle with the Arminian Goodwin exactly
parallels that previous battle. Owen approvingly summarizes the goal of
Augustine’s writings on perseverance: to oppose any notion of perseverance
which makes it not to be “the fruit and work of the grace of God in us, but the
work and effect of our own endeavours, upon a supply of such means, motives,
persuasions, and considerations, as we are or may be furnished withal.”44
In proving that genuine believers cannot fall away, Owen frequently refers to
the gracious nature of perseverance, and plainly mocks Goodwin’s teaching that
“God hath promised the believer shall persevere in case they persevere!”45
Countering Goodwin’s claim that eternal life is a reward for successful obedience
as a Christian, Owen grants that eternal life may be called a reward, but notes:

It is a reward neither procured by (properly and morally, as the

deserving cause) nor proportioned unto the obedience of them by
whom it is attained. A reward it is that withal is the free gift of
God, and an inheritance purchased by Jesus Christ; a reward of
bounty, and not of justice, in respect of them upon whom it is
bestowed, but only of faithfulness in reference to the promise of it;
a reward, by being a gracious encouragement, as the end of our
obedience, not as the procurement or desert of it. 46

A faithful Puritan, Owen also ties perseverance to the covenant of grace;

perseverance is effectual, in part, because it is a natural outgrowth of the
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 75

42. See also Augustine’s comments on perseverance in De praedestinatione , 4.

43. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 21.

44. Ibid., 64.

45. Ibid., 248.

46. Ibid., 503.

 covenant of grace within which the believer’s salvation is found.47 On the
gracious nature of the gift of perseverance, Augustine and Owen clearly thought
along the same lines.

2. Perseverance Given to the Elect Who Cannot Lose It

Although Augustine’s writings have caused some confusion on this point,48
his views on this issue are quite explicit; he firmly maintained that each and every
one of the elect had received the gift of perseverance from God, and that they
cannot ultimately lose their salvation. Augustine speaks directly about the elect
numerous times in De correptione et gratia and occasionally in De dono
perseverantiae. After addressing the necessity of admonitions in De correptione
et gratia, Augustine asserts that the gift of perseverance is assuredly given to the
elect and, on account of that gift, they cannot ultimately fall away from grace.49
This inability distinguishes them from other believers who are not part of the elect
and who will eventually perish in disobedience. Of the elect, however, Augustine
forcefully asserts that “no one perishes, because all are elected.”50 “When the gift
of God is granted to them…none of the saints fails to keep his perseverance in
holiness even to the end.”51 Similarly, the elect cannot commit the sin unto death
(1 John 5:16 ), because their election and perseverance protects them from this
sin.52 Finally, Augustine argues that the elect cannot cease to be elect because
their number “is so certain that one can neither be added to them nor taken from
them.”53 The salvation of the elect is certain because of the grace of election, and
consequently, the certainty of their perseverance is guaranteed.
The inability of the elect to lose their salvation and fail to persevere to the end
is the main objective of Owen’s work on perseverance. While the certainty of the
elects’ perseverance is secondary to the gift-status of perseverance for Augustine,
Owen’s eye is cast directly on the question of ability of a saint to fall from grace.
In the Dedicatory Epistle of The Saints’ Perseverance, Owen outlines his goal:

That you and all the saints of God may yet enjoy that peace and
consolation which is in believing that the eternal love of God is
immutable, that he is faithful in his promises, that his covenant,
ratified in the death of his Son, is unchangeable, that the fruits of
the purchase of Christ shall be certainly bestowed on all them for

47. Ibid., 204-25. Cf., Ferguson, The Christian Life , 20-27.

48. McGiffert, A History of Christian Thought , 96; Robins, Basis of Assurance, passim .

49. De correptione , 13–16.

50. Ibid., 14. Cf., 23.

51. De perseverantiae , 9.

52. De correptione , 35.

53. Ibid., 39.

 whom he died [clearly the elect, for Owen], and that every one
who is
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 76
really interested in these things shall be kept unto salvation, is the
aim of my present plea and contest.54

This purpose Owen faithfully pursues throughout this book, as well as significant
arguments to support this notion in his other writings.55
Neither Augustine nor Owen, however, denied the possibility that the elect
may partially or temporarily fall away from the faith—the reality of perseverance
was not seen as a shield against sin, but a promise of the elects’ eventual
perseverance through sin. Thus, the main occasion of Augustine’s De correptione
et gratia is to advocate for the necessity and usefulness of pastoral rebuke and
correction. Rebuke is necessary in part because the one offering the admonition is
unaware of the elect status of the one he is correcting.

Let no one therefore say that a man must not be rebuked when he
deviates from the right way, but that his return and perseverance
must only be asked for from the Lord for him. Let no considerate
and believing man say this. For if such an one is called according
to the purpose, [i.e., elect in Augustine’s sense, see below] beyond
all doubt God is co-working for good to him even in the fact of his
being rebuked. But since he who rebukes is ignorant whether he is
so called, let him do with love what he knows ought to be done; for
he knows that such an one ought to be rebuked. God will show
either mercy or judgment; mercy, indeed, if he who is rebuked is
“made to differ” by the bestowal of grace from the mass of
perdition, and is not found among the vessels of wrath which are
completed for destruction, but among the vessels of mercy which
God has prepared for glory; but judgment, if among the former he
is condemned, and is not predestinated among the latter.56

Augustine freely acknowledges the possibility of the elect faltering, but “if
perchance they deviate from the way, when they are rebuked they are amended,”
and “they who for a season wander from the way return, that they may continue
unto the end what they had begun to be in good.”57 A lapse into sin and
disobedience occurs even in the elect, yet with the elect, their eventual repentance
and renewed faithfulness is guaranteed by God. “The faith of these, which
worketh by love, either actually does not fail at all, or, if there are any whose faith

54. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 5–6.

55. E.g., Owen, The Nature of Apostasy , 32–33.

56. De correptione , 25. Cf., 10.

57. Ibid., 13; 23.

 fails, it is restored before their life is ended, and the iniquity which had intervened
is done away, and perseverance even to the end is allotted to them.”58
Owen is also well aware of the possibility (even of the actuality) of the elect
partially lapsing into sin. Owen was frustrated about the decline in contemporary
religion, “that among the generality of professed Christians, the glory and power
of Christianity are faded and almost utterly lost,” and responded with his book,
The Nature of Apostasy 59 In this work, Owen distinguishes
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 77
between partial and total apostasy, warning every believer about the grievous guilt
and danger of either kind.60 Owen cites the example of Peter, who fell into sin, yet
recovered, as proof that departure from the way of truth is not necessarily
permanent, but the person can be brought back to full communion. “A man may
so fall into a way of sin as still to retain in his mind such a principle of light and
conviction as may be suitable to his recovery.”61
Goodwin, Owen’s opponent, had pointed to the various numbers of believers
who fall into sin as proof that believers do indeed lose their salvation. Owen
considers this argument very seriously and takes a large portion of his reply to
Goodwin to answer this charge.62 He does not deny the actuality of sin in
believers; on the contrary, he persuasively argues for its presence in every
believer. However, Owen asserts that this condition proves (1) the presence of
two wills operating against one another in every true regenerate person, (2) the
inability of sin to ever reign in one who is truly converted, and (3) the lack of total
consent given by the believer to sin.63 In this way, Owen both acknowledges the
readily proved existence of sin in believers, yet denies the ultimate victory of that
sin over the elect. Once again, on substantial issues concerning the effectual
nature of perseverance, Owen parallels Augustine’s presentation closely.
However, the divergent orientations of their respective works do perhaps
indicate a significant difference in the approach taken by Augustine and Owen.
Augustine grounds his discussion of perseverance in the gratuitous nature of
salvation: God, and God alone, is responsible for the believer’s eternal salvation.
Thus, for Augustine, the saints’ perseverance is rooted in his overwhelming
understanding of grace. As mentioned above, Owen certainly does not dispute
this; indeed, it forms a necessary background for his own exposition of the
doctrine. Nevertheless, Owen’s writing on perseverance does not center on the
grace of God, but on the nature of God itself. The Saints’ Perseverance divides

58. Ibid., 16. Cf., De perseverantiae , 15; 19; 33.

59. Owen, The Nature of Apostasy , 3. Cf., 11; Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 79.

60. Owen, The Nature of Apostasy , 52–60.

61. Ibid., 34.

62. Both chapter I and XV of The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance refute Goodwin’s charge and
individual arguments.

63. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 515–16.

 nicely in half—the latter part a polemical response to Goodwin’s Redemption
Redeemed, and an earlier positive exposition of the doctrine. In this section, Owen
grounds the doctrine of perseverance in the immutability of God’s nature,
purposes, and covenant.64 The believer will persevere to the end, not ultimately
because of the nature of grace, but because God himself has unchangeably tied
himself to the eternal salvation of his chosen people. Joel Beeke notes that in
Owen, salvation is secure because “God is immutably engaged to his people by
means of his promises which form the heart of the covenant of grace.” 65
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 78
Such a relationship is irrevocable by definition. Augustine also notes concerning
every believer who has been given the gift of perseverance that “none of them
perishes, because God is not mistaken,” i.e., perseverance is attached to God’s
nature.66 However, he does not trace out this form of argument, instead focusing
upon the absolute gratuity of grace.
This difference between Augustine and Owen, however, does not substantially
alter their formulations of the doctrine. As discussed above, both readily
acknowledge the freely gracious character of perseverance and its undeniable
efficacy for the elect. On these and other crucial aspects of the doctrine,
Augustine and Owen assert the same thing. As Owen notes, “thus far Austin is
clearly engaged with us, that perseverance is a gift of God, that it is given by him
to everyone that doth persevere, and that every one to whom it is given is
inseparably confirmed in grace, and shall infallibly persevere to the end.” 67 The
difference rests with how the two theologians tie this doctrine to their overall
theologies: Owen sees the saints’ perseverance as grounded in the immutability of
the Godhead, while Augustine discusses the doctrine from the perspective of
soteriology and grace. Whatever substantial differences may appear between the
two, it is unlikely to reside in this fact.

3. The Apostasy of “Believers”

Though their terminology differs, both Augustine and Owen also hold similar
views on the nature of apostasy within the visible church community. It was the
real danger of apostasy which led Augustine to write De correptione et gratia in
the first place, and in that treatise he clearly acknowledges that members of the
church body—true, pious, faithful members—can indeed fall into sin in such a
way as they will be eternally punished. Augustine argues for the validity of
rebuking backsliders who have not persevered in godliness, “because they have of
their own will been changed from a good to an evil life, and on that account are
worthy of rebuke; and if rebuke should be of no avail to them, and they should
persevere in their ruined life until death, they are also worthy of divine

64. Ibid., 120-39; Ferguson, The Christian Life , 264.

65. Beeke, Assurance of Faith , 216.

66. De correptione , 14.

67. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 64. Note that Owen refers to Augustine as “Austin.”
 condemnation for ever.”68 Augustine readily acknowledges that many believers
fail to persevere and ultimately are condemned. As explored below, for
Augustine, there is no contradiction here with his assertion that the elect cannot
lapse into condemnation, because he draws a firm distinction between believers
and the elect.
Owen as well recognized that many professed believers eventually give up the
faith and die apart from the church and the teachings of the gospel.
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 79
Indeed, this is one of the main reasons he wrote his work on Apostasy; though a
significant theological thinker, Owen’s interests were deeply pastoral and these
guided much of his writings.69 Goodwin had claimed that Reformed writers did
not take apostasy seriously and consequently ignored large sections of Scripture
which warn of its possibility. Owen, however, freely acknowledged the danger of
apostasy, and offered the following description of what is frequently experienced
within the Christian community:

1. It is generally recognized that there is “an inferior, common work of

the Holy Spirit” in persons “causing in them a great alteration and
change as to light, knowledge, abilities, gifts, affections, life, and
conversation, when the persons so wrought upon are not quickened,
regenerated, nor made new creatures, nor united to Jesus Christ.” 70

2. These people upon whom the Spirit has laid his “common work” may
assent to the realities of the gospel as true in its kind and not merely a
counterfeit profession of their beliefs.

3. In light of the above, these people cannot be termed hypocrites since

they are not counterfeit believers, pretending only to be genuine
believers. Their faith is not merely for show and absent of all
substance, “yet, notwithstanding all this, they are in bondage, and at
best seek for a righteousness as it were by the works of the law, and in
the issue Christ proves to them of none effect.” 71

4. Many often have excellent gifts, abilities, qualities, even rendering

useful service to the mission of the church—nevertheless, they remain
unregenerate persons.

5. Having experienced the conviction of the Holy Spirit, as well as the

manifold gifts and blessings he brings to true believers, these persons

68. De correptione , 11.

69. Ferguson, The Christian Life , 262; Orme, The Life of John Owen .

70. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 640–41.

71. Ibid., 641.

 who have yet to be fully united to Christ are capable of sinning against
the Holy Spirit, “the unpardonable apostasy from God.”72

Owen and Augustine both agree that believers from the Christian community can,
and sometimes do, turn away from the faith and are condemned as unfaithful.
The harmony between this assertion and the conviction mentioned above
concerning the elects’ certainty of perseverance is found in the distinctions the
two authors make between those who receive the gift of perseverance and those
who do not. Augustine speaks of the church as those who are believers, some of
whom receive the gift of perseverance, continue on as Christians to the end, and
are ultimately saved, and some of whom do not receive the gift of perseverance
and are accounted as part of the reprobate: those who do not persevere “are not
made to differ from that lump which it is plain is condemned, as all go from one
into condemnation.”73 Augustine
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 80
is clear that this condemnation is reserved even for those who “having heard the
gospel and been changed by it for the better, [yet] have not received
perseverance.”74 Augustine does not deny that those who do not persevere have
been touched by God—indeed, his description of these people who ultimately will
perish is surprising. He consistently refers to them as “believers” and notes that
they were “called” by God; they are described as “those whom He gave love by
which they might live Christianly,” “some of His own children—whom He has
regenerated in Christ—to whom he has given faith, hope, and love,”75 and
“renewed by the laver of regeneration.”76 Nevertheless, they are actually “children
of perdition” and God knows this for he has not elected them.77
Augustine elaborates on this notion by distinguishing between those believers
who have been called, and those who have been “called according to the
purpose,” i.e., the elect. Those given the gift of perseverance “were not so called
as not to be elected, in respect of which it is said, ‘for many are called but few are
elected;’ but because they were called according to the purpose, they are of a
certainty also elected by the election, as it is said, of grace.”78 In speaking of those
who will certainly persevere, Augustine notes:

72. Ibid., 642.

73. De correptione , 12. Cf., Augustine, De doctrina Christiana , iii.32, in NPNF , vol. 2 (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1974), 519–97.

74. De correptione , 12.

75. Ibid., 17-18.

76. De perseverantiae , 21.

77. De correptione , 40; 20.

78. Ibid., 13.

 they are elected because they were called according to the
purpose—the purpose, however, not their own, but God’s… . For
whoever are elected are without doubt also called; but not
whosoever are called are as a consequence elected. Those, then,
are elected, as has often been said, who are called according to the
purpose, who also are predestinated and foreknown.79

This distinction is important to Augustine, and continues to play an important role

in his explanation of both the doctrine of perseverance and the experience of some
believers who fall away.80
Thus, some people appear elect to our eyes, even receiving much grace in this
life. Yet, their ultimate failure to persevere demonstrates that they are not one of
the elect. However, that does not mean that they are hypocrites, for their
righteousness is not feigned, but real; their righteous and pious living is not faked,
but a result of their having been given grace from heaven. In Augustine’s thought,
no one is able to live, even temporally, a godly life without grace. Many believers
in the church, then, have been given the grace to hear, believe, and obey the
Gospel—and are even called
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 81
“regenerate” by Augustine—yet have not been given the grace to persevere to the
end.81
In this sense, Augustine even seems to indicate that these people who will
ultimately not persevere have been predestined to live for a time a Christian life,
though they have not received the gift of perseverance to match that gift of initial
faith. There is a kind of “double predestination” here (though of course Augustine
uses no such term)—first a predestination to an initial life of faith (as described in
De praedestinatione sanctorum ) and an additional predestination to perseverance.
The elect receive both the gift of initium fidei and perseverantis fidei. Some
believers only receive initium fidei, and are ultimately not distinguished from the
reprobate. In Augustine’s terminology, many are called (i.e., predestinated to
receive initium fidei) to a temporary life of faith, but few are chosen (i.e.,
predestinated to receive both the gift of initial and persevering grace).82 Augustine
anticipates the natural question: why would God grant initial graces to some and
not complete the process with persevering grace? Augustine’s constant refrain in
light of these questions is “God’s ways are unsearchable!”83

79. Ibid., 14. Cf., 20; 39.

80. De praedestinatione , 7; De perseverantiae , 21; 33; De doctrina Christiana , iii.32.

81. De correptione , 18–22.

82. De praedestinatione , 33; De correptione , 13–16. Cf., De perseverantiae , 21; 33; 54.

83. De perseverantiae , 21; In Joannis Evangelium , LIII, 6; De correptione , 17; De praedestinatione , 11;
16; 26.
 But of two pious men, why to the one should be given
perseverance unto the end, and to the other it should not be given,
God’s judgments are even more unsearchable… . Were not both
created by God—both born of Adam—both made from the earth,
and given from Him who said, “I have created all breath,” souls of
one and the same nature? Lastly, had not both been called, and
followed Him that called them? and had not both become, from
wicked men, justified men, and both been renewed by the laver of
regeneration? But if he were to hear this who beyond all doubt
knew what he was saying, he might answer and say: These things
are true. In respect of all these things, they were of us.
Nevertheless, in respect of a certain other distinction, they were not
of us, for if they had been of us, they certainly would have
continued with us. What then is this distinction? God’s books lie
open, let us not turn away our view; the divine Scripture cries
aloud, let us give it a hearing. They were not of them, because they
had not been “called according to the purpose;” they had not been
chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world; they had not
gained a lot in Him; they had not been predestinated according to
His purpose who worketh all things. For if they had been this, they
would have been of them, and without doubt they would have
continued with them.84

Owen also distinguished between two sorts of people who make up the visible
church community: real or genuine believers who will certainly persevere to the
end, and professed believers who will not persevere. Owen contends that
possession of Christ and profession of the faith are not the
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 82
same thing. He recognizes that in the second group, i.e., those who profess
Christianity and outwardly appear to be genuine believers, there will be some
hypocrites, people who feign their Christian faith.85 But, for the most part, Owen
views these people as sincere in their Christian experiences, honestly professing
Christian faith. Nevertheless, those who appear to fall away from the faith have
experienced only a temporary holiness, changed in outward appearance and
thought, but not renewed in their nature. They have received true evangelical
graces from God, graces unique to the Gospel dispensation and the work of the
Holy Spirit.86 These gifts from the Holy Spirit are not to be taken lightly, but as
evidence of the Spirit’s great work in the world. Yet, these “especial gospel
privileges” and “evangelical” graces are not the same thing as salvation. The
Spirit has blessed certain men in a powerful way, yet not granted them

84. De perseverantiae , 21.

85. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 80.

86. Owen, The Nature of Apostasy , 17–18; 33–34.

 salvation—they remain out side the elect, even while experiencing great benefits
of grace. Owen describes such people:

such as, having received sundry common gifts and graces of the
Spirit—as illumination of the mind, change of affections, and
thence amendment of life, with sorrow of the world, legal
repentance, temporary faith, and the like, which are all true and
real in their kind,—do thereby become vessels in the great house of
God, being changed as to their use, though not in their nature,
continuing stone and wood still, though hewed and turned to the
serviceableness of vessels; and on that account they are frequently
termed saints and believers. On such as these there is a lower (and
in some a subordinate) work of the Spirit, effectually producing in
and on all the faculties of their souls somewhat that is true, good,
and useful in itself, answering in some likeness and suitableness of
operation unto the great work of regeneration, which faileth not.
There is in them light, love, joy, faith, zeal, obedience, etc., all true
in their kinds; which make many of them in whom they are do
worthily in their generation : howbeit they attain not to the faith of
God’s elect, neither doth Christ live in them, nor is the life which
they lead by the faith of the Son of God.87

Interestingly, Owen does echo Augustine’s distinction, noting that professed

believers who ultimately fail to persevere have proven that they are not “called
according to the purpose of God.”88 It is clear from these descriptions, that
Augustine and Owen thought similarly concerning the true nature of those who
eventually fail to persevere.
In his denial of the doctrine of the saints’ perseverance, Goodwin had tried to
claim Augustine as holding a similar view: “Now the judgment of the fathers
more generally, and of Austin more particularly, stood for the possibility of the
saints’ defection, both total and final, wherein it seemeth
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 83
the greater part of our modern reformed divines have departed from them.”89
Owen, however, expresses outrage at the claim and cannot imagine “from what
ambiguity of expression it is that any sentence is stolen from Austin and others of
the ancients, seeming to countenance the doctrine of the saints’ apostasy,” and
feels confident in asserting “that not one of the ancients, much less Austin, did
ever maintain such an apostasy of saints and such a perseverance as that which
Mr. Goodwin contendeth for.”90 Owen’s outrage notwithstanding, he does earlier
in his preface to the reader note that Augustine’s terminology differs from his, yet

87. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 90.

88. Owen, The Nature of Apostasy , 33.

89. Goodwin, Redemption Redeemed , 170.

90. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 497–98.

 insists that the church fathers “be allowed the common courtesy of being
interpreters of their own meaning:”

What weight in those days was laid upon the participation of the
sacramental figures of grace, and what expressions are commonly
used concerning them who had obtained that privilege, are known
to all. Hence all baptized persons, continuing in the profession of
the faith and communion of the church, they called, counted,
esteemed truly regenerated and justified, and spake so of them.
Such as these they constantly affirmed might fall away into
everlasting destruction.91

Thus, although Owen calls such people “unregenerate”92 and Augustine refers to
them as “regenerate,” Owen believes they have the same group in mind and differ
only in terminology built on their differing understanding of the church
sacraments. Goodwin’s claim to Augustine is built upon an equivocal use of
terminology and not on any substantive link between their positions. Rather, as
Owen notes, those who fail to persevere are actually in the same category as
Owen himself describes:

These are the persons which Austin and those of the same
judgment with him do grant that they may fall away, such as, upon
the account of their baptismal entrance into the church, their pious,
devout lives, their profession of the faith of the gospel, they called
and accounted regenerate believers; of whom yet they tell you,
upon a thorough search into the nature and causes of holiness,
grace, and walking with God, that they would be found not to be
truly and really in that state and condition that they were esteemed
to be in.93

4. The Purpose of Apostates within the Church

Augustine and Owen did differ significantly in what they perceived the
purposes of God to be in allowing a mingling in the church of some who would
not persevere and some who would. Augustine clearly thought that it was in the
best interests of holiness that God allowed both those elect with
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 84
perseverance and those without to be together in one church. He seems to have
two purposes in mind: first, that every believer would fear the danger of apostasy
and strive against falling into it, and second, that pride would not develop within
God’s people:

91. Ibid., 65-66.

92. Ibid., chapter XV.

93. Ibid., 66. Cf., De correptione , 18.

 Those who will not persevere are, by the most foreseeing will of
God, mingled with those who will persevere, for the reason that we
may learn not to mind high things, but to consent to the lowly, and
may ‘work out our own salvation with fear and trembling’ for it is
‘God that worketh in us both to will and to do for His good
pleasure.’94

That such things as these [scriptural warnings about apostasy] are

so spoken to saints who will persevere, as if it were reckoned
uncertain whether they will persevere, is a reason that they ought
not otherwise to hear these things, since it is well for them ‘not to
be high-minded, but to fear.’95

God has judged it to be better to mingle some who would not

persevere with a certain number of His saints, so that those for
whom security from temptation in this life is not desirable may not
be secure. For that which the apostle says, checks many from
mischievous elation: ‘Wherefore let him who seems to stand take
heed lest he fall.’ But he who falls, falls by his own will, and he
who stands, stands by God’s will. ‘For God is able to make him
stand;’ therefore he is not able to make himself stand, but God.
Nevertheless, it is good not to be high-minded, but to fear.96

These citations reveal Augustine’s concern that the doctrine of perseverance not
be taken as an excuse for immoral living, nor for the furthering of pride in one’s
life. Thus, the presence and “fall from grace” of certain people in the community
of faith is seen as a testimony against such unholy attitudes.
In Puritan England, Goodwin had objected to the doctrine of perseverance
largely on the grounds that it produced such a moral laxity and engendered the
kind of pride that Augustine warned against.97 Owen, however, rejected such
arguments. As Sinclair Ferguson notes, “rather than encourage loose living, the
assurance of perseverance promotes truth and holiness in the Christian life.”98 The
presence of apostates within the professing body of Christ, whatever their true
nature, tests every believer in order to establish them in a greater maturity of faith.
Whatever the reason, the presence of those who fall away from the faith does not,
in Owen’s view, shake in the least the faith of those truly called by God: “that no
sound persons may be shaken, because unhealthy ones are shattered,—that those
may not tremble who are built on the rock, because those are

94. De perseverantiae , 33.

95. De correptione , 40.

96. De perseverantiae , 19. See also, 39; 62.

97. Goodwin, Redemption Redeemed , chapter XI.

98. Ferguson, The Christian Life , 263. Cf., Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , chapter X.
 WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 85
cast down who are built on the sand,—is one part of my aim and intendment in
handling this doctrine.” Apostasy, while shocking, “yet is it exceedingly remote
from being any true ground of shaking the faith of those who truly believe.”99
Fear cannot be a reason for the presence of those who will fall away:

It is denied that the fall of the most glorious hypocrites is indeed an

efficacious engine in the hands of the adversary to ingenerate any
other fears and jealousies, or to expose them to any other shakings,
than what are common to them in other temptations of daily
incursion, from which God doth constantly make a way for them to
escape, 1 Cor. x.13.100

5. The Subjective Effect of the Doctrine on Believers

The different understanding on the presence in the church of those who do not
receive the gift of perseverance highlights perhaps the largest difference between
Augustine and Owen, the subjective influence of the doctrine on believers. As
most studies on perseverance note, Augustine developed his doctrine with the
explicit intention not to give a sense of certainty and assurance to the believer. 101
The exact manner in which Augustine separated the two is not nearly as obvious
as the fact that he did actually do so.
While teaching the undeniably gratuitous character of perseverance,
Augustine insisted that a believer could not tell if he had the gift of perseverance
or not. This was part of Augustine’s reasoning for advocating the necessity of
pastoral admonitions in De correptione et gratia —since a Christian leader cannot
tell if one’s failures are due to a temporary or final apostasy, he is duty bound to
rebuke all who fall away.102 In De civitate Dei, Augustine states that the only way
one can know for sure during this lifetime if they are part of the elect, is through
special revelation: “For what man can know that he will persevere to the end in
the exercise and increase of grace, unless he has been certified by some revelation
from Him who, in His just and secret judgment, while He deceives none, informs
few regarding this matter?”103 Otherwise, “Let not men say, then, that
perseverance is given to any one to the end, except when the end itself has come,
and he to whom it has been given has been found to have persevered unto the
end.”104 Any presumption as to

99. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 80.

100. Ibid., 81.

101. Advocates for a subjective assurance have cited Augustine as follows: “To be assured of our salvation
is no arrogant stoutness; it is our faith. It is no pride; it is devotion. It is no presumption; it is God’s
promise,” Ryle, Holiness , 216; Beeke, Assurance of Faith , 12. However, I have been unable to track down
this citation, and am suspicious of its validity. The original quotation was made by Bishop Jewel.

102. De correptione , 25.

103. Augustine, De civitate Dei , xi.12, in NPNF , vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 1–511.
 WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 86
one’s elect status, Augustine fears, “may engender pride.” 105 It is only in heaven,
where the temptation of pride is not present, that one’s elect status can be known
with certainty. Thus, he gives this command:

Holding this hope, serve the Lord in fear, and rejoice unto Him
with trembling. Because no one can be certain of the life eternal
which God who does not lie has promised to the children of
promise before the times of eternity,—no one, unless that life of
his, which is a state of trial upon the earth, is completed. 106

This, of course, is a very different position than that taken by Owen. As noted
above, one of Owen’s main goals in attacking Goodwin’s “perseverance by
human merit” doctrine was so that “all the saints of God may yet enjoy that peace
and consolation,” 107 i.e., a subjective assurance of salvation. For Owen, the tie
between the objective character of perseverance and the subjective effect of
assurance in the believer is undeniable. Despite never writing a full-length treatise
on assurance, Owen faithfully expounds the doctrine fully in A Practical
Exposition Upon Psalm CXXX, and in at least a half dozen other works he
significantly addresses the issue. 108 Although Owen was sensitive to believers
who lacked the certainty of their faith, he was strongly convinced that assurance
was part and parcel of Christian faith. As part of his argument for the doctrine of
perseverance, Owen asserts that many within the family of God experience the
blessing of assurance:

I no way doubt but many thousands of believers, whose

apprehensions of the nature, properties, and conditions of things, as
they are in themselves, are low, weak, and confused, yet, having
received the Spirit of adoption, bearing witness with their spirits
that they are the children of God, and having the testimony in
themselves, have been taken up into as high a degree of comforting
and cheering assurances, and that upon the most infallible
foundation imaginable, as ever the most seraphically illuminated
person in the world attained unto. 109

104. De perseverantiae , 10.

105. De correptione , 40.

106. De perseverantiae , 62.

107. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 5–6.

108. For example, see Owen, A Practical Exposition Upon Psalm CXXX ; Two Short Catechisms ;
Communion with God . See also, Beeke, Assurance of Faith , 213–80.

109. Owen, The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance , 83.

Whereas Augustine wrote about perseverance in order to elevate the gracious
character of God’s grace, Owen intentionally has in mind the subjective,
experiential aspect of the doctrine. More than anything else, it is this difference
which distinguishes Augustine and Owen, and which contributed to much of the
confusion surrounding Augustine’s doctrine.

VI. Conclusion
Although the historical setting for Augustine’s discussion of perseverance
differed from that of Owen’s, there is a significant continuity in thought between
the two theologians. While the focus of their writings leads to an
WTJ 62:1 (Spring 2000) p. 87
emphasis on different nuances, their positions overlapped significantly on major
issues. Augustine argued pervasively for the understanding of perseverance as a
gift from God and separated from human merit. While Owen instead concentrated
his writings on the infallible efficacy of perseverance, he readily acknowledged
the gratuitous character of perseverance and in large part assumes that character in
his argumentation. Both authors insist on defending God’s actions in persevering
the elect to the end—Augustine promotes the completely gratuitous nature of
God’s grace, and Owen ties perseverance to God’s immutable promises. While
the difference on this level affects the approach taken by the authors, it does not
significantly impact their specific formulation of doctrine.
Both theologians also agree that some members of the visible church
community have not in fact been given the gift of persevering faith. Augustine
considers these to have been predestined or called to a life of faith for a temporary
time, with a real, genuine godliness, yet such that it will not persevere to the end.
Owen similarly recognizes a powerful, special work of the Holy Spirit in their
lives, bringing about significant changes and godliness, yet a work of the Spirit
which stops short of true, genuine saving faith. The difference one encounters
between Augustine and Owen on this level is largely a matter of semantics and/or
a function of Augustine’s sacramental/ecclesiastical views. On issues of
soteriology and salvation, their understanding of perseverance is very similar.
What is different between the two is their respective views on the subjective
impact of the doctrine of perseverance. Augustine’s concern for holiness and his
worries about the evils of pride led him to deny any possibility (apart from special
revelation) of a believer having sustained assurance of his salvation and inclusion
in the elect. Owen, on the other hand, tied the objective God-centered
perseverance to a subjective, believer-oriented assurance of salvation. Because the
Christian can trust in God’s perseverance, he can have certainty of his eventual
attainment of the kingdom of heaven. This difference also colored their respective
understandings of why God allows those who will not persevere to mingle with
those who will. Augustine held that God used these examples to inspire holiness,
fear, and humility. Owen, alternatively, denied that fear of apostasy should
undercut a believer’s assurance, and that the presence of apostates tested genuine
believers causing them to mature in their faith.
Despite these differences, however, John Owen’s presentation of the doctrine
of perseverance in his dispute with the semi-pelagian John Goodwin closely
 parallels Augustine’s own formulation in light of his controversy with semi-
pelagian opponents twelve hundred years earlier.

Reprinted with the permission of Westminster Theological Journal.