Mystery Guest

Sleep experts warn against surfing the Internet right before bed, and I have to admit that after my experience the other night, I am inclined to agree with that advice. It is not conducive to a good night’s sleep. I started by watching an old episode (1956) of the game show “I’ve Got a Secret” on YouTube, the one with Mr. Samuel J. Seymour, a 95-year-old gentleman who was the last living witness to the Lincoln assassination in 1865. The panelists discovered Mr. Seymour’s secret in short order; the last two of the four didn’t even get to question him. Hard to believe that the last living witness to the assassination of Abraham Lincoln died two years before I was born – it reminded me that my father had once said that when he was a little boy, an old Confederate soldier had stayed overnight in their home. I then watched episodes of “To Tell the Truth,” one of the great old shows of my childhood. Three guests all claim to be the same person, and the panelists must guess which contestant is the real one. A variation on this was the basis for the celebrity round of the almost unbearably classy “What’s My Line?” where Gene Autry, Bob Hope, Robert Mitchum, Red Skelton, even Archbishop Fulton Sheen and the Harlem Globetrotters took their turn trying to stump the blindfolded panel. What fun to watch such a great old game show! I could have stayed up all night watching episodes, but due to the lateness of the hour, I finally forced myself to shut down the computer and go to bed.

And I had a dream. I dreamed that I was a blindfolded panelist on an old black-and-white episode of “What’s My Line?” – and yet somehow I could see the proceedings, as if I were watching myself on TV. Had I been in the audience, I would have seen the Guest enter, I would have risen to give Him a standing ovation as the host intoned, “Would you come in, Mystery Challenger, and sign in, please!” As it was, I kept my seat; I had no idea Who had just entered the room.

But I soon suspected, for the ebullient host was beside himself. His effusive introduction of the mystery guest as a working man whose life had changed the world, someone whose name meant the world to millions upon millions of people, someone whose sandals he, the host, was not worthy to untie, kind of gave the whole thing away.

We panelists got the picture. The questioning began with my friend Bobby, a warm and friendly Christian youth leader. Bobby beamed broadly beneath his blindfold as he posed his first question:

“Sir, can we safely assume that You are a carpenter by profession?”

“Yes,” the Guest answered quietly, making no attempt to disguise His voice.

“And that You were born in Bethlehem of Judea?” Bobby continued.

“I was,” agreed the Guest.

Grinning from ear to ear, Bobby played it for all it was worth.

“And when You taught, You taught as one having authority, and not as the scribes, is that correct, sir?”

“Correct,” answered the Guest.

Bobby was so happy that he nearly tore off his blindfold.

“And You taught Your disciples that they were justified by faith alone, did You not?”

The Guest sighed and shook His head. “No, I did not teach that.”

Bobby gasped audibly, but the host hurried us on. “One down and nine to go! Penny?”

My Pentecostal friend glowed almost electrically. “You are, sir, I would venture to guess, the One who made the blind to see and the deaf to hear?”

“Yes,” the Guest answered with a gentle smile.

“The One who walked on the water, and fed the 5,000?”

“That was Me,” He replied.

“The One who came that we might have life, and have it abundantly?”

“Yes, Penny.”

“The One who told us that we might know that we know that we know that nothing that we do can ever cause us lose that life?”

No answer, just a sad, tired look.

“Oh,” interrupted our amiable host. “It looks like that’s a ‘no’ to your question, Penny. Two down and eight to go! We’ll move on to our next panelist, Larry!”

Ignoring Penny’s baffled protests, my neighbor, Larry, a former missionary, ploughed ahead.

“I can’t tell You what an honor it is to have You here, Mr. Mystery Guest! My goodness, I don’t know where to begin! You wrote the Book which alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian!”

“What you said about My Book is not correct,” came the reply.

“I mean,” Larry stammered, “I mean, your apostles wrote the Book, under Your inspiration, which alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian!”

“What you said about My Book is not correct,” our Guest repeated quietly.

“Aww, that’s cheating, Larry!” scolded our persistently perky host. “When you get a ‘no,’ we have to move on! Three down and seven to go! Renée?”

Of course, by this point I had stage fright big-time; I’m not the most poised person, and game show appearances aren’t exactly my style. Yet there I sat behind my blindfold, knowing without seeing who our Mystery Guest must be. This was my chance to make Him known to the panel, to the studio audience, to the television audience. What would I ask?

“Sir, You taught that we must love You above all things, and our neighbor as ourself, correct?”

“The two great commandments, yes,” He answered softly.

“And You taught that we must persevere to the end in our service to You in order to be saved, right?”

“I did,” came the reply.

“Now, hold on a minute…” Bobby grumbled.

“And that a man is not justified by faith alone, but by his works.”

“You have spoken truly,” was His answer.

“Oh, that can’t be right,” exclaimed Penny.

“And You established Your Church to be the pillar and foundation of the truth, didn’t You, sir?”

“I did.”

“Well, this certainly isn’t who I thought it was,” I heard Larry mumble.

Wanting to give my fellow panelists another chance, I threw the game.

“You, uh, didn’t happen to insinuate to a Baptist preacher that if he didn’t raise 4.5 million dollars, You might ask him to cash in his chips, did You?”

I thought I heard a chuckle. “Believe Me, I did not,” our Mystery Guest said.

“Four down and six to go!” chirped our host, and it was Bobby’s turn again. But Bobby seemed to have lost interest in the game.

“Well, you sir, whoever you may be, certainly you weren’t one of the apostles or the disciples. Were you perhaps one of the original Gnostics?”

“Of course not, Bobby.” came the sorrowful answer.

“Five down and five to go! Penny?”

“Well, I don’t know,” Penny opined disdainfully, “Are you one of those of whom the Bible said, ‘They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us?'”

A long silence was broken by the host’s embarrassed reply. “Uh, Penny, I’m taking our Guest’s silence as a definite ‘no.'” Six down and four to go! Larry?”

Larry began with a long, drawn-out sigh. “Would your name, sir, be either Hymenaus or Alexander?”

I gasped.  Bobby muttered, “I’m outta here!” and I could feel Larry pushing his chair back.

“Wait!” I cried as I heard their footsteps. “Don’t you know Who this is? Take your blindfolds off! Look and see Who you’re talking to! Please!”

“Seven down and three to go!” shouted out our now-flustered host.

As I pleaded with the other panelists, the light in the room became so bright that I could see the glow even though my eyes were covered. I tore off my blindfold, only to realize that I was actually lifting my head up from my pillow. The light of the full moon was shining brightly through my window, brightly enough to awaken me from sleep. I shuddered. Thank God it had only been a nightmare.

Unfortunately, though, my little nightmare hit a way too close to home. The actual Jesus of the Bible is something of a mystery to Protestants. They know so much about Him, they love Him as their Savior and they strive to serve Him faithfully, and yet there are things that He said and did that they just wouldn’t recognize because those things contradict the prevailing Protestant interpretation of Scripture, things like:

By your endurance you will gain your lives.
(Lk 21:19, see also Mt 10:22, Mt 24:13, Mk 13:13, Rev 2:10)

But if that evil slave says in his heart, ‘My master is not coming for a long time,’ and begins to beat his fellow slaves and eat and drink with drunkards; the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour which he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Mt 24:48-51, see also Mt 25:30)

If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up, and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. (Jn 15:6)

Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. (Rev 2:5)

Not exactly warm-and-fuzzy once-saved/always-saved theology there – Jesus emphasized the necessity of faithful service to the end, and His apostles echoed that theme in Romans 11:19-22, 1 Corinthians 15:1-2, Galatians 5:2-4, Colossians 1:21-23, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Hebrews 3:12, Hebrews 6:4-6 and Hebrews 10:23-29. Another misconception: Jesus did not emphasize that He had come to instruct His followers to compose sacred writings – that was done almost incidentally, which accounts for the “occasional” nature of the New Testament. Far from teaching that the Bible is to be regarded as the pillar and foundation of Christianity, the Scriptures teach that it is the Church which is the foundation of truth (1 Timothy 3:15 – a verse which most Protestants are ignorant of, along with Jesus’ statements in Mt. 16:17-19, Mt. 18:17-18, Lk. 10:16, 1 Jn 4:6, as well as His apostles’ actions at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15, and their teachings concerning the transmission of their God-given authority to the men they ordained in Acts 1:15-26, Acts 6:6, 2 Cor 10:6, 2 Thess 3:14, 2 Tim 1:6, 2 Tim 2:2, 2 Tim 4:1-2, Titus 2:15, 1 Jn 4:6, and Heb 13:17). And in that Book which Protestants and Catholics so love, the only place where the phrase “faith alone” is found is in James 2:24, which assures us that “You see that a man is justified by works and NOT by faith alone.” (another verse that Protestants touch upon only in an effort to refute).

By selectively quoting from the words of the Savior and his apostles, a Jesus has been constructed whose appearance is hard to reconcile with that of the Man from Galilee. Small wonder that when the Church proclaims the teachings of the Real Deal, many Protestants reject Him as some kind of impostor. Yet Jesus famously said: “My sheep hear My voice.” How, 20 centuries after the Ascension, can a Christian be certain that the voice that he is hearing is Christ’s? Jesus actually made provision for that when He told His apostles:

He who hears you, hears Me!

Jesus’ voice could be heard when His apostles preached the Gospel to the 1^st-century world, and when they wrote their epistles. Jesus’ voice can also be heard to this day when the successors to those apostles, the bishops of the Church Jesus founded, speak in union with the successor of Peter. That’s why the apostles first official act after the Ascension was to filled Judas’ “office” – the authority is transferred from the first man to hold the office to the second, and on down the line. St. John, one of the apostles, explained this phenomenon of Jesus speaking through His chosen men quite clearly. He wrote: “We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us” (1 Jn 4:6).

If you’re not listening to the Church, you’re ignoring the commands of the shepherds. When the Chief Shepherd calls, you may not be able to recognize the voice of the Man Who in this life will always remain to you something of a Mystery Guest.

 

On the memorial of St. Raphael of St. Joseph Kalinowski

Deo omnis gloria!

Sometimes You Really Have to Wonder

I once explained to a Protestant the Catholic teaching that a valid marriage cannot be dissolved. I explained our understanding of Genesis 2:24, Malachi 2:16, Matthew 5:31-32, Matthew 19: 9, Mark 10:11, Luke 16: 18, and 1 Corinthians 7, and discussed the fact that no one up until the time of the Reformation felt that remarriage was ever an option after divorce. She listened carefully, asked many questions, and evinced understanding. But in the end, she shook her head and admitted that she would accept the Catholic teaching on the permanence of marriage, except for the fact that she couldn’t find another church which agreed with the Church that remarriage is an impossibility in cases where a valid marriage has previously taken place.

Not unusual for a Protestant to feel that way. Many things in a Protestant context are decided by the quasi-biblical principles of “free and fair elections” and “majority rules.” My friend simply felt that, in this case, Catholics were outvoted. What is not given due consideration, at least not in the more “modern” Protestant denominations of an Evangelical or charismatic bent, is that when Protestants are doing their polling, the vast majority of Christians are allowed no say whatsoever. You see, under their system, when you die you forfeit your right to cast a vote. The beliefs of those who have gone before are null and void.

Of course, no one thinks about it in exactly this way; no one really thinks about it at all. It simply never occurs to these Protestants to put in the time to research the historic teachings of the Christians in prior centuries on any given subject. It never occurs to them to do this because, despite their firm belief in eternal life in Christ, to them the dead are DEAD and they are GONE.

This attitude has consequences. The Assemblies of God USA has produced a statement of faith, over 2,700 words’ worth, chockfull of Scripture but absent of any references to how their understanding of the Bible matches up with what Christians have believed down through the centuries. Phooey on those dead folks – what do their beliefs matter? What we believe and teach NOW is REAL Christianity! It’s silliness like that which led Spurgeon to quip, “It seems odd that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to them should think so little of what He has revealed to others.”

Sometimes you really have to wonder….

In contrast, on the website of a Reformed Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh, you are advised that the church considers itself to be “a part of the historic Judeo-Christian Church, and our foundational vision and beliefs seek to be rooted in scripture and the history of the Church. Therefore we hold to the most basic beliefs of the church found in The Apostles’ Creed.”

One can certainly make the case that one’s beliefs are “rooted in Scripture and in the history of the Church” by referencing the Apostles’ Creed:

We believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.

We believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.

He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.

He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.

He descended to the dead.

On the third day he rose again.

He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again to judge the living and the dead.

We believe in the Holy Spirit,

The holy catholic Church,

The communion of saints,

The forgiveness of sins,

The resurrection of the body,

And the life everlasting. Amen.

The Apostles’ Creed is a good place to begin. In using one of the ancient creeds as their statement of faith, this church is demonstrating an interest in continuity, admitting that what the early Christians believed actually mattered. This is not unusual for the spiritual descendants of Calvin, a Reformer who often referred to the Church Fathers and their teachings (although Catholics would take issue with how he understood them).

So what does one of the more modern Protestant denominations (nondenominational, charismatic, independent) do should it be brought to their attention that the beliefs of 2,000 years’ worth of Christianity ought to count for something? They can do what the churches that I formerly attended did – they can simply claim that what they are teaching is exactly what the early Christians believed. That is what the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada has done. Their statement of faith reads in part:

“The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada stands firmly in the mainstream of historical Christianity.”

Of course, I can claim that I’m a direct descendant of St. Augustine of Hippo – but that doesn’t make it so. Let’s look at some of the PAOC’s beliefs:

1. The Lord’s Supper is a symbol, memorial and proclamation of the suffering and death of our Lord Jesus Christ. This ordinance of communion is to be participated in by believers until Christ’s return.

2. Water baptism signifies the believer’s identification with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection and is practised by immersion.

3. Assurance of salvation is the privilege of all who are born again by the Spirit through faith in Christ, resulting in love, gratitude and obedience toward God.

The denomination is serving up a purely symbolic Lord’s Supper, a baptism which “signifies” something rather than actually effecting something (and which MUST be by immersion), and eternal security – three beliefs/practices which the group claims are rooted “firmly in the mainstream of historical Christianity.”

The mainstream of historical Christianity in an alternate universe, perhaps?

Let’s let the early Christians explain their beliefs concerning the “Lord’s Supper” (Holy Communion). Jesus said “This IS My body.” Did the early Christians have the faith to believe what He said?

They [the Gnostics] abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. – St. Ignatius of Antioch, 107 A.D.

Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachi [1:10-12]…It is of the sacrifices offered to Him in every place by us, the Gentiles, that is, of the bread of the Eucharist and likewise of the cup of the Eucharist, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it. – St. Justin Martyr, 2^nd century

He taught the new sacrifice of the New Covenant, of which Malachi, one of the twelve prophets, had signified beforehand: [quotes Mal 1:10-11]. By these words He makes it plain that the former people will cease to make offerings to God; but that in every place sacrifice will be offered to him, and indeed, a pure one; for His name is glorified among the Gentiles. – St. Irenaeus of Lyons, 2^nd century

“Eat My Flesh,” He says, “and drink My Blood.” The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutriments. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery! – St. Clement of Alexandria, 3^rd century

He Himself warns us, saying, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.” Therefore do we ask that our Bread, which is Christ, be given to us daily, so that we who abide and live in Christ may not withdraw from His sanctification and from His Body. – St. Cyprian of Carthage, 3^rd century

Our Lord Jesus took in His hands what in the beginning was only bread; and He blessed it, and signed it, and made it holy in the name of the Father and in the name of the Spirit; and He broke it and in His gracious kindness He distributed it to all His disciples one by one. He called the bread His living Body, and did Himself fill it with Himself and the Spirit. And extending His hand, He gave them the Bread which His right hand had made holy: “Take, all of you eat of this, which My word has made holy. Do not now regard as bread that which I have given you; but take, eat this Bread [of life], and do not scatter the crumbs; for what I have called My Body, that it is indeed. – St. Ephraim. 4^th century

Let us approach the celebration of the mysteries. This bread and this wine, so long as the prayers and supplications have not taken place, remain simply what they are. But after the great prayers and holy supplications have been sent forth, the Word comes down into the bread and wine — and thus is His Body confected. – St. Athanasius, 4^th century

The bread again is at first common bread; but when the mystery sanctifies it, it is called and actually becomes the Body of Christ. – St. Gregory of Nyssa, 4^th century

You may perhaps say: “My bread is ordinary.” But that bread is bread before the words of the Sacraments; where the consecration has entered in, the bread becomes the flesh of Christ. And let us add this: How can what is bread be the Body of Christ? By the consecration. The consecration takes place by certain words; but whose words? Those of the Lord Jesus. – St. Ambrose, 4^th century

After the type had been fulfilled by the Passover celebration and He had eaten the flesh of the lamb with His Apostles, He takes bread which strengthens the heart of man, and goes on to the true Sacrament of the Passover, so that just as Melchisedech, the priest of the Most High God, in prefiguring Him, made bread and wine an offering, He too makes Himself manifest in the reality of His own Body and Blood. – St. Jerome, 5^th century

“But by the prayers of the Holy Church, and by the salvific Sacrifice, and by the alms which are given for their spirits, there is no doubt that the dead are aided that the Lord might deal more mercifully with them than their sins would deserve. For the whole Church observes this practice which was handed down by the Fathers that it prays for those who have died in the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the Sacrifice itself; and the Sacrifice is offered also in memory of them, on their behalf. – St. Augustine, 5^th century

The historical record goes on and on in this vein; every Christian up until the Reformation was taught that the bread and wine actually become the Body and Blood of Jesus. Those Christians took the words “This is My body” quite literally. So in what sense is the PAOC belief in the bread and wine as mere symbols “mainstream”? Perhaps by “historical Christianity” they mean Protestant Christianity? Sorry, Charlie…

Who, but the devil, has granted such license of wresting the words of the holy Scripture? Who ever read in the Scriptures, that my body is the same as the sign of my body? or, that it is the same as it signifies? What language in the world ever spoke so? It is only then the devil, that imposes upon us by these fanatical men. Not one of the Fathers of the Church, though so numerous, ever spoke as the Sacramentarians: not one of them ever said, It is only bread and wine; or, the body and blood of Christ is not there present.

Surely, it is not credible, nor possible, since they often speak, and repeat their sentiments, that they should never (if they thought so) not so much as once, say, or let slip these words: It is bread only; or the body of Christ is not there, especially it being of great importance, that men should not be deceived. Certainly, in so many Fathers, and in so many writings, the negative might at least be found in one of them, had they thought the body and blood of Christ were not really present: but they are all of them unanimous. – Martin Luther, 16^th century

Okay, so the claim about being in the “mainstream of historical Christianity” is bogus as far as Holy Communion goes – the PAOC teaching on that subject wasn’t invented until very late in the game; even Martin Luther thought it was tommyrot. How about their belief that baptism merely signifies the change that takes place in the believer when he is baptized into Christ, and that baptism must be by immersion?

Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [i.e., running water]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. -The Didache, 1^st century

I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God when we had been made new through Christ; lest, if we omit this, we seem to be unfair in the explanation we are making. As many as are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, “Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Now, that it is impossible for those who have once been born to enter into their mothers’ wombs, is manifest to all. And how those who have sinned and repent shall escape their sins, is declared by Esaias the prophet, as I wrote above; he thus speaks: “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from your souls; learn to do well; judge the fatherless, and plead for the widow: and come and let us reason together, saith the Lord. And though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white like wool; and though they be as crimson, I will make them white as snow. But if ye refuse and rebel, the sword shall devour you: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” – St. Justin Martyr, 2^nd century

Where there is no scarcity of water the stream shall flow through the baptismal font or pour into it from above; but if water is scarce, whether on a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available. – St. Hippolytus of Rome, 3rd century

There is absolutely nothing which makes men’s minds more obdurate than the simplicity of the divine works which are visible in the act, when compared with the grandeur which is promised thereto in the effect; so that from the very fact, that with so great simplicity, without pomp, without any considerable novelty of preparation, finally, without expense, a man is dipped in water, and amid the utterance of some few words, is sprinkled, and then rises again, not much (or not at all) the cleaner, the consequent attainment of eternity is esteemed the more incredible. – Tertullian, 3^rd century

As [Novatian] seemed about to die, he received baptism in the bed where he lay, by pouring… – Pope Cornelius I, 3^rd century

Being baptized, we are illuminated; illuminated, we become sons; being made sons, we are made perfect; being made perfect, we are made immortal… This work is variously called grace, and illumination, and perfection, and washing. Washing, by which we cleanse away our sins; grace, by which the penalties accruing to transgressions are remitted; and illumination, by which that holy light of salvation is beheld, that is, by which we see God clearly. – St. Clement of Alexandria, 3^rd century

For prisoners, baptism is ransom, forgiveness of debts, the death of sin, regeneration of the soul, a resplendent garment, an unbreakable seal, a chariot to heaven, a royal protector, a gift of adoption. – St Basil the Great, 4^th century

… for no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the sacrament of baptism…. “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” – St. Ambrose, 4^th century

Good luck finding anyone among the early Christians who believed that baptism is just a symbol. They believed that “baptism… now saves you” (1 Pet 3:21). And don’t look to the Great Reformer for any help on this, either:

This is the simplest way to put it: the power, effect, benefit, fruit, and purpose of baptism is that it saves. For no one is baptized in order to become a prince, but as the words say, ‘to be saved.’ To be saved, as everyone knows, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death and the devil, to enter into Christ’s kingdom, and to live with him forever. Martin Luther, 16^th century

Strike two! Now, what are the chances that the idea of “assurance of salvation” is “in the mainstream of historical Christianity”? Romans 11:19-22 warned the early Christians that “You may say ‘Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.’ Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off.” How did the early Christians interpret passages such as these?

He who raised Him up from the dead will raise us up also – if we do His will, and walk in His commandments, and love what He loved, keeping ourselves from all unrighteousness. – St. Polycarp, 2^nd century

I hold further, that those of you who have confessed and known this man to be Christ, yet who have gone back for some reason to the legal dispensation, and have denied that this man is Christ, and have not repented before death – you will by no means be saved. – St. Justin Martyr, 2^nd century

Those who do not obey Him, being disinherited by Him, have ceased to be His sons. – St. Irenaeus of Lyons, 2^nd century

We ought indeed to walk so holily, and with so entire substantially of faith, as to be confident and secure in regard of our own conscience, desiring that it may abide in us to the end. Yet, we should not presume. For he who presumes feels less apprehension; he who feels less apprehension takes less precaution; he who takes less precaution runs more risk. Fear is the foundation of salvation; presumption is an impediment to fear. More useful, then, is it to apprehend that we may possibly fail, than to presume that we cannot; for apprehending will lead us to fear, fearing to caution, and caution to salvation. On the other hand, if we presume, there will be neither fear nor caution to save us. – Tertullian, 3^rd century

Certain ones of those who hold different opinions misuse these passages. They essentially destroy free will by introducing ruined natures incapable of salvation and by introducing others as being saved in such a way that they cannot be lost. – Origen, 3^rd century

Let us press onward and labor, watching with our whole heart. Let us be steadfast with all endurance; let us keep the Lord’s commandments. Thereby, when that day of anger and vengeance comes, we may not be punished with the ungodly and the sinners. Rather, we may be honored with the righteous and with those who fear God. – St. Cyprian of Carthage, 3^rd century

You kind of know what’s coming, don’t you?

In my judgment, we must believe in the mercy of God, but remain uncertain about our and others’ future perseverance, or predestination. As he said: ‘if you think that you are standing, watch out that you do not fall,’ (1 Cor 10:12). Martin Luther, 16^th century

Only by radically redefining the meaning of the words “historical Christianity” can one claim with a straight face that these modern-day teachings are what Christians down through the ages have believed. And not to pick on the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada – every “Bible-believing church” I was ever a part of taught me that I was being faithful to the teachings of historical Christianity. How so? Simple – I believed what the Bible says (I believed my own private interpretation of Scripture) and the early Christians believed what the Bible says, and therefore my modern-day beliefs, whatever they happened to be, were exactly the same as those of the early Christians. There was simply no doubt in my mind that this was true. That sincere belief was simply taken on faith; I never tried to demonstrate its historical accuracy. I just knew it was so.

Sometimes you really have to wonder….

 

On the memorial of Bl. Maria Angela Truszkowska

Deo omnis gloria!

The Better-than-Good!™News

The Christian message has always been advertised as “the Good News,” and for very good reason. Mankind had no way to enter Heaven before the coming of the Savior. Christians are tasked with proclaiming the Good News – God loves the world so much that He sent His Son, the Messiah Jesus Christ, to die for us! Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven! He is seated at the right hand of the Father, and He is coming back again!

It doesn’t get much better than that!

But wait! There’s more! is the cry of many Evangelical churches trying to do the Good News one better. It isn’t enough just to know that you can have eternal life; you need to know that you can’t lose it….

These churches preach the once-saved/always-saved gospel; the idea that if an individual makes a sincere, one-time confession of faith, accepting Jesus as his Lord and Savior, then come hell or high water – he’s SAVED. Call it the Better-than-Good!™News. While you sometimes hear the proposition qualified with the disclaimer that the believer isn’t allowed to subsequently repudiate Christianity (if he does, all bets are off), short of in-your-face apostasy, salvation is – according to these believers – a done deal. These churches are selling tickets to Heaven, and they are cheap, cheap, cheap. The Catholic version of the gospel – the proclamation that one must not only believe and be born again, but subsequently grow in holiness and lead a life of faithful service to Christ to the end – is viewed as Bad News, a spurious gospel shackling Catholics to works-righteousness when God wants them free to revel in their eternal security.

As you can imagine, the belief that you and everyone else at your church are headed without question straight to Heaven will impact the rest of your theology. The OSAS brand of Christianity is streamlined and marvelously straightforward; Christians live in this world for the purpose of preaching the Better-than-Good!™News. Period. You need to get saved so that you can get others saved so that they can get others saved. Evangelization is the be-all and end-all of this system. The necessity of evangelization is something Protestants and Catholics can agree on, but to those who preach the Better-than-Good!™News it is an obsession. If you tend to the needs of the disadvantaged, you do it because it is the best way of evangelizing those lost souls. If you participate in the political system, you do it to create a safe civic atmosphere for evangelization. If you take an interest in those you meet, you do it with an eye on their eternal destiny, presenting them with free tickets to your church’s Halloween Hell House Evangelization Extravaganza at your earliest opportunity. Churches which preach eternal security tend to devote Wednesday evening services to the subject of the Rapture – Jesus is coming soon, very soon, certainly in our lifetime, so we must spread the word before our neighbors get left behind! Both Protestants and Catholics are familiar with the Scripture passages enjoining believers to forsake sin and live in an upright fashion. These are viewed by Catholics as reminders from a God Who insists that, after baptism, we strive to become holy as He is holy so that we can enter into His presence. If evangelization is the be-all and end-all, where’s the angle in those passages? In an OSAS context, these verses are woven right into the sales package – “Clean up your act, folks, for when unbelievers see how you live, they’ll want what you’ve got!” The Better-than-Good!™News is a product, and believers learn to pitch it.

This perspective on the gospel sells like hotcakes for several reasons, one of them being that it presents itself as a kind of goal in itself, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, the journey’s end. OSAS churchgoers sing hymns like “Victory in Jesus!” emphasizing the fact that the battle has been won; it’s over – I’m saved. Those who join the system feel free to breathe a sigh of relief now that they’ve reached the end of the struggle. With God in charge of their lives, there will be no more real suffering for them, they conjecture. How can there be, with God as their co-pilot? He knows where the turbulence is; surely He will steer His children clear of it. Which is why any kind of upheaval in the life of this kind of Christian can be potentially faith-shattering. Trouble provokes questions along the lines of “Why is God allowing this to happen to me? To what purpose? This makes no sense!  If I’m suffering this much now, and God does nothing to stop it, how can I be sure that the real estate that I bought in Heaven is really on the up-and-up? Maybe it’s all too good to be true?” Sadly, tribulation can cause what was to be a flight straight to Heaven to crash-land, never to take off again.

Adherents can’t say that Scripture didn’t warn them – a king does not go to war without first counting the cost. Like it or not, there’s a war on. Christianity isn’t a daily battle – it’s a moment-by-moment conflict. It is admittedly a peculiar situation – the victory has been won (thank you, Jesus!), but the war isn’t over – not by a long shot. The battle rages; skirmishes are being fought street by street, and even house to house. The stakes are astronomically high, for losing a battle can potentially mean losing your very salvation. In OSAS churches, discussion of the actual cost of Christianity is buried deep in the fine print. It is glossed over because it’s, well, not exactly a selling point. When “success” is measured by church growth, converts need to be raked in Sunday after Sunday. The presentation of the Better-than-Good!™News is geared towards a streamlined conversion process, one in which a man can wander in off the street and five minutes later walk back out with an iron-clad guarantee of salvation, come what may. No muss, no fuss – no counting the cost.

Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. For which one of you, when he wants to build a tower, does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who observe it begin to ridicule him, saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’

Far from being bad news, the Catholic insistence on the necessity of final perseverance is actually good news, because it is the truth. When we are born again in baptism, we become members of Christ’s very body, and as His body we lead His life on earth. Suffering and struggling against the sins that lead to spiritual death are unavoidable. Forewarned is forearmed, and a decent RCIA program will be there to forewarn potential converts. I as an Evangelical was shocked to learn that I was expected to slog through a six-month discernment period before finally being allowed to declare myself determined to be reconciled to the Church. Yet what better way to force me to count the cost? No, my salvation will not be a done deal when I enter the Church. Yes, the possibility still exists that I might choose death over life by loving my sins above all else. No, that doesn’t mean that Catholics are shackled to works-righteousness; the Church teaches (and has always taught) that we are saved by grace through faith. It does mean that we Catholics incorporate verses like Lk 12:42-46, Rom 11:19-22, 1 Cor 15:1-2, Gal 5:4, Col 1:21-23, 2 Pet 2:20-22 and Heb 3:12; 6:4-6 and 10:23-29, verses that teach that it is possible to lose one’s salvation, into our theology rather than explaining them away. And while, yes, you do have to actively participate in the conflict – working out your own salvation with fear and trembling, as St. Paul phrased it – no, you do not fight alone. Catholics joyfully proclaim the doctrine of the communion of saints: all the inhabitants of Heaven, from the Blessed Virgin and the angels on down, are committed to making sure that you are saved in the end. So, while you will have to fight, you will never fight alone.

And that is seriously Good News.

 

On the memorial of St. Robert Bellarmine

Deo omnis gloria!

Tom, Dick and Teri Talk Again

Tom, Dick and Teri are friends who all work at the same big company. Although each is a member of a different Protestant denomination, they meet for lunch to encourage one another in their Christian walk. On this particular day, Tom arrives last, and is surprised to find Teri and Dick glaring at each other over their macaroni and cheese.

“Hey guys! What’s up?

Dick looks down at his plate as Teri pipes up.

“Oh, not much! I just found out that Dick here is a heretic, that’s all.”

Tom does a double-take and seats himself across from Dick. “Dude,” he asks in a stage whisper, “Why didn’t you tell me?”

Dick scowls as Teri chatters. “Well, don’t feel bad – he didn’t tell me, either. It seems our friend here is calling into question the reliability of the Word of God!”

Tom refuses to take the bait. “Aw, come on, Teri! You know that isn’t true. What are you talking about?”

Teri stabs at her mac-and-cheese as she continues to glare at Dick. “Our friend Dick is an evolutionist!”

Dick squares his jaw and struggles to keep his voice down. “You know that’s not what I said, Teri!”

“It most certainly is!” Teri shoots back. “You said the first two chapters of Genesis can’t be taken literally – that makes you an evolutionist!!”

“Whoa! Whoa!” Tom cautions. “Let’s just calm down here. Start from the beginning. What did you actually say, Dick?”

“Actually,” Dick emphasizes as he scowls at Teri, “what I said was that it isn’t absolutely necessary to take every word in the first two chapters of Genesis literally. In other words, when it talks about ‘days,’ it may not mean literal 24-hour days, just as Peter said that 1,000 years are like a day to the Lord….”

“Copout!” Teri calls out. “You don’t believe the creation account, and you’ve found some kind of ‘proof text’ in another part of the Bible to justify your unbelief!”

“That’s called ‘allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture!‘” Dick protests. “We know from the Bible that when God talks about a ‘day,’ He doesn’t always mean a 24-hour period!”

“Well,” Tom points out as his macaroni and cheese cools, “that’s not exactly what that verse says….”

Dick’s mouth drops open. “Are you siding with her?” he asks.

“I’m not ‘siding’ with anybody!” Tom protests, ” I’m just saying that 2 Peter 3:8 actually says ‘With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.’ That’s not the same as saying ‘When God talks about a day, He doesn’t always mean a 24-hour period!'”

“Of course it is!” Dick insists, but Tom holds up his hand and turns to Teri.

“So I believe what Dick is saying is that he’s a Day-Ager – he believes the Biblical account of creation, but thinks that the 6 ‘days’ of creation are much longer time periods than normal days. That doesn’t make him an evolutionist, Teri.”

Teri snorts. “People who believe that are already half-way down the slippery slope. Once you compromise the truth of the Scriptures, you start to question everything the Bible teaches.” She leans towards Dick, and her eyes narrow. “I bet you think it’s okay to baptize by pouring, don’t you?”

Dick’s mouth drops open. He starts to answer, but Tom interrupts. “Teri, no Christian takes every single word or phrase in the Bible literally. For example, you…”

Dick cuts him off. “It would be crazy to take every word of Scripture literally! You’d end up like the people who read Psalm 91:4 and think that God is a celestial chicken!!”

It is Tom’s turn to scowl. “Come on, Dick! Nobody believes that God is a chicken!”

“You know what I mean!” Dick insists. “People who take the last chapter of the book of Mark literally, with all the snake-handling and poison drinking!”

Teri stiffens. “My church takes the last chapter of Mark literally.”

Tom and Dick stare at Teri, glance at each other, and fall silent.

“If you’re a Christian, you HAVE TO take the Bible literally!!” Teri announces loudly, and several people at the surrounding tables glance in her direction. More quietly, she hisses at Dick, “The Bible says it – I believe it – that settles it!!”

“Teri, be reasonable!” Tom implores. “There are many, many passages in Scripture that you don’t take literally!”

“Name one!” Teri challenges incredulously.

“I can name several!” Tom responds. “1 Peter 3:21 – Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

Dick grins at Teri. “Yeah, see, you have to take that figuratively, Teri. Baptism obviously doesn’t save us!”

“Yet that’s exactly what that verse says,” Tom comments softly.

Dick frowns. “Well, no, Tom – I mean, the verse says that baptism is an appeal to God for a clear conscience, so we understand that it’s our FAITH that saves us, and baptism is just the outward sign of our obedience!”

“It says,” Tom reiterates, “BAPTISM now saves you as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus.”

“Well, then, what’s that part about the appeal to God for a clear conscience?” Dick asks.

“In Greek it’s eperōtēma, and it refers to the formal acceptance of a contract or covenant in which the terms of the agreement were proclaimed and the compliance with the terms was solemnly promised. It’s like what the early Christians pledged in their baptismal rites. They were asked to publically reject Satan. They were asked ‘Do you believe in God, the Father Almighty? Do you believe in Christ Jesus, the Son of God?’ and the answer they gave, their rejection of Satan and their proclamation of faith, was their “I do,” their pledge, which then served as their ‘appeal’ to God for a clear conscience. The early Christians definitely did take this verse literally. They believed that ‘baptism now saves you.'”

Teri has whipped her King James out of her purse. “Are you sure that verse is even in the Bible?” she demands.

“Trust me on this,” Tom retorts wryly. “And how about John 20:22-23? ‘And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.’ Taken literally, this indicates that the risen Lord appeared to His apostles to confer the authority to forgive and retain sins!”

Dick is grinning broadly. “Whereas we all know that Jesus was just explaining to them that they could assure believers that their sins were all forgiven – past, present and future – because of their faith in Christ, and they could likewise assure unbelievers that their sins were NOT forgiven!”

“Thereby making a hash out of what Jesus actually said,” Tom comments. Dick’s eyebrows shoot up. “Why did He even bother to make this special appearance, Dick, and breathe on them, filling them with the Holy Spirit, just to pass on a trite observation like that?”

Dick does a double-take. “Are you kidding? What do you think Jesus meant, Tom?”

“I think He probably meant what He said,” Tom observes quietly.

Teri is flipping furiously through her Bible. “Is that verse in John or in 1 John?”

“And what about Paul’s command in Philippians 2:12?” Tom continues. ‘Continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling!‘ Teri, you don’t take that literally.”

Teri’s mouth opens as she thinks. “But…” she stammers, “but, you can’t take that literally!”

“That’s the point, Teri!” Dick crows. “If you take that verse literally, you’re admitting that you might be able to lose your salvation!”

Tom’s not finished. “And Romans 3:23, ‘For all have sinned, and fallen short of the glory of God.’ You know you don’t take that literally.”

Teri looks up from her Bible, shocked. “I take every single word of that verse absolutely literally,” she announces.

Tom tilts his head as he questions her. “Really? Really? Every single word?”

Teri puts her Bible in her lap and leans forward in her chair. “EVERY SINGLE WORD. For ALL have SINNED, and FALLEN SHORT of the GLORY OF GOD.”

“All right,” Tom says quietly. “And you’ll agree that Paul is talking about actual sin here, not the original sin that we inherited from Adam.”

Teri nods emphatically.

“Okay, Teri – for ALL have sinned: Two-week-old babies.”

“Huh?” Teri and Dick respond in unison.

“Two-week-old babies – have they sinned?” Tom asks Teri.

There is silence as Teri and Dick contemplate this.

“Do you believe that infants sin?” Tom asks. “How about the profoundly mentally retarded – can they sin? How about the fetus in the womb? You would be the first to insist, Teri, that from the moment of conception the embryo is a living PERSON, and therefore falls under Paul’s blanket statement here. For ALL have sinned….”

Teri and Dick sit silently frowning, as Tom continues.

“Remember, when Paul was talking about Jacob and Esau in the womb of their mother, he said, ‘Yet before the children had been born or had done anything good or bad.’ He’s basically saying that the unborn can’t sin, right? So even if you do believe that newborns and the profoundly mentally handicapped can somehow sin, to say that an unborn child can sin contradicts Scripture. Teri, millions of those unborn children have lived and died without sinning! So how can you take Romans 3:23 literally?”

Before Dick or Teri muster up a reply, Tom goes on. “And then there’s John 6:22-71. Jesus emphasized over and over that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us. ‘Whoever eats this bread will live forever’ – ‘Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you’ – ‘Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life’ – ‘My flesh is real food and my blood is real drink’ – ‘Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them’ – ‘The one who feeds on me will live because of me’ – ‘Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.’ Teri, you don’t take one word of that literally.”

Dick is beside himself with glee. “Of course you don’t, Teri! This is a prime example of why certain verses just can’t be taken literally! Jesus Himself told us not to take this discourse literally when He said ‘It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life,” meaning that we are to take this passage FIGURATIVELY!”

Before Teri can answer, Tom retorts quietly, “And this is a prime example, Dick, of how you have decided not to accept the literal meaning of a passage because it would demand too much faith, so you have found a “proof text” to justify your unbelief.”

Dick and Teri both gasp. Teri grins broadly as she recognizes her earlier objection being used to demolish Dick’s assertion. Dick defends himself. “Jesus said, ‘the words I have spoken to you are spirit and life!’ That means that His words were meant to be understood in a spiritual, not a literal sense! ‘This is My body’ is a figure of speech!”

Tom explains, “When Jesus said ‘the words I have spoken are spirit and life,’ He couldn’t have meant ‘I have spoken metaphorically.’ You think you are using Scripture to interpret Scripture, but seriously, Dick, where in the Bible is the word ‘spirit’ ever used as a synonym for ‘symbolic’?? And if Jesus was saying ‘Take everything I’ve just said metaphorically,’ there’s another problem, because right in the middle of this supposedly metaphorical discourse Jesus mentions ‘My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.’ Is that a metaphor?? Did He not literally sacrifice His very flesh on the Cross for the life of the world?? How do you justify exempting the one passage you happen to believe from the metaphor?? And why, while we’re on the subject, didn’t Jesus take His disciples aside to explain this very hard saying in private? That’s what He did with every other hard saying – but with this one He just asked them ‘Are you leaving me, too?’ Kind of harsh, when He could’ve just explained the ‘metaphor’ to them….”

Tom leans back in his chair, pushing his untouched macaroni plate away. Teri, struggling to understand how her excellent argument has just been used to prove something she vehemently rejects, reaches for her water glass. Dick squints angrily at Tom. “Every one of your examples, but one, is a case in which we don’t take the Bible literally but Catholics DO, and Romans 3:23 is a case where we insist on a literal, rigid interpretation of the word “all” in order to disprove Catholic doctrine – an interpretation,” Dick admits uncomfortably, “which you’ve just shown to be unworkable.”

Teri chokes on her water, and Tom passes her a napkin.

“Cath-licks!” she gasps, and Dick pats her firmly on the back till she stops choking. “Catholics,” she repeats after she has cleared her throat, “don’t take the Bible literally! Catholics don’t believe a word the Bible says – the pope makes up Catholic doctrine! His worst fear is that people are actually going to read the Bible and find out what it really says!”

Ignoring Teri, Tom leans towards Dick. “My point is that all Christians take certain parts of the Bible literally while taking other parts figuratively. Every denomination does this. So the question isn’t ‘Should I take every word of Scripture literally?’ No, because then we’d end up with your ‘celestial chicken’ proposition. The question is, which parts of the Bible were meant to be taken literally, and which parts were meant to be taken figuratively,
and how can we know which are which?
It just so happens that Catholics take many passages of Scripture literally, which is what makes their doctrine distinctively Catholic – Protestants explain those verses away, claiming that they were meant to be taken figuratively. Yet, can we claim that we somehow know which verses were meant to be taken figuratively? We can’t even agree amongst ourselves on that! How can we be sure that we’re not taking these ‘Catholic’ verses figuratively because we lack the faith to take God at His word?”

“I wish you’d get off this Catholic kick,” Dick grumbles. Teri stands up.

“They’re not gonna believe me at church when I tell ’em,” she declares with a toss of her head as she picks up her tray to go. “I had lunch with TWO heretics!”

 

On the memorial of St. Jane Frances de Chantal

Deo omnis gloria!

Photo credits: Macaroni and cheese with panko topping and a Soju-based cocktail in a tumbler at Blue at 2337 Market Street in San Francisco, California. “Gourmet Mac & Cheese: Fresh mozzarella, sharp cheddar, Parmesan, elbow pasta, topped with Japanese bread crumbs.” Description from their online menu as viewed on 2007-05-27, by Rick Audet from San Francisco, California, United States /Wikimedia Commons

Surprise!

One item of profound concern to me back when I was contemplating entering the Church was the note of dire warning in the collective voice of Protestantism. No daughter was ever more seriously cautioned against rash elopement – he’s not serious about you, he’ll mistreat you, he’ll get tired of you, he’ll leave you, you’ll come crawling home, you’ll rue the day…. The gloom-and-doom prognostication is enough to give any would-be convert grave pause; after all, conversion is a serious step, and anyone who undertakes it lightly has no real comprehension of the potential eternal consequences. I was worried, especially since I was bringing children into the Church with me. What if the warnings proved true?

Next Easter will mark our 10^th anniversary as Catholics, and after nearly 10 years I think I can speak with some authority on this subject. Did the Protestant misgivings hold water? Let’s examine them one by one – you might be surprised:

Protestants warned that by submitting myself to the teaching of the Church I would make of myself an intellectual slave.

Surprisingly, since proclaiming that “I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church teaches, believes and proclaims to be revealed by God,” I have been freed to ponder and explore doctrine like never before, securely tethered to “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15).

Protestants warned that by using set prayers, I would be putting a chokehold on my devotional life.

Surprisingly, written prayers proved to be the trellis upon which my frail prayer life has grown and borne fruit.

Protestants warned that by participating in the liturgy I would lose any sense of a personal relationship with Christ.

Surprisingly, by participating in the Church’s worship at Mass, my personal relationship with Jesus has been greatly strengthened, as I now have the assistance of the Church teaching me how better to pray and to worship my Lord, and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist to change me from the inside out.

Protestants warned that when I began striving to obey the commandments of Christ, I would become bound up in works and lose sight of grace.

Surprisingly, in attempting to obey Christ’s command to love God and love my neighbor as the Church teaches us to do, I have been overwhelmed by the necessity of God’s grace to fit me for this otherwise impossible task.

Protestants warned that by embracing a belief system that proclaimed the existence of a ministerial priesthood, I would betray my understanding of the “priesthood of the believer.”

Surprisingly, when I accepted the idea of priests who offer up the once-for-all sacrifice of the Body and Blood in the Holy Eucharist, I became profoundly aware of my own responsibility as a member of the priesthood of believers, most especially when I assist at Mass, and when I pray, “Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I adore Thee profoundly. I offer Thee the Most Precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles of the world, in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges and indifference by which He is offended. And through the infinite merits of His Most Sacred Heart, and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg of Thee the conversion of poor sinners.”

Protestants warned that by confessing my sins to a mere man, I would forget that only God can forgive sins.

Surprisingly, by taking seriously my responsibility to confess my sins to a priest, I have become profoundly convinced of God’s love and forgiveness in the confessional.

Protestants warned that by forsaking their “once-saved/always saved” theology, I would lose all sense of “blessed assurance” and live in constant fear of hell.

Surprisingly, by admitting that the Bible does teach that we can lose our salvation, I have been freed to embrace a constant, trust-filled reliance on the only One Who can keep sin from ruling over me (Ps 119:133, Rom 6:12) rather than pretending that this One will turn a blind eye no matter what I do….

Protestants warned that my Christian walk would suffer as I embraced the notion of “a second chance” at salvation after death known as Purgatory.

Surprisingly, as I came to understand that the doctrine of Purgatory proclaims a final, thorough cleansing for those already headed to Heaven, I began joyfully offering up my sufferings in this life in cooperation with the God Who loves me too much to leave me the way He found me.

Protestants warned that I would be taught to consider 7 uninspired books to be Holy Scripture, books that the Church added to the Bible after the Reformation in support of false doctrines.

Surprisingly, the historical truth turned out to be the opposite of what I had been warned, and I began studying the 7 inspired books that Protestants removed from Holy Scripture, books that had been there since the New Testament canon was settled.

Protestants warned that I would end up praying to Mary and the saints rather than to God.

Surprisingly, as a faithful Catholic I have been taught to ask Mary and the saints to pray for me to the Lord our God that I would love Him above all things.

Protestants warned that I would lose sight of Christ when I cultivated a devotion to Mary.

Surprisingly, by drawing closer to Mary, my relationship to Christ has become deeper and wider and more profound than ever, as I ponder the events of her Son’s life through her eyes.

Protestants warned that I would become disillusioned with Catholicism when I found out what Catholics were really like.

Surprisingly, as I receive my Lord in Holy Communion Sunday after Sunday, I have been given special insight into the sins and failings of one Catholic in particular – myself. I am far too busy fighting to overcome that which displeases God in my own life to worry about what other Catholics are really like, although I suspect that they are for the most part a lot like me. “What is that to you? You follow Me.”

Protestants warned that I might get “left behind.”

Surprisingly, it turned out that the novel doctrine of the “secret rapture” so dear to Evangelical hearts is nothing more than theological speculation on their part, heavy on eisegesis and devoid of historicity. As a Catholic I await with the Church the glorious Second Coming of our Lord.

Protestants warned that I was leaving the Truth behind.

When I entered the Catholic Church, I left behind nothing that was true in all the Protestant denominations I had loved throughout my life. I entered into MORE truth, into the very Fullness of the Truth, when I was reconciled to the Church. After all, the Catholic Church is the Church established by Jesus Christ the Lord, and so there is

no surprise about that at all!

On the memorial of St. Francis Xavier

Deo omnis gloria!

Was St. Paul a Quack?

Did you ever hear of a doctor warning his patients to make sure that their hearts don’t stop beating? Get a family member to sit by your bed all night taking your pulse, he tells you – they can get help at the first sign of trouble! Better yet, buy a heart monitor – you can’t be too careful! You must keep your heart beating at all costs!!!

Goofy, huh? What a quack! The heart, after all, is an involuntary muscle! You expect that it’s going to keep beating whether you want it to or not! Can you imagine your doctor telling you that it is your responsibility to be on your guard and keep your heart beating?

Evangelicals have a couple of doctrines that are really dear to their hearts, two that they got from Luther – sola fide and sola Scriptura (faith alone and the Bible alone), and one from Calvin – the doctrine of “eternal security,” colloquially known as “once-saved/always saved.” Televangelists refer to it as “You can know that you know that you know that you know that you know….”

One brand of Evangelical teaching on eternal security is somewhat different from the doctrine of “perseverance of the saints” first set forth by Calvin (and I do mean FIRST set forth – NO ONE before Calvin preached this doctrine). These Evangelicals tend to emphasize the faith ALONE aspect of eternal security, looking to John 3:18 as a proof-text:

Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

Now, when you read that verse, you read “Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.” But when these folks read that verse, they read “Whoever BELIEVES in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not BELIEVE stands condemned already because they have not BELIEVED in the name of God’s one and only Son.” In other words, it’s all a matter of whether or not you BELIEVE. When you “get saved,” many Evangelicals tell you, you will start living a Christ-like life out of sheer gratitude to God – BUT YOU DON’T HAVE TO. Sanctification is totally optional. You may, and unfortunately some do, continue to live like the devil, but you need never fear that eternal damnation might be in the cards. This perspective sees salvation as God’s work entirely, and therefore a Christian, no matter how wildly and deliberately he sins, cannot lose his salvation. Nothing he does can earn his salvation, and therefore nothing he does can cause him to forfeit it. “Free Grace” is another name for this particular understanding of eternal security. “Easy, greasy grace” and “easy believe-ism” are other, less flattering ways of referring to it.

Not all Evangelicals adhere to the “Free Grace” perspective on salvation. Many believe that when a person gets saved, he WILL begin to live a Christ-honoring life. If he doesn’t – he didn’t really get saved. This assumption leads, understandably, to a lot less “security” than the “eternal security” proponents would like you to believe. An Evangelical who “gets saved” and then finds himself engaging in sin will naturally tend to doubt his salvation. This gives rise to altar calls encouraging folks to “rededicate” their lives to the Lord. If that fails to assuage the doubt, one can always “get saved” all over again. As my toddler daughter put it (back in our Baptist days), “I got saved three times already! My Sunday School teacher saved me once, and I saved myself once in my bedroom, and today I got saved again!” Cute – but not so cute when adults get baptized, and re-baptized, and three-baptized… all because they’re afraid that their “salvation” wasn’t for real.

The utter subjectivity of this view of eternal security poses some unusual difficulties. My son’s eighth-grade Bible teacher told the class that she never talks to Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses who knock on her door, because she is afraid that they will deceive her with their false doctrine and lead her away from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, causing her to be damned. Understandably shocked, the children asked her if she was saying that she could lose her salvation? “Of course not!” was her answer – if that happened, then she had never really been saved to begin with. My son, now a freshman in college, still gets headaches trying to follow that convoluted logic, but it is inherent in the system. As an Evangelical, you get used to playing Extreme Mental Twister when you think about these things.

St. Paul’s warnings to the Philippians, the Romans, the Corinthians, the Galatians and the Colossians don’t help any. Up against the Evangelical Protestant understanding of “eternal security,” St. Paul is like a cardiologist warning his patients to keep their hearts beating! “The heart is an involuntary muscle!” you say? That’s what I learned in school – so the idea that a doctor would warn me to make sure my heart keeps beating strikes me as bizarre! But the Evangelical idea of eternal security claims that salvation is akin to an involuntary muscle – it’s not up to you to keep the “heart” of your salvation beating – either (a) IT CAN’T STOP or (b) if it “stops,” it’s because it was never really actually beating…. (my head hurts). Yet the apostle Paul warns the Colossians:

And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach– if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.

He warns the Galatians:

Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

He warns the Corinthians:

Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.

And he warns the Romans:

You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off.

All of these verses indicate the reality that a Christian can be severed from Christ, can fall from grace, can be cut off, can believe in vain. St. Paul’s admonition to the Philippians therefore takes on an air of extreme urgency: Work out your salvation with fear and trembling!

St. Peter (2 Pet 2:20-22) and the author of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:12, Heb 6:4-6) echo the same refrain. Hebrews 10:23-29 puts it very strongly, warning of the “fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire” for those who go on deliberately sinning after receiving the knowledge of the truth. The Great Physician, Himself meek and lowly of heart, teaches the same doctrine (Lk 12:42-46) – remember the steward given charge over the Master’s household, the guy who eats, drinks and makes merry instead of faithfully carrying out his charge? What did the Master do to that steward when He returned? Turn a blind eye to his misdeeds and promote him?

St. Paul was no quack. His warnings about falling from grace are very necessary reminders to us – do not be arrogant, but be afraid. Whether your theology admits it or not, your heart can most certainly betray you. Or as the author of the book of Hebrews puts it: Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God….

On the memorial of St. Teresa de Jesús

Deo omnis gloria!

What the Bible Should Say

Many of you have read my “conversion story” at Why I’m Catholic. This term “conversion” leaves a lot to be desired. Technically, Protestants don’t “convert” to Catholicism – we are reconciled to the Church, because we are already Christians by virtue of our baptism. But that’s so wordy – it’s so much easier to say “I converted.”

The word “convert” comes from the Latin “com” (with) and “vertere” (to turn). Nowadays we also speak of “deconversion,” when someone falls away from the faith, and of “reversion,” as when a Catholic convert to Protestantism “reverts” to his former Catholic beliefs. Since Protestants and Catholics are all Christians to begin with, I think we need some more specific terms for what happens when someone leaves Catholicism for Protestantism, or vice versa. I tend to think of Catholics as “subverting” when they reject the teachings of the Church for “what does this Bible verse mean to you?” I myself “supraverted” when I left behind a lifetime of private interpretation of Scripture in order to be reconciled to my mother, the Church. I am motivated by the desire to see all of Protestantism supravert!

So, for those of you who have read my supraversion story, here are a few of the Scriptures I listed as posing a problem for me as a Protestant. Some of these verses (like Colossians 1:24 – “Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church”) were a shock to me when I first encountered them, because there was no way to comfortably reconcile them to my existing beliefs. Others, like II Timothy 3:16, had bothered me all my life because of the nagging certainty that we were stretching or twisting them all out of proportion to make them agree with our theology. After all, what’s a Bible-Alone Christian to do if the Bible won’t say what it SHOULD say?

II Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

As an Evangelical, I was convinced that Holy Scripture is the pillar and foundation of truth. That’s how I was taught to read II Timothy 3:16, ignoring the fact that that verse claims only that:

a) Scripture is God-breathed

b) Scripture is useful

c) Scripture makes it possible for God’s servants to be fully equipped for good works.

We distorted that into “Scripture is the sole infallible guide and rule of our faith and practice!” As you can see, the verse just doesn’t say that. Holy Scripture simply isn’t (and never claims to be) the pillar and foundation of the truth.

1 Timothy 3:15: “…the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.”

In 45 years of Protestant experience, I never knew that that statement was in the Bible. If you had told me that the CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of the truth, I would have told you that you were badly deceived.

James 2:24: “A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.”

Another one of those verses that I read right over. Try walking up to a “Bible-believing Christian” and saying, “A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.” They may very well shriek “Heresy!!” No, not heresy – James 2:24.

Revelation chapters 2 and 3

Works, works and more works! For a “Faith Alone” kinda guy, the Jesus of Revelation chapters 2 and 3 seems weirdly hung up on the “works” that the churches have been performing! “I know your works” – Rev 2:2. “I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first.” “I know your works” Rev 3:1. “I know your works” Rev 3:8. “I know your works” Rev 3:15. To calm the Evangelical soul, the NIV (the most popular Protestant translation of the Bible into English) translates this as “I know your deeds.” “Works” just has that Catholic ring to it….

Matthew 25:31-46: When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ “The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

An assignment for those who insist that “works” have nothing to do with our salvation – find a judgment scenario in Scripture where anyone is judged on their faith alone.

1 Corinthians 13:13: “And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.”

So what?

As Evangelicals, we were all about FAITH. Every passage in the Bible was made to fit into our interpretive paradigm of FAITH ALONE. This little verse acts as a tiny pinprick in the great big balloon of FAITH ALONE assumptions. If “love” is the greatest, how can we possibly be saved by faith alone?

Galatians 5:4-6: You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.

Here’s where 1 Corinthians 13:13 goes to work – it’s NOT faith alone, but “faith working through love,” because the greatest of these is NOT faith, but love. This has been the Catholic position vis-à-vis faith and works since the beginning.

John 17:20-23: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

As a Protestant, I was certainly familiar with this passage, but I took it to mean that Christians need to get along in a generalized sense. In my understanding, “be one” morphed into “don’t argue too much over the passages of Scripture you can’t agree on – if necessary just go out and start your own church – nothing wrong with that.” We all knew that denominations were a necessary accommodation to our Christian inability to see eye-to-eye on every little thing.

1 Corinthians 1:11-13 – “My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?”

St. Paul’s definitive statement against denominationalism comes complete with excuse-making that sounds suspiciously like “I follow Luther”; “I follow Calvin”; “I follow Wesley.” As Evangelicals we realized this, but were helpless to do anything about it, preferring instead to believe that we Protestants agreed on The Essentials.

Ephesians 4:11-13: “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.”

This passage presents a problem to those who stretch II Timothy 3:16 all out of proportion, for while that verse tells us that the Scriptures fully equip us for good works, Ephesians 4:12 tells us that the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers do this as well – a problem if you are trying to attribute that role to Scripture ALONE. Obviously Church leaders must play some part in that equipping. The Bible isn’t even mentioned here.

Ephesians 4:13 also presents a difficulty for those who believe that we just need a live-and-let-live attitude towards Christians of other denominations, proclaiming as it does that our goal must be “unity in the faith and knowledge of the Son of God.” Obviously, this unity is only possible if our leaders are all preaching the same doctrine….

Philippians 2: 12-13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”

As Baptists, there was one thing we were all certain of when we discussed Philippians 2:12-13, and that was that St. Paul did NOT mean “continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling!” That was IMPOSSIBLE, because when we prayed the sinner’s prayer, we were saved in an instant for all time and eternity. We twisted the verse like a lump of clay until we made it say something like “continue trying to become more Christ-like!” – emasculating the “fear and trembling” part, and sweeping the word “salvation” under our theological carpet. Over the years that carpet got quite a few lumps under it….

1 John 5:13: These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.”

What we did to 1 John 5:13 should be illegal. Placing the last 8 words of this verse in solitary confinement, we proclaimed that you could “know that you know that you know” that you are saved for all eternity. We wanted so badly to assure you of your eternal salvation that we neglected to read you the fine print: 1 John chapters 1-4! St. John’s checklist is extensive (“You can know if you have eternal life IF you (a) walk in the light, (b) obey God’s commands, (c) walk as Jesus did, (d) do what is right, (e) love your brother), and it is enough to send anyone scurrying back to St. Paul’s advice in Philippians: “WORK OUT YOUR SALVATION WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING!”

So there are twelve examples of the major “fudge factor” that I participated in as an Evangelical. And I’m not the only one who feels this way; apparently the translators of the New International Version agreed with me – Evangelicals simply have to put a “spin” on certain passages of Scripture in order to make popular Evangelical theology work. Well-known Anglican bishop and author of Justification: God’ Plan and Paul’s Vision, N.T. Wright, critiqued the NIV with the following words:

“Again and again, with the Greek text in front of me and the NIV beside it, I discovered that the translators had another principle, considerably higher than the stated one: to make sure that Paul should say what the broadly Protestant and evangelical tradition said he said….”  

 

On the memorial of St. Regina

Deo omnis gloria!