The Economic Politics of Papal Rome Infused in Western Thinking

By Richard Bennett and Robert J. Nicholson

“My kingdom is not of this world,”[1] was the response of the Lord Jesus to Pilate’s interrogation of Him regarding His relationship to the political economy of the Roman Empire.  The Lord fulfilled all righteousness in respect to fearing God, and honoring in this case, Caesar, and the pattern is demonstrated for His disciples to follow.  The kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ is heavenly; however, believers in the Lord Jesus Christ live in the world as He did.  They are in the world, but not of the world.  In contrast, the kingdom of the Pope of Rome is very much of this world.  Papal Rome binds men, even in economic matters.  Few people, outside of the Vatican Curia, are aware of the Vatican’s vast financial and real estate assets, through which it has exerted a powerful effect upon the world economy, both historically and in the present day.  For example, the Papal Church is a multinational corporation operating in the USA and across most of the western world, with a local office in almost every town. 

It is a law of the Roman Church that, “By virtue of his primacy in governance the Roman Pontiff is the supreme administrator and steward of all ecclesiastical goods.”[2]  All holdings even on the local level belong to the Pontiff.  The impact of Catholic economic theory, doctrine, and commercial practice is global.  Influence on government policy, state treasury decisions, commercial bank management, stock exchange pricing, academic teaching, media presentation, multinational corporations, and employees are profound.  In fact, the reach of Rome in commerce far exceeds the dimensions of its ‘spiritual’ rule over those that she calls, “the faithful.”  Its financial tentacles extend into private and public education, civil elements of federal and state health care, national charities, and a multitude of minor municipal enterprises.

Whatever Papal Rome teaches on economics, redistribution of wealth, and social justice, she does so even while seated as a primary player in many boardrooms of international industry and banking.  Further, she often occupies these seats of power by using Catholic non-clerical trustees and share proxies to remain relatively invisible.  Even at a local level, their commercial bank trading accounts are hidden from the view of public and government, and more importantly, never audited by any independent body.  All transactions, transfers, and trade exchanges occur “in house” under the supervision of diocesan business managers, otherwise known as bishops.  The line of financial transmission runs from episcopates and regular clerical orders direct to the Vatican Bank in Rome.  This bank is in fact, the cash, stock, and bonds treasury of the Vatican City–State.  It answers to nobody but the Roman curia and its pope.

Stripped of its camouflage, and seen to be occupying a privileged position in the world of commerce and finance, the Roman Catholic Church is firmly enthroned as the queen of capital.  And all this is quite separate from her fabulous material wealth of real estate, gold, silver, precious gems, and priceless art.  The Vatican has real estate all the way down to parish schools, presbyteries, and churches from one end of the globe to the other.  The Papacy is identifiable as an international financial leech sucking the economic lifeblood from other nation–states.  Particularly in the “third world,” Papal Rome holds, almost unhindered, sway over substantial populations of devotees in such places as the Philippines, Mexico, or South American countries.  The Papacy exerts financial power in ways that most dictators can only dream about.  This is the practice of Papal Rome and how it actually behaves in the real world of global economics.

At this present time, pontifical teaching on economic theory has become hugely influential worldwide.  This can be seen in Europe in her philosophy of intrusion into economic matters for the purpose of wealth.  Redistribution of wealth is the economic philosophy formulated by the Vatican.

Biblical Economic Principles

Without embracing “capitalism,” which has its own pitfalls, we shall first give an overview of the biblical principles of economics.  True economics must be administered by justice, rendering objectively to each, based on one’s conduct relative to the commandments of Scripture.  The key requirements of justice are revealed in the Ten Commandments and the civil and judicial laws that are given throughout Scripture.  The Apostle expressed the relationship between faith and God’s moral law, “do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.”  Scripture also teaches all men are not due equal wages for their labor regardless of their behavior.  The biblical standard is that the more work that is done the greater must be the wages, “the workman is worthy of his meat,” and “the laborer is worthy of his hire.”[3]  The Bible does not teach that justice means equality of conditions among all men.  The Lord is our provider and He expects that we deal justly with our fellow man, 

“Behold, the hire of the laborers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth.”[4] 

The Bible permits justice for a violation of the Commandment, “Thou shalt not steal.”  Any church or society that ignores the moral standards of the Bible is heading for strife and difficulties within families and the lives of individuals. 

Historical Scholarship in Economics

In 1904 and 1905, the German ecumenist Max Weber published a book that has created great interest.  According to Weber, the ways of life in the earliest part of the 20th century were motivated by biblical ideas.  There were new lifestyles where hard work was motivated by the principle that such work brought its reward with increase of goods.  The application of principles of honest hard work and the discipline of labor and time were means by which the believers could be responsible before God.  Basically, however, with the accumulation of money for investment, a gradual secularization took place.  The biblical way of doing business gave way to modern capitalism.  Thus, with the expansion of trade and the pursuit of wealth by economic strategies, gain became an end itself.  They were no longer dependent on the economic practices that biblical principles brought.[5]  The rationale of the biblical principles had been appropriated by secularism and transmuted into the spirit of modern capitalism.  This is in harmony with Weber's major theme of the “rationalization of action” in theoretical sociology.  So, since we are not endorsing modern capitalism, we need to go back to biblical economic responsibility and the commandment to not steal.  In facing these clear biblical principles, on the other hand, we have the devastating economic theories of Papal Rome.  These destructive theories have to be documented, as they are difficult to believe, if we were not to quote from exact Roman Catholic sources.

Roman Catholic Economic Philosophy

Where Roman Catholic economic theories have been embraced, nations have been devastated.  The Pope claims legislative and executive authority over his subjects, even in economic matters.  In total contrast, Scripture presents man as answerable to God for the use of possessions and capital.  The Word of God upholds the principle that the ownership of private property is a just reward for labor on the principle that “the labourer is worthy of his hire.”[6]  Rightful ownership proceeds from the receipt of an inheritance or gifts on the standard, “a good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children…”[7] The Lord instructed His disciples regarding economics, as for example, in a parable when He likened God to a vineyard owner, expecting a return on His investment.  He is expecting profit from both His vines and His workers.  He rewards good stewardship and punishes poor stewardship.  God’s will for believers is that they be faithful stewards that are accountable to Him.  Believers are entrusted with talents and goods to be used for the glory of God and the good of others, especially those of the household of faith. 

According to the Bible, a person cannot procure for himself what he needs out of the riches of others, as we will document; however, Papal Rome officially teaches this must be done!  Besides the devastating partnership with fascism and dictators in the first part of the 20th century, there have been many devastating revolutions and upheavals in nations across the world through the Roman Catholic teaching regarding “social justice.”  The Papacy’s Vatican Council II proclaimed the principles of the possession of property, including the need that can exist of making another’s goods one’s own property.  The Council made clear the wide disparity between rich and poor nations, and it endorsed the most influential of all Catholic theologians, Thomas Aquinas, in his philosophical “justification for theft.”  The official words of the Council are,

“Whatever the forms of property may be, as adapted to the legitimate institutions of peoples, according to diverse and changeable circumstances, attention must always be paid to this universal destination of earthly goods.  In using them, therefore, man should regard the external things that he legitimately possesses not only as his own but also as common in the sense that they should be able to benefit not only him but also others.  On the other hand, the right of having a share of earthly goods sufficient for oneself and one's family belongs to everyone.  The Fathers and Doctors of the Church held this opinion, teaching that men are obliged to come to the relief of the poor and to do so not merely out of their superfluous goods.  If one is in extreme necessity, he has the right to procure for himself what he needs out of the riches of others.”[8]  This is

The theological roots of Vatican Council II’s teaching go back to the most influential of all Catholic theologians, Thomas Aquinas, whose writings it quoted.  Aquinas wrote,

“….whatever certain people have in superabundance is due, by natural law, to the purpose of succoring the poor… In cases of need, all things are common property, so that there would seem to be no sin in taking another’s property, for need has made it common. …it is lawful for a man to succor his own need by means of another’s property by taking it either openly or secretly; nor is this, properly speaking, theft and robbery…. It is not theft, properly speaking, to take secretly and use another’s property in a case of extreme need; because that which he takes for the support of his life becomes his own property by reason of that need….  In a case of a like need a man may also take secretly another’s property in order to succor his neighbor in need.”[9]

In Aquinas’ philosophy, “need” is the criterion for what is right regarding the possession of property.  Need can make another’s goods one’s own.  This is simply a philosophical justification for theft.  The “Robin Hood principle” of robbing the rich to feed the poor, is also contained in Aquinas’ reasoning.  He stated,

“In a case of a like need a man may also take secretly another’s property in order to succor his neighbor in need.”[10]

The Catholic writers, Leonardo and Clodovis Boff have explained the devastating results of Liberation Theology implementing in Latin America, the Vatican Council II teaching.  The “preferential option for the poor” implemented the Robin Hood principle for theft and has devastated not only Central and South America but also developing nations, and across the world and in particular, Africa and the Philippines.  This principle, called “Liberation Theology” has really been the root cause of revolutions in many nations in South America.  The failure of Liberation Theology is admitted even among those who persist in trying to implement its fantasies.  The revolutionary fervor of the of the 1970’s and 1980’s has not abolished the grueling poverty in Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Costa Rica; rather, it has been in these and other nations a demoralizing economic and social influence.

Many Different Fronts to Attract People to Papal Economics

The Maryknoll and Jesuit orders of the Roman Catholic Church began their support of Catholic economic policy.  These Catholic orders continue to have members implementing the principles of Catholic economic policy.  In Ossining, N.Y., there is the headquarters of the Maryknoll order; it is a dominant force for Catholic economic strategy.  And the Paulist Press, of the Catholic Missionary Society of St. Paul, also implements many principles of Catholic economic strategy through the radical feminist theology movement.  It is necessary to document the general policy of the Catholic Church for the Western World.  We quote firstly from the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales.[11]  They state publicly that their goal in “evangelization” is to encounter the modern world with the Church’s social teaching.  What they teach is the following,

“In encountering the modern world, the Church’s social teaching is a necessary component of evangelisation as we meet people in their social, political and economic contexts.  In particular this must be a priority in lay formation.  The ‘preferential option for the poor’ and walking with the poor in mission have a particular priority.”[12]

The mindset of the Papal teaching is seen in these words.  The way that they are to win people is through Catholic economic policy.  It is quite similar to the Pastoral Letter on the U.S. Economy issued by the Catholic Bishops of the USA.  In writing about the “option for the poor” they state,

“As followers of Christ, we are challenged to make a fundamental ‘option for the poor’ –– to speak for the voiceless, to defend the defenseless, to assess life styles, policies, and social institutions in terms of their impact on the poor.”[13] 

What is the mission field for Catholic Bishops as they advocate the Papal policy of evangelization by social teaching?  In the U.S.A., the answer is 36 million Americans.  One of the ‘quick links’ on the United States conference of Catholic Bishops’ web page is, “Poverty USA.”[14]  There it is stated,

“The numbers are staggering.  Today, nearly 36 million Americans live in a state of poverty, hunger, and hardship.  That is more than last year.  More than ever before.”

When we consider that the Vatican is one of the richest corporations in the entire world, we really see warning lights, because it is quite like the old tale of the wolf and “Little Red Riding Hood.”  When we read the statements of the massive Roman Catholic conglomerate, by far the wealthiest corporation worldwide, we sense that we are listening to the wolf speaking to Little Red Riding Hood. 

To explain just what we are looking at in Papal Rome we quote from the book, “In God’s Name” by David Yallop,

“The Catholic faith’s claim to uniqueness is valid.  It is the only religious organization in the world that has its headquarters an independent state, Vatican City, which is a law unto itself.  At 108.7 acres it is smaller than many of the world’s golf courses, is the size of St. James’s Park in London, and is approximately on eight the size of Central Park in New York City.  A leisurely stroll around Vatican City takes something over an hour.  To count the wealth of the Vatican would take far longer…Bernardino Nogara was a member of a devout Roman Catholic family; many of its members made, in a variety of ways, significant contributions to the Church…Evidently Nogara was not a man with whom to play Monopoly.  Apart from banks, he acquired for the Vatican controlling interests in companies in the fields of insurance, steel, financing, flour and spaghetti, mechanical industry, cement, and real estate.  With regard to the last–named his purchase of at least 15 percent of the Italian giant Immobiliare gave the Church a share of an astonishing array of property.  Societa General Immobiliare is Italy’s oldest construction company.  Through its ownership of the building firm, Sogene, Immobiliare—and therefore to a significant degree the Vatican after its 15 percent acquisition—owned the Rome Hilton, Italo Americana Nuovi Alberghi, Alberghi Ambrosiani (Milan), Compagnia Italiana Alberghi Cavalieri, and Societa Italiani Alberghi Moderni.  These are just the major hotels in Italy.  The list of major buildings and industrial companies owned by Immobiliare is twice as long.  In France it built huge block of offices and shops at 90 Avenue des Champs Elysees, and other of 61 Rue de Ponthieu, and another at 6 Rue de Berry. In Canada it owned one of the world’s tallest skyscrapers (the Stock Exchange Tower, situated in Montreal), the Port Royal Tower, a 224–apartment block, a huge residential area in Greensdale, Montreal…In the United States it had five huge apartment blocks in Washington D.C., including the Watergate Hotel, and in New York, a residential area of 227 acres at Oyster Bay. In Mexico it owned an entire satellite city of Mexico City called Lomas Verdes. This list of properties is by no means exhaustive.  Nogara also bought into General Motors, Shell, Gulf Oil, General Electric, Bethlehem Steel, IBM and TWA.  If the shares moved, and moved upward, men like Nogara created the movement.”[15]

When we see that the wealthiest corporation in the world is now using its spiritual, moral, and political power to reach out to the poor of the nations, we understand that it is their policy to use this for what they call “evangelization.”  That is they desire to attract, they hope, literally millions of people to their Church by way of their financial programs. 

The Vatican’s Economic Political Power

So we comprehend that in the United States the appeal for “evangelization” using this type of Catholic policy is 36 million people in the U.S.A. alone.  This should really set Bible believers to on guard against what has become a coalition of evangelicals listening to Catholic moral and social teaching.  The stage is set like never before.  There is a definite undertone of Catholic bias in the media, such as quite popular talk show hosts as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingram.  Roman Catholics such as Pat Buchanan, Alan Keyes, Henry Hyde, Phyllis Schlafly, William J. Bennett, William F. Buckley, Jr., and others are accepted as moral crusaders by Evangelical Christians.  Indeed, many of the issues they stand for are things that every Christian should be advocating.  However, what is never addressed is the damning effect of Vatican economic teaching on the lives of peoples and nations. 

Correct understanding of the Bible is to see man as a sinner utterly destitute in sin.  To see his personal need of salvation before God, and then as he trusts on Christ and Christ alone, he knows the true freedom in peace that comes with salvation, and thus he becomes a responsible citizen.  This is the Good News, and Catholic economic policy is a curse because it subordinates the Gospel and biblical evangelism to a secular ideology.  Catholic economic policy, acclaimed by many Catholic theologians, has been allowed to grow wildly in South America, Central America and other Catholic nations, bringing with it increased destitution, poverty, and most of all spiritual death. 

Climax in Conclusion

For the most part conservative Evangelicals do not make statements on economic policies.  Most likely they will remain silent, because they have been convinced any Christian policy regarding social and economic life is always radical.  They allow and applaud the many ministries that deal with family issues of budget and economy, but they fail to draft any Christian policy statements, or in any way to challenge the Vatican on a field where so few have dared to thread.  The results of this attitude are universally devastating.  Many are convinced that to speak out on social and economic matters in the name of Christ is to be extreme.  True Christians are losing by default unless they begin to address general economic issues that are so clearly delineated in Scripture

God has mandated and regulated both ownership of property[16] and a free enterprise economy in His Word.[17]  The biblical economic system checks injustice and grants men responsibility in both private property and in economic decisions.  It allows men the freedom to act with the dignity of beings created in God’s image.  The importance of true economics is that it offers not riches or extravagance, but a freedom to one’s role in God’s universe.  God’s rules in economic matters are achieved through self-control,[18] by family supervision,[19] and finally by civil government.[20]  A free market economy is based on the private ownership of property and individual responsibility.  Civil governments ought to promote a free market economy, and to advance an economic policy where human beings can have their needs for food, clothing, and shelter met through their own labor and not through stealing from others under the guise of social welfare programs where people are forced to pay through punitive taxes for others, many who refuse to work. 

Church government is responsible for the true Gospel and church discipline.[21]  Church government ought to manage its own finances, and it may advise its members on economic matters; but Church government does not and ought not regulate personal, family, and civil economic policy.  However, the Vatican’s dogma on “need” being the criterion for what is morally right is simply a philosophical justification for theft.  Because God is the All Holy One, He abhors moral unrighteousness.  Yet, this is exactly what Catholic economic policy is in word and deed.  God, being by nature infinitely Holy and True, hates falsity, as it is the greatest and most deformed evil.  The word of J. C. Ryle applies directly to true Christians at the present time.

“Let us not be ashamed of showing our colors and standing out for New Testament truth.  Let us not be stopped by the cuckoo cry of ‘controversy.’  The thief likes dogs that do not bark, and watchmen that give no alarm.  The devil is a thief and a robber.  If we hold our peace, and do not resist false doctrine, we please him and displease God.”

The Lord commands each true believer to “occupy till I come.”[22]  All Christians have commerce to do for Christ Jesus in this world, for this they are commissioned, and they are not to be idle.  The Lord furnishes the gifts necessary for the business of those that are called to economic matters.  The Lord Jesus commands His disciples to increase their “talents,”[23] to make the most of them, to increase their capability of doing good, and to do it until He comes.  The talents He gives to His people to invest include the most necessary one, that of contending for the faith.  This responsibility is particularly necessary in the areas of understanding and defending the true biblical standard in economic policy.  The Lord delivers the charge, “The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal, and as every one has received the gift, so let him minister the same”[24]

The Lord God continues His creative work as He draws men and women to His righteousness and eternal life.  The Apostle Paul proclaimed the Gospel of Christ as, “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth…for therein is the righteousness of God.”[25]  This re-creation can occur today as the work of the same Spirit of God that hovered over the earth at the beginning, as we obey His command, “this is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”[26]  

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article. 

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] John 18:36

[2] Code of Canon Law #1273 

[3] Matthew 10:10; Luke 10:7

[4] James 5:4

[5] See Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904–5) (1992 edition) pages 180-183.

[6] Luke 10:7

[7] Proverbs 13:22; Matthew 21:38

[8] Vatican II Documents, Gaudium et Spes, Para. 69The text is also on the Internet at: https://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com/2006/06/11/114988568487273185/

[9] Summa Theologiae, 11-11, 7th article

[10] Ibid.

[11] All the bishops of England & Wales meet together twice a year to decide policies for the church at national level. http://www.catholic-ew.org.uk/cbcew/index.htm 6/10/05

[12] www.osjspm.org/economic_justice_for_all.aspx 11/16/06

[13] www.osjspm.org/cst/eja.htm 6/9/05

[14] http://www.usccb.org/cchd/povertyusa/index.htm 6/10/05

[15] In God’s Name by David Yallop, pages 92, 93, 97-98

[16] Exodus 20:15, 17; Deuteronomy 19:14

[17] Ecclesiastes 5:19; Proverbs 10:2-4, 12:24, 13:4,11; I Thessalonians 3:10

[18] Timothy 3:4-5; 2 Peter 1:5-8, Proverbs 16:32

[19] Psalm 101:2; Ephesians 6:1-4; I Timothy 3-4-5

[20] Romans 13:1-4; I Peter 2:13-14, It is God's prerogative to make His laws bind conscience so that men,” render to    Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God’s.” Mark 12:17

[21] Romans 1:16-17; Galatians 1:7-9; Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:5

[22] Luke 19:13

[23] Talents is referring to that which God has given to believers to invest and have increase. Matthew 25:14-30

[24] I Corinthians 12:7; I Peter 4:10

[25] Romans 1:16

[26] John 6:29

The Papal Claim to Have the Keys of the Apostle Peter

For most Catholics, the authority of the Pope, as derived from Peter, is the main cornerstone of their faith.  For the others, it is the lifesaver to fall back on when all else fails.  In my own life, it was a presupposition that I did not question until the very end of my years as a priest.  I did begin to investigate seriously the Pope’s position when John Paul II came to visit Trinidad in 1985.  I remember the loud and pompous ceremony of that day in the Port-of-Spain stadium.  Vivid in my mind is the memory of the veneration given to the Pope by the crowds as he entered the stadium.  The people rose and with one voice continued to shout, “JP, we love you,” accompanied by the rhythmic beat of bongo drums.  The Pope bowed in recognition to the adulation. 

Inside myself, I was already debating the premise of whether or not he held the keys of the Apostle Peter.  So painful was the evening to me that when it came to the end and each priest was to have a personal photograph taken together with the Pope, I quietly left.  In driving home in the pouring tropical rain, it seemed as if dark clouds had come down on my presupposition.  How could this man claim to have the authority and power of Peter, since in most respects he was utterly different in manner and message from St. Peter?  I thought of the account of Cornelius, “Cornelius met him [Peter] and fell down at his feet, and worshiped him.  But Peter took him up, saying, stand up; I myself also am a man.”[1]  From that evening on, I knew that I had to begin analyzing in earnest the famous text in Matthew’s gospel, blazoned in stone, in Latin, on St. Peter’s basilica in Rome, “Tu est Petrus.”  I wish to share the thoughts I had then and now as I have continued to study the precious Word of the Lord.

The Petrine primacy of the Pope is an historic holdover from the false Decretals of Constantine and Isidore.  Nonetheless, the Papacy is the bulwark and foundation of the Church of Rome.  It is also the pride and joy of devoted Catholics by giving them, they are assured, a direct link to Jesus Christ.  And in these latter days, it appears that the world has rekindled its love of the Papacy.  Against the voices of Scripture, history, and reason, the Papacy declares its Church to be founded on the Apostle Peter alone, stating that he was the first bishop of Rome, thus bequeathing his full authority to subsequent popes and bishops.  This is the linchpin of Roman Catholicism.  Officially the Church of Rome states,

“The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the ‘rock’ of his Church….This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church’s very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.”[2]

This statement, in fact the whole Roman Catholic structure, is based on three presuppositions:

1.     That the text of Matthew 16:16-20 means Peter was the foundation of the Church; that         the Church was built on him,

2.     That Peter went to Rome and was the first bishop in Rome,

3.     That Peter’s successors are the bishops of Rome under the primacy of the Pope.

It is worth mentioning here that the list of popes concocted by Rome is a fable.  In its humble beginning, the church at Rome was guided by a plurality of elders rather than one single bishop.  Then throughout its latter history, there was much intrigue with many of those claiming to be the successor of Peter, an overview of which I will incorporate in the conclusion of this article.  In this article, however, our main focus is not to recount the history of the Papacy but rather to analyze the premise of this notion that the Church of Rome takes for granted.

Presupposition 1: the Lord Made Simon Alone (Whom He Named Peter) the “Rock” of His Church; i.e., the foundation of His Church.

“And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.  And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona:  for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.  And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven:  and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.  Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ”  (Matthew 16:16-20).

Whatever his contemporaries apprehended Christ to be, this text of Scripture plainly shows that the disciples had a distinct knowledge of Him, expressed without hesitation by Peter on their behalf.  The Lord attributes this intuitive knowledge that He was “the Christ” (Anointed-Messiah) and “the Son of the Living God” (co-eternal with the Father and therefore likewise God) to be a revelation from His Father in heaven.  It is this revelation, the Lord declared, that would become the rock or foundation stone upon which He would build His Church.  This cannot be argued against as it is the very concluding subject of the Lord’s charge to the disciples, “Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.”  To hold the view that Peter himself is the rock is to deliberately pervert the plain sense of the Lord’s own words.  To infer that the Church was built upon a mere man—and not upon God’s revelation of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God—is to insult Christ’s doctrine and corrupt God’s Word. 

The Holy Spirit confirmed the true meaning of the verse by having it written in Greek.  The word for Peter in Greek is petros.  It is masculine in gender and signifies a “piece” of rock, larger than a small stone.  In contrast, the word for a large rock in Greek is petra.  It is feminine in gender, describing bedrock, massive in size, and immovable.  The Church was thus founded upon massive bedrock, not a mere chip of granite.  That bedrock is the God-given revelation by the Father in heaven.  Congruent with this revelation is the distinct commission given to Peter in verse 19.  “Unto thee,” that is, to Peter personally, was given the “keys of the kingdom of heaven.”  Keys can both open and close.  In this declaration by Christ, these keys were meant to open.  In fact, this prophetic declaration of the Lord was literally fulfilled when Peter was made the first instrument of opening the same revelation to the Jews, “God hath made that same Jesus...both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36), and to the Gentiles (Acts 10:34-44).  The power of the keys was concerning this same revelation of the Person of Christ, actuated by the initial proclamation of this revelation, first to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles.  The Apostle Peter alone fulfilled the initial proclamation.  Succession to this prophetic commission is not possible since there was but one first opening of the kingdom for the Jews as for the Gentiles.  The second part of verse 19 was a commission for the responsibility of binding and loosening.  This is concerning church discipline and was given as well to the other Apostles, as is seen in Matthew 18:18.  The whole focus, therefore, of the Matthew 16:16-20 text is on the divinity of Jesus as “the Son of the living God,” and His role as Messiah or Christ.  This fact is the rock (petra) on which His Church is built.

The Catholic apologists argue that the gospel of Matthew was originally written in Aramaic.  They claim that the original text of Matthew 16:18 used the word Ke’pha for both the name given to Simon Barjona and as the word for the rock upon which Christ promised to build His Church.  The fallacy of these claims is that the New Testament was inspired in the Greek text, and that there is no Aramaic text in existence from which it is purported to have come.  There are Aramaic and Syriac “translations” of the original Greek text; these, however, cannot be trusted to accurately represent any supposed original Aramaic text.  The Aramaic texts are merely uninspired translations of the original Greek text.[3] 

Even without inventing a non-existing original Aramaic text, the Church of Rome has taken to their advantage the fact that the word Peter and the word “rock” closely resemble each other.  As a result Rome has adeptly substituted the one for the other, and thus made the passage to read, “Thou art Peter; and upon thee, Peter, will I build my Church.”  However,, the Lord said “upon this rock,” not “upon thee.”  “This rock” signified the truth that had just been enunciated in the words, “the Christ, the Son of the living God.”  This truth holds a place so fundamental and essential to the Church that it may be truly call “a rock.

Preposterous Claims for a Pontiff Who Substitutes for Christ

Jesus as the Christ has full, supreme, and universal power.  This prerogative is His alone, and any pretension by another to hold this power is heinous, despicable, and blasphemous.  Yet, the Church of Rome does not blush to claim Christ’s power for her pope.  In fact, she officially teaches,

“For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”[4]

Only Christ Jesus, being the very Son of God, can claim that every human creature is to be entirely subject to Him in faith and practice.  The Church of Rome has ascribed to her Pontiff the offices that belong by nature to Christ alone.  “Full, supreme, and universal power” solely and rightfully belongs to “the Son of the living God.”

It delighted the Father that in Christ Jesus alone as Savior, all fullness should dwell, “the fullness of him that filleth all in all.”[5]  He alone abundantly gives to all that are His own people, “grace for grace.”[6]  The Church of Rome’s lust for power is not satiated by attempting to usurp supreme and universal power over the whole Church, rather she alleges further that she has been allotted the very fullness of grace and truth, “…[T]he very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.”[7]  Thus, the Roman Church has made herself into a substitute for Christ.  She decrees therefore, “There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive.”[8]  Outrageous and pretentious as these claims are, the Pontiff goes still further by declaring, “It is the right of the Roman Pontiff himself alone to judge…those who hold the highest civil office in a state.”[9]  The Roman Pontiff is presented as supreme, accountable to no one, and the sole judge of what is right and wrong. 

The Claim Also Speaks Against the Holy Spirit, the True Vicar of Christ

In stating “the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church, has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise,” the Church of Rome also speaks against the Holy Spirit.  The Lord Jesus Christ entrusted the universal care of souls into the safekeeping of the Divine Person of the Holy Spirit.  Concerning this third Person of the Trinity who was to be His substitute, the Lord promised that, “when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”[10]  The Holy Spirit convicts of sin as He makes the sinner realize his lost condition and convicts him of his need of Christ’s righteousness.  He it is who brings to life a soul dead in sin.  This miracle of grace is spoken of in Scripture as, “the exceeding greatness of His power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of His mighty power, which He wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead.”[11]  The majesty, greatness, and indescribable power of the office of Vicar of Christ are such that a believer must stand in awe of His divine Person.  That any human being should lay claim to the office of Vicar of Christ is totally absurd and blasphemous.  Because there is a direct connection between the redemption of Christ and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, it is a soul-damning error to mistake the work of the Holy Spirit as Vicar of Christ with the position or work of any man.  As Christ Jesus had been the Master, Counselor and Guide to the believers, He promised to send the Holy Spirit as His substitute so that He might abide with them for ever.[12]  In believers’ lives the Holy Spirit has full, immediate, and universal influence, as the Scripture so wonderfully teaches, “Now the Lord is that Spirit:  and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.  But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.”[13]  The work of the Spirit is transforming; the believers are changed from one degree of glorious grace unto another until by that same grace one day they will be perfect with Him in glory forever.  How much therefore should Christians prize the full and complete ministry of the Holy Spirit! 

In the face of these awesome truths concerning the role and ministry of the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ, it is horrendous to learn that the Vatican proclaims, “The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, ‘supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls.’”[14]  Persuading men and women that Christ the Lord left a mortal man to be His vicar on earth attempts to gainsay the very purpose of Christ Jesus.

Historic Devolution from the Vicar of Caesar to Vicar of Christ

The outlandish assertion that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ came relatively late in the history of the Papacy.  To begin with, the Bishop of Rome claimed to be the vicar of Caesar and his successors, the rightful heirs to the Caesars.  The city that had been the seat of power for the Imperial Roman Empire became the city for the bishop of Rome to exercise his authority.  Gradually other bishops and national monarchs accepted him as vicar and successor to Caesar with the same supreme title of “Pontifex Maximus.”  Next the bishops of Rome claimed to be “The vicar of the prince of the apostles,”[15] that is, the vicar of Peter.[16]  Thus, in the early fifth century Bishop Innocent I (401-417AD) insisted that Christ had delegated supreme power to Peter and made him the Bishop of Rome.  Following this, he held that the Bishop of Rome as Peter’s successor was entitled to exercise Peter’s power and prerogatives.  Boniface III, who became Bishop of Rome in 607, established himself as “Universal Bishop,” thus claiming to be vicar and master of all other bishops.  It was not until the eighth century, however, that the particular title, “Vicar of the Son of God,”[17] was found in the fraudulent document called “The Donation of Constantine.”[18]  Although this notorious document was proven false in the early sixteenth century, the Bishops of Rome have used the title “Vicar of Christ” since the eighth century.  This title has been the Pope’s supreme claim to spiritual and temporal supremacy.  The taste of divine power, with which the title resonates, has proven to be addictive.  The “Vicar of Christ” is able to recognize no authority other than his own.  He looks upon himself as Master of all, and boldly proclaims, “The First See is judged by no one.”[19] 

The end result of the Church of Rome’s interpretation concerning what Christ said to Peter is the creation of a pontiff who claims inerrant infallible teaching authority and power over all creatures in both spiritual and temporal realms.  The Apostle Paul foretold such an absurd office when he prophesied that there would come “the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God”[20] in place of “the Christ, the Son of the living God.”[21]  Indeed, there has been erected the Pontiff, the son of perdition.  The Papacy at its core office and essence, professes to be an entire substitute for the true Christ and His work.  This office must therefore be identified and denounced, as the Holy Scripture does, “And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.”[22]

Presupposition 2:  That Peter Went to Rome and Was the First Bishop in Rome

The Scripture is utterly silent about the Apostle Peter going to Rome.  His visits to Samaria, Lydda, Joppa, Caesarea, and Antioch were carefully recorded.  But there is simply no mention made of his going to Rome, which is essential to establish the Roman Catholic position.  Certainly the Holy Spirit would not have passed over an event so significant and essential.  In his letter to the Romans, the Apostle Paul greets many in the Church at Rome but offers no salutation to Peter.  The same Apostle Paul, being at Rome in the reign of Emperor Nero, never once mentions Peter in any of his letters written from Rome to the churches and to Timothy, although he does remember very many others who were with him in the city.  Clearly this presupposition regarding Peter being in Rome as its first bishop is a supposed conjecture, a deception, pure and simple.  It cannot be the rock solid foundation on which faith is based.

Presupposition 3:  That Peter’s Successors Are the Bishops of Rome Under the Primacy of the Pope

This presupposition is officially stated in the following words,

“Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church…”[23]

In Scripture there is no mention of successors to Peter or the Apostles.  The criteria for apostleship are given in Acts 1:21-22.  The position of the Apostles was unique to them and to Paul—all directly chosen by Christ Jesus with no hint of succession.  In the New Testament, the Apostles appointed not other apostles but rather elders[24] and deacons.  This false presupposition is of the essence of the Papacy.  It is a huge system based on the concept of apostolic succession.  But apostolic succession without apostolic doctrine is a fraud.  The Lord God never entrusted His truth to a personal succession of any body of men.  Such a foundation of its very nature is flawed.  Visible apostolic succession throughout history was impossible.  If one link failed, the whole sequence after it was invalid.  Yet Catholicism hitched its star to the notion of apostolic succession. 

The real roots of the Papacy are those of the Imperial Roman Emperor and not the Lord Christ Jesus.  The Lord commanded, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.  But ye shall not be so:  but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.”[25]  Christ absolutely proscribed all domination in his kingdom.  The same condemnation of worldly ways was repeated by the Apostle Peter, “Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock.”[26]  The Roman Catholic Church is not the successor to the Apostle Peter but rather to the Imperial Roman Empire, as her hierarchical and totalitarian control so steadfastly demonstrates.

Early Church Leaders on the Meaning of the Matthew 16 Text

The early church leaders and theologians gave unanimous agreement, in writing, on the true meaning of the Matthew 16 text.  The writings of forty-eight church leaders together with the “apostolical constitutions”[27] from the third to the eighth century are preserved.  William Webster has compiled these writings in a scholarly article entitled “The Patristic Exegesis of the Rock of Matthew 16:18.”[28]  From this article we quote the testimony of Theodoret, the bishop of Cyrus (393-457).

“Let no one then foolishly suppose that the Christ is any other than the only begotten Son.  Let us not imagine ourselves wiser than the gift of the Spirit.  Let us hear the words of the great Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’  Let us hear the Lord Christ confirming this confession, for ‘On this rock,’ He says, ‘I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.’  Wherefore too the wise Paul, most excellent master builder of the churches, fixed no other foundation than this.  ‘I,’ he says, ‘as a wise master builder have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon.  But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereon.  For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.’  How then can they think of any other foundation, when they are bidden not to fix a foundation, but to build on that which is laid?  The divine writer recognizes Christ as the foundation, and glories in this title.[29]  Other foundation no man can lay but that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus (I Cor. iii.11).  It is necessary to build upon, not to lay foundations.  For it is impossible for him, who wishes to build wisely, to lay another foundation.  The blessed Peter also laid this foundation, or rather the Lord Himself.  For Peter having said, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;’ the Lord said, ‘Upon this rock I will build My Church.’  Therefore, call not yourselves after men’s names, for Christ is the foundation….[30]

“Surely he is calling pious faith and true confession a ‘rock.’  For when the Lord asked his disciples who the people said he was, blessed Peter spoke up, saying ‘You are Christ, the Son of the living God.’  To which the Lord answered: ‘Truly, truly I say to you, you are Peter and upon this rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’[31]

“‘Its foundations are on the holy mountains.’  The ‘foundations’ of piety are divine precepts, while the ‘holy mountains’ upon which these foundations are laid are the apostles of our Saviour.  Blessed Paul says concerning these foundations:  ‘You have been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets whose cornerstone is Christ Jesus.’  And again he says:  ‘Peter, James and John who are perceived to be pillars.’  And after Peter had made that true and divine confession, Christ said to him:  ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.’  And elsewhere Christ says:  ‘You are the light of the world, and a city set on a hill cannot be hid.’  Upon these holy mountains Christ the Lord laid the foundations of piety….[32] 

“Let us inquire who is he that is called a stone; and at which appearing small, later became very great, and covered the earth.  Let us, therefore, hearken to God Himself saying by the prophet Isaias, ‘Behold I lay in Sion a stone costly, a corner stone, precious, elect, into the foundations thereof, and everyone that believeth in it shall not be confounded’ (Is. xxviii.16)...Let us also listen to the blessed David prophecying and crying out, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?’ (Matt. xxi.42).  And the blessed apostle Peter teaching among the Jews, and bringing before them the prophecy of the Lord, says, ‘This is the stone which, rejected by you the builders, is become the head of the corner’ (Acts iv.11).  And the blessed apostle says, ‘Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone’ (Eph. ii.20); and elsewhere he says, ‘Other foundation no man can lay but that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus,’ (1 Cor. iii.11); and again, ‘They drank,’ he says, ‘of the spiritual rock which followed them, but the rock was Christ’(1 Cor. x.4).  Wherefore we are taught by the Old and New Testament, that our Lord Jesus Christ is called a stone.[33]

“For if they say that these things happened before baptism, let them learn that the great foundation of the Church was shaken, and confirmed by divine grace. For the great Peter, having denied thrice, remained first; cured by his own tears. And the Lord commanded him to apply the same cure to the brethren, ‘And thou,’ He says, ‘converted, confirm thy brethren’ (Luke xxii.32).”[34]

Final Word in Conclusion

As we saw at the beginning of this article, the church at Rome was guided by a plurality of elders rather than by a single bishop.  Throughout its latter history, there was much deceit, with many claiming to be the successor of Peter.  What in fact these bishops demonstrated was that they were descendants of Adam and his sin.  The concept of the bishop of Rome as a successor of Peter was not seriously held until the fourth century.  It was first devised by Damasus, bishop of Rome (366-384), then Innocent I (401-417).  It was more fully formulated in the teaching of bishop Leo I (440-461) in the fifth century.  It took many centuries of intrigue and massive forgeries before the concept became dogma in the Roman church.  The Hibernian Christians never accepted the teaching until the Norman Conquest in 1172.  The Eastern Orthodox Churches have never accepted it.[35]

The desire to be the successor of Peter was the driving force of many men over the centuries so as to reign with power and majesty.  Two, even three, concurrent popes were known to vie for the throne at the same time.  Thus, for example, at one time three popes in their lust for power each claimed the authority of Peter amid the curses and excommunications with which they assailed one another.  The Council of Constance in 1415 set out to settle the matter.  The historian Wylie gives some of the details,

“The way being thus prepared, the Council now proceeded to the trial of the Pope.  Public criers at the door of the church summoned John XXIII to appear and answer to the charges to be brought against him….The indictment contained seventy accusations, but only fifty were read in public Council; the rest were withheld from a regard to the honor of the Pontificate….Thirty-seven witnesses were examined, and one of the points to which they bore testimony, but which the Council left under a veil, was the poisoning by John of his predecessor, Alexander V.  The charges were held to be proven, and in the twelfth session (May 29th, 1415) the Council passed sentence, stripping John XXIII of the Pontificate, and releasing all Christians from their oath of obedience to him.  When the blow fell, Pope John was as abject as he had before been arrogant.  He acknowledged the justice of his sentence, bewailed the day he had mounted to the Popedom, and wrote cringingly to the emperor, if haply his miserable life might be spared[36]—which no one, by the way, thought of taking from him.  The case of the other two Popes was simpler, and more easily disposed of.  They had already been condemned by the Council of Pisa, which had put forth an earlier assertion than the Council of Constance of the supremacy of a Council, and its right to deal with heretical and simoniacal Popes.  Angelus Corario, Gregory XII., voluntarily sent in his resignation; and Peter de Lune, Benedict XIII., was deposed; and Otta de Colonna, being unanimously elected by the cardinals, ruled the Church under the title of Martin V.”[37]  

Coming to reign on the chair of St. Peter was not done by election as it is commonly understood.  Rather craft and intrigue of depraved men and women were the major part in deciding succession to the papal throne, as the historian Miller explains,

“For many years the papal tiara was disposed of by the infamous Theodora and her two daughters, Marozia and Theodora.  Such was their power and evil influence, by means of their licentious lives, that they placed in the chair of St. Peter whom they would—men wicked like themselves.  Our pages would be defiled by an account of their open unblushing immoralities.  Such has been the papal succession.  Surely Jezebel was truly represented by these women, and in the influence they obtained over the Popes and the city of Rome.  But, alas! alas! Jezebel, with all her associations, corruptions, tyrannies, idolatries, and uses of the civil sword, has been too faithfully represented by popery from its very foundation.”[38]

Believing on Christ and believing on the pontiff are irreconcilable positions.  As others in the past have noted, with the pontiff there is found an “altar” instead of a communion table, a “priest” instead of a preacher, ceremonies instead of sound doctrine, sacraments instead of saving grace, traditions instead of the Written Word of God.  This is not in the Church based on God’s revelation of Jesus as “the Christ, the Son of the living God” but rather an institution based on the rule a pontiff.  Therefore, we voice the Lord’s own exhortation, “hearken unto me now therefore, o ye children, and attend to the words of my mouth.  Let not thine heart decline to her ways, go not astray in her paths.  For she hath cast down many wounded:  yea, many strong men have been slain by her.  Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death.”[39]  Those persons or nations submitting themselves to her and her pontiff know neither life nor freedom.  Only in the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, is found freedom and eternal life!  Believe on Him and Him alone “and have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”[40]

Scriptures proclaim that the one supreme sovereign head of the Church is the all holy, unchangeable, all-powerful, all knowing, all wise Lord Jesus Christ.  The Roman Catholic Church proclaims that reigning Pontiff, “as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”[41]  One cannot serve two sovereigns for the Lord’s commands contradict those of the Pontiff.  A man cannot be impartial between two masters who are incompatible.  When the necessity of a choice arises, he is will despise the one he does not love supremely.  So when the Lord Jesus Christ says, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,”[42] and the so-called Sovereign Pontiff demands, “a religious respect of intellect and will, even if not the assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate.…”[43], one must decide who it is that he loves and fears the most. 

The Lord Christ Jesus died in place of the true believer.  His life and finished sacrifice alone are the ransom for the believer.  “The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”  This was the price demanded by the All Holy God in order that His justice might be satisfied in the forgiveness of sins.  As a result of this payment the true believer on Christ Jesus alone is freed from sin and Satan.  “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”  The Matthew 16:16-20 text is foundational to eternal life, as the role and the divinity of “the Son of the living God” is the rock on which His Church is built!   ¨

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article. 

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] Acts 10:25-26

[2] Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), Para. 881

[3] An in-depth study of this topic and its historical background (including an examination of the translations of the Greek New Testament which were made in the first five centuries of the Christian Church) is given by Pastor David Th. Stark at:  http://www.gpcredding.org/petra.html  7/10/04

[4] Catechism, Para. 882

[5] Ephesians 1:23

[6] John 1:16

[7] Declaration “Dominus Iesus”, On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church, Sect. 16, Sept. 5, 2000

[8] Catechism, Para. 982

[9] Code of Canon Law, Latin-English Ed., New English Tr. (Canon Law Society of America, 1983) Canon 1405

[10] John 16:8

[11] Ephesians 1:19-20

[12] John 14:16

[13] II Corinthians 3:17-18

[14] Catechism, Para 937

[15] “Vicarius principis apostolorum” is the official title in Latin.

[16] This has been a long-standing contention, since Scripture never mentions Peter as ever residing in Rome.

[17] “Vicarius Filii Dei” is the official title in Latin.

[18] “The Donation of Constantine” states “…as on earth he (Peter) is seen to have been constituted vicar of the Son of God, so the pontiffs, who are the representatives of that same chief of the apostles…” http://www.jmgainor.homestead.com/files/PU/PF/doco.htm 3/9/05

[19] Code of Canon Law, Canon 1404

[20] II Thessalonians2:3, 4

[21] Matthew 16:16

[22] Revelation 17:18

[23] Catechism, Para 892

[24] The terms overseer and elder/pastor are used interchangeably (Acts 20:17, 28; I Peter 5:1-4).

[25] Luke 22:25-26

[26] I Peter 5:3

[27] These were Augustine, Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Aphraates, Apostolical Constitutions, Asterius, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Basil of Seleucia, Bede, Cassiodorus, John Cassian, John Chrysostom, Peter Chrysologus, Cyprian, Cyril of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Didymus the Blind, Epiphanius, Ephrem Syrus, Eusebius, Firmicus Maternus, Firmilian, Fulgentius, Gaudentius of Brescia, Gregory the Great, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, Hilary of Poitiers, Ignatius, Isidore of Pelusium, Isidore of Seville, James of Nisbis, Jerome, John of Damascus, Maximus of Turin, Nilus of Ancyra, Origen, Pacian, Palladius of Helenopolis, Paschasius Radbertus, Paul of Emessa, Paul Orosius, Paulinus of Nola, Prosper of Aquitaine, Tertullian, and Theodoret.

[28] http://www.christiantruth.com/fathersmt16.html

[29] Ibid., Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume III, Theodoret, Epistle 146, To John the Economus, p. 318

[30] Ibid., Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1, 12.  Cited by J. Waterworth, A Commentary (London: Thomas Richardson, 1871), p. 149

[31] Ibid., Commentary on Canticle of Canticles II.14, M.P.G., Vol. 81, Col. 108

[32] Ibid., Commentary on Psalms 86.1, M.P.G., Vol. 80, Col. 1561

[33] Ibid., Commentary on Daniel ii.34.  Cited by J. Waterworth, A Commentary (London: Thomas Richardson, 1871), p. 153

[34] Ibid., Haeret. Fab. Book 5, Chapter 28.  Cited by J. Waterworth, A Commentary (London: Thomas Richardson, 1871), p. 152

[35] King Henry with a strong military carried out the designs of the Papacy in 1171.  He received submission from Archbishop and Bishop at the Synod of Cashel in 1172.  See our article “The Legacy of the True Historical Patrick” on our webpage: www.bereanbeacon.org  

[36] Hardouin, Acta Concil., tom. viii, pp. 361-362

[37] J. A. Wylie, History of Protestantism (N. Ireland:  Mourne Missionary Trust, 1878, 1985) Vol. I, Book 3, p. 153.  See also Hartland Publications, Vol I, p. 242

[38] Andrew Miller, Miller’s Church History in Books For The Ages (Albany, OR USA:  AGES Software)  Ch. 16, p. 432

[39] Proverbs 7:24-26

[40] Ephesians 5:11

[41] Catechism, Para 882

[42] Matthew 22:37

[43] Code of Canon Law, Canon 752

Papal Promotion of Collective Ownership and Theft

Dear Friend,

A biblical understanding of economics is one of the gifts that God gives to sustain us, believer and non-believer alike.  Biblical economic principles are to be treasured as they bring some degree of stability and wellbeing into societies.  This current Pope, like his predecessors, is flagrantly denying private property and basic biblical economic principles because he has accepted the papal principle of “the universal destination of goods.”  The Lord’s people need to be made aware of these facts and some of the examples that fall under them. 

Mismanaging $2.3 billion of taxpayers’ money and helping illegal aliens unlawfully find shelter are just two examples of what comprise this important topic.  What is at stake is the livelihood of millions of people and a sinister enslaving of many Catholics in the name of so-called social welfare.  All of this and more is carefully documented in our current article given below.  I ask that you respond in prayer and forward the article to others.  I request also, if possible, that you post it on your web page.

Yours in Christ Jesus and for His Gospel,

Richard Bennett 

Papal Promotion of Collective Ownership and Theft

By Richard Bennett and Robert J. Nicholson

Pope Benedict XVI, and his Vatican system, taught that private property is not personal as such, but belongs to all people.  His predecessor, Pope John Paul II stated, “Private property, in fact, is under a ‘social mortgage,’ which means that it has an intrinsically social function, based upon and justified precisely by the principle of the universal destination of goods.”[1]  The principle of “the universal destination of goods” is clearly observed in what the present pope endorses in the second part of his encyclical entitled “God is Love.”[2]  Benedict wholly sanctions the principle of the universal ownership of all goods embalmed in the writings of popes Leo XIII, Pius XI, John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II.[3]  The phrase, “all goods,” includes not only the goods found in nature but manufactured goods as well.  As John Paul II stated, “The vast majority of people can have access to those goods which are intended for common use: both the goods of nature and manufactured goods.’’[4]  Another Vatican Council II document upholds the same principle of the “universal ownership of all goods” and emphatically teaches, “If one is in extreme necessity, he has the right to procure for himself what he needs out of the riches of others.”[5]

The more this socialistic principle is legally accepted by various nations, the greater gain there is for the needy, particularly of the one billion Catholics worldwide.  This doctrine of a claimed prior right to all goods, based on need, is what Benedict XVI proposed as the fundamental norm of the State:  a share of the community’s goods is to be guaranteed to each person.  In the Pope’s own words, “It is true that the pursuit of justice must be a fundamental norm of the State and that the aim of a just social order is to guarantee to each person, according to the principle of subsidiarity, his share of the community’s goods.”[6]

Benedict’s Economic Principle Applied

When Benedict’s principle is applied nation by nation, there are dire consequences.  For example, in the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ 1995 Pastoral letter, “Economic Justice for All,” the same principle is disseminated.  It states,  “In Catholic teaching, human rights include not only civil and political rights but also economic rights …‘all people have a right to life, food, clothing, shelter, rest, medical care, education, and employment.’”[7]  The impact of this policy in the USA by itself results in a yearly redistribution of $2.3 billion of taxpayers’ money through the auspices of Catholic Charities.  The City Journal states the following,

“You would think that Catholic Charities USA would be a perfect model to emulate, getting the poor into the mainstream by emphasizing moral values and ethical conduct.  But no: rather than trying to promote traditional values and God-fearing behavior, Catholic Charities …has become over the last three decades an arm of the welfare state, with 65 percent of its $2.3 billion annual budget now flowing from government sources and little that is explicitly religious, or even values-laden, about most of the services its 1,400 member agencies and 46,000 paid employees provide.”[8] 

On April 26, 2007, the website for Catholic Charities USA stated the following,

“Washington, DC Catholic Charities USA took its ‘Campaign to Reduce Poverty in America’ directly to Congress today, with a briefing on the struggles of 35 million Americans who experience hunger...Poverty in America is a moral and social crisis.  It threatens the health and economic well-being of our families and our nation as a whole.  In response to this crisis, Catholic Charities USA has launched the Campaign to Reduce Poverty in America.” [9]  

Where some of the money is spent is reported by The California Catholic Daily.  

“San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer said he is ‘really very happy’ about a compromise plan that makes it possible for Catholic Charities adoption workers in his archdiocese to refer homosexual couples to adopt children.  The California Catholic Daily made a transcript of the on-air interview Archbishop Niederauer gave to San Francisco’s KCBS available on Feb. 7.”[10] 

Taxpayers’ money paying for children to be adopted by homosexual couples does not spell “health and economic well-being” but rather moral irresponsibility and sin.  Nevertheless, “The Campaign to Reduce Poverty” in America continues with the 1,400 agencies of Catholic Charities USA.  To rake in additional funds sometimes, graphic images, persuasive words, and intense pseudo-spiritual manipulation are employed to excite a sense of public guilt in governments and individual culpability in private donors.  An example is the well-known quotation from Vatican Council II, “Since there are so many people prostrate with hunger in the world, this Sacred Council urges all, both individuals and governments, to remember the aphorism of the Fathers, ‘feed the man dying of hunger, because if you have not fed him, you have killed him.’”[11]  Statements like this are routinely presented in the accusative case. 

It is very significant that in 2002, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, likewise, stated publicly that their goal in evangelization is to encounter the modern world with the Catholic Church’s teaching of the “preferential option for the poor.”  They assert the following principles that “the ‘preferential option for the poor’ and ‘walking with the poor in mission’ have a particular priority.”[12] 

How such evangelization is put into effect is seen in news reports as, for example, on May 6, 2007, “The head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, has called for the government to consider an amnesty for illegal immigrants in the UK.”[13]  This type of appeal to come to the aid of presumably poor illegal aliens is similar to the work done by Catholic Charities in the USA, of which The New Tribune reports, “Churches in five big U.S. cities plan to protect illegal immigrants from deportation, offering their buildings as sanctuary if need be, as they pressure lawmakers to create a path to citizenship for the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.”[14]  On May 9, 2007, Fox News reported that,

“Beginning Wednesday afternoon, a Catholic church in downtown Los Angeles and a Lutheran church in North Hollywood each intend to shelter one person as part of the ‘New Sanctuary Movement.’  A handful of churches in other U.S. cities plan similar efforts in the months ahead to spotlight the plight of illegal immigrants.  ‘We want to put a human face to very complex immigration laws and awaken the consciousness of the human spirit,’ said Father Richard Estrada of Our Lady Queen of Angels Catholic Church in Los Angeles, where one illegal immigrant will live.  Organizers don’t believe immigration agents will make arrests inside the churches.”[15] 

Helping illegal aliens, some of whom are known criminals, and encouraging them to break laws and avoid law enforcement in the UK or in the USA is not only illegal, it is contrary to the Bible.[16]  Violating charitable trust by blatant misuse of public funds, particularly by encouraging lawlessness against the civil government from whom the charity is received, is an affront both to governments and their tax-paying citizens. Campaigns of passive, civil lawbreaking have their roots in Ghandi’s philosophy and the like, but not Christianity.

A Biblical Critique of the Economic Philosophy of Papal Rome

Catholic evangelization through economics is not the kind of democratic socialism employed by many of the nations of the world.  It is something quite unique.  The Papacy reasserted its historic views on the nature of private property at Vatican Council II.  We must examine this teaching carefully.  The Roman Catholic Church’s idea of private property and wealth is that all goods have a universal purpose to help all men.  Hence, Rome’s view is that the wealth of rich nations and private economically competent citizens is not their legitimate possession by either moral right, legal earning, or inherited possession.  The Vatican Council makes much of the wide disparity between rich and poor nations.  As its solution, the Vatican teaches the redistribution of goods to those in extreme need.  Her official words are,

“Whatever the forms of property may be, as adapted to the legitimate institutions of peoples, according to diverse and changeable circumstances, attention must always be paid to this universal destination of earthly goods.  In using them, therefore, man should regard the external things that he legitimately possesses not only as his own but also as common in the sense that they should be able to benefit not only him but also others.  On the other hand, the right of having a share of earthly goods sufficient for oneself and one’s family belongs to everyone.  The Fathers and Doctors of the Church held this opinion, teaching that men are obliged to come to the relief of the poor and to do so not merely out of their superfluous goods.  If one is in extreme necessity, he has the right to procure for himself what he needs out of the riches of others.”[17]

However, the Bible states, “Thou shalt not steal.. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house …nor any thing that is thy neighbor’s.”[18]  The Vatican philosophy is simply a justification for theft—whether on an individual level or governmental level.  As for the sin of stealing, even if it were brought on by extreme necessity, such a reason is not permissible before the Lord God.  He declares, “Men do not despise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry; but if he be found, he shall restore sevenfold; he shall give all the substance of his house.”[19]  The Lord Jesus Christ clearly addressed the crux of the issue concerning physical needs, “For all these things do the nations of the world seek after:  and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things.  But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you.”[20]  This is God’s promise, that He will provide the necessities of food and clothing for His own, who walk uprightly[21], nor will He contravene His laws in doing so, for this would blemish His holiness, which is not possible.  But the Vatican, having apostatized from the Gospel nearly five hundred years ago, cannot teach its followers to depend on God, whom they do not know.  Thus they have taken into their hand man-made methods that are anti-biblical and an affront to God Himself.

Hence, the economic principles of the Roman Catholic Church are anti-biblical and sinful.  When applied by Catholic Charities they have disastrous effects.  Ignoring, belittling, and opposing the biblical-moral teaching given by God while professing to be Christian is the Vatican’s favored tactic for secularizing the principles and objectives of Christian charity.  This allows it to keep its own hand buried deep in the public purse and, therefore, has been a colossal, hypocritical imposition on modern government, replete with dire consequences for the poor.  The same principle is implemented in Latin America, the Philippines, and Zimbabwe as “liberation theology.”  Such liberation theology has been the root cause of revolutions in many nations in South America.  Even with its failure, many persist in trying to implement its fantasies.  The revolutionary fervor of the 1970s and ’80s has not abolished the grueling poverty in Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Costa Rica; rather, it has been in these and other nations a demoralizing economic and social influence. 

Bible Exposes Catholic Idea of Economic Justice

The U.S. Catholic Bishops’ 1995 Pastoral letter, “Economic Justice for All,” states,  “In Catholic teaching, human rights include not only civil and political rights but also economic rights …‘all people have a right to life, food, clothing, shelter, rest, medical care, education, and employment.’”  The Catholic Church’s conception of what God gives out of His providential grace is skewed because the Bible does not speak in terms of rights.  The Bible speaks rather in terms of man’s sin and God’s graciousness both to unregenerate sinners[22] and to those who are His own because they trust on the Lord Jesus Christ alone for their salvation.[23]  Those who are in Christ Jesus learn to trust His providential care for all that they need.  This trust frees them from abject slavery to

“And on receiving it they grumbled at the master of the house,  saying, 'These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.  But he replied to one of them, 'Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius?  Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you.  Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Mat 20:11-15“individuals, governments, and institutions, whether religious or civil."

Nor does the Bible teach that justice means equality of material conditions among all men.  The key requirements of justice among men are revealed in the Ten Commandments and the civil and judicial laws governing economic relations that are given throughout Scripture.  The Apostle Paul expressed the relationship between faith and God’s moral law, “Do we then make void the law through faith?  God forbid:  yea, we establish the law.”[24]  For example, Scripture teaches that all men are not due equal wages for their labor regardless of their behavior.  The biblical standard is “The workman is worthy of his meat,” and “…the laborer is worthy of his hire.”[25]

Further, the Lord is our provider and He expects that we deal justly with our fellow man in all principles of exchange value for goods or labor, “Behold, the hire of the laborers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth:  and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth.”[26]  The Bible severely condemns all violations of the Commandment, “Thou shalt not steal,”[27] whether it be on the part of governments, employers, employees, or churches.  Any society, civil or religious, that ignores the moral standards of the Bible is heading for strife and difficulties within families and in the lives of individuals.  Contrary to the official teaching of Rome, the Bible shows that individuals are under no obligation to give up their private property and inheritance; rather their obligation is to deal with it responsibly according to the commands of the Lord as given in His written Word.  The Lord absolutely forbids the invading of any man’s rightful possessions and the taking of that which is not our own by fraudulent acts, “Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor’s landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it.”[28]  God, the Holy Spirit, enforces the point of individual responsibility regarding one’s private property by preserving for us His account of the infamous case of deceitful dealing, such as that of Ananias and Sapphira where Peter acknowledged, “While it remained, was it not your own?  And after it was sold, was it not in your own control?”[29]  Private property is to be retained, managed, or disposed of by believers as they see fit as responsible stewards under God, according to the principles of justice published in His Word.

Therefore, it is worthy of serious reflection that as one of the wealthiest corporations in the world, the Roman Catholic Church stands solidly in direct contravention of the Bible, which is God’s infallible Word.  The Roman Church consistently uses its considerable resources to teach that private property has an intrinsically social function with the corollary that one in extreme necessity has the right to procure for himself what he needs out of the riches of others.  The Vatican does practice what it preaches regarding procurement of other peoples’ resources for its own purposes.  It is the outstanding hypocrisy of the Vatican that while it maintains an unbiblical and parasitic attachment to civil governments across the world by sucking up their capital and resources into funding Catholic social action—thereby taking from others what is not its own—it rarely if ever parts with a penny of its own enormous assets to help the poor.  David Yallop documented something of the Vatican assets in his book, In God’s Name.

“To count the wealth of the Vatican…Apart from banks, he [Bernardino Nogara] acquired for the Vatican controlling interests in companies in the fields of insurance, steel, financing, flour and spaghetti, mechanical industry, cement, and real estate.  With regard to the last-named his purchase of at least 15 percent of the Italian giant Immobiliare gave the Church a share of an astonishing array of property.  Societa General Immobiliare is Italy’s oldest construction company.  Through its ownership of the building firm, Sogene, Immobiliare and therefore to a significant degree the Vatican after its 15 percent acquisition owned the Rome Hilton, Italo Americana Nuovi Alberghi, Alberghi Ambrosiani (Milan), Compagnia Italiana Alberghi Cavalieri, and Societa Italiani Alberghi Moderni.  These are just the major hotels in Italy.  The list of major buildings and industrial companies owned by Immobiliare is twice as long.  In France it built a huge block of offices and shops at 90 Avenue des Champs Elysees, and other of 61 Rue de Ponthieu, and another at 6 Rue de Berry.  In Canada it owned one of the world’s tallest skyscrapers (the Stock Exchange Tower, situated in Montreal), the Port Royal Tower, a 224-apartment block, a huge residential area in Greensdale, Montreal…In the United States it had five huge apartment blocks in Washington D.C., including the Watergate Hotel, and in New York, a residential area of 227 acres at Oyster Bay. In Mexico it owned an entire satellite city of Mexico City called Lomas Verdes.  This list of properties is by no means exhaustive.  Nogara also bought into General Motors, Shell, Gulf Oil, General Electric, Bethlehem Steel, IBM and TWA.  If the shares moved, and moved upward, men like Nogara created the movement.”[30]

With even these few of its many assets in mind, it is clear that the Vatican conveniently ignores its own dictum that “the right of having a share of earthly goods sufficient for oneself and one’s family belongs to everyone.  The Fathers and Doctors of the Church held this opinion, teaching that men are obliged to come to the relief of the poor and to do so not merely out of their superfluous goods.”  Clearly the Vatican has not included itself in the necessity to “come to the relief of the poor and to do so not merely out of their superfluous goods.”  Nor has the exorbitantly wealthy Papacy observed its own Vatican Council II dictum that if you do not feed a dying man, you have killed him.  Thus comes the Papacy’s necessity to fund its practice of charity by persuading from others, through deception and assignment of guilt—particularly from its own carefully taught, loyal people, and from civil governments—what the Vatican itself will not supply from its own vast treasuries. 

The Catholic Church further exacerbates the economic problems of the poor by laying on them rituals, which deliver nothing but cruel deception and deeper poverty.  Instead of looking to the Father in heaven and His Word to learn biblical stewardship of their money and property, the Catholics are taught to look to Holy Mother Church.  The official teaching of the Roman Church states, “No one can have God as Father who does not have the Church as Mother.”[31]  The same “Mother Church” teaches them to pay money for masses for the dead, who are being purified in Purgatory.  Just like Limbo, Purgatory is nonexistent.  Nevertheless, she states,

“From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.”[32] 

Masses said for the dead are one of the biggest money-spinners of the Catholic Church.  Hence, the money that the poor do manage to scrape together often goes to pay for worthless religious rituals rather than for provisions for their families, or for capital to start a small business to provide for their families.[33]  Truly, through her teaching, the Roman Catholic Church has for centuries promoted, and continues to promote, grinding poverty, in spite of her centuries-long apparent concern.

Conclusion

The same Lord who created heaven and earth and all that in them is, requires His own to depend increasingly on Him and not on their own power and resourcefulness.  It is from this biblical perspective that one must view the machinations of the Roman Catholic social teaching and practice.  Evangelicals ought to think carefully about the economic principles laid out in the Bible and compare those to what the Roman Catholic Church is promoting, with gathering success, as her social policy.  It is signal that the Roman Catholic Church’s social policy is one of its primary tools of evangelism, two others being education and medicine.  The reason is clear enough.  The Catholic Church formally went apostate at the Council of Trent in 1546 when she denied the Gospel, which is the power of God unto salvation.[34]  Present-day dogma of the Vatican not only upholds the teaching of the Council of Trent but also declares that such Councils are infallible.[35]  Hence, it is clear that the Catholic Church must evangelize by the strength of her own ingenuity and power. 

The Lord God of heaven and earth continues His work of drawing men, women, and children to His righteousness and true salvation in the Son of God.  As the Apostle Paul proclaimed, “for He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.”[36]  The Lord is personally All Holy; yet as the substitute for the believer’s sin, He rendered Himself legally responsible to the wrath of God.  The consequence of Christ’s faithfulness in all that He did, culminating in His death on the cross, is that His righteousness is credited to the believer.  It was God who legally constituted Christ to be “sin for us.”  He was “made sin” because the sins of all of His people were transferred to Him, and in like manner, the believer is made “the righteousness of God in Him” by God’s reckoning to the believer Christ’s faithfulness to the precepts of the law.  Quite clearly, therefore, the Gospel is the gracious act of God whereby a believing sinner has legal right standing in Christ.

In face of spiritual death and economic disaster reigning through Vatican teaching and practice, we look to the “God of all grace.”[37]  To withstand and counter the apostasy we have documented, we need to see the Lord’s principle in His Word and pray for its application, “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:  that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.”[38]  ♦

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article. 

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] Encyclical, “Sollicitudo Rei Socialis,” John Paul II, Sect. 42

[2] www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est_en.html

[3] Encyclical, “Deus Caritas Est”, Sect. 27  

[4] Encyclical, “Laborem Exercens”, 1981, John Paul II, Sect. 19

[5] “Gaudium et Spes,” Vatican Council II:  The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, Para. 69.  Text is also on the Internet at: http://www.osjspm.org/cst/gs_cos2.htm

[6] Encyclical, “Deus Caritas Est”, Sect. 26

[7] National Conference of Catholic Bishops, www.osjspm.org/rights_and_duties.aspx   2/7/2007 

[8] www.city-journal.org/html/10_1_how_catholic_charities.htmlAlso: www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will020501.asp

[9] www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/news/content_displays.cfm?fuseaction=display_document&id=960&location=3

www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/poverty/ 4/28/2007

[10] www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=229805/9/2007

[11] Vatican II Document No. 64, Gaudium et Spes, 1965, Section 69

[12] www.caseresources.org/resources/resources_research.htm6/6/2007

[13] http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1829121/posts 5/10/2007

[14] www.thenewstribune.com/888/story/58267.html

[15] www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,271009,00.html

[16] I Peter 2:13-14

[17] Vatican II Documents No. 64, “Gaudium et Spes,” Para 69

[18] Exodus 20:15, 17

[19] Proverbs 6:30-31

[20] Luke 12:30, 31

[21] Psalm 84:11

[22] Matthew 5:45 b & c

[23] Matthew 6:24-34

[24] Romans 3:31

[25] Matthew 10:10; Luke 10:7

[26] Leviticus 19:13; Deuteronomy 25:15; Proverbs 11:1, 16:11, 20:10; Jeremiah 22:13; Luke 3:13; James 5:4

[27] Exodus 20:15

[28] Deuteronomy 19:14

[29] Acts 2:4

[30] David Yallop, In God’s Name:  An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I  (New York:  Bantam Books, 1984) pp. 92, 93, 97, 98

[31] Catechism of the Catholic Church (Liguori Publications, 1994) Para. 181

[32] Catechism, Para. 1032

[33] See John W. Robbins, Ecclesiastical Megalomania:  The Economic and Political Thought of the Roman Catholic Church (The Trinity Foundation, 1999, 2006) ISBN 978-0-940931-75-6

[34] Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. by Roy J. Deferrari from the Thirtieth Ed. of Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum (St. Louis, MO:  B. Herder Book Co., 1957) # 822, Canon 12, “If anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified:  let him be anathema [cursed].”

[35] Catechism, Para. 891

[36] II Corinthians 5:21

[37] I Peter 5:10

[38] Romans 5:20

Papal Rome and the European Union

Dear Friend,

The Vatican has been the most powerful institution in Europe, and although its influence declined at the time of the Reformation, it has made a significant recovery in the past two centuries.  The Protestant nations of Europe that were religiously, politically, and economically freed from a totalitarian Roman Church, seem now to be blindly returning to her yoke of bondage.

The Vatican bank’s tax exempt status in Italy has made it possible for her to manipulate many of the largest multi-national corporations   However, her influence is nothing when compared with her power in Europe and in the world of politics and religion.  A Jesuit priest writing in ‘Inside the Vatican’ stated, “Despite the importance of the papacy for the Catholic church and its prominent role in international affairs, its internal workings are little known to Catholics, to world leaders, or to the world at large.”*

This lack of knowledge is particularly evident when it comes to the role the Vatican plays in the making of the EU.  If the Protestant nations of Europe are to remain free, true believers on both sides of the Atlantic must address the issue of Rome and the EU and take it to God in prayer.  It is the authors’ desire that this study of one of the most powerful institutions in the world be carefully examined.  Our purpose is to sound the alarm and to stimulate others to do so too.

Kindly study and comment on the article.  Please forward the article to others, and place on your website.

Yours with deep concern for the New Europe as it is being formed,

Richard Bennett and Michael de Semlyen[1]

Our WebPages are located on:  www.bereanbeacon.org

http://reformationfaith.com/

* Inside the Vatican: The Politics and Organization of the Catholic Church, by Thomas J. Reese, Harvard University Press, 1996, 4 

Papal Rome and the European Union

By Michael de Semlyen and Richard Bennett

Papal Rome is widely respected and admired by the world.  She is seen as well organized, successful and influential, as well as dignified and authoritative.  The aura of uncritical acclaim around the person of successive popes is unique to the Church of Rome.  No other global institution has it.  Her pronouncements on moral issues carry great weight.  So well regarded is the Papacy today that the acceptance of her extends even to Evangelicals, most of whom have ceased to question her doctrine.

Why then should we take a position contrary to this avalanche of present-day approval?  We do so because we are commanded by the Lord God to proclaim His truth and His warnings.  For all is not at all as it seems.  We believe that the late great British preacher Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was correct when he proclaimed that “the Roman Catholic Church is a counterfeit and a sham; it represents prostitution of the worst and most diabolical kind…It binds the souls of its people absolutely, just as Communism and Nazism did, and it is itself a totalitarian system.”[2]

Papal Pronouncements on Europe

On August 31, 2003, Pope John Paul II entrusted the future of the new Europe to Virgin Mary.  In the words of the Catholic news agency Zenit,

“He placed Europe in Mary’s hands, so that it would ‘become a symphony of nations committed to building together the civilization of love and peace.’  Last Sunday, the Holy Father urged that the final draft of the European Constitution should recognize explicitly the Christian roots of the continent, as they constitute a ‘guarantee of a future.’”[3]

The official teaching of Rome makes clear that this statement concerning “the Christian roots of the continent” is a facade.  When the Pope or his Church use the term “Christian” they mean “Roman Catholic.”  A recent official decree of Rome condemns “the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.”[4]  Rome officially proclaims that the Christian Church of Christ is the Catholic Church.  In her decree she states, “Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.”[5] 

Just as the Nazis declared non-Aryans to be non-humans, so now the Church of Rome declares other churches to be non-churches.  Her official words are, “the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense.”[6] 

In the same document, Dominus Iesus (September 5th 2000), footnote 51 refers to a decree that states, “We declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”[7]  The mind of Rome is thus expressed in her official decrees.  Once the Protestant nations are committed to the emerging European superstate and its Constitution, the Vatican’s plan to once again “Christianize” the European Union will be implemented.  As described by the London Sunday Telegraph, “The Pope is calmly preparing to assume the mantle which he solemnly believes to be his Divine Right - that of new Holy Roman Emperor, reigning from the Urals to the Atlantic.”[8]   

The Vatican as a “Unique Contribution” to the EU

The EU already has most of the attributes needed for nationhood.  It has a passport, a flag, a single currency, and an anthem.  It is also drawing up in its constitution the further characteristics of nationhood such as a president, international ambassadors, and a foreign secretary.  The Vatican carefully gives soul to all of this by claiming that this is “a unique contribution to the building up of a Europe open to the world.”  The Pope in his Ecclesia in Europa states,

“One and universal, yet present in the multiplicity of the Particular Churches, the Catholic Church can offer a unique contribution to the building up of a Europe open to the world.  The Catholic Church in fact provides a model of essential unity in a diversity of cultural expressions, a consciousness of membership in a universal community which is rooted in but not confined to local communities, and a sense of what unites beyond all that divides.”[9] 

“The Particular Churches in Europe are not simple agencies or private organizations.  Rather, they carry out their work with a specific institutional dimension that merits legal recognition, in full respect for just systems of civil legislation.”[10]  

“Particular Churches in Europe” is simply a pretense.  The Vatican views itself as the Particular Church, and officially states, “The Catholic faithful are required to profess that there is an historical continuity — rooted in the apostolic succession — between the Church founded by Christ and the Catholic Church.”[11]

From the decrees published it is clear that, apart from the Church of Rome establishing herself as the “unique contribution to the building up of a Europe open to the world,” she claims for herself “legal recognition” in accord with her own “civil legislation.”  This has been the basis of the Vatican’s political manipulation over the centuries.  While Rome carefully prepares her own legal place, she will tolerate no rivals.  “[T]he ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate are not Churches in the proper sense.”[12]  Most certainly they are not to be included as part of the “unique contribution to the building up of a Europe open to the world”!

As author Adrian Hilton has warned in a recent article in The Spectator,

“[T]he issue of European religious union is one that has been concealed even deeper than the plans for political union, but the ratchet towards a Catholic Europe is just as real.  The Pope’s recent demand that ‘God’ be featured in the emerging European constitution has been echoed by many leading Catholic politicians and bishops.  While on the surface such a reference may offend only Europe’s atheist and humanist contingent, it must be observed that when the Vatican refers to God, she sees herself as God’s infallible vice-regent upon earth, the leading organ of divine expression; indeed, according to its publication Dominus Iesus [5 September 2000], as the only mediator in the salvation of God’s elect, insisting that all other Churches, including the Church of England, ‘are not Churches in the proper sense’.”[13] 

The Real Meaning of the Popes Message to Europe

The Ecclesia in Europa pronouncement is one of the cleverest produced by Pope John Paul II.  It is a masterpiece that purportedly proclaims the Christian message, while in fact it teaches the rites and rituals of the Papacy.  For example the concept of the “Gospel of hope” is mentioned forty times in the dissertation.  The message however is not one of hope; rather it is an adept counterfeit.  For example, Paragraph 74 begins by stating,

“A prominent place needs to be given to the celebration of the sacraments, as actions of Christ and of the Church ordered to the worship of God, to the sanctification of people and to the building up of the ecclesial community.” 

The Pope thus presents his physical, symbolic sacraments as the efficacious cause of salvation.  In place of the direct obedience to Christ Jesus demanded in the Gospel of faith, the sacraments are purported to be “actions of Christ.”  This is where the Vatican’s pretense of “hope” lies.  Such sacraments are declared necessary for salvation in the official teaching of Rome,

“The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation.  ‘Sacramental grace’ is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament.”[14]

By setting aside the direct work of God in Christ Jesus, the sacraments of Rome are an attempt to steal from Christ His Priesthood and an attempt to rob Him of His power as Mediator.  The Roman Church attempts to rob God the Holy Spirit of His peculiar work as the Sanctifier, by attributing His power of giving grace to its own rituals.  Thus, it attempts to rob God the Father of His prerogatives of justifying and forgiving sinners.  This is the reality behind the concept of the “Gospel of hope” that permeates the Pope’s message to Europe.  Throughout the centuries, Rome has substituted her sacraments for the Gospel in a consistently degrading insult to the grace of God.  Shameful to God and damning to men is the Pope’s memorandum to Europe.   

We are at a seminal moment in history, as the Holy Roman Empire re-emerges as a European Superstate.  Throughout her history the Papacy has remained self-governing and invincible to every restraining force other than that of the power of God in the Gospel.  Bible believers need to be aware of the times in which we live, we need to study the history of the EU in order to see the outworking of the guile of Rome.

A Short History of the EU

After the destruction, ruin, and enormous human cost of the Second World War, statesmen and politicians resolved to ensure that it would never happen again.  In 1946 Sir Winston Churchill suggested in a famous speech at Zurich in Switzerland that, “we must build a kind of United States of Europe.”  This was not, as Euro-enthusiasts have often insisted, a commitment for Britain to participate in the European project.  Churchill envisaged a Western Europe of free independent sovereign nations, not an undemocratic federal Superstate.  Together the nations would reach for a destiny of unprecedented co-operation and harmony.

In 1950 the Schuman Plan proposed the supra-national pooling of the German and French coal and steel industries in order to lay the basis of European economic unity.  The partial merger of the economies of the two traditional enemies would ensure continuing peace between them.  French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman and German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer signed the agreement, The Treaty of Paris, as co-founders of the Franco-German Coal and Steel Confederation.  Like their colleagues Jean Monnet and Paul Henri Spaak, they were both devout Roman Catholics who shared the vision of successive post-war Popes for a re-Catholicized and united Europe.  Adenauer and Schuman, along with Alcide de Gasperi, all three “founding fathers,” are in the process of being made into “Saints” by the Vatican as a reward for founding the new Europe “on Roman Catholic principles.” 

The European Economic Community (The EEC), established in 1957 by The Treaty of Rome brought in Italy, Holland, Belgium, and Luxemburg to join France and Germany, removing trade barriers between member states and unifying their economic policies.  It made clear to those with sufficient stamina to read the Treaty’s lengthy and turgid document that the aim of the project was always to achieve political unity in economic disguise, “an ever closer union.”[15]

In 1962 the Common Agricultural policy was introduced with a single European market and price fixing, which has consistently favored French farmers.  The Northwest Technocrat commented on the developing design of the European project at that time, “Fascism in Europe is about to be reborn in respectable business attire, and the Treaty of Rome will be finally implemented to its fullest extent.  The dream of a Holy Roman Empire returning to power to dominate and direct the so-called forces of Christian mankind of the Western world is not dead, but still stalks through the antechambers of every national capital of continental Western Europe, in the determination of the leaders in the Common Market to restore the Holy Roman Empire with all that that means!”[16]

Nearly thirty years later, the London-based Sunday Telegraph was to express the same concern in a major article headed “Now, a Holy European Empire?”  It stated,

“The Vatican notoriously thinks in centuries.  In Pope John Paul II we have the most political pope of modern times.  It is in the movement towards federalism of the Common Market, with the coming membership of Eastern European countries, as well as in the turmoil of the Soviet Union, that the Pope may see the greatest possibility for an increase in Catholic political power since the fall of Napoleon or since the Counter-Reformation.  The Common Market itself started under the inspiration of Catholic politicians – such as Adenauer of Germany, Paul Henri Spaak, Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman….The EC Social Charter and the socialism of Jacques Delors (President of the European Commission) are imbued with Catholic social doctrine.  If European federalism triumphs, the EC will indeed be an empire.  It will lack an emperor: but it will have the Pope.  It is difficult not to think that Wojtyla realises this.”[17]

In 1967 Prime Minister Harold Wilson announced that Britain would apply to join the European Community (the Common Market).  The British people voted to do so in a referendum in the belief that they were joining a closer trading relationship, a kind of club, rather than being bound into an evolving Superstate.  Unfortunately no more people had read The Treaty of Rome in the 1960s than had read Mein Kampf in the 1930s.  Politicians and opinion formers, who should have known better, accepted assurances that no loss of sovereignty was involved in acceding to the EEC.

In 1973, Prime Minister Edward Heath, who definitely did know better, committed Britain into membership of the EEC.  Ireland and Denmark joined the same year.  In 1979, the European Parliament was established in Strasbourg with its first direct elections.  The word “economic” was carefully dropped from the name of the project that was now to be described as the European Community (EC).  Greece joined the EC in 1981, which was the year of the Single European Act - enacting the gradual transfer of executive, legislative and judicial powers from member States to EC “instrumentalities.”  Spain and Portugal signed up to the EC in 1986, making a total of twelve member states.  In 1990, East Germany joined as part of a united Germany. 

In February 1992, The Maastricht Treaty, or Treaty of European Union, was signed at Maastricht in Holland by the foreign and finance ministers of the member states.  Its objective was to bind the twelve nations into cooperation or “ever closer union” on a range of issues other than economic and trading.  To this end the EC was renamed The European Union.  The Maastricht Treaty established economic and monetary union, which would lead ultimately to all member states sharing a single currency.  The religious dimension, although not apparent, was the key to what was being formed.  Among European leaders who were most influential in furthering the Maastricht agenda were Jacques Delors and Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers (both Jesuit educated) as well as devout Catholics German Chancellor Kohl and Prime Minister Felipe Gonzales of Spain.  These four leaders were all products of the Roman Catholic Social Movement, which believes that “there is no nobler task than the unifying of our continent” and views the idea of a united Europe as essentially a Catholic concept.

The Amsterdam Treaty followed and was signed in 1997 as a further notch of the ratchet of “ever-closer union,” meaning in fact, ever diminishing sovereignty, following the principle of acquis communautaire (which asserts “that what has been acquired cannot be taken away”).  The Amsterdam Treaty gave more powers to the unelected Commission and particularly to its unelected President as the initiator, administrator, mediator, negotiator, and guardian of the Treaties.  The Treaty of Nice, signed by Prime Minister Tony Blair in December 2000, was the last in the series of treaties, which have progressively drained the UK of its sovereignty.  At Nice there was finally and irrevocably established the EU as a sovereign federal state.  A new European criminal code, Corpus Juris, will replace the classic, longstanding British criminal code.  Vital elements such as Trial by Jury and Habeas Corpus are missing from this new code.[18]

EU Supreme Power

Even before the Treaty of Nice came into force, the EU Constitutional Convention, presided over by former French President Valery Giscard d’Estaing, produced its first draft of a constitution for Europe in October 2002.  On 13 June 2003 a final version of the draft Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe, was produced.  Quoting from the London Daily Telegraph,

“To the strains of Beethoven’s Ode to Joy, the Convention on the Future of Europe proclaimed agreement yesterday on a written constitution for a vast European Union of 450 million citizens bringing together East and West.  Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the chair of the 105-strong body, held up a text…‘We have sown a seed and I am sure that seed will grow and bring fruit.  Europe’s voice will be heard and respected on the international stage.  Instead of a half-formed Europe, we have a Europe with a legal identity, with a single currency, common justice, a Europe which is about to have its own defence.’  There was no vote. M Giscard, famed for his autocratic style during 16 months of stormy debates, simply discerned consensus among the MPs, MEPs, and national envoys.  Few were willing to spoil the party by crying foul….The Constitution gives the EU full ‘legal personality’ and determines that EU law will have primacy over the law of member states.  It prohibits Westminster from legislating in most areas of national life - agriculture, justice, energy, social policy, economic cohesion, transport, the environment, and aspects of public health – unless Brussels chooses to waive its power.”[19]

“If the new constitution is accepted, the EU will no longer be a treaty organization in which member states agree to lend power to Brussels, for certain purposes, on the understanding that they can take it back again.  Rather, the EU will itself have become the fount of power, with the ability to sign international treaties in its own right.  It will have its own President, foreign minister and foreign policy; its own parliament, supreme court, flag, anthem and currency.  It will have become a sovereign state, in fact a federal superstate.  The member states whose constitutions will be subject to this higher constitution, will cease to be sovereign.  The new order will be irreversible.  M Giscard made clear that the national veto is to be abolished in 50 new areas, including immigration and asylum.”[20] 

Under the new Constitution’s rules, no nation is to be allowed to secede from the EU except by a two-thirds majority vote of member states in agreement with the secession, which is a sure indication that the nations in the EU have lost their sovereignty.

The Same Spirit - of Domination

The EU will acquire competence in “all areas of foreign policy, including the progressive framing of a common defense policy,” though major decisions must be unanimous.  The European Court, which acquires vast powers, will ensure that member States “actively and unreservedly support the EU’s common foreign and security policy.”  Article 8 of the draft Constitution, which also imposes “an obligation of loyal cooperation vis-à-vis the Union” of member states, reinforces the supremacy of EU law over the laws of member states.[21]  An EU attorney-general will be able to prosecute “cross-border crime,” a catch-all term that will allow Brussels the supreme jurisdiction throughout the EU.  The Constitution lacks any serious democratic dimension and is clearly designed to strengthen the EU power structure for the benefit of the European elite.  Doubtless the intention is to force it through with the minimum of real democratic scrutiny.

This spirit of absolute autocracy that is to govern the EU is frighteningly akin to the spirit that rules in the Vatican, “The First See is judged by no one.”[22]  Rome’s stamp upon the pages of history has ever been “no accountability.”  Its laws also state, “It is solely the right of the Roman Pontiff himself to judge, in cases mentioned in can. 1401:  1. those who hold the highest civil office in a state.”[23]  The same spirit of despotism in both systems loudly proclaims supreme caution.

“The Abandoning of a Thousand Years of History”

The Treaty that establishes the new Constitution, due to be agreed by the Intergovernmental conference in 2004 is far more extensive than any previous treaty.  Derek Heathcote-Amory, the Conservative Party representative at the Constitutional Convention, rightly described it as “bigger than the treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice rolled together.”  The implications of such huge changes, “the abandoning of a thousand years of history,” have not been really understood by the majority of the British people.  Little by little, treaty by treaty, first the EEC, then the EC, then the EU; people have become used to Europe and bored with it; and with so many scare stories about Brussels, so-called dangers threatening their independence and sovereignty, so many Eurosceptics “crying wolf.”  It has all being going on as long as they can remember – and, after all, Britain does have the fourth largest economy in the world, and in the main they have prospered.  The problem is that the wolf is now at the door!

Many of those who cherish Britain’s independence and who do not want to give away that for which two world wars were fought to retain, realize this.  If the move to establish the Constitution for Europe were ratified by the UK parliament, it would be the first time that the United Kingdom has adopted or acceded to a wholly written constitution.  How can the UK adopt such a constitution, having never had one before?  The answer would seem to be straightforward.  The people must give their consent.  However, if the Labour government has its way there will be no referendum.  Tony Blair, who is said to have set his sights on the top job as President of the “United States of Europe,” has made clear that there will be no referendum.  He does not want it because he knows he cannot win it.  Also a referendum campaign would educate the people in both what is proposed and what has already happened.  The Prime Minister agreed to hold a referendum on the Single Currency before he came into office in 1997, but to date he has hesitated to do so, as “the conditions have not been right” again, meaning that he would have lost it.

The EU’s Power Symbols

The EU Parliament’s main base is Strasbourg in France.  The city symbolizes the dream of Franco-German integration that was at the heart of the Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne.  In December 2000, the European Union opened its new Parliament building there.  It is patterned after Dutch artist Pieter Breugel’s famous painting of the Tower of Babel.  Breugel’s painting portrays the Tower unfinished, as does the new EU building, which is built to appear unfinished in close resemblance to the painting.  Outside the Parliament building is a statue of the goddess, Europa, riding a Bull.  Inside, the dome displays a colossal painting of the Woman riding the Beast.  The woman riding the beast symbol also appears on some of the “two euro” coins that have been minted.[24]

The same imagery has appeared on EU postage stamps, including the British one issued in 1984 to commemorate the second elections for the European Parliament.  The EU’s conscious use of such symbolism creates the impression that it wishes to bring to mind Europe’s desire to rule using all the power it has at its disposal.  In Scripture, the Woman riding the Beast is revealed in Revelation 17.  The identification with the Church of Rome has long been apparent to Bible believers.  This interpretation of Bible prophecy did much to empower the Reformation.  Only Papal Rome is a city which is sited on seven hills, a religious system, whose Prelates “are arrayed in purple and scarlet color,” a civil state “with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication”, historically, with hands that are crimson with the blood of Bible believers, “that has been drunken with the blood of the saints and with the martyrs of Jesus.”  Papal Rome is the only worldwide religious system that calls itself and its virgin goddess “Mother.”

History Also Unveils What is Now Happening

A brief review of European history helps with this identification of the Papacy with Scripture.  After the collapse of the Roman Empire in the fifth century, the Papacy continually sought to establish the same dominance as had the Caesars (in fact successive Popes used the same name - Pontifex Maximus).  They did so by weaving together both temporal and spiritual jurisdictions and blasphemously assumed to themselves the office of “the Vicar of Christ”.  In that spurious role, in the course of a few centuries, they were able to subjugate the kings of Europe who became their vice regents.[25]  Thus century-by-century the “Mother Church” succeeded in extending her power, usurping that of civil governments.  Under the guise of religion she planted her own hierarchical system of government, with its exhaustive financial requirements, in each of Europe’s kingdoms.  The blending of things civil and sacred was the Vatican’s hard-to-resist method of operation in those dark ages.  Unhappily, this is still so today, and will be so again, once power and control have been consolidated in the new “United States of Europe.”  “Semper eadem (always the same),” meaning Rome never changes.

The duplicity of the Papacy’s perpetual mixing of political and spiritual powers could surely not be better portrayed than in God’s Word in Revelation 17.  The Apostle John beheld the ten-horned beast, representing the Roman Empire, carrying a woman dressed in purple and scarlet, decked with gold, precious stones, and pearls.  She is a harlot, and the mother of harlots and abominations, the paramour of kings, the pitiless persecutor intoxicated with the blood of the saints and of the martyrs of Christ Jesus.  The angel told John, “The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sitteth.”  To explain this singular fact and to avoid guesswork, he adds, “the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth” (v 7).  The city is indisputably Rome.  The name upon the harlot’s brow is “mystery”.  The city cannot be pagan Rome, about which there was no mystery.  In contrast, Papal Rome was mysterious and continues to be elusive.  Babylon, in the book of Revelation, is a city and an harlot.  Jerusalem, in the same book, is a city and a bride.  Babylon is the deceptive lover of earthly kings; Jerusalem the chaste bride of the King of Kings.  The contrast is between Church and Church, the faithful Church and the Apostate Church.  

The Flag – Another EU Spiritual Symbol

The flag of the European Union, blue with a design of twelve stars in a circle derives from the twelve stars that in Catholic tradition are the halo around the head of the Virgin Mary.[26]  The stars stem from the belief that twelve is the symbol of perfection and of what is unchangeable.  The political purposes behind all of these symbols are much debated; the Biblical significance, however, is revealing.[27]  According to the European Union publication Europe’s Star Choice: “The flag has its roots in Romanism, takes its symbolism from Romanism, and represents the Roman Catholic ideal.”  The design with its halo of stars was inspired by many pictures of the Virgin Mary, the most prominent of which is on the Council of Europe stained glass window in Strasbourg Cathedral.

The EU’s “single market,” “social chapter,” and “subsidiarity” are concepts of Roman Catholic social teaching, originating with Pope Pius XI in the 1930s, and adopted by Hitler’s Vatican-backed Third Reich.  Nazi Finance Minister Walther Funk, styled as the architect of Hitler’s “New Europe”, issued a compendium of papers in 1942 which contained detailed plans for a Europe bearing close resemblance to the Europe now emerging.  Funk’s papers described:-“The European Economic Community”, “The Common European Currency”, “Harmonisation of European Rates of Exchange,” A Common Labour Policy, and a European Regional Principle.  The last has now become known as the Europe of Regions Policy.  England is to be replaced by seven regions, which with Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland will total ten regions in all.  Together they are to replace the United Kingdom!

The Third Reich to Be Followed by the Fourth

The Third Reich, like the EU, was an attempt to revive the Roman Empire.  The higher strategy of the Vatican and the acquiescence of the Catholic Central Party had brought Hitler to power.  Instrumental in this strategy were Reich Chancellor Franz von Papen and Papal Nuncio, Monsignor Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII.  Von Papen goes down in history as the man who obtained Hitler his two-thirds majority, signed the law which made him Head of State and was also responsible for the enormously important Concordat with the Church of Rome in 1933.  He declared, “the Third Reich is the first power in the world to put into practice the lofty principles of the Papacy.”[28]  Incredibly, given his responsibility for Nazi atrocities, he was acquitted at Nuremberg and later became Papal Chamberlain to Pope John XXIII.  Pacelli, as Pope Pius XII, became notorious for his silence with regard to the Holocaust and the other appalling crimes committed by the Fascists in Europe.  The Vatican’s attempts to canonize him have proved highly controversial.

The Nazi leadership was mainly Roman Catholic.  Hitler and Himmler were greatly influenced by the Jesuits, as was Mussolini whose Father Confessor was a Jesuit.  Hitler said of Himmler, “in Himmler I see our Ignatius de Loyola.”[29]  Joseph Goebbels was also Jesuit-educated, as was Walter Schellenberg who led the SD or Sicherheitsdienst, the Security Service of the SS, and before being sentenced to death at Nuremberg for crimes against humanity, stated that, “the SS organisation has been constituted by Himmler according to the principles of the Jesuit Order.  Their regulations and the spiritual exercises prescribed by Ignatius of Loyola were the model Himmler tried to copy exactly.”[30]

The lesson and warning of history is that undemocratic regimes whose leaders owe allegiance to the Pope or practise “the lofty principles of the Papacy” pose a threat to individual liberty, and carry out religious persecution.  For example, the inquisition was alive and well in the Balkans in the 1940s.  “Convert or die” was the choice of offer to 900,000 Orthodox Serbs in the new state of Croatia, run by Nazi puppet, Anton Pavelich and Roman Catholic Primate, Archbishop Alois Stepinac.  200,000 were “converted”; 700,000, who preferred to die, were tortured, shot, burned, or buried alive.  This appalling persecution, carried out mainly by Ustashi priests and friars “for the triumph of Christ and Croatia,” included many of the worst atrocities of the War; certainly the mutilations were horrific, the savagery terrible.[31]

Few people know what took place in Croatia during the Second World War: news of it has been simply suppressed.  Nor do they understand what happened in the Balkans in the 1990s.  The re-establishing of Croatia as an independent state, during the disintegration of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, is instructive.  The European Union, led by Germany ignored the protest of Britain and many other nations in pressing for this to happen.  The Vatican was the first to recognise the reborn Croatia.  Writing in September 1991 in the Sunday Telegraph historian Andrew Roberts expressed surprise that “almost the entire Western media have chosen to champion the Croats. … how are the Serbs expected to react to the decision to adopt the Ustashi’s chequered symbol as the Croatian national flag?  In Krajina it takes longer than the attention span of today’s CNN broadcaster to forget the way Franciscan friars participated in the slaughter of Serbs in Croatian Bosnia.  Orthodox Serbs were promised protection if they converted to Catholicism and were then killed, after they entered the churches, as the priests looked on.”[32]  None of this is surprising if we know the history of Roman Catholicism. 

“From the birth of Popery in 600, to the present time, it has been estimated by careful and credible historians, that more than FIFTY MILLIONS of the human family have been slaughtered for ‘the crime’ of heresy by popish persecutors, an average of more than forty thousand religious murders for every year of the existence of Popery.”[33] 

The Scripture speaks prophetically of her lust for power and blood; history has recorded many of the gruesome details.     The Papacy has been predominant throughout the whole history of Europe.  It has left its mark and record on most of the major nations.  In times past it has proven itself to be totally dominant in its control of Kings and Princes.  The whole history of the Western world over fourteen centuries has been plagued by the intrigues and machinations of the Church of Rome in unceasing pursuit of her global designs.  In the words of the historian J.A. Wylie,

“….as regards the influence of Popery on government, it were easy to demonstrate, that the Papacy delayed the advent of representative and constitutional government for thirteen centuries.  Superstition is the mother of despotism; Christianity is the parent of liberty.  There is no truth which the past history of the world more abundantly establishes than this.  It was through Christianity that the democratic element first came into the world.…The papal government is the very antipodes of constitutional government: it centres all power in one man: it does so on the ground of divine right; and is therefore essentially and eternally antagonistic to the constitutional element.  Its long dominancy in Europe formed the grand barrier to the progress of the popular element in society, and to the erection of constitutional government in the world.”[34] 

Our Hope and Prayer for Europe

Once again we have come to a defining moment in history.  Once more the Vatican is engaged in placing its hallmark and its rituals on the face of Europe to further its familiar agenda.  It does so in a number of different ways directed from the highest levels of command in the Vatican.  First, it operates directly through its civil ambassadors in each European nation.  According to the Catholic Almanac “Papal representatives ‘receive from the Roman Pontiff the charge of representing him in a fixed way in the various nations or regions of the world.’”[35]  Second, the Roman Church also deals directly and legally with individual nations through its many legal concordats.  Less directly, it operates through its representation and influence in most of the governmental agencies of Europe.  This involvement, especially in the area of finance and business, is documented in her Almanac under the heading of “Governmental Organisations.”  These include the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the Organization of American States, the International Organization for the Unification of Private Law, and the International Council on Grain, among others.  Rome has her observers and delegates in all of these many listed organizations.[36]  Finally, she operates through her own people in Europe whose allegiance is first and foremost to the Roman Catholic Church.  Many of her people have access to positions in the ruling structure of their nation.  As Roman Catholics, they are enjoined by the Vatican to use both influence and position to bring that nation into line with papal policy on any particular issue.

We need to pray that Europe will not be taken back to the state that it was in, spiritually and politically, during the Middle Ages.  Roman Catholicism though outwardly and politically strong is inwardly and spiritually feeble.  By her laws and ceremonies, her Bishops, Priests and laity are obliged to accept the system that recognizes the Pope as the universal “Sovereign Father” while denying the true Father and the Son.  From its traditions, history, and crises, it is evident that it is an institution lacking the Gospel of grace in Christ, one that walks in darkness and in the shadow of death.

In contrast, the true Christian faith may outwardly look small and weak; but inwardly, and in essence, it is the strongest power on earth.  That same power liberated most of Europe at the time of the Reformation.  It is the power that is in Christ Jesus the Lord, and inseparable from Him.  In the words of the Apostle Peter, “blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.”[37]  The reason for our confidence is our relationship to the risen Savior the Lord Jesus Christ.  He is Lord, the universal King and Sovereign, the Priest and Savior.  Christ Jesus our Lord is a Prophet, anointed with the Spirit and furnished with all gifts necessary for the instruction, guidance, and salvation of His people through His written Word, the Holy Scriptures.  He and His Gospel of grace are our hope for the future of Europe.  Our inheritance is reserved in heaven, on earth however we “are kept by the power of God through faith…”[38]

We remember that the greatest power of God has often been experienced in times of the greatest declension, such as the time of the 18th century Revival and that of the Reformation itself.  “The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light:  they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.”[39]  God in His sovereignty and in His divine timing can bring a people to the Bible, to His truth of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.  When He pleases He is able with one word of His grace, to renew Europe by an act of His power, and make His enemies the footstool of Christ.  We pray that He will give us the faith of the Reformers and of all those in the history of Europe who have given their lives for Biblical Truth.  For the European Union we pray the words of the prophet of the Lord, ‘“Turn thou us unto thee, O LORD, and we shall be turned; renew our days as of old.”[40]  God can send forth His Spirit when He pleases.  He did so at the time of the Reformation; we pray that He will do so again now!  We remember the words of John Owen at another tuning point of history.  He spoke of his own nation, England, at a time of social disintegration yet looking for revival.  We now need that same faith and confidence for Britain and for the future of all the EU,

“When God will do this I know not: but I believe God can do this: He is able to do it – able to renew all his churches, by sending out supplies of the Spirit, whose fullness is with Him, to recover them in the due and appointed time.  And more; I believe truly, that when God hath accomplished some ends upon us, and hath stained the glory of all flesh, He will renew the power and glory of religion among us again, even in this nation.”[41]

Watch and Pray; Sound an Alarm in Zion

The Church of Rome is one of the major players in the “creeping totalitarianism” of the New World Order.  Her designs on the EU are a major part of the unfolding global strategy.  We need to watch and pray as the “Fourth Reich” emerges out of its embryo.  A watchman of old was expected to guard against robbers and disturbers of the peace.  We are all commanded to be watchmen, “to watch and pray.”  There has been a dreadful apathy that has afflicted the household of God, an indifference to the clear threat to our ancient liberties and Protestant identity from both the EU and the Church of Rome.  As watchmen of the Lord today we are to guard against false teachers and false religion.  We are to watch and discern the actions and words of the one who would seek to supplant the Gospel with apostasy and tyranny.  Our task under God is to sound an alarm, “blow ye the trumpet in Zion…let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the Lord cometh, for it is nigh at hand.”[42]  Now even more than in the days of old the commands of the Lord are to be obeyed, “son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.”[43]  As we make our stand, so also we pray expecting to see the power of God at work in Europe, “they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.”[44]  We owe the liberty that we yet enjoy to Jesus Christ the Lord.  By His faithfulness and perfect sacrifice He has satisfied the demands of the broken law of the All Holy God.  It is He, the Son of God, who has made us free.  “If the Son of God shall set you free you will be free indeed.”   

There is genuine unity of all true believers throughout the world.  There is but one faith.  All true believers are converted by the same Holy Spirit, and receive the same work of grace, which places them in the Beloved.  In Christ Jesus we are spiritually one and called to stand fast in this liberty, and stand firm in His truth.  “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be ye not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.”[45] 

Permission is given by the authors to copy this article if it is done in its entirety without any changes.

Permission is also given post this article in its entirety on Internet WebPages.

Our WebPages are located at: www.bereanbeacon.org

http://reformationfaith.com/

[1] This article was written in 2010.

[2] Bible League Quarterly (20 Thistlebarrow Road, Salisbury SP1 3RT, England) Oct-Dec 1981

[3] Date: 2003-08-31 Code: ZE03083104http://www.zenit.org/english/ 9/3/03

[4] DOMINUS IESUS September 5th 2000Para. 4 www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html 

[5] Ibid., Para. 17

[6] Ibid., Para. 17

[7] Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. by Roy J Deferrari from Enchiridion Symbolorum, 13th ed (B. Herder Book Co., 1957),  #469

[8] Sunday Telegraph, July 21, 1991

[9] Eccelsia in Europa, Para. 116 www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_20030628_ecclesia-in-europa_en.html  9/23/03

[10] Ibid., Para. 20, 7/15/03Bolding in any quotation indicates emphasis added in this paper unless otherwise noted.

[11] DOMINUS IESUS, Para. 16

[12] Ibid  Para 17

[13]Adrian Hilton, “Render unto the Pope,” The Spectator, 30 August, 2003,  http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php3?table=old&section=current&issue=2003-11-15&id=3450&searchText=   11/17/2003

[14] Catechism of the Catholic Church(Liguori, MO:  Liguori Publications, 1994) Para. 1129

[15] Vid. Treaty of Rome, Articles 164-188

[16] The Northwest Technocrat, 1962

[17] Sunday Telegraph, 25 August 1991

[18] See Frederick Forsyth “The Abolition of Habeas Corpus” and Lord Stoddart on Corpus Juris, www.bullen.demon.co.uk 11/18/03

[19] Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, “Few willing to spoil the party for Giscard” in www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/06/14/weu14.xml  6/17/03

[20] Ambrose Evans-Pritchard www.watch.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/home.sa/a/9699 7/7/03 See also Noel MalcolmDaily Telegraph28/7/03 “A Federal Constitution with the Heart of a Manifesto”  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fopinion%2F2003%2F07%2F28%2Fdo2801.xml  1/17/03

[21] www.euroscep.dircon.co.uk/corpus4.htm 11/18/03

[22] Code of Canon Law, Latin-English ed., New English Tr. (Wash. DC:  Canon Law Society of America, 1983) Can. 1404 All canons are taken from this source unless otherwise stated.

[23] Canon 1405, Sec.1Can. 1401:1 states, “By proper and exclusive right the Church adjudicates: 1. cases which regard spiritual matters or those connected to spiritual matters.”

[24] These EU figure-symbols can wee see on the Internet: www.pointsoftruth.com/beastarises.html7/7/03; http://fp.thebeers.f9.co.uk/europe.htm7/7/03;  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PatriotSaints/message/2707/7/03; www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=eu47/7/03

[25] For fuller treatment, see J. A. Wylie, The History of Protestantism (Rapidan, VA 22733:  Hartland Publications, 2002) Orig. publ. 1878.  Four vols, particularly Vol. I, Ch. 3 “Development of the Papacy from the Time of Constantine to Hildebrand.”

[26] For further detail, see Adrian Hilton, The Principality and Power of Europe:  Britain and the emerging Holy European Empire (Box 67, Ricksmanworth, Herts WD3 5SJ, U.K.:  Dorchester House, 2000) p. 55.

[27] Documentation on these EU symbols are found on the following WebPages: www.pointsoftruth.com/beastarises.html  7/7/03;

http://fp.thebeers.f9.co.uk/europe.htm  7/7/03;  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PatriotSaints/message/270  7/7/03;

www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=eu4  7/7/03

[28] Robert d’Harcourt, “Franz von Papen l’homme a` tout faire…” (L’Aube, 3 Oct. 1946) in The Vatican Against Europe by Edmond Paris, Tr. from French by A. Robson, First English Ed 1961 (184 Fleet Street, London, EC4:  The Wickliffe Press, 1961) p. 271

[29] Libres Propos, Flammarion, Paris 1952

[30] Edmond Paris, The Vatican Against Europe (London:  Wycliffe Press, 1961)

[31] The Vatican’s Holocaust (Springfield, MO: Ozark Books, 1986)

[32] Sunday Telegraph, 15 September 1991

[33] “No computation can reach the numbers who have been put to death, in different ways, on account of their maintaining the profession of the Gospel, and opposing the corruptions of the Church of Rome.  A MILLION poor Waldenses perished in France; NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND orthodox Christians were slain in less than thirty years after the institution of the order of the Jesuits.  The Duke of Alva boasted of having put to death in the Netherlands, THIRTY-SIX THOUSAND by the hand of the common executioner during the space of a few years.  The Inquisition destroyed, by various tortures, ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND within thirty years.  These are a few specimens, and but a few, of those which history has recorded; but the total amount will never be known till the earth shall disclose her blood, and no more cover her slain"  John Dowling, History of Rome in Scott’s Church History, Book 8 

[34] J.A. Wylie, The Papacy, Book III. Chapter III, “Influence of Popery on Government”

http://www.freepres.org/papacy/pap03-03.htm 9/25/03

[35] Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Almanac 1998(Huntington, IN:  Our Sunday Visitor, Inc., 1997) p.168

[36] The Catholic Almanac 1998, p171

[37] I Peter 1:3

[38] I Peter 1:5

[39] Isaiah 9:2

[40] Lamentations 5:21

[41] John Owen, The Works of John Owen (Johnstone & Hunter, 1850-53; Reprinted by The Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh EH12 6EL, 1976) Vol. 9, p 514

[42] Joel 2:1

[43] Ezekiel 3:17

[44] Isaiah 40:31

[45] Galatians 5:1

Papal Rome Exalts Her Throne

On September 5, 2000, the Roman Catholic document called, “Dominus Iesus”[1] was issued by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger; head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.[2]  Carrying the full authority of an official Vatican decree, it declares the Roman Catholic Church to be the only “instrument for the salvation of all humanity.”[3]  Dominus Iesus has been “ratified and confirmed” by “The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II.”[4] 

Timothy George, who launched the lie of ECT II on December 8, 1997 in Christianity Today, has now written his approval of the Vatican’s document.  Mr. George, by his validation of Rome, continues to betray the Lord and His true Church; i.e., the Body of Christ, which is made up of all those saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.  He begins by saying that he welcomes Dominus Iesus and then declares, “In an unusual way it is an encouragement to the kind of ecumenism we ought to be engaged in.”  Curious and unusual, indeed, since Dominus Iesus proclaims, “…the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense.”[5] 

These two standards disqualify Timothy George’s own Southern Baptist Church.  In consequence of this, Mr. George belongs to a church that is not a church “in the proper sense.”  It is bizarre that he should accept this document, let alone applaud it!

“Valid Episcopate”

For a church to be considered proper in the eyes of Rome, the first litmus test that Dominus Iesus demands is the “valid Episcopate” (i.e. the priestly power office of the Bishop).  That power is possessed neither by Mr. George nor his church.  The power of the Bishop, Rome claims, comes through the physical laying on of hands and the right words of incantation.  That is but a tradition and is clearly expressed in Rome’s official words of Vatican II:

“In fact, from tradition, which is expressed especially in the liturgical rites and in the customs of both the Eastern and Western Church, it is abundantly clear that by the imposition of hands and through the words of the consecration, the grace of the Holy Spirit is given, and a sacred character is impressed in such wise that bishops, in a resplendent and visible manner, take the place of Christ himself, teacher, shepherd and priest, and act as his representatives (in eius persona).”[6]

In contrast the Scripture teaches that no elder takes Christ’s place as priest.  All believers have immediate access to God in Christ Jesus; all share in the royal priesthood of praise (I Peter 2:9).  Rome’s sixth sacrament, “Holy Orders,” which claims to pass on Christ’s sacrificial priesthood by laying on of hands, is a tradition of men that contradicts scriptural truth.  In the Bible, Christ’s unending priesthood cannot be transferred to any other person, as stated in Hebrews 7:24 “But this man [Jesus Christ], because He continueth ever, hath an unchangeable[7] priesthood.”[8]  Rome does not have Christ’s New Testament sacrificial priesthood,[9] let alone its higher grade of Episcopacy.  The whole office of Rome’s Episcopate is that of sacrificial bishop and priest.  Rome needs its Episcopacy to maintain her seven physical sacraments.  The whole life of the Church of Rome revolves around her bishops and priests and the sacraments that they perform.  Thus, the Church of Rome officially states,

“The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation.  'Sacramental grace' is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament.”[10] 

Looking to physical signs to give “sacramental grace” and calling that “the grace of the Holy Spirit” is literally a blasphemy against the All Holy God.  It not only takes from the character of God whose person alone gives grace, but it presupposes that His power can be controlled in the seven sacraments of Rome.  Rome’s sacramental system and the Episcopacy from which it flows is a soul-damning tradition of men.  Far from being a test of a true church, it is the hallmark of those who sit in Satan’s seat exalting themselves as the dispensers of “light.”

Eucharistic Mystery

The second litmus test for Timothy George, and all those studying this “unusual” document, is what Dominus Iesus calls “the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery.”  This is clearly defined in the Catholic Catechism,

“The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: ‘The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.’  ‘This divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner.’”[11]

This teaching is sacrilegious.  That Christ needs to offer Himself more than once is blasphemous.  Such a concept attempts to reduce Christ’s sacrifice to imperfection; the reason being that it assumes that His one offering, made once, was not good enough to make complete atonement.  What is absolutely perfect and consummated cannot be repeated since repetition is a proof of imperfection.  To this end the Holy Spirit teaches precisely, “Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.”[12]  Before the all Holy God and His Written Word, Rome does not have a valid Communion table or the priestly power of the Episcopate.  The Pope’s two standards for defining the validity of churches are both lying traditions.  In the words of Christ Jesus the Lord, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”[13]  If Mr. George wishes to stand hand-in-hand with this system, seeking unity, he had better begin praying to Saint Jude, the Roman Catholic patron of hopeless cases! 

Clearly then, Timothy George, J.I. Packer, Bill Bright, Os Guinness, Max Lucado, T.M. Moore, Bishop Williams Frey, Charles Colson, and other signers and endorsers of ECT I & II are now not in limbo but rather out in no man’s land.  Did George and his fellow ecumenists really believe that the Pope will simply fade into the shadows and allow “Evangelicals” to exercise themselves independently of his will?  Do they think the rhetoric of the Vatican and the witness of history to be empty forerunners, and are they as hoodwinked as that generation which had Mein Kampf in their hands and Hitler in their midst, but saw no connection?

Roman Catholic Supremacy

In Section 17, Dominus Iesus speaks of the Roman Catholic Church as the “Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.”  This presumed primacy is the arrogant underpinning of the whole document, flouting the Lord’s commandment, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them...But ye shall not be so.”[14]   Rome in 2000 spoke, as did the infamous Boniface VIII in 1302,

“Furthermore we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they, by necessity for salvation, are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

The dominant presupposition of Rome is that the Lord set up a totalitarian hierarchy of pope, cardinals, patriarchs, major archbishops, archbishops, metropolitans, coadjutor archbishops, diocesan bishops, coadjutor bishops, etcetera.  This is the spirit of Diotrephes, “who loves to have the preeminence,” gone mad.  The biblical organizational structure of the bride of Christ is utterly different.  In the true body of Christ, those ordained as elders and deacons are still only brothers within the same body and the one Master is Jesus Christ the Lord.  “For one is your master even Christ and ye are all brethren.”[15]

Part of the same hierarchical presupposition is expressed in Dominus Iesus, Section 16, “…the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.”  Presumed in this declaration is the idea that Peter went to Rome, was her first bishop, and subsequently, the bishops of Rome have by “apostolic succession” retained his prerogatives and more.  The assumption is groundless.  In biblical history, there is no mention of Peter ever visiting Rome.  When Paul was imprisoned in Rome, he never once mentions Peter being there, which, if Peter were the head of the church ruling from Rome, Paul surely would have done.  The Roman Catholic Church’s position is completely inconsistent with the recorded commission that the Apostle Peter was to take the Gospel to the Jews, as was the Apostle Paul to the Gentiles, including those in Rome.  Nor is there anywhere in Scripture where there is the slightest suggestion of the existence of an “apostolic succession.”  In the New Testament, the Apostles appointed elders and deacons, not a line of apostles.  There are no biblical texts for these power-endowing statements of Dominus Iesus.  Rather, the Papacy declares by fiat that it is so.  The Papacy now is nothing more than the head of the Apostate Church depicted in Scripture, ravenous for power, the “woman” who is seated upon the beast reigning over peoples, nations, and tongues.  Such arrogance, as the presumed “Primacy, which…the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church,” is mind-boggling. 

Submission of Intellect and Will

In Section 4, in one sentence of 170 words, Dominus Iesus states that the root of the problem to unity and salvation is “the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.”  This means that the bottom line of Dominus Iesus is the stipulated demand to submit one’s entire mind to an earthly fallible authority that claims to be infallible.  Moreover, she pronounces that the consequence for not obeying is punishment with a “just penalty.”  The official word of Rome states,

“A religious respect of intellect and will, even if not the assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate on faith or morals.” 

The Lord himself looked to the authority of the Scriptures, as did His Apostles after Him.  The biblical message breathed out by God is revelation in written form (II Tim. 3:15-16).  The biblical claim is that what God has inspired was His written Word (II Pet. 1:20-21).  When the Lord Jesus Christ said, “the Scripture cannot be broken,”[16] He was speaking of God’s authoritative written Word.  The events, actions, commandments, and truths from God are given propositionally; i.e., in logically written sentences.  God’s declaration in Scripture is that it, and it alone, is the final authority in all matters of faith and morals.  Thus, there is only one written source from God; there is only one basis of truth for the Lord’s people.  Against this precept of not believing “outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church” is the command of the Scripture not to think above what is written:  “…that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.”[17]  “God….in these last days hath spoken unto us through His Son,”[18] and not through the Pope’s ex cathedra pronouncements, nor through the Magisterium of the Church of Rome!

Engineering of Concepts

The key catchword of Dominus Iesus is the word “salvific.”  It is repeated in obtuse, yet clever sentences 39 times!  Many of the statements concerning the role of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in salvation are biblically correct.  However, these truthful concepts are used as a camouflage behind which Rome manufactures her claim that Christ’s “salvific” work is in the Roman Catholic Church.  Thus, Section 16 of Dominus Iesus asserts, “Therefore, the fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery belongs also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord.”  And, “The Lord Jesus, the only Saviour, did not only establish a simple community of disciples, but constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: he himself is in the Church.”  This claim that Christ’s salvation belongs to and is in the Roman Catholic Church is a lie.  Roman Catholic “salvation” is claimed to come through inner righteousness bestowed through her Baptism.  Thus, Rome teaches:

“Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith.  It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy.”

Such a concept of supposed righteousness within the soul by means of a physical sacrament is a lie of Satan.  The words of the risen Christ in giving the Gospel are crystal clear.  “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be damned.”[19]  Faith is the key of saving grace, and unbelief the chief damning sin.  Faith in Christ is absolutely necessary for salvation unto eternal life; baptism is an ordinance that follows salvation.  The alleged “fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery” as belonging to the Church of Rome is a soul-damning lie.

The Lie as Lived Out

As Catholics live it out, the “salvific mystery…in the church” is a long journey through the Sacrifice of the Mass, sacraments, good works, merit, worship of Mary and the saints, etcetera.  One is required to partake of the “salvific mystery” in order to be good enough to die in “sanctifying grace” and then to be saved, or at least, for the majority, to land for a time in purgatory.  One is left to wonder how “full” is that measure of grace found within the Catholic Church; how “perfect” is her sacrifice of the Mass; how hopeful are “the last rites” if their accomplishments are such as to send souls to a psuedo-hell called purgatory.

The same Section 16 states, “This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.”  It is the constant ploy of the Roman Catholic Church to focus a person’s faith for salvation to the Roman Catholic Church herself.  In her official words she states:

“There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive. ‘There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest.’”

In Scripture, however, salvation is mediated through Jesus Christ alone, the only mediator between God and man.[20]  The instrument of salvation is not a Church but rather faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”[21]  “However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.”[22]  The boundaries of salvation are all of God, and not that of any Church, to demonstrate in the words of the Apostle that He is “just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”[23]  The precincts of salvation are outlined in Romans 3: 24, “being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,”[24] showing that God’s grace is the efficient cause, and the payment is “through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”[25]  To attempt to bring the Roman Catholic Church into the nature of the salvific work of the Godhead, indeed to make her the fount of that work, is gross blasphemy.  In Scripture, salvation is in Christ Jesus alone, “to the praise of the glory of his grace.”[26]

Rome’s Sacraments Displace the Gospel   

In Section 21, the Roman Catholic Church now has the same nerve, as during the Inquisition and the Council of Trent, to state that there is a “divine origin” and salvific power to her sacraments.  Thus, Dominus Iesus states, “One cannot attribute to ‘various religious traditions’ a divine origin or an ex opere operato[27] salvific efficacy, which is proper to the Christian sacraments.”  This is in accord with what she claims in her “infallible” Council of Trent:

“If anyone shall say that by the said sacraments of the New Law, grace is not conferred from the work which has been worked [ex opere operato] but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace: let him be anathema.”

Nonetheless, the central point of the God of the Gospel is that God saves the ungodly by faith alone.  In the words of the Apostle Paul, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”[28]  To officially reject “faith alone in the divine promise” and uphold “the work which has been worked” of Rome’s physical sacraments is formal apostasy, damning the adherents to eternal hell.  The warning of Scripture still stands, “As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”[29]

Outside Rome, No Church!

In the ecumenical context in which this document has been published, the Roman Catholic Church’s arrogance is summarized in Section 17, “the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense.”  Indeed, this is ominous; as the Nazis declared non-Aryans to be non-humans, so now Rome declares other churches “not Churches in the proper sense.”[30]  As the Apostle Peter might say, “Indeed, this sounds as the voice of ‘a roaring lion.’”  The statement is directed against all post-Reformation churches, including the Lutherans and Anglicans; including the churches of Timothy George, J.I. Packer, Bill Bright, Charles Colson, and other false messengers of ECT I and II.  Had those who were being drawn into ecumenism and dialogue done any serious study of her major documents and history, they would have found that the Roman Catholic Church has had this iron-clad mindset all along.  For her, the only true Church sits on the Seven Hills of Rome; the only successful dialogue is to come back into her arms.  Thus, Vatican Council II’s post-conciliar document, No. 42, on ecumenism had already stated,

 “…dialogue is not an end in itself…it is not just an academic discussion.”   Rather, “ecumenical dialogue...serves to transform modes of thought and behavior and the daily life of those [non-Catholic] communities.  In this way, it aims at preparing the way for their unity of faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible.”

Transform them it must, for there is no “equality” in the “doctrinal content” that other churches and their ecumenical cohorts have to bring to the table.  The Papal Primacy in a forceful inquisitorial manner is saying come back to “Holy Mother,” otherwise we will treat you as a non-church.  Confident ecumenizers ought to rethink their position.  Their base in groups defined by Rome as “Churches not in the proper sense” leaves them without power because they have already compromised the Gospel and the authority of Scripture alone.  Would the late Charles Colson and the extant J.I. Packer, both known for continued defense of their ecumenical lies, follow Mr. George?  Would these men, like George, embrace the guillotine that is to behead them?  Logically, the next step after that would be to apply for membership in her whose official colors are scarlet and purple.

Ecumenists Come to the Table Empty Handed

The table is set for a most interesting response to Dominus Iesus.  One leading ecumenist has bowed the knee and we await the response of the others.  In face of the continued discussion of the Dominus Iesus document and the stand that has been made in Canada by a group of Reformed pastors, silence is not good enough.  To continue to ecumenize with Rome, footless as they are on her authoritarian ground, is illogical and obtuse.  The self-exalted Rome in Dominus Iesus defines even the “equality” she offers to her suitors.  Sect. 22 of Dominus Iesus states, “Equality, which is a presupposition of inter-religious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the parties in the dialogue, not to doctrinal content.”  In other words, she grants them “personal dignity” as human beings, but when it comes to “doctrinal content,” the other churches and religions, the J.I. Packers, and Chuck Colsons, are non-entities until they enter her arms.

George’s Supposed Common Ground With Rome

The second paragraph of George’s acceptance of Dominus Iesus begins with the words,

“Seventy-Five Years Ago Evangelical Leader, J. Gresham Machen, Observed That Bible-Believing Protestants and faithful Roman Catholics shared more in common with one another than they did with others who denied the deity of Christ, the miracles of Jesus, the Holy Trinity, or the second coming of Christ. That is still true today, and we must continue to work for greater mutual understanding on the basis of a shared commitment to the core of orthodox Christian belief.”

Had the Church of Rome openly opposed these cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, she would not be named Mystery Babylon.  For Bible-believing Christians there is no mystery when the enemies of Christ openly deny the true faith.  The worst and greatest adversary of Christ is the one who in pretense of service to Christ presumes to undermine cardinal doctrines by man-made traditions.  Thus, in Rome’s teaching, Christ's deity is severely tarnished when such deity is officially taught to be within her communion bread.  Also, the full supreme and universal dominion of the divine Christ is blemished as an imperfect man claims His position.  This Rome does as she declares

“For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, namely, and as pastor of the entire Church, has full, supreme and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.” 

Likewise, the essential doctrine of the Trinity is brought to naught if one accepts Rome’s tradition of the “All Holy Mother” as proclaimed in her teaching, 

“By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the ‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One.”  

Roman Catholic tradition disgraces the holiness of the Godhead, the deity of Christ, and the very Gospel of His finished work.  George’s alleged common ground with Rome is true only to the point where such fundamental doctrines are made of none effect by her traditions

We inquire of George and other ecumenists who applaud him where common ground can be found with the worship of Mary, her declared Immaculate Conception, Assumption, the veneration of statues, the bloodless sacrifice of the Mass, auricular confession to a priest, baptismal regeneration, Purgatory, indulgences, celibacy, and other doctrines of devils; including an infallible pope who demands submission of one’s intellect and will.  Even John Armstrong who published the ludicrous statements of Timothy George ought to be rebuked for total lack of discernment and for carding George as featured speaker at Reformation & Revival Ministries’ Reformation, held in October 2001.

The Bottom Line for Mr. George

In his final paragraph George states,

“I dare to say that there are countless Roman Catholics who know Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, just as there are, no doubt, (in my denomination) many Southern Baptists who have been duly dunked but are still spiritually dead.”

“Dare to say” is mere speculation.  George would have us with eyes that are distracted from the tangible evidence of heretical, blasphemous papal doctrine, and focused on conjecture.  The difference between Roman Catholicism and biblical truth is that of chalk and cheese.  It is one thing to unwittingly baptize unconverted souls; it is indeed quite another thing to baptize countless infants declaring to the world,

“The [Roman Catholic] Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude.”

Mr. George’s Proposal

Mr. George’s main thesis is that “Evangelicals who care about the gospel should welcome the Vatican’s spurning of religious relativism.”  This is like a modern Little Red Riding Hood remarking to the Big Bad Wolf, “What wonderful absolutism you have,” and Rome replies, “All the better to devour you, my dear.”  How could one “care about the Gospel,” and “welcome the Vatican” in the same breath?

Decisive Moment of History

We have reached a real crossroads in the whole “ecumenical compromise” of our own times.  It is time for those who really love the Lord of glory and His written Word to make a strong campaign for His truth.  What George has done, in upholding Rome’s self-glorification, is lay down a gauntlet before those who call themselves biblical Christians.  Where are you?  Do you join with those running into the arms of her who sits on the Seven Hills, calling herself “Holy Mother;” while, in biblical terms, her doctrines are of the whore of Babylon?  Or, are you with those who stand to expose her?  Christians are commanded by the Lord to contend for the faith.  To simply ignore the present battle is to deny the Lord of glory.  His great commandment to give the Gospel “to the uttermost parts of the earth”[31] is laid on those of us who call ourselves biblical Christians.  To uphold His gospel of truth based on His written Word is what is laid before us.  We pray that we may do this, speaking the truth in love but without compromise.  In the same way that our precious Lord castigated the Pharisees, we who are Christians must oppose modern Rome and her daughters.  Those who claim to be in Christ Jesus the Lord must expose not simply Rome, but also expose those who flirt with her, even as she sits as a queen disparaging them.

The Lord Jesus warned us of other “christs”[32] as did Peter of “false teachers”[33] and Paul of “wolves”[34] within the flock.  It is not simply that these apostates existed in former days.  A biblical Christian must have the courage to face these wolves for the Lord Jesus Christ.  Christ is our example to follow.  The Lord exposed Pharisees establishing their own righteousness and making the written Word of no effect; we cannot afford to do less.  The disciples of our day ought to oppose an apostate system that officially gainsays the glorious truths of our God. 

These things are written with great care because the salvation of many is involved.  The Lord faced the sincere and devout Pharisees with a very strong word.  They, like many present-day Catholics, were making tradition equal to the authority of the written Word and were not counting on God’s grace alone.  The Lord said to those Pharisees of His own day, “If you believe not that I am He, you shall die in your sins.”[35]  If anyone continues to hold to the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching authority, and her “salvific” righteousness, he, likewise, will die in his sins.  The Lord Christ Jesus died in place of the believer, the One for the many (Mark 10:45).  His life and finished sacrifice alone are the ransom for the believer.  As He declared, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.”[36]

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article. 

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs can be seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/

cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html

[2] Formerly known as the Office of the Inquisition, then the Holy Office, it is still housed in the same building in Rome as it had been during those horrendous centuries of torture and death when it carried out the papal decrees.

[3] Dominus Iesus, Para. 22.

[4] Scriptures speak of One Supreme Sovereign Head of the Church:  the All Holy, Unchangeable, All-Powerful, All Knowing, All Wise Lord Jesus Christ.

[5]  Dominus Iesus Section 17

[6] No. 28, Lumen Gentium, 21 November 1964, Vol. I, Sec. 21, pp. 373-374

[7] Aparabatos (Greek) meaning: not transferable, not passing on to others.  In the New Testament, no sacrificial priests are mentioned, only elders and pastors.  In Christ Jesus, all believers are part of the royal priesthood

[8] Hebrews 7:24

[9] See our article on the “The Priesthood” on our Website.

[10] Catechism of the Catholic Church   Para. 1129 

[11] Catechism, Para. 1367

[12] Hebrews 7:27

[13] Matt 15:8-9

[14] Luke 22:25

[15] Mt. 23:8

[16] John 10:35

[17] I Corinthians 4:6

[18] Hebrews 1:2

[19] Mark 16:16 

[20] John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Tim. 2:5

[21] Acts 16:31

[22] Romans 4:5

[23] Romans 3:26

[24] Romans 3:24

[25] Ibid.

[26] Ephesians 1:6

[27] “Ex opere operato is a Latin expression meaning “by the work worked.” It refers to the fact that the sacraments confer grace when the sign is validly effected -- not as the result of activity on the part of the recipent [sic] but by the power and promise of God.” http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-does-the-expression-ex-opere-operato-mean

[28] Romans 4:5

[29] Gal. 1: 9

[30] Dominus Iesus No. 17

[31] Acts 1:8

[32] Mark 13:22

[33] II Peter 2:2

[34] Acts 20:29

[35] John 8:24

[36] John 6:2

A Portrayal of the Woman of Revelation - Chapter Seventeen

The Holy Spirit in Revelation Chapter Seventeen vividly depicts the features of the Apostate Church.  It is done in graphically precise detail.  The Apostle John beheld the ten-horned beast carrying a woman dressed in purple and scarlet, decked with gold, precious stones, and pearls, a harlot, and the mother of harlots and abominations.  She is the paramour of kings, merciless, cruel, intoxicated with the blood of the saints and of the martyrs of Christ Jesus.  These symbols are brilliantly portrayed.  “The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth” (v 9).  This the Holy Spirit clarifies by proclaiming, “the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth” (v 18).  The city indisputably is Rome.  The name upon the harlot’s brow is “mystery” (v 5).  She cannot be heathen Rome of which there was no mystery because her character was never concealed.  “Christian” Rome, however, is a mystery, for she is not what she appears.  Babylon, in the book of Revelation, is a city and a harlot.  Jerusalem, in the same book, is a city and a bride.  Babylon is the fraudulent lover of earthly kings; Jerusalem, the chaste bride of the King of Kings.  The contrast is between the faithful Church and the Apostate Church.  Chapter Seventeen thus describes in detail the character of the Apostate Church.[1]  

Religious Power Seated on Civil Power

The woman is seen “sitting upon the scarlet-colored beast” (v. 3).  The woman, the Papal Church, is seated upon a scarlet-colored beast, the civil power.  She controls and directs for her own ends the civil power on which she rides.  The political civil power is subordinate to the spiritual control of apostate Rome and is the Pope’s necessary instrument used to fulfill his aspirations and objectives.  This is exactly the history of the Papal Church.  

The Papal Church arose through the favor of the Emperors of the old Imperial Roman Empire.  Constantine who in 313 AD declared Christianity to be the state religion of Imperial Rome set the stage for this.  Before that time, the church was the fellowship of believers under one head, the Lord Jesus Christ, working under their pastors by the authority the written Word as received in the gospel accounts of the life of the Lord, and the writings of the Apostles together with the Old Testament.  The church by Constantine’s design, however, was to be organized and governed on the Imperial Roman Empire model.  Thus was governance of the church divided into four great provinces and a bishop in each province elevated above his brothers.[2]  Historically, the power of the Bishop of Rome increased as the imperial power of the Emperor declined.  Besides Justinian’s edict in 538 AD, the edicts of the Emperors Theodosius II and Valentinian III proclaimed the Roman Bishop “as Rector of the whole Church.”[3]  So it is that by the edicts of civil powers, with the sanction of the Italian bishops, the Roman Bishop became the head of the Western clergy.  By this time, however, the demise of the Imperial Roman Empire was at hand, and one might have thought that the state church would fall with the Empire.  The Bishop of Rome, however, claimed an authority on a higher than that given by civil power, in order that his position would be secure perpetually.  Skillfully he grasped to himself the ideal tool, the title of successor to the Apostle Peter, through which he claimed himself to have been invested with the authority of Holy God.  In doing this, he rose to a position far above that of mere patriarchs and emperors.  Wylie summarizes,

“With the assertion of this dogma the system of the Papacy was completed essentially and doctrinally, but not as yet practically.  It had to wait the full development of the idea of vicarship, which was not till the days of Gregory VII [Hildebrand, 1073-85].  But here have we the embryotic seed—the vicarship to wit—out of which the vast structure of the Papacy has sprung.  This it is that plants at the centre of the system a pseudo-divine jurisdiction, and places the Pope above all bishops with their flocks, above all kings with their subjects.  This it is that gives the Pope two swords….The day when this dogma was proclaimed was the true birthday of the Popedom.  The Bishop of Rome had till now sat in the seat of Caesar; henceforward he was to sit in the seat of God.”[4]

To do this, of course, required intrigue, deceit, suppression of the Bible and the Gospel—all of which was accomplished over the course of time so that by the time of the great Reformers of the sixteenth century, it was clearly understood that the Papal church was the woman who rides the beast.  Among us today is this same church, the Roman Catholic Church, still claiming the same authority and still pursuing the same agenda.

In Daniel chapter seven, the little horn, symbolizing the papacy, persecuted the saints[5] and spoke against God “the most High”[6] but would come to its end at the termination of 1260 years.[7]  That occurred in 1798 with the arrest of Pope Pius VI in the wounding of its head, 1260 years after Justinian’s edict of 538 AD.  The Papal Church languished and lost its civil power for decades.  Revelation chapter thirteen explains however, a second rise of this same political-ecclesiastical institution as a last day power, “And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed:  and all the world wondered after the beast.”[8]  This came to fruition, just as Scripture had foretold.  In 1929 Mussolini signed the Lateran Treaty with Pope Pius XI officially conceding Vaticanus Mons (Vatican Hill) from the nation of Italy to the Pope.  The wound was healed!  At the hand of civil power, the Papal Church had once again sprung forth as a landed theocracy, still claiming for her Pope the titles of Successor to the Apostle Peter and Vicar of Christ.  

While she became the smallest independent state in the world (108 acres) she again has become one of the greatest in political intrigue, in the words of Lord Acton “the fiend skulking behind the Crucifix.”[9]  Because she is established on civil power and as a sovereign state, she wields much sway in national and international law, particularly in the nations in which she has papal nuncios as ambassadors.  At present she maintains civil relations with 172 countries at Embassy level.  According to the Catholic Almanac, “An apostolic nuncio has the diplomatic rank of ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary…a nuncio has precedence among diplomats in the country to which he is accredited and serves as dean of the diplomatic corps on state occasions.”[10]  The history of Papal Rome, her seeming demise, and her present day position in the world, show that she fits what the Holy Spirit revealed Revelation 17.  

Significance of Place, Attire, and Possessions

The place of residence of the Papal church was never in doubt, “the seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth” (v. 9).  The system itself still delineates the area of residence of the Papal State, “...It is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire area of Vatican State proper now is confined....”[11]  The revelation of God shows forth the attire and possessions of the Apostate system, “And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication” (v. 4).  Scarlet, the usual color of the robes of kings and military men, was and still is the favorite color of Papal Rome.  Cardinals for example, are clothed all in scarlet.  Papal patriarchs, metropolitan archbishops, archbishops and bishops wear purple and “the Pectoral cross”.  “The Pectoral cross” is declared by Rome to be “decorated with gems; that of a bishop usually contains relics of a martyr.”[12]  Papal Rome has the “the golden cup” in the chalice on her altar, which must be gold or gold-plated.  Biblically, gold represents perfection and the things of God.  Deceptively Rome offers a “pure” outward display, but of her Eucharistic use of that golden cup she states, “…in the sacrifice of the Mass Our Lord is immolated.”[13]  In Scripture Lord Jesus Christ’s perfect sacrifice was once offered.[14]  Thus the golden cup she holds out as the center of her worship to God is filled with the most odious of abominations, an apt image to denote her idolatry and superstition. 

Description of the Inner Character

Verse 5 delineates her inner character “upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.”  She is called “great” because of the scale of the Papal influence, and because of the multitude of kings, princes, and presidents with whom she has done business.  The Papal Church is also invested with the title, “Mystery Babylon the Great”.  Throughout her history she has been an enigma.  She continues to be so, even to those within her own system.  Truly God’s Word describes her as a “Mystery”.   She is also called “Babylon” as she is the exact antitype of the ancient Babylon in her idolatry and cruelty.  Babylon of old was only a miniature pastel portrait of her.  “Babylon the great” titles herself as “Holy Mother Church”.[15]  She has the audacity to proclaim, “‘No one can have God as Father who does not have the Church as Mother.’”[16]  In truth the Bible has revealed her inner character as, “the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth” (v. 5).  The Pope and his Church bring into the worship of God the worship of the communion bread[17] and Mary as “‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One,”[18] with the Pope himself designated as “Most Holy”.[19]  The traditions of “Holy Mother Church” also bring into the worship of God the frustrated lives of celibate men and women, and worst of all, it brings in the idolatry which God hates.[20]  Icons and saints’ bones alike are venerated as relics.[21]  Papal Rome encourages people to contact the dead.  She teaches, “In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead...Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping ‘them, but also of making their intercession for us effective.’”[22]  As the promoter of lewdness through the institutions of her unholy traditions, there never was a more expressive or appropriate title applied to her than that penned by Holy Spirit through the Apostle John.

Her History of Persecution of True Believers

The Roman Church has employed kings and princes in her work of persecution.  Her courts first tried and condemned the believers, after which they were delivered over to the civil authority to be executed.  In the Papacy’s crusades against Bible believing cities, towns and territories, Rome enlisted the civil power of kings and potentates to carry out her cruel deeds.  In those many years, the Papal system was “drunken with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs” (v. 6).  The Crusades against the Albigenses, the Vaudois, and the Waldenses were replete with outrageous slaughters and barbarities.  The individual hounding down of true believers that resulted in atrocious torture and death is the documented history of the state religion of the Papacy.  For centuries through her Office of the Inquisition, she organized wars against Bible believing cities and territories.  In the middle of the thirteenth century, Pope Innocent IV devised in detail for the many inquisitors how torture was to be perpetrated.  “Innocent IV gave comprehensive instructions regarding how torture was to be applied in his bull At Extirpanda (1252).  This was revised and reissued by subsequent Popes.  Torture is prescribed, but it was to stop short of pulling off limbs or causing death...Ruinous punishments are enacted on all who harbor or give advice or favor to a heretic.  How completely the abominable system was the direct achievement of the Papacy is show by the clause that no change could be made without the special authority of the Apostolic See.”[23]  

“From the birth of Popery in 600, to the present time, it is estimated by careful and credible historians, that more than fifty millions of the human family,[24] have been slaughtered for the crime of heresy by popish persecutors, an average of more than forty thousand religious murders for every year of the existence of Popery.”[25]  Roman Catholic author, Peter de Rosa, wrote of the atrocities of the Roman Catholic torture machine,  

“The record of the Inquisition would be embarrassing for any organization; for the Catholic Church, it is devastating.  Today, it prides itself, and with much justification, on being the defender of natural law and the rights of man.  The papacy in particular likes to see itself as the champion of morality.  What history shows is that, for more than six centuries without a break, the papacy was the sworn enemy of elementary justice.  Of eighty popes in a line from the thirteenth century on, not one of them disapproved of the theology and apparatus of Inquisition.  On the contrary, one after another added his own cruel touches to the workings of this deadly machine.”[26]  

The Papacy has shockingly fulfilled the image from Revelation of the woman blood-drenched from six centuries of her murderous rampage.  In the Bible, the Holy Spirit foretold of her lust for power and blood.  History has recorded some of the gruesome details.

Mixture of Political and Spiritual Power

How could the fusion of the political and deceptive spiritual power of the Papacy be better represented than in Revelation 17?  In her unending challenge to the Lord Jesus Christ for His place and prerogatives to rule over the kings of the earth, her monarchy and priesthood persist in associating with rulers and governments as she continues to grasp insatiably at the power to rule supreme on earth.

 As the Word of God is fulfilled, and until the Lord Christ Jesus comes, it is the commission of believers to warn one another with that same clarity that the Bible sounds forth.  It is the duty of true believers toshow forth the fulfillment of what was predicted in Revelation 17.  Such was the conviction of the believers of old.  It is only by honest and faithful testimony to the revelation of the Holy Spirit that freedom from her control will come to those presently ensnared by her lies.

Present Day State of Affairs

Papal Rome has stood in direct opposition to the Gospel of Christ.  For this, the judgment of God will come upon her.  There never was a clearer duty than that of withdrawing from Papal Rome and her ecumenical followers.  Her iniquity is corrupting and intoxicating the nations with a counterfeit head of the Church, a sham gospel, and will make her utter ruin the just and righteous act of God!  The voice of the Lord thunders from the final chapters of the Bible and reverberates throughout the world, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.”[27]  The Woman sitting upon the scarlet-colored beast will continue and wax strong and draw to her bosom multitudes, nations, and power and glory of the world, as the Lord said she would.  However the final condemnation of her and those within her is already written, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.”35  God’s reserved wrath, His punishing justice, and His enmity to sin, will be revealed to the entire world.  The destruction of Papal Rome will proceed from the glory of His power.  “The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation.”[29]  Idolatry is a damning sin of human nature.  It will prove fatal to those who persisted in it, in the very presence of the Savior they have slighted and rejected.[30]

Bible believers of old recognized the Apostate Church from the pages of Scripture and were prepared to both expose her and to face her in the strength and wisdom of the Lord.  Among many others there were John Wycliff, John Huss, and Savonarola.  During the Reformation, among many others were Martin Luther, William Tyndale, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, John Bradford, and John Foxe.  In the 17th and 18th centuries produced believers such as John Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible, and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist Confessions of Faith.  Sir Isaac Newton, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, John Wesley add to the list.  In more recent times there were men such as Charles Spurgeon, Bishop J. C. Ryle and Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones.  All these men and many more knew the precision of Scriptures regarding both the true bride of Christ and the Apostate woman “drunken with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs.”  The Written Word has been fulfilled in history, in both light and darkness.  Like those believers of old, we must enter into battle.  He is with us, and we will have the final victory.   The words of the Apostle we repeat,  “…having done all, to stand.  Stand therefore.”[31].  The certainty of the final triumph should animate us in our efforts, and encourage us in our struggles.  The punishment Christ Jesus will inflict in “the wine of the wrath of God” is echoed the words of the great The Battle Hymn of the Republic[32]: “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;  He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored; He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword; His truth is marching on….Glory! Glory! Halleluja! His truth is marching on….He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat; He is sifting out the hearts of men before His judgment seat;  Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer Him!  Be jubilant, my feet; Our God is marching on.  Glory! Glory! Hallelujah! Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!  Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!  His truth is marching on.”   ♦

[1] The Roman Catholic Church officially went apostate at the Council of Trent in 1547.  Canon 9, “If anyone shall say that by faith alone the sinner is justified, so as to understand that nothing else is required to cooperate in the attainment of the grace of justification, and that it is in no way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will:  let him be anathema.”  Can. 12 “If anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified:  let him be anathema.”  Denzinger, Henry, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. By Roy J. Deferrari, 30th Ed. of Enchiridion Symbolorum, Rev. by Karl Rahner, S. J. (St Louis, MO:  B. Herder Book Co., 1957)  #819, #822.  These canons are absolutely upheld by the RCC today.  

[2] J. A. Wylie, The History of Protestantism, 4 vols. Orig. publ. 1878 (Rapidan, VA:  Hartland Publications, 2002) Vol I, p. 4.

[3] J. H. Merle D’Aubigne, History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century 4 vols. (New York:  American Tract Society, 1848) Vol. I, p. 42

[4] Wylie, Vol. I, p. 10

[5] “I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;” Daniel 7:21

[6] “And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws:” Daniel 7:25a

[7] “and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.” Daniel 7:25b

[8] Revelation 13:3

[9] Acton, Correspondence, 55; as quoted in Himmelfarb, Lord Acton, p. 151  See our article “Vatican Prepares to Control Through Civil Law” on our WebPage: www.bereanbeacon.org

[10] Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Almanac, 2001, p. 277.

[11] Robert Broderick, The Catholic Encyclopedia (Nashville, TN:  Nelson Inc., 1976) pp. 528-529

[12] The Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 466

[13] Vatican Council II Documents, No. 9, Eucharisticum Mysterium, 25 May 1967, Vol. I, Sec. 3, pp. 102-103

[14] Christ’s sacrifice marked the fulfillment and end of the priestly ordinances of the Old Testament, “there is no more offering for sin.” (Hebrews 10:18)  The unique oneness of Christ’s sacrifice is in this very fact that it was one offering once made.  The concept “once” is deemed so important that it is asserted seven times by the Holy Spirit in the New Testament.  

[15] Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Ed. (Wash DC:  US Catholic Conf., 1994, 1997) Para 1163

[16] Catechism, Para 181

[17] “There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind ‘that all the faithful ought to show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God, as has always been the custom of the Catholic Church.  Nor is it to be adored any the less because it was instituted by Christ to be eaten.”  Vatican Council II:  The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, No. 9, Eucharisticum Mysterium, Austin Flannery, ed. (Northport, NY:  Costello Publ. Co., 1975) 1981 ed., Vol. I, Sec. 3, p. 104

[18]  “By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the ‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One.”  Catechism Para 2677

[19] Denzinger, Henry, #649

[20] “Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified…the veneration of icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints.”  Catechism, Para 2131 

[21] Catechism, Para 1674

[22] Cathecism, Para 958

[23] William Shaw Kerr, A Handbook on the Papacy (Edinburgh:  Marshall Morgan & Scott, 1950) pp. 232-233.

[24] “A million of poor Waldenses perished in France; nine hundred thousand orthodox Christians were slain in less than thirty years after the institution of the order of the Jesuits.  The Duke of Alva boasted of having put to death in the Netherlands, thirty-six thousand by the hand of the common executioner during the space of a few years.  The Inquisition destroyed, by various tortures, one hundred fifty thousand within thirty years.  These are a few specimens, and but a few, of those which history has recorded; but the total amount will never be known till the earth shall disclose her blood, and no more cover her slain” Scott’s Church History in John Dowling, The History of Romanism, 1881, Classic Reprints No. 57 (Pensacola, FL:  Vance Publications, 2002) Book VIII, Ch. 1, p. 542 Emphasis in the original.

[25] Dowling, p. 541  (Emphasis in the original)

[26] Peter DeRosa, Vicars of Christ:  The Dark Side of the Papacy (New York, NY: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1988) p. 175.

[27] Revelation 18:4

35 Revelation 14:8

[29] Revelation 14:10

[30] See ‘Indifference or Ignorance:  The Practice of Idolatry Within the Church’ by Richard Bennett and Randall Paquette.   Available through Richard Bennett’s Catalogue and www.bereanbeacon.com 

[31] Ephesians 6:13,14

[32] Julia Ward Howe , “Battle Hymn of the Republic”, The Atlantic Monthly, Feb. 1862; Vol. 9, No. 52; p. 10

A Summary Chart of the differences between Biblical Truth and Catholicism

The Apparitions of “Mary” - Divine or Demonic?

The important subject of the apparitions of “Mary” must be addressed in the light of Biblical truth because the message given in the apparitions is either from God, and thus for the instruction of the believers, or from Satan, and thus to the destruction of believers.  It is of such great importance because many of those in the Roman Catholic Church have their lives centered around the apparitions, and because the apparitions confirm and give a dramatized background to the official teaching of the Church of Rome itself.  

We must examine the subject carefully because we are warned in 1 John 4:1 “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” and also in 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.  Therefore it is not great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”  Since the apparitions claim to have a message of salvation, that message must be seen in the light of the gospel message given in the Scriptures.  The Apostle Paul gives a severe warning in Galatians 1:8-9 for those who preach another gospel, and warns believers to examine the message even if it came to them from “an angel from heaven.”

The gospel is the power of God unto salvation.  Justification, which the gospel brings, is objective and outside the believer who, by grace through faith, is “accepted in the Beloved.”(Eph 1:6)  It is forever counted perfect in Christ based on Christ’s righteousness and on His finished sufficient sacrifice on the cross.  If, like the Apostle Paul and all true reformers throughout history, we measure “right standing” or “eternal curse” before the All Holy God in the light of the gospel, there can be no doubt on which side the appearances of “Mary” falls.

On the following pages you will read many exact quotations from apparitions and locations of “Mary” throughout the world, which have been documented in two publications, Quite Contrary:  A Biblical Reconsideration of the Apparitions of Mary and Graven Bread:  The Papacy, the Apparitions of Mary, and the Worship of the Bread of the Altar[1] by Timothy Kauffman.  The apparitions present Mary in many different formats.  Some of these are quite similar, yet there are always distinguishing characteristic to each of the different messages.  One such characteristic is that “Mary” appears to be a co-redeemer.  Another is that she is presented as a co-mediator with Christ Himself, or as a high-priestess on behalf of believers.  She is also presented as the promised Messiah and even sometimes as being part of the Trinity.  As you read these apparition messages, you should be horrified to find that “Mary” often claims the unique aspects of glory, which are due to Christ alone, for herself.  

Apparitions Present Mary as Co-Redeemer

Examples of such are seen in the following claimed apparitions:

Apparition of Mary to Lucia Abobora, Fatima, Portugal 1917

 “‘Jesus wishes to make use of you to have me acknowledged and loved.  He wishes to establish in the world the devotion o My Immaculate Heart’ ..[Lucia Recalled,] ‘Before the palm of the right hand of Our Lady was a Heart encircled by thorns which seemed to have pierced it like nails.  We understood that it was the Immaculate Heart of Mary outraged by the sins of humanity, for which there must be reparation.’”[2]

Apparition of Mary to Nancy Fouler, Conyers, Georgia, USA, 1987-Present

 “Our Loving Mother said, ‘We are both revealing our suffering faces to you.  Tell others we suffer for them in love.’”3  “During the vision, Jesus appeared to Nancy on the cross and, then, merged with an image of His Mother.  This vision was repeated over and over and over and over.  The vision appeared to show the oneness of their suffering.”4

Apparition of Mary to Tarcisio di Biasi, Oliveto Citra, Italy 1985

 “My son, when you recite the rosary, you should think that in each mystery there is contained all the love and suffering of my Son and of myself for all of you.”5

Apparition of Mary to Maximin Graud and Melanic Mathieu, LaSelette, France: 1846

 “For a long time I have suffered for you; if I do not want my son to abandon you, I am force to pray to him myself without ceasing.  You pay no heed.  However much you would do, you could never recompense the pain I have taken for you.”6 

Apparition of Jesus to Nancy Fouler, Conyers, Georgia, USA. Starting 1987

 “Look from where graces flow, where they start.  If there were no graces from Me, there would be no one on earth.  My graces flow through My Mother.  Now I am giving you My graces.”7

Apparitions Present Mary as Co-High Priestess

Examples of such are seen in the following claimed apparitions:

Apparition of Mary to the Children of Medjugorje, Bosnia: Starting 1981

 “I am with you and day after day I offer your sacrifices and prayers to God for the salvation of the world.”8

Interior Locution of Mary to Cyndi Cain, Bella Vista, Arkansas: 1989-Present

 “Ask the heavenly Father to permit my Immaculate Heart to Triumph. Pray. Be my little victims, for so many souls are saved by your loving sacrifice.”9

Apparition of Mary to Nancy Fouler, Conyers, Georgia, USA: Starting 1987

 “Dear children, thank you for responding to my call here in Conyers.  I call all my children here.  Thank you for your prayers and sacrifices.  My Son receives all your prayers and sacrifices and He stopped the war.”10

“I cannot restrain my Son’s hand.  Please help me help you.  Offer your daily sacrifices and prayers, please, in reparation for the sins of the world.”11

Apparition of Mary to Lucia Abobora, Faitma, Portugal 1917

 “..Pray a great deal, and make sacrifices for sinners, for many souls go to hell because they have no one to sacrifice and pray for them.”12

Apparitions Present Mary as Co-Messiah

Examples of such are seen in the following claimed apparitions:

Apparition of Mary to the Children of Medjugorje, Bosnia Starting 1981

 “I seek your prayers, that you may offer them to me for those who are under Satan’s influence, that they may be saved.”13

 “I love you with my motherly love and I call upon you to open yourselves completely to me, so that through each of you I may be enabled to convert and save the world, where there is much sin and many things that are evil.”14

Apparition of Mary to Theresa Lopez, Denver, Colorado, USA: Starting 1981

 “I have come to save the world through you, dear children.15

Apparition of Mary to Estela Ruiz, Phoenix, Arizona, USA: Starting 1988

 “Satan has claimed many souls.  Know that I am here in the world to defeat him.”16

Apparition of Mary to Sister Agnes Sasagawa, Akita, Japan: 1973-1981

 “I alone am able still to save you from the calamities which approach.  Those who place their confidence in me will be saved.”17

Apparition of Jesus to Nancy Fowler, Conyers, Georgia, USA: Starting 1987

 “I am Jesus, Son of the Lining God.  I was born of My Holy Mother, Blessed Virgin Mary, who will crush the head of Satan.”18

Apparitions Present Mary as Goddess

Apparition of Jesus to Nancy Fowler, Conyers, Georgia, USA: Starting 1987

 “Look at the four points on the cross.  I will explain.  See the Holy Trinity of God in three points.  See in the other point My Mother, part of the Holy Trinity of God.”19

“One branch was selected from all branches.  This branch is the most pure, the most delicate, the most perfect of all branches.  My Mother is above all creatures and She is elevated to the Throne of God.”20

Interior-Locution of Mary to Carlos Lopez, San Francisco, California, USA: Starting 1991

 “Trust also in your Mother.  I am the Morning Star whom announces the day, the Light which is near, the Light of God, the Light of Love, the Light of peace, the Light of eternal salvation. . . I will ascend to heaven to take possession of My throne alongside of My Son.”21

Interior Locution of Jesus to Cyndi Cain, Bella Vista, Arkansas: Starting 1989

 “My little ones, I ask you to listen to the words of My Mother, for they are My Words and My Infinite Graces and Merits which She, the Eternal Virgin, dispenses.  Yes, Eternal, for before time began She was known to the Trinity.”22

Biblical Response

The apparitions preach a “gospel” which is always the same. Consider the most popular of the apparitions mentioned above: Fátima. In 1917, the apparition of Mary at Fátima, Portugal, stated that the children there needed to increase the level of their sacrifices, because, “…many souls go to hell because they have no one to sacrifice and pray for them.”

This stands in direct contradiction to the teaching of the Scripture which plainly states that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was the first, last, and only meritorious sacrifice for the remission of sins (c.f., also Hebrews 10:4):

 “For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.”(Hebrews 9:26) “Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin” (Hebrews 10:18). 

Clearly, the visions of Mary at Fátima serve to detract from the message of the cross and, indeed, to undermine its efficacy. The same is true of visions of Mary at Medjugorje, at Denver Colorado, Phoenix Arizona, Conyers Georgia, and across the world.

The Medjugorje visions have a particular offense against the Cross of Christ that unashamedly and blatantly contradicts the gospel message of Christ.  In the below citation, take note of what it is that the vision of Mary puts forth as the cause of God’s anger toward mankind. On April 5, 1985, the vision of Mary at Medjugorje stated,

 “Dear children, this evening I pray that you especially venerate the Heart of my Son, Jesus. Make reparation for the wound inflicted on the Heart of My Son. That Heart is offended by all kinds of sin.”2[3]

The reason this statement by the apparition of Mary is so damaging to the Gospel of Christ is that it portrays Christ’s sufferings as the cause of our separation from God when in fact Christ’s sufferings are the cause of our reconciliation. As it is written in Isaiah 53:11, God contemplated Christ’s sufferings and was satisfied:

“He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.”

We are informed by Paul in Romans 5:1 that the reason “we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,” is that Christ’s sufferings removed the cause of separation by satisfying the Father’s wrath against us. His sufferings completely atoned for our guilt and satisfied the wrath of God, for Christ in His sufferings bore the iniquities of “the many.” God, in Christ, punished our iniquities and thereby removed the offense by which His children were separated from Him. What is more, the Scriptures teach us that the Lord did not do this reluctantly. Rather, it was pleasing to Him: 

“Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin…” (Isaiah 53:10).

The Scriptures teach us that the sufferings of Christ removed the offense that separated us from God. The apparition of Mary says exactly the opposite. As the citation above demonstrates, the vision of Mary at Medjugorje teaches that the sufferings of Christ are the offense: “Make reparation for the wound inflicted on the Heart of My Son.” A testimony to the absolutely confusing and hopeless gospel of the apparitions of Mary is the fact that they assert that we need to make reparations to God for the wounds inflicted on His Son. The truth is that the wounds inflicted on Christ are the reason we do not need to make reparations!

These two visions of Mary have shown contempt for the sanctity and purpose of the Cross of Christ. Both have lied about their identity (i.e., Mary) and both have lied about their origins (i.e., heaven). We must therefore let the authority of the Apostle Paul weigh in on the matter, and he renders his verdict: “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” (2 Corinthians 11:14) The apparitions and their message come under the judgment of God on those who teach a false gospel.

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:8-9). 

Clearly Pope John Paul II saw himself as the custodian of the Fátima apparition’s mandate to consecrate Russia to “Mary’s Immaculate Heart.” which he has done.  On October 8th, 2000, he went so far as to consecrate the world and the new millennium to “Mary Most Holy.”2[4]  

In this manner, the visions of Mary have lent themselves to increasing John Paul’s esteem in the eyes of men. Likewise have the popes—John Paul II in particular—lent their influence to increasing the apparitions’ esteem in the eyes of the world. Is their relationship not one of mutual support and mutual endorsement? Have they not together influenced the world? 

Paragraph 67 of the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church Para. states,

“Throughout the ages, there have been so-called ‘private’ revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church.  They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith.  It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history.  Guided by the magisterium of the [Roman Catholic] Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ of his saints to the Church.”

Rome rationalizes acceptance of other sources of extra-Biblical revelation by stating that the ordinary faithful Catholics welcome whatever the “magisterium” that is the teaching power of the Roman Church guides them into accepting.  She consolidates her power over the rank and file Catholics by denying in practice that revelation is complete and definitive.The apparitions have become part of the tradition of Rome. This is shown by such as Roman Catholic priest, Michael Scanlon at Holy Family Catholic Church in Ogden, Utah. On January 6, 1994, when he stated, “We’re a Church that believes in Scripture and Tradition. This is our tradition. This is part of the belief of our Church: the traditions of our Lady’s apparitions and those messages.”2[5] Scanlon acknowledged the apparitions of Mary as part of the deposit of faith. 

More detailed analyses of the messages of the apparitions of Mary, their demonic origins and their interactions with Popes, are contained the books Quite Contrary and Graven Bread. The reader is encouraged to investigate these issues further. Upon doing so, one finds the Roman Catholic church allied with a demon and its messages of establishing ones own righteousness by self suffering, reparation, and prayer and obedience to one claiming to be Co-Redeemer, co High Priestess, even elevated Throne of God.

1 Timothy F. Kauffman, Quite Contrary, 189 pp. including bibliography, glossary, and indices; Graven Bread, 204 pp. including appendices, bibliography, glossary, indices. Out of print can only be purchased second hand

2 Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, pp. 68-9  Brackets added for clarity.

3 To Bear Witness, pg. 99, para. 172  Message of February 2, 1991

4 To Bear Witness, pg. 68, para. 86  Vision of March 29, 1991

5 Our Lady Queen of Peace,” Our Lady in Italy,” pg. 14, Message of May 7, 1986.  Used by permission.

6 Zimdars-Swartz, pg. 30  Message of September 19, 1846

7 To Bear Witness, pg. 63, para. 73  Message of August 26, 1990

8 Caritas of Birmingham,, “Messages From Our Lady,” September-December 1990 issue, pg. 1. Message of November 25, 1990

9 A Call to Peace, vol. 4, no. 1, “1992 Locutions from the Hidden Flower of the Immaculate Heart,” pg. 15. Message of August 14, 1992

10 To Bear Witness, pg. 75, para. 106. Message of march 13, 1991. The reference is to the Gulf War of 1991.

11 The Apparition of Mary’s message to the United States, October 13, 1992

12 Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, pp. 51-2, 120

13 O’Carrol, pg. 222. Message of February 25, 1988

14 Caritas of Birmingham, June-October 1992 edition, pp. 1-2. Message of
August 25, 1992

15 Kuntz, pp. 61-2. Message of November 10, 1991

16 Our Lady Queen of Peace, “Messages from Our Lady of the Americas,” pg. 9. Message of January 13, 1991.  Used by permission.

17 Our Lady Queen of Peace, “Our Lady in Italy,” pg. 14. Message of January 10, 1986. Used by permission.

18 To Bear Witness, pg. 58, para. 65. Message of November 17, 1990

19 To Bear Witness, pg. 38, para 22. Message of August 14-15, 1990

20 To Bear Witness, pg. 38, para. 22. Message of July 11, 1991

21 Sign of the Times, Volume 6, Number 2, April/May/June 1994

Published by Signs of the Times, Sterling, Virginia, Maureen Flynn, editor. “Heaven’s Global Tapestry.” pg. 49. Message of February 2, 1994

22 A Call to Peace, vol. 4, no. 1, “ Locutions from the Hidden Flower of the Immaculate heart,” pg. 4. Message of January 23, 1992

23 Words From Heaven: Messages of Our Lady from Medjugorje, 5th ed., (Birmingham, AL: St. James Publishing Company, ©1991) , pg. 162. Message of April 5, 1985

24 “The culminating moment of the Jubilee of Bishops was the Mass concelebrated by the Pope and Bishops in St Peter's Square on Sunday morning, 8 October.  Tens of thousands of the faithful gathered for the sacred liturgy, which concluded with the Act of Entrustment to Mary Most Holy.”  L'Osservatore Romano Weekly edition in English 11 October 2000.htm

25 From a video of Michael Scanlon’s sermon.. (Emphasis in original)

Baptism in the New Testament

The glorious history of the Reformation has been entangled in the whole question of the efficacy of the waters of baptism.  It appears that impressive Gospel message of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, and in Christ alone has been ensnared by a Reformed tradition.  In the Reformed and Presbyterian world, a huge conflict has taken place over the meaning of water baptism.  The reason for this is what is called the Auburn Avenue controversy.[1]  From 2002 Doug Wilson, Steve Wilkins and Steve Schlissel, leading Presbyterians have advocated the new birth in Christ Jesus by means of the waters of baptism. Thus Doug Wilson states, “Baptism is our introduction to union with Him.”[2], and “while we do not take the connection between water baptism and grace and salvation as an absolute, we do take it as the norm.”[3]

In Jeremiah 31:31-34 we read that the New Covenant was not to be like the Mosaic Covenant, which the Israelites broke.  Plainly put, the New Covenant is unbreakable.  Furthermore, as the Lord reports through Jeremiah, God will write His law upon the heart of every member of the New Covenant, and every member of the New Covenant will know Him.  In stark contrast to the word of the Lord through the Prophet Jeremiah, Steve Wilkins teaches that by means of water baptism God elects His people into a conditional covenantal union.  Wilkins states, “The elect are those who are faithful in Christ Jesus.  If they later reject the Savior, they are no longer elect.”[4]  In other words Wilkens teaches that there can be covenant breakers within the New Covenant, when the Lord clearly declared the opposite through the Prophet Jeremiah.  This is just the top of the iceberg of what is now a massive movement inside Presbyterian Reformed circles and beyond.  There is an equally strong movement that opposes these teachings by upholding the traditional teachings of the Westminster Confession of Faith and the teachings of such as Calvin and Luther.[5]  What is necessary in the face of this monumental struggle is to go back to the clear-cut teaching of God’s Words in the New Testament. 

In the New Testament there is an absolute connection between the Spirit and the Word of God and not between physical water and grace.  Thus the Lord Christ Jesus said, “the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.”[6]   The Apostle Paul spoke of “the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.”[7]  The Word of God and the Spirit of God are so connected that they cannot be separated.  Coming to new birth in the New Testament is by the Holy Spirit through the instrument of God’s Word.  Thus the Apostle Peter proclaims, “being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.”[8]  Consistently and absolutely in the teaching of Christ Jesus and the Apostles, sinful people receive the Spirit simply by the hearing of faith, “this only would I learn of you, received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?”[9]  Conversely the absolute word of God also proclaims how salvation is not accomplished.  It is “not of works, lest any man should boast.”[10] Similarly, when the Jews asked Jesus what they should do to work the works of God, He responded, “This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” (John 6:29 --- footnote it if you like it).  Salvation is not by means of the moral law or any ceremony, as the Scripture states, "and if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace”.[11]  Thus the Lord Christ Jesus clearly stated, “that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”[12]  The Apostle Paul states how this same Biblical principle is lived out, “for we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.”[13]  In this passage Paul has reference to the true circumcision, the circumcision of the heart, as opposed to that ritual which was merely outward in the flesh.  

The Scripture clearly states that, “faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.”[14] The parameters of salvation are the Lord and His grace, as is stated in Romans and Ephesians, "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.”[15]  The Gospel of the Lord Christ Jesus in the Word of God is the only channel through which the Spirit of God communicates new life to a sinful human being. 

The Holy Spirit’s Baptism That Brings New Life

The direct work of the Holy Spirit on the soul of man is necessary because man is spiritually dead.  In the words of the Apostle Paul, “for the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.”[16]  In similar fashion the Apostle Paul wrote,  “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God”.  The new birth is a change wrought by God’s sovereign Holy Spirit.  The new birth by the Holy Spirit is essential because natural man is totally deficient in and of himself.  It is not that he is weak and needs stimulation.  Spiritually he is dead.  As the Apostle writes elsewhere, “and you has He quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.”[17]  Because there is a direct connection between the redemption of Christ and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, it is a soul damning error to substitute ritual or ceremony for the work of the Holy Spirit.  “God hath given to us eternal life and this life is in His Son.”[18]  The work of the Holy Spirit is absolutely necessary to bring the sinner to Christ, to overcome his innate opposition, and induce him to believe.  And it is sinful arrogance to suppose that you have had either the inclination or the capacity to affect this change in yourself by any work or ritual.

Concerning the Holy Spirit, the Lord promised that, “when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”[19]  The Holy Spirit convicts of sin as He makes the sinner realize his lost condition and brings him to sense his need of Christ’s righteousness.  The Holy Spirit alone can impart spiritual life to the soul and supernatural light to the mind.  Therefore the Lord Himself proclaimed, “verily, verily, I say unto thee except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”[20]  The Holy Spirit is the sole and only efficient cause of being “born again”.  The same principle of life is later repeated by the Lord, “it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing…”[21]  The wonderful work of the Holy Spirit opening the mind and heart to redemption is highlighted by the Apostle Paul, “eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.”[22]  The Lord God saves sinners gloriously, “according to his mercy, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.”[23]  True believers are “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God,”[24] for “of his own will begat he us with the word of truth.”[25]  This is utterly splendid, clear, and profound.  The Spirit of God’s unique work is to apply Christ’s redemption to the sinner.  In this regeneration He works as a free agent.  He dispenses His power where, when, and on whom He pleases.  In the words of the Lord, “the wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.”[26]  The wind is an element which man cannot control.  As the wind is not regulated by man’s desires or plans, so likewise it is with the Spirit of God.  He is absolutely sovereign in all His operations. 

Water Baptism in Contrast

In stark contrast to the written statements of leading Presbyterian Pastors, the words of the risen Christ in giving the Gospel are crystal clear.  “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be damned.”[27]  Faith is the key of saving grace, and unbelief is the chief damning sin.  Faith is what is necessary for salvation, and baptism is an ordinance that follows faith and simply testifies to it.  Proof of this is found in the fact of the omission in the second half of the verse:  it is not “he that is not baptized shall be damned,” but rather “he that believeth not.”  

The sign of the New Covenant is not baptism but regeneration.  Nevertheless, many force a parallel between circumcision, the Old Covenant sign, and baptism, far beyond anything, which the Scriptures intend.  Nevertheless, if for the sake of argument we concede such a parallel, we must consider the significance of the fact that Paul declares that Abraham was justified prior to his circumcision.  And he received circumcision as a sign of the faith, which he had previously exercised.  If we are to force a parallel between circumcision and baptism, is it not obvious that baptism should be the sign of a faith previously exercised?

Faith is so indispensable that though one is baptized yet believes not, he shall be damned.  The sinner is condemned because of his sin nature and his personal sin.  God’s divine justice is upon him; nothing can propitiate God’s justice but saving faith in Christ.  This faith, by God’s grace, brings instantly God’s act of justification.  

Doug Wilson teaches that the sacrament of baptism creates a union with Christ. He says, “Moderns who are stuck with the language of Westminster want to say that we actually have to understand this as a sacramental union, with the word sacramental being understood as some sort of diluting agent. But I want to say that it is a sacramental union, with union meaning union.”[28]  This teaching mocks both the justice and grace of the Lord God.  The Scriptures proclaim the Holiness and Righteousness of God in the flawless life and death of the God-man the Lord Christ Jesus. Justification in the first place has to do with God Himself, to show that He is just in justifying the sinner in Christ.  He brings about legal union with Christ only by the Gospel that deals with who God is in His Holy and Righteous nature.  The Gospel demonstrates that because of who God is, He alone justifies.  Thus Romans 3:26 states, “To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”  The final cause of justification is the glory of the Divine Holiness, Justice, and Goodness.  Thus the one who teaches union with Christ by means of a sacrament is teaching another gospel accursed by God.[29]  In the ministry of the Apostle Paul, the jail keeper in great agony of spirit, asked, “What must I do to be saved?”  The clear and direct answer of the Apostle Paul and Silas to the question was, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”[30]  The jail keeper and his household heard the Word of the Lord first in order that they might believe.  “And they [Paul and Silas] spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.”[31]  Believing on Christ Jesus is life and salvation.  In the words of the Apostle, baptism is important because the Lord commanded it.  It testifies to saving faith and is a public declaration of the finished work of Christ applied to an individual soul.  Faith is what is necessary for salvation; but baptism, while important, is not of the essence of salvation.  In Christ Jesus’ own words, “he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”[32]

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article. 

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] Going back the Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church (PCA) conference in 2002 when Steve Schlissel, Doug Wilson, Steve Wilkins, and John Barach sought to redefine reformed doctrine. 

[2] “Reformed” Is Not Enough by Douglas Wilson (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2003) p 168.

[3] Ibid., p. 105

[4] “Covenant, Baptism, and Salvation’ by Steve Wilkins 56-58

[5] Reformed” is Definitely Enough: A critique of Douglas Wilson’s book, “Reformed” is not Enough” By C. Matthew McMahon on: www.apuritansmind.com/BookReviews/Sourpuss/WilsonDouglasReformedNotEnough.htm

[6] John 6:63

[7] Ephesians 6:17

[8] 1 Peter 1:23

[9] Galatians 3:1-2

[10] Ephesians 2:9

[11] Romans 11:6

[12] John 3:6

[13] Philippians 3:3

[14] Romans 10:17

[15] Romans 3:24, Ephesians 2:8

[16] Romans 8:2

[17] Ephesians 2:1

[18] I John 5:11

[19] John 16:8

[20] John 3:3

[21] John 6:63

[22] I Corinthians 2:9-10

[23] Titus 3:5

[24] John 1:13

[25] James 1:18

[26] John 3:8

[27] Mark 16:16

[28] “Reformed” Is Not Enough by Douglas Wilson (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2003) p 89

[29] Galatians 1:8-9

[30] Acts 16:31

[31] Acts 16:32

[32] John 5:24

The Bible is the Absolute Basis of Truth

Scripture Alone is Inspired and Inherently Authoritative.

The Biblical message breathed out by God is revelation in written form. (2 Timothy 3:15-16).  The Biblical claim is that what God has inspired was His written word (2 Peter 1:20-21).  When the Lord Jesus Christ said, “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), He was speaking of God’s written word.  The events, actions, commandments, and truths from God are given to us in propositional, i.e. logical, written sentences.  God’s declaration in Scripture is that it and it alone, is this final authority in all matters of faith and morals.  Thus there is only one written source from God, and there is only one basis of truth for the Lord's people in the Church.

The Truth and the Scripture

The Lord Jesus Christ, in His great high priestly prayer, declared clearly the truth of God's Word.  He said, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.”  This was consistent with the declarations right through the Old Testament in which the Holy Spirit continually proclaims that the revelation from God is truth, as for example Psalm 119:142, “thy law is truth.”  The Lord Himself therefore identified truth with the written Word.  There is no source; other than to Scripture alone, to which such a statement applies.  That source alone, the Holy Scripture, is the believer’s standard of truth. 

In the New Testament, it is the written word of God and that alone to which the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles refer as the final authority.  In the temptation, the Lord Jesus three times resisted Satan, saying, “It is written” as for example, in Matthew 4:4, “he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”  In stating “It is written,” the Lord used the exact same phrase that is used in the Holy Bible forty six times.  The persistence of the repeated phrase underlines its importance.  The Lord's total acceptance of the authority of the Old Testament is evident in His words found in Matthew 5:17-18, 

“Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfil.  For verily, I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.”

 Other Sources of Authority Condemned

Furthermore, in refuting the errors of the Sadducees, the Scripture records the Lord saying, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God” (Matthew 22:29).  Christ Jesus continually castigated and rebuked the Pharisees because they made their tradition on a par with the Word of God.  He condemned them because they were attempting to corrupt the very basis of truth by equating their traditions to the Word of God.  So He declared to them in Mark 7:13 “[You are] making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such things do ye.”  Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the ultimate authority, and it alone is the final judge of Tradition.

The Word of the Lord says as a commandment in Proverbs 30:5,6 “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.”  God commands that we are not to add to His Word: this command shows emphatically that it is God's Word alone that is pure and uncontaminated. 

 Aligned with Proverbs, the Lord’s strong, clear declaration in Isaiah 8:20 is: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.”  The truth is this: since God’s written word alone is inspired, it and it alone is the sole rule of faith.  It cannot be otherwise. 

The Expression “Sola Scriptura”

From the time of the giving of the Decalogue on Mt. Sinai, when Holy God wrote with His finger on the tablets of stone (Exodus 31:18), until this present day, the written word of God has been extant in the world.  The term “sola Scriptura” or “the Bible alone” as the measure of truth is short hand, as it were, for the emphatic and repeated statements of Scripture and of the commandment of God.  The very phrase “ It is written” means exclusively transcribed, and not hearsay.  The command to believe what is written means to believe only the pure word of God.  It separates from all other sources the corpus what a man is to believe.  What is at stake before the All Holy God is His incorruptible truth. 

In the very last commandment in the Bible God resolutely tells us not to add to nor take away from His Word.

“For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18-19) His Word is absolutely sufficient in itself.  (Psalm 119:160) 

The Prescript and Interpretation

The principle of "sola Scriptura" is consistent with the very way in which the word of truth that comes from God, is to be interpreted, as Psalm 36:9 explains, "For with thee is the fountain of life; in thy light we see light".  God's truth is seen in the light of God's truth.  This is exactly the same as the Apostle Paul says, "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual" (I Corinthians 2:13).  It is precisely in the light which God's truth sheds, that His truth is seen.  (Cp. John 3:18-21, II Corinthians 4:3-7.) 

The Apostle Peter, under the impulse of the Holy Spirit, declares, "knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation.  For prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:20-21).  Logically then, Peter makes it very clear that in order to maintain the purity of Holy God's written word, the source of interpretation must be from the same pure source as the origin of the Scripture itself.  Scripture can only be understood correctly in the light of Scripture, since it alone is uncorrupted.  It is only with the Holy Spirit's light that Scripture can be comprehended correctly.  The Holy Spirit causes those who are the Lord's to understand Scripture (John 14:16-17, 26).

Since the Spirit does this by Scripture, obviously, it is in accord with the principle that Scripture itself is the infallible rule of interpretation of its own truth "it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth" (I John 5:6). 

Those truly desiring to be true to Lord in this very matter of the standard of "sola Scriptura" must turn to the Lord to obey His command, "Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you" (Proverbs 1:23).  If one is yearning of truth in this essential matter, in the attitude of Psalm 51:17 "with a broken and a contrite heart", the Lord God will not despise, but reveal to him or her the basic foundation where the Lord Christ Jesus stood, as did the apostles.  In the words of the Apostle John,  "This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true." (John 21:24).  The Apostle John wrote, as did Peter and Paul, in order that those who are saved should know that his testimony is true.

The Adequacy of Scripture

The total sufficiency of Scripture is declared by the Apostle Paul, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).  For final truth and authority, all that we need is the Scripture. 

The Claim That Sola Scriptura Was Not Possible

In an attempt to justify a tradition as an authority, an appeal is often made to the very last verse in John's gospel where it is stated, "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen”. (John 21:25)  Of course there were many of the deeds and sayings of the Lord, which are not recorded in Scripture.  Scripture is the authoritative record that Holy God has given His people.  We do not have a single sentence that is authoritatively from the Lord, outside of what is in the written word.  To appeal to a tradition for authority when Holy God did not give it is futile.  The idea that somehow sayings and events from the Lord have been recorded in tradition is simply not true.  

Another desperate attempt to justify Tradition, is the statement that the early church did not have the New Testament.  The Apostle Peter speaks about the writings of the Apostle Paul when he states, "…even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction”  (2 Peter 3:15-16).  Peter also declares that he was writing so that the believers could remember what he said.  So he wrote, "Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth” (2 Peter 1:12). 

From the earliest times a substantial part of the New Testament was available.  Under the inspiration of the Lord, the Apostle Paul commands his letters to be read in other churches besides those to which they were sent.  This clearly shows that the written word of God was being circulated even as the Apostles lived.  The Lord's command to believe what is written has always been something that the believers could obey and did obey.  In this matter we must have the humility commanded in the Scripture not to think above what is written.  "…that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another” (1 Corinthians 4:6).

The Regulation and Our Love of God

The Lord brings the topic of truth to bear on our love for Him.  This again underscores its importance.  “Jesus answered and said to him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.  He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings; and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent Me”(John 14:23-24).  And then again “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matthew 24:35).

The Lord himself looked to the authority of the Scriptures alone, as did His apostles after Him.  They confirmed the very message of the Old Testament. “The law of the LORD is perfect”(Psalm 19:7).  The believer is to be true to the way of the Lord, holding alone to what is written:  “Thy Word is truth.” All true believers therefore must acknowledge that there is an absolute measure by which a thing may be judged to be truth or false.  In times past, that standard was called “the rule of faith” or “the basis of truth”, meaning the measure by which truth is known.  This principle is as we have seen clearly demonstrated in both the Old and New Testaments, is that the written word of God itself is the basis of truth.

The Basis of Truth for the Roman Catholic Church is a Relative Standard.

For Roman Catholicism, the basis for truth is not absolute.  Rather, its basis is threefold: the Bible, tradition, and what is proposed as divinely revealed by the Roman Catholic Church.  Of these three sources, the ultimate authority is the decision and decrees of the reigning pope. This is seen in official documentation from Roman Catholic sources.

 Post-Vatican Council II Canon Law

Canon 750  

“All that is contained in the written word of God or in tradition, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the [Roman Catholic] Church and also proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the [Roman Catholic] Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium, must be believed with divine and catholic faith . . .” 

 Canon 749  

“The Supreme Pontiff, in virtue of his office, possesses infallible teaching authority when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful...he proclaims with a definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held as such.”(Sec.1) 

Canon 752 

“A religious respect of intellect and will, even if not the assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops enunciate on faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium even if they do not intend to proclaim it with a definitive act; therefore the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid whatever is not in harmony with that teaching. ”

 Canon 333  

“There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff.”  (Sec. 3) 

Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) 

Paragraph 80  

“Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together and communicate one with the other.  For both of them, flowing out from the same divine wellspring, come together in some fashion to form one thing and move towards the same goal.”

Paragraph 81  

“Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.  And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.  It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound, and spread it abroad by their preaching.”

Under the heading called The Apostolic Tradition and the sub heading ….continued in apostolic succession. The following is stated, 

Paragraph 77   

“In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors.  They gave them ‘their own position of teaching authority.’  Indeed, ‘the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.” 

Comment: Nowhere in Scripture is there reference to the existence of the apostolic succession.  In the New Testament the Apostles appointed not apostles but elders and deacons. There is no Biblical text for these power-endowing sentences of the new Catechism. Paragraph77 is an example of so-called “truth” by decree.

Paragraph 78  

“This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it.  Through Tradition, ‘the [Roman Catholic] Church, in her doctrine, life, and worship perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes.’  ‘The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer.’”

Comment: Official RC teaching as Roman Catholic authors fail to define what are the contents and precise doctrines of the claimed “apostolic Tradition”.  The simple reason that is not done is because it does not exist. The only special revelation man possesses today from God that was committed to the Apostles is the written Scriptures There does not exist any corpus of doctrine form the Lord or the apostles outside of the written word of Scripture. It is truly arrogance to declare RC tradition as “living transmission accomplished in the Holy Spirit”.  Colossians 2:8 sounds the warning against such manmade tradition, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” 

Paragraph 82  

“As a result the [Roman Catholic] Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, ‘does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone.  Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”  [Same as Vatican Council II, Sec. 9, p. 755]

Paragraph 84  

“The apostles entrusted the ‘Sacred deposit’ of the faith (the depositum fidei), contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the [Roman Catholic] Church.”

 Paragraph 85  

“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the [Roman Catholic] Church alone.  Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.’ This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.”

Comment:  Why would anyone be motivated to read the Bible if he is not allowed to let the Bible interpret itself?  (Psalm 36:9; II Peter 1:20-21). 

Paragraph 67  

“Throughout the ages, there have been so-called ‘private’ revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church.  They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith.  It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history.  Guided by the magisterium of the [Roman Catholic] Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ of his saints to the Church.” 

Comment:  The teaching in this paragraph is an example of Tradition attempting to nullify the written word of God.  According to Rome’s teaching, while ordinary Catholics may be vehicles for extra-Biblical revelation, discernment of the authenticity of such revelation does not extend to the ordinary Catholics themselves.  Rather it must be fed through the magisterium of ‘Mother Church', which does claim such authority [See also canon 750 above.]  Rome rationalizes acceptance of other sources of extra-Biblical revelation by stating that the ordinary faithful Catholics welcome whatever the magisterium of the Roman Church guides them into accepting.  She consolidates her power over the rank and file Catholics by denying in practice that revelation is complete and definitive. The Bible warns, “not to think above that which is written”.[1]  Here Rome gives acceptance to private extra-Biblical revelation, but only at her discretion.  What follows from such unbiblical doctrine is, for example, the tide of acceptance of apparitions of “Mary” and her “works-gospel”.

Summary:  

In face of the principle of Sola Scriptura, the written word of God alone being the ultimate authority, Rome has attempted to establish her own Tradition.

The Church of Rome never defines the doctrinal content of this supposed apostolic Tradition that is binding on all men! Yet one is told is that it exists, that the Roman Catholic Church possesses it, and that one bound therefore to submit to the Roman Church which alone possesses the fullness of God’s revelation from the apostles. What official RC teaching, and Roman Catholic authors fail to determine, is the contents and precise doctrines of the claimed “apostolic Tradition”. The simple reason that they do not give such is because it does not exist.  If any one claims II Thessalonians 2:15 as establishing Tradition, they are challenged to list the doctrines Paul is referring to in which the he says he committed orally to the Thessalonians. The only special revelation man possesses today from God that was committed to the Apostles is the written Scriptures. As we have seen the Lord Christ Jesus looked to the authority of the Scriptures alone, as did His apostles after Him.  They validated the very message of the Old Testament. The true believer holds alone to what is written:  “Thy Word is truth.” As the Lord Himself repudiated that Tradition which attempted to make the written word of God to be on none effect, so must we. 

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article.  

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212 

[1]  I Corinthians 4:6

Catholic Mysticism and the Emerging Church

First we must define just what the term ‘mysticism’ means.  Mysticism is an attempt to gain ultimate knowledge of God by a direct experience that bypasses the mind.  As practiced by those who claim to be Christian, mysticism not only bypasses the mind, but it circumvents Christ Jesus as mediator.  For centuries, the Roman Catholic Church has assimilated into herself the mystery elements of pagan religions; however, in 1965, at the time of Vatican Council II, Papal Rome officially joined itself with pagan religions and their practice of seeking to know God by direct experience.  Some of the exact words of approval for these practices are still in the Vatican Council II documents.  For example, Papal Rome states,

“…In Hinduism men explore the divine mystery and express it both in the limitless riches of myth and the accurately defined insights of philosophy.  They seek release from the trials of the present life by ascetical practices, profound meditation and recourse to God in confidence and love.  Buddhism in its various forms testifies to the essential inadequacy of this changing world.  It proposes a way of life by which man can, with confidence and trust, attain a state of perfect liberation and reach supreme illumination either through their own efforts or by the aid of divine help…The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions.”[1]  

Thus, Papal Rome officially accepts in Hinduism, that with confidence and love, one may seek release from the trials of the present life by ascetical practices and profound meditation.  Similarly, in Buddhism, one may “attain a state of perfect liberation and reach supreme illumination, either through their own efforts or by the aid of divine help.”  Such an authorized approval of pagan practices has now become quite apparent in modern day Catholicism.  Two months after the Vatican’s monumental acceptance of pagan mysticism, another well-known papal document revealed the heart of Roman Catholic policy.  The basis for the recognition of pagan practices was proclaimed to be a “divine element” in mankind.  This divine element in mankind makes it possible for the Catholic to have some sense of brotherhood with other religions.  The exact words of another Vatican Council II document are,

 “It [Vatican Council II] longs to set forth the way it understands the presence and function of the [Roman Catholic] Church in the world of today.  Therefore, the world which the Council has in mind is the whole human family seen in the context of everything which envelops it…  This is the reason why this sacred Synod, in proclaiming the noble destiny of man and affirming an element of the divine in him, offers to co-operate unreservedly with mankind in fostering a sense of brotherhood to correspond to this destiny of theirs.”[2]

The Jesuit mystical priest, William Johnston, explains what had happened as the Papal Church recognized pagan religions as valid ways to reach God.  

“Then came the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965).  Overnight the Catholic Church which had been a Western institution exporting its wares to the East became a world community.  Asian and African bishops and theologians assembled in Rome and, with their European and American confreres, acknowledged that the Spirit of God is at work in all peoples and in all religions.  Since then, most theologians recognize non-Christian religions as ‘valid ways’.”[3]

Out of this mingling of Papal traditions with Paganism the same William Johnston teaches disastrously deceitful ways to directly experience God.  He writes, “Self-realization lies at the very heart of Buddhism …In self-realization I become one with God just as the object is one with the mirror and just as Jesus is one with his Father.”[4]   Thus, it is that present day Catholicism stands hand-in-hand with Buddhism and Hinduism.  

Emerging Church Movement

Since the late twentieth century the Emerging Church Movement has become quite influential in the USA and across the world.  Much of what movement teaches is quite similar to Catholic mystical practices; sometimes it actually uses traditional Catholic techniques and methods. Until recently, while the alignment of Roman Catholicism with the “Emerging Church Movement” was evident, there was no formal recognition of the matter.  However, was announced in early 2008 that leading Catholic and Emerging Church personages are to speak at what is called “The Emerging Church conference,” which is to take place on March 20-22, 2008 in Albuquerque, NM.  The website proclaiming this coming together states the following, “Come to the first large gathering of Roman Catholic, Mainline Protestant, Evangelical, and other Christians seeking to explore this emergence and convergence together.  You’ll be inspired by provocative speakers and spiritual leaders and engage in in-depth conversation about our shared quests for: A fresh understanding of Jesus, Spirituality that links contemplation and action, Social justice and holistic mission, Authentic community.  Join Fr. Richard Rohr, Brian McLaren, Phyllis Tickle, Shane Claiborne, Alexie Torres-Fleming.[5]   (Richard Rohr is a Franciscan monk and Catholic priest, the founder of the Center for Action and Contemplation.) 

The Roman Catholic Church was very wise in its choice of Emergent Church leaders.[6]  Besides Brian McLaren, who has always been the main leader and so-called guide of the movement, they chose Phyllis Tickle.  In point of fact, the movement to some extent centers on Phyllis Tickle and her book, “The Great Emergence.”[7]  Phyllis Tickle has likened the Emergent Church leader, Brian McLaren, to Martin Luther.  [8] In the book, she emphatically denies the Bible alone (Sola Scriptura) as being the sole standard of truth.  In The Great Emergence she writes, 

“The Reformation…was to answer the question…  Sola Scriptura, scriptura sola…  While we may laugh and say the divisiveness was Protestantism’s greatest gift to Christianity, ours is a somber joke.  Denominationalism is a disunity in the Body of Christ and, ironically, one that has a bloody history…  Now, some five hundred years later, even many of the most die-hard Protestants among us have grown suspicious of “Scripture and Scripture only.”  

We question what the words mean - literally?  Metaphorically?  Actually?  We even question which words do and do not belong in Scripture and the purity of the editorial line of decent of those that do.  We begin to refer to Luther’s principle of “sola scriptura, scriptura sola” as having been little more than the creation of a paper pope in place of a flesh and blood one.  And even as we speak, the authority that has been in place for five hundred years withers away in our hands.[9]

In her book Tickle also writes, 

“The next assault in this progression of assaults [upon Sola Scriptura] was the ordination of women to the Protestant clergy…  The ordination of women was followed, of course, by their elevation to the episcopacy in the Episcopal Church in the United States.  Clearly the battle of ‘Scripture only’ was being lost.  …Enter ‘the gay issue.’  To approach any of the arguments and questions surrounding homosexuality in the closing years of the twentieth century and the opening ones of the twenty-first is to approach a battle to the death.  When it is resolved—and it most surely will be—the Reformation’s understanding of Scripture as it had been taught by Protestantism for almost five centuries will be dead.”[10]

Tickle not only repudiates Sola Scriptura (Bible alone) as being the sole standard of truth, in her acceptance of the Roman Catholic Church, as a viable expression of Christianity, she has denied the essential of biblical faith.  This is seen in her writings and in the address she gave at St. Peter’s Catholic Church, Memphis, Tennessee in 2002.[11]  She definitely identifies herself as being “Post-Christendom” and “Post-Protestant.”

“I’m Phyllis Tickle and I’m here talking with Pete Rollins and what we’re talking about is Emerging or Emergent Christianity, ...we may not have the word we’re happy with, but we know we’re Post-Christendom, we’re Post-Denominational, we’re Post-Protestant …”[12]

Phyllis Tickle now joins Brian McLaren as a formidable leader of Emergent Christianity.  Together, with thousands of devoted followers across the world, they amount to one of the most serious menaces to true Christian faith.  True believers are those who adhere to God only and His Written Word (“Sola Scriptura”), as did the Lord and the Apostles after Him.  They believe we are saved before the all-Holy God by grace alone, through faith alone, and in Christ alone; and, all glory and praise is to God alone.  It is these very principles that are now being ruthlessly attacked by Phyllis Tickle and other Emerging Church leaders.  Because of this, it is of vital importance that genuine believers defend true biblical faith.  

The Origin of Roman Catholic Mysticism

In the 12th and 13th centuries, going back to the Eastern mystics, there was great interest in mysticism.  From this interest, some mystical elements were found among new orders of monks being formed, such as the Franciscans of Saint Francis and the Dominicans of Saint Dominic.  It was not, however, until the 16th century that mystics such as Ignatius Loyola, Teresa of Avila, and John of the Cross developed a systematized mysticism in their writings.  These well-known instigators of mysticism laid out steps by which a person was to achieve personal union with the divine.  The modern arousal of interest in Catholic mysticism can be traced in the 20th century to Thomas Merton (1915-1968), a Trappist monk of the Abbey of Gethsemani of Kentucky USA.  He wrote many books and essays.  For example, Merton taught that there exists a divine core to the human person that the person discovers through mysticism.  Thus Merton stated, 

“…now I realize what we all are.  And if only everyone could realize this! …I suddenly saw all the secret beauty of their hearts, the depths of their hearts where neither sin nor desire nor self-knowledge can reach, the core of their reality, the person that each one is in God’s eyes.  If only they could all see themselves as they really are.  If only we could see each other that way all the time.  There would be no more war, no more hatred, no more cruelty, no more greed.  …I suppose the big problem would be that we would fall down and worship each other.”[13]

The Catholic priest, William Shannon, is a devotee of Merton.  He often cites his mentor, as he does with the following quote that endorses an idolatrous self-identification with God.  Shannon writes,  

“A person of true faith travels, not without difficulty, towards the heart of mystery.  Such a person, as Merton puts it, works ‘his way through the darkness of his own mystery until he discovers that his own mystery and the mystery of God merge into one reality, which is the only reality.’  DQ 180”[14].  

These quotations from Merton and Shannon are standard descriptions of the pantheistic myth of modern Catholicism that identifies Being or Nature with God with human nature or essence.  These blasphemous lies are merely further expansion of the basic teaching of Vatican Council II that stated that there is an element of the divine in mankind.  Thus, Merton and Shannon, in their pantheistic identification of God, have attempted to destroy God’s self-sufficiency as Creator and as the Lord God Almighty.  They have endeavored to clone God into the image of humans.  According to Romans 1:25, they have attempted to, “changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.”  In the place of the true worship of God, they have set about to establish pantheistic idolatry.

Evangelical Endorsement of Catholic Mysticism

Many see the so-called Evangelical, Richard Foster, as the person who preceded the Emerging Church leaders in seeking for pantheistic identification with God.  Foster stated, “Contemplative Prayer immerses us into the silence of God.  How desperately we in the modern world need this wordless baptism! …Progress in intimacy with God means progress toward silence.”[15]   Foster asks rhetorically, “What is the goal of Contemplative Prayer?”  And he answers, “To this question the old writers answer with one voice:  union with God….  Bonaventure, a follower of Saint Francis, says that our final goal is “union with God,” which is a pure relationship where we see ‘nothing’.”[16]  Foster’s statement, “Our final goal is ‘union with God’,” is just an Evangelical rehashing of the Catholic concept of a divine element with man as the basis of mankind’s union with God.  Foster has a whole website devoted to deceitful mysticism.  See Renovare.org.  In 2005, he went so far as to publish what he calls the “Renovare Study Bible” to further pave the trail for pantheistic identification with God.  Subsequent to Richard Foster the Emergent Church movement has been the most successful promoter of Catholic mysticism, and increasingly the movement is affecting many people across the world.  

The Teaching of Emerging Church Leader and Its Outcome

Tony Jones was the National Coordinator of Emergent Village.  He had been a regular speaker at National Youth Workers Conventions and respected enough to be one of the featured seminar presenters for the Zondervan National Pastors Conference in February 2006.  He had written the books, Soul Shaper: Exploring Spirituality and Contemplative Practices in Youth Ministry (2003), and The Sacred Way: Spiritual Practices for Everyday Life (2005).  Like so many leaders in the Emergent Church, his personal testimony was without hope before God.  For example, in writing about “The Quest for God,” he showed himself fumbling in the darkness of unbelief.  He wrote, “[Some of us] have this nagging feeling that God is following us around, nudging us to live justly, and expecting us to talk to him every once in a while…Every time I leave God’s side, as it were, it’s not too long until I feel God tagging right along beside me, I can’t seem to shake him.  Yet having this sense of God’s company doesn’t necessarily translate to a meaningful spiritual life.  I know this because despite my awareness of God’s presence, I have spent most of my life trying to figure out what to do about it.”[17]  This sad testimony is of a man who was a leading light of the Emergent Church movement.  In the Epilogue to his two books, in the sections called “Developing a Rule of Life,” Jones urges his readers to use certain religious exercises, He wrote,

“Following some experience with the ancient practices outlined in this book, you may decide to incorporate some of them into your personal Rule of Life.  An example of a rule could look something like this:  Pray through two centuries of the Jesus Prayer in the morning and evening every day.  Keep the Sabbath from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday every week.  Walk a labyrinth once a month.  Take a two-day silent retreat once a year.  Fast and walk the Stations of the Cross every Friday during Lent.  Take a 28-day Ignatian retreat every decade….”[18]

His final advice he declares is mandatory, 

“We have lots of options in our ministries, but developing a disciplined spiritual life isn’t one of them.  That is, it isn’t optional.  It’s mandatory...Slow down.  Listen to God.  Be silent.  Meditate.  Make the Stations.  Stare at the icon.  And there, do you feel it?  The divine light of the Risen Christ flickering within you, slowly building to a roaring fire….”[19]  

A biblical Christian is startled by the endorsement of so many Roman Catholic practices.  In the words of Scripture this is, “counsel by words without knowledge.”[20]  And the Word of God specifically forbids staring at icons for spiritual life, and the consequences of such idolatry.”[21]

Because of allegations of a marital affair, Tony Jones resigned as National Coordinator in the autumn of 2008.  While he was National Coordinator for Emergent Village, Relevant Magazine interviewed him on the issue of homosexuality.  He was asked, “You mentioned earlier that you have lesbian pastors and conservative absolutists.  It seems that it would create a tension point when it comes to endorsing that person’s view or platform.”  Jones replied, 

“If you believe that Christianity is–at its very heart–a tension-filled, dialectical endeavor, you have less problems with these tension-filled relationships with believers.  Christianity is paradoxical.  Life comes out of death.  Jesus was fully human and fully divine.  We haven’t yet found that there’s anything that justifies us breaking fellowship with somebody else who loves and is trying to follow Jesus.” [22]

Jones’ personal blog is now at the inter-spiritual website called Beliefnet.  In Same Sex Marriage Blogalogue: How I Went from There to Here, Jones removed all doubt as to his position.  He thinks that Christians should also take his position regarding those who are unrepentant in their persistent and determined practice of the sin of homosexuality.  He states, 

“And yet, all the time I could feel myself drifting toward acceptance that gay persons are fully human persons and should be afforded all of the cultural and ecclesial benefits that I am.  (“Aha!” my critics will laugh derisively, “I knew he and his ilk were on a continuous leftward slide!”)  In any case, I now believe that GLBTQ [Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual, Trans-gendered, Queer] can live lives in accord with biblical Christianity (at least as much as any of us can!) and that their monogamy can and should be sanctioned and blessed by church and state.”[23]

Tony Jones has shown the end result of his emergent beliefs. As the Lord Himself explained, “even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringethforth evil fruit.”[24]  Jones let go of the knowledge of Christ Jesus as the only Mediator and became entrapped within the traditions of men and the bankruptcy of worldly spirituality.  Jones made mystical exercises seem so worthy—that by endorsing Catholic mysticism, idolatry, and fleshly devotions—he bewitched those who read or tried to implement his teaching.  The manufactured relics of Catholicism that were presented by Jones are absolutely opposed to biblical truth.  The Lord God’s command is that believers are to be “casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.”[25]  Tony Jones is an example of evil treasure brought forth from evil things.

Objective Salvation in the Lord of Glory

As Mediator, Christ Jesus is the only means of union between God and man, “that in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him.”[26]  Christ Jesus is exalted to “the right hand of the Majesty on high”[27] as the One Savior.  He and His Gospel are objective and real.  This Gospel is not an idle tale, nor a piece of incomprehensible mysticism; rather, it is the proclamation of the awesome, historical work of redemption accomplished by God Himself.  The Father appointed Christ Jesus as the guarantor of real salvation.  Christ Jesus was glorified for finishing the Father’s mightiest work.  In Christ’s own words, “I have glorified thee on earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.”[28]  He had fulfilled all the Father’s will, and so, gloriously honored the Father.  As Savior, He is exalted high above “all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.”[29]  He alone—not some mystic charm of Papal Rome or Buddha—has been given all authority in heaven and in earth.  He has been given power over all flesh that He should, in His own words, “give eternal life to as many as thou [God] hast given him.”[30]  He alone has been given a name, which is above every name, “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”[31]  It is God’s commandment that we trust on Christ.  “This is his command, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ.”[32]

True faith involves a repudiation of the self-deceit of any experiential mystical means of reaching God, “for there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”[33]   The Lord Jesus stands ready to receive every sinner who will throw away his rebellion and pride and trust in Him alone for salvation.  Preaching the real historical Christ and His Gospel is the answer to the mindless adumbrations of Rome and the ecumenical mystics.  Thus alone, can the true Church, God’s people, go “forth fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners.”[34]  The Gospel is a mighty deliverance from the groveling religious subjectivism of Rome and her Emerging Church cohort.  To know God is life itself to a Christian.  In the words of the Lord Himself, “this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”[35]  Knowledge of God, and faith in Him, are the means whereby all spiritual supports and comforts are conveyed to the true believers.  “According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue.”[36]

Conclusion and Application

We now understand how serious is the infiltration of Catholic mysticism into its own system, and now the same mysticism is being propagated by the Emergent Church movement.  The machinations of Catholic mysticism, and that of the Emergent Church, have clearly unveiled apostasy, seeing that they have rejected the Christ of history, received “the christ of Satan,” which “christ” is “enlightenment,” and “self realization;” while they sport and play with Satan’s rites for fulfillment in such as “Centering Prayer,” “The Ignatian Examen,” and “The Labyrinth.”

There is no valid excuse for true believers to be deceived by “false apostles” who transform themselves into the “apostles of Christ,” “for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”[37]  There are many false prophets gone out into the world, but if we diligently study these things, which God has recorded for our safeguard against the subtle deceptions of Satan, we need not mislead nor be misled.  The forces of evil are present in the influence and power of the Papal Church, and at the time, the Emerging Church is powerful, but not all-powerful.  It has been fought and overcome by One greater and mightier.  We take courage, though the subtleties and deceit of mysticism beats fiercely upon us, they only drive us closer to Christ.  “But be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.” [38]  What a glorious closing for the Lord’s final discourse to His Apostles, what a wonderful Word to us at this hour.  There must be no surrender, no compromise, and no fellowship with the world of mysticism.  Here is the Lord’s war-cry; “him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.”[39]  As we stand strong in Him, it will not be long before the conflict will cease!  For “Whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world; and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.”[40]

Permission is given to copy this article.  

Our MP3s are easily downloaded, and our DVDs can be seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] Vatican Council II:  The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, No. 56, Nostra Aetate, “Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions,” 28 Oct. 1965, Austin Flannery, Gen. Ed., Vol. I, Para. 2, p. 739

[2] Vatican II Document No. 64, Gaudium et Spes, 7 Dec. 1965 in Flannery, Vol. I, Sec. 2, 3 pp. 904-5  (Bolding in any quotation is added in this presentation)

[3] William Johnston, The Mirror Mind (New York: Fordham University Press, 1990) p. 7

[4] Ibid., p. 33, 39

[5] http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/conferences/emer/ 1/8/2009

[6] Others, Shane Claiborne is a founding partner of The Simple Way, a faith community in inner city Philadelphia. Alexie Torres-Fleming is the founder of Youth Ministries for Peace and Justice in the South Bronx.  In addition, she is the co-founder of the Southern Bronx River Watershed Alliance.

[7] Phyllis Tickle, The Great Emergence, (Baker: Grand Rapids, MI., 2008

[8] http://pomomusings.com/2006/11/20/sblaar-day-23-what-is-emergent/, 1/21/09. 

[9] Ibid., p. 46 & 47

[10] Ibid., p. 100 & 101

[11] http://www.explorefaith.org/stepstones/everyday.html

[12] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUnMn_sOFXw  

[13] Thomas Merton, Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander, Image edition Dec. 1989 (Garden City, New York:  Doubleday, 1966) pp. 157-158.  This book has official Roman Catholic approval. 

[14] William Shannon, Seeds of Peace: Contemplation and Non-Violence (New York:  Crossroad Publ. Co, 1996) p. 73

[15] Foster, Richard J., Prayer: Finding the Heart’s True Home (San Francisco:  Harper, 1992) p. 155

[16] Ibid., p 159

[17] Tony Jones, The Sacred Way:  Spiritual Practices for Everyday Life (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 2005) p. 15

[18] Sole Shaper, p. 233

[19] The Sacred Way, pp. 198-199; Soul Shaper, p. 233-234

[20] Job 38:2

[21] Exodus 20:4-5 Verse 5 “Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

[22] Transcript on file at Apprising Ministries Website: http://apprising.org/

[23] http://blog.beliefnet.com/tonyjones/2008/11/same-sex-marriage-blogalogue-h.html, 1/21/09, (bold theirs)

[24] Matthew 7:17

[25] II Corinthians 10:5

[26] Ephesians 1:10

[27] Hebrews 1:3

[28] John 17:4

[29] Ephesians 1:21

[30] John 17:2

[31] Philippians 2:10-11

[32] I John 3:23

[33] I Timothy 2:5

[34] Song of Solomon 6:10

[35] John 17:3

[36] II Peter 1:3

[37] II Corinthians 11:13-14

[38] John 16:33

[39] Revelation 3:21

[40] 1 John 5:4

Catholic Mysticism Infused into Society

The strong influence of Catholic mysticism has helped immensely to transform the New Age movement from being merely a counterculture-subculture, to becoming embedded into ordinary society.  Catholic mysticism has very effectively and subtly invaded many facets of life without being recognized or critically examined.  This has been actively promoted through self-help medical, educational, and psychological programs that employ methods such as meditation, philosophical programming, and self-hypnotic contemplation.  In mixing Eastern subjective spirituality with Western self-assurance, Catholic mysticism has done much to influence the core spiritual beliefs and values of the West.  In the September 2005 issue of Newsweek, the feature article was called “Spirituality in America.”  It stated that, 

“Americans are looking for personal, ecstatic experiences of God.”  The article began showing Catholic use of a Buddhist’s teachings…Father Thomas Keating, the abbot of St. Joseph’s Abbey, couldn’t help noticing the attraction that the exotic religious practices of the East held for many young Roman Catholics.  To him, as a Trappist monk, meditation was second nature.  He invited the great Zen master, Roshi Sas’aki’, to lead retreats at the abbey.”  

After this, the magazine devoted nearly 20 pages to explain just how Catholic mysticism is permeating America.  The same priest, Thomas Keating, writes,  

“In the mystical life one passes from one layer to the next in an inner or downward journey to the core of the personality where dwells the great mystery called God….  This is the never-ending journey, which is recognizable in the mysticism of all the great religions.  It is a journey towards union because the consciousness gradually expands and integrates data from the so-called unconscious while the whole personality is absorbed into the great mystery of God”[1]

This falsehood, called a journey to “the great mystery called God” can further lead a person into the whole mystic plague that Papal Rome is launching into society.  Likewise, the Catholic monk and priest, Basil Pennington, is a major proponent of pagan practices and Gnostic mysticism.  He writes, 

“In the course of the years, sitting in silent prayer, beyond where words can interfere, men and women of many diverse traditions have come together.  In that deeper place a oneness is experienced that gives assurance and heart to our feeble ecumenical efforts and interreligious dialogues.  Maharishi Mahesh Yogi has said that if one percent of the people would meditate we will have peace.  Jesus spoke of the leaven that will leaven the whole.”[2]

Unfortunately, what Pennington advocates is the dangerous stupidity of silent meditation plus false ecumenism.  He also expressed total ignorance of what the Lord meant by “leaven.”  Christ Jesus did not recommend using leaven but rather warned His disciples to beware of it.  The Pope of Rome officially endorses the same false ecumenism and lying mystical pestilence of Basil Pennington.  For instance, the late Pope John Paul II wrote,

“Is it not one of the ‘signs of the times’ that in today’s world, despite widespread secularization, there is a widespread demand for spirituality, a demand which expresses itself in large part as a renewed need for prayer?  Other religions, which are now widely present in ancient Christian lands, offer their own responses to this need, and sometimes they do so in appealing ways….  The great mystical tradition of the Church of both East and West has much to say in this regard.”[3]

Called by different names, this Catholic mysticism, i.e., “contemplative prayer,” “mantra meditation,” or “altered state of consciousness,” is permeating the world.  The key factor of Catholic mysticism is the claim that there is an element of the divine in each human person.  This assertion was officially proclaimed in 1965 at Vatican Council II in Rome.  The claimed divine element in mankind makes it possible for the Papal system to create a so-called brotherhood with other religions.  The exact words of Papal Rome’s intent to influence mankind are the following,

 “This is the reason why this sacred Synod, in proclaiming the noble destiny of man and affirming an element of the divine in him, offers to co-operate unreservedly with mankind in fostering a sense of brotherhood to correspond to this destiny of theirs.”[4]

Pagan Paraphernalia Paraded as Christian

The Emerging church movement is working together with the Papal system to change society.  A conference in March '09 was planned for this purpose.[5]  Thus, a follow up to the conference states, 

“The Post-Conference option envisions a think-tank approach that might lead to new insight and the creation of a space where all can learn together while ‘conspiring’ to expand the emergent conversation across the widest possible array of Christian life.” 

The conference website recommends the use of icons in order to bring a person into communication with God.  The actual words are the following, 

“The purpose of icons is first to create reverence in worship and second to serve as an existential link between the worshipper and God and bring communion.  Icons have been called prayers, hymns, sermons, in form and color.  They are the visual Gospel.  As St. Basil said, ‘What the word transmits through the ear, the painting silently shows through the image, and by these two means, mutually accompanying one another…we receive knowledge of one and the same thing.’”[6]

In this type of imaginary knowledge often lays a foundation for a pantheistic concept of ‘god’ in society.  It is no wonder that civilization is being ravaged by such forbidden representations of Christ.[7]  And following the use of icons, society is inundated with cultic imaginations such as “Harry Potter,” “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” and “Sabrina the Teenage Witch.”[8]  The “Icon Studio” is an example of how such icons can be obtained in modern society.  For instance, the Icon Studio states, 

“OUR MISSION…‘To help your faith community, honor and celebrate Jesus Christ, the ‘Word made flesh,’ by providing you with the highest quality icons for your worship space and house of prayer.’”[9]

The Icon Studio’s purpose in worship is exactly what the Word of God declares corrupts a person.[10]  Subsequent to icons, one has the marketing of statues, candles, and labyrinths for religious worship.  For example, Group Publishing sells, “The Prayer Path: A Christ-Centered Labyrinth Experience,” where it is advised, 

“Open your eyes...open your ears...open your heart...encounter God.... Participants will ‘journey’ through the labyrinth guided by a CD that soars with provocative, devotional narration set against a worshipful music backdrop.  Eleven stations on their journey will lead them to ‘let go’ of busyness, hurt and distractions that can spoil relationships, ‘center’ their lives on God and spend time with him, and reach out to the world with Christ’s love.”[11]

Walking a labyrinth, in fact, or with the help of a marketed package, is pagan spirituality.  The Word of God has been replaced with subjective feelings and a pagan practice.[12]  An investigation into how such practices have affected society has been made.  The Agape Press reports, 

“As researchers probed deeper, what they found should shake churches to the core.  Barna, for example, after noting that 86 percent of teenagers claimed that they believed in God, asked, ‘But what is the nature of the God they embrace?’  He is a strange god indeed, as it turns out.  In his book, Third Millennium Teens, Barna revealed this stunning fact: 63 percent of church-going, supposedly Christian teens said they believed ‘Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, Jews and all other people pray to the same God, even though they use different names for their god.’  In other critical areas of Christian doctrine—e.g., the divinity of Christ, the resurrection, the reality of absolute truth—the majority of church-going teenagers simply do not hold to views that are orthodox.”[13]

Not only teenagers, but also many believers could be lulled into a mystical ecumenical fantasy world.  St. Peters in Rome, Notre Dame in Paris, Rick Warren in the Saddleback Church in California, and the multitude of Emergent churches are really like a Disney World in the field of religion.  Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are meant to be set apart from the world; while they are in the world, they are not to be part of its worldly, evil system.[14]  If there is no true repentance and forgiveness, serious chastisement on the people of God can be expected in the form of increasing spiritual stupor and blindness.  The Holy Spirit strongly warns of the apocalyptic consequences of these deceptions and of the judgment of those who promote lies in the name of God.[15]

International Political Ramifications

Anglican Alan Jones, Dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, California is influencing society and politics.  He speaks to a generation to whom moral relativism, irrationalism, and Roman Catholic ecumenism have become the dominant forms of thinking.  This generation has no moral absolutes.  Rather, imaginations and images based in the lusts of the mind have become a predominant mode of teaching.  In such turbulent waters, Alan Jones has written a book called, “Reimagining Christianity: Reconnect Your Spirit without Disconnecting Your Mind.”  Jones has had a worldwide influence, as a quick perusal of the Internet will confirm.  However, his influence does not stop with lecturing world wide to ordinary individuals.  Much more serious is the political and international recognition that he has received.  What is critical in his effort to influence the world community is his endorsement of the United Religions Initiative (URI).  The purpose of URI is to create “United Religions,” a world parliament of religions, which is a

“…permanent assembly, with the stature and visibility of the United Nations, where the world’s religions and spiritual communities will gather on a daily basis, in prayerful dialogue and cooperative action, to make peace among religions and to be a force for peace among nations, to address urgent human need and to heal the earth.”[16]  

This “peace among religions” is to include the acceptance of Islam, something that the papacy has already officially done.[17]  URI has two hundred and two chapters throughout the world, called Cooperation Circles.  It is designed to evolve into a United Nations for Religions.  While the whole emphasis is supposedly “spiritual,” a desire for legal power is evident in URI documents.  For example, according to the Preamble to the Charter, URI plans a Worldwide Movement,

“...to support freedom of religion and spiritual expression, and the rights of all individuals and peoples as set forth in international law.”[18]  

Alan Jones also has influence with militant feminists.  For example, on June 2, 1994, hundreds of women staged San Francisco’s “Renaissance of the Sacred Feminine Conference” at Grace Cathedral where Alan Jones is dean.  Alan Jones not only participated, but he “‘shared his delight in our ‘post-traditional’ culture and ‘the new ways and forms to express the spirit.’  A worldwide sisterhood of angry, militant feminists is rising to power.”[19]  Jones’ global impact in both religion and politics did not start on its own.  Its launching pad was the Emergent Church movement. Where the movement ultimately leads is a horrible rejection of the Lord’s Gospel.  For example, Jones rejects what is central and pivotal to the Gospel message.  He brazenly declares, “The Church’s fixation on the death of Jesus as the universal saving act must end, and the place of the cross must be re-imagined in Christian faith.  Why?  Because of the cult of suffering and the vindictive God behind it.”[20]  Jones goes on to say, “Penal substitution was the name of this vile doctrine.”[21]  In spite of what Jones says, Jesus Christ the Lord came with the express purpose of dying as a substitutionary atonement for sin.[22]  Jones’s attempt to thwart the Lord’s mission is truly Satan’s work![23]

New Age Practices Overtake Society

One Emergent Church leader who is especially popular in Christian high schools and youth groups is Rob Bell.  He is the author of Velvet Elvis.  He is also the creator of mini-film series called Noomas (from the Greek word pneuma) meaning spirit or breath.  Rob Bell is very open about his affinities towards the mystical.  For example, he states, “We’re rediscovering Christianity as an Eastern religion, as a way of life.”  A news story in The New York Times on June 16, 2007, highlighted meditation in colleges and schools, illustrating how serious this matter is.  The New Age is overtaking society, with children as a prime target.  Unsuspectingly, a whole generation is being taught by such as Rob Bell on how to enter dangerous demonic realms through practicing New Age meditation remarketed as Christian meditation.  How successful he is in human terms has been outlined, 

“Rob Bell is currently traveling around the country delivering a message titled ‘The Gods’ Aren’t Angry.’  Mr. Bell said, he will present an ‘anthropology of religion,’ looking at where humans first got the idea of gods, goddesses and deities and why people often feel that ‘some god or goddess somewhere’ is angry ‘and needs to be appeased,’ he said.  I have no idea what Rob Bell is saying in these messages…but what I do know is that every venue on his tour is sold out except for New York.  Further 56,000 people download his sermons every week, 1.1 million people have purchased his NOOMA videos, and 500,000 copies of his two books have been sold.  I am not exactly sure how influential the emerging church is right now, but if Rob Bell is any indication, its influence isn’t going away any time soon.”[24]

Another example occult mysticism permeating life is given in the writings of Mike Perschon from Alberta, Canada.  He wrote in his Disciplines, Mystics, and the Contemplative Life, 

 “I started using the phrase ‘listening prayer’ when I talked about my own experiences in meditation.  I built myself a prayer room, a tiny sanctuary in a basement closet filled with books on spiritual disciplines, contemplative prayer.  In that space I lit candles, burned incense, hung rosaries, and listened to tapes of Benedictine monks.  I meditated for hours on words, images, and sounds.  I reached the point of being able to achieve alpha brain patterns, the state in which dreams occur, while still awake and meditating.”

Mike Perschon may call it prayer but, in fact, it is the same practice used in eastern religions to achieve union with other gods.  He instructs on how to have feelings of euphoria with one’s common sense overwhelmed.  A person may believe he has made a connection with something spiritual, as “alpha brain patterns” have allegedly broken through.  It fact, it is simply occult mysticism sugarcoated; deadly poison which is typical Catholic mysticism, and now, the Emerging Movement.  

The Emerging Church leader, Erwin McManus, states that his “goal is to destroy Christianity as a world religion and be a recatalyst for the movement of Jesus Christ.”[25]  In McManus’ book, The Barbarian Way, he talks about being “awakened” to a “primal longing that...waits to be unleashed within everyone who is a follower of Jesus Christ.”  McManus says that the “greatest enemy to the movement of Jesus Christ is Christianity.”  Mark Yaconelli is another voice of the Emerging Church.  His work, called “Ancient-Future Youth Ministry,” claims that ancient practices can bring life to youth ministries.  Yaconelli is the director of the Youth Ministry and Spirituality Project at the Presbyterian Church USA.  Youth ministry leaders are trained at the Project to meet regularly for faith sharing, contemplative prayer, and communal discernment.  They are then encouraged to begin forming young people in contemplative understanding through silence, solitude, and a variety of contemplative exercises and spiritual formation tracks.  National news services such as the Wall Street Journal, Knight Rider News Service, CBS radio, and ABC World News Tonight have all featured news stories on various aspects of the Project.  The self-styled “Jesus Christ” of McManus and Yaconelli turns out to be a deceiving image in their co-called enlightened mysticism. 

The well-known Rick Warren, by endorsing Catholic contemplative prayer techniques, further assists mysticism to infiltrate society.  For instance, Warren in his book, The Purpose Driven Life, quotes from the Catholic mystic, Brother Lawrence.[26]  He also cites, approvingly, the famous Catholic mystic, Madame Guyon.[27]  He approves of the basic, mystical teacher of Catholicism, St. John of the Cross.[28]  He agrees with and quotes from the Catholic priest mystic, Henri Nouwen.[29]  He also highly approves of “Mother Teresa” who taught there are many ways to get to God.[30]  With Warren having a deep influence on society across the world, we see Catholic mysticism propagated in ways that we would have not deemed possible.  

Culmination and Application

What has been shown in this presentation regarding the outright invasion of Evangelicalism by Catholic mysticism and its commandeering of New Age verbiage and paraphernalia, should cause serious individuals to carefully examine the foundation upon which their hopes are built.  The wicked love darkness, but God’s people love the Light!  Mystics have unscrupulously equated the true God with “the god within.”  They have thought to divest themselves of God Himself by turning to inward self-realization and enlightenment.  Their values are set on personal inner feelings that are often incapable of reasoned explanation, and they have not assessed the depths of their own wickedness.  

By public demonstration, by official sanction, in countless books and seminars, as well as websites with broad ecumenical support, the papacy has set a mystical agenda that the world loves and accepts.  The Emergent Movement has gone where no movement has gone before—into “inter-spirituality.”  They want to generate new thinking, new discoveries, with new ways to do things. They say it is justified because we live in a new world, and we have to be futurist thinkers to survive the changes that are taking place.  However, we know, as the Scriptures tell us, that sorrows shall be multiplied upon those that hasten after another god.  This is the destiny of those who run into apostasy.[31]  The doom of those who hasten to reinvent Christ and His cross, as they eagerly crave for mysticism and all the lusts of the mind, bring upon themselves judgments from the true God and His Christ.  They that multiply mystical ways increase anguish and pain for themselves, both in this life and the one to come.  The Scripture explains the reason for their ruin: “Because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:  that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”[32]   

Aligning itself with Papal Rome, the Emergent Movement with its mission is really nothing more than the rebirth of the liberalism that blighted the Christian World in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.  It is simply an extreme form of that liberalism with a re-imagined Christ and His sacrifice, a re-imagined way of influencing people with Papal and pagan mysticism slapped on top of it.  Irrationalism is substituted for the new birth.  The cultivation of imaginations and images of God’s gifts of grace and faith has taken place.  False ecumenism substitutes for complete dependence on God.  The carnal mind and human reason have been attracted and charmed by many rites and rituals, but they lack any conviction and leading of the Holy Spirit of truth.  The spirit of the Emerging Church is basically that of boasting and glorying with the lusts of the “mind for mysticism” and the “heart for rituals.”  The achievements of man, i.e., his development and improvement, greatness and self-sufficiency, are the shrine at which leaders of the movement worship.  However, the mighty thundering of the Lord’s Word proclaims, “Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.”[33]  In face of all of this apostasy, the grace of God still conquers, redeems, and saves.  The Scripture explains grace as power.  Grace not only makes salvation possible, but it is also efficient and all-powerful to that end.  The Lord God’s astonishing grace still breaks the arrogance of the papacy working hand-in-hand with the Emergent Church apostasy.  

Catholic mysticism, through the soul-destroying voices of the Emergent Church, is demolished by the direct work of the Holy Spirit through the Gospel.  The Gospel alone remains the power of God unto salvation.  We see His power as we boldly proclaim His graciousness.  Every individual who is saved is “being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”[34]  In the face of subjective, irrational speculations, it is objective, rational, consistent, and all-powerful.  The Gospel of Christ stands firm.  The absolute sovereignty of God is a great battering ram against human pride and the doctrines of men, which we have documented.  By nature, we were “dead in trespasses and sins”;[35] and in practice, rebels against the All-Holy God.  We were justly exposed to the curse of the Law.  Yet, the love of the heavenly Father, in the Gospel of grace, rescued us from His fiery indignation.  By His grace, we turn to Him in faith alone, for the salvation that He alone gives, by the conviction of the Holy Spirit, based on Christ’s death and resurrection for His own, and believe on Jesus Christ the Lord alone, “for by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  Not of works, lest any man should boast.”[36]  Such grace and love melts our hearts in adoring gratitude as we proclaim, “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto Thy name give glory, for Thy mercy, and for Thy truth’s sake.”[37]  “For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever.  Amen.”[38]  ¨

Permission is given to copy this article.  

Our MP3s are easily downloaded, and our DVDs can be seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] The Inner Eye of Love: Mysticism and Religion p.127 (1981)

[2] M. Basil Pennington, Finding Grace at the Center: The Beginning of Centering Prayer, pp.10, 11 Co-authored with Thomas Keating, and Thomas Clarke

[3] OFFICIAL APOSTOLIC LETTER OF POPE JOHN PAUL II “NOVO MILLENNIO INEUNTE”

[4] Vatican II Document No. 64, Gaudium et Spes, 7 Dec. 1965 in Flannery, Vol. I, Sec. 2, 3 pp. Emphasis added

[5] See: http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/conferences/emer/ 1/8/2009

[6] http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/conferences/JB/post/icons.php  1/28/2009

[7] The Scripture makes clear that God forbids a representation in art of what is divine (Exodus. 20:4-6).  Making images to represent God corrupts those who use them (Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16).  Images teach lies about God (Habakkuk 2:18-20).  God should not be represented in art, and all who practice idolatry are commanded to repent (Acts 17:29-30).  In the New Testament, as in the Old, the Holy Spirit orders, “little children, keep yourselves from idols” (I John 5:21).  

[8] 2003 Reuters Limited 6/20/03

[9] http://www.theikonstudio.com/welcometo.html 1/28/2009  

[10] “And he declared unto you…even Ten Commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.  Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake...Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure....” (Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16)

[11] http://store.grouppublishing.com/OA_HTML/ibeCCtpItmDspRte.jsp?item=14191&section=16883 1/27/2009

[12] http://www.letusreason.org/Nam30.htm  1/28/2009

[13] http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152005a.asp  1/28/2009

[14] John 17:14-15 

[15] II Thessalonians 2:5-12

[16] http://www.scp-inc.org/publications/journals/J2204/Penn1.php   1/28/2009

[17] The Papacy and Islam on http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles_new.hm tm

[18] http://www.uri.org/About_URI.html  (Bolding in any quotation indicates emphasis added in this paper.) 

[19] http://www.crossroad.to/Books/TwistofFaith/1-Father-Mother.html

[20] Alan Jones, Reimagining Christianity:  Reconnect Your Spirit without Disconnecting Your Mind (Hoboken, NJ:  John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2005) p. 132 

[21] Alan Jones, p. 168

[22] John 12:2

[23] Matthew 16:23 When the Lord called Peter ‘Satan’ because Peter attempted to stop Him from going to the cross.

[24] http://electexiles.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/the-cultural-thermometer-millenials-an-emerging-pastor-on-tour-feminist-cavemen-teen-sex-and-genocide//  1/28/2009

[25] Christian Examiner, March 2005

[26] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 2002) Page numbers only in succeeding citations.

[27] Ibid., p. 193

[28] Ibid., p.108 Ibid p.108 

[29] Ibid., p.108, p.269

[30] Ibid., pp. 125, 231

[31] Psalm 16:4 “Their sorrows shall be multiplied that hasten after another god.”

[32] II Thessalonians 2:10

[33] Revelation 19:6

[34] Romans 3:24

[35] Ephesians 2:1

[36] Ephesians 2:8, 9

[37] Psalm 115:1

[38] Romans 11:36

The Catholic-Lutheran Accord

Dear Friend,

While apostasy is predicted in Scripture, it still comes as a shock to see it face-to-face.  The apostasy in the October 31, 1999, Roman Catholic Church and The Lutheran World Federation “The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification was called “a milestone in Christian history” “the end of reformation” and other similar statements of acceptance. 

The Bible believer is to remember such was foretold and he is to continue to contend for Biblical faith. The Lord Jesus Christ through the Apostle Paul commands His disciples to “stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel.” They are likewise commanded to “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” The analysis given below is simply obedience to that Biblical word. 

I request that you study the analysis and make it known far and wide, and continue to stand strong in the precious Love and Truth of our All-Sufficient Lord.

In the Lord’s loving kindness and grace, 

Richard Bennett 

The Catholic-Lutheran Accord

A Denial of the Gospel and the Righteousness of Christ

In the dialogue between Evangelicals and the Roman Catholic Church here have been alarming attempts in recent times to declare Roman Catholics as “brothers and sisters in Christ” as we saw in the whole ‘Evangelicals and Catholic Together’ movement.  However something more authoritative took place in 1999.  “The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” (an official doctrinal statement jointly authored by representatives of the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation) was signed on October 31st, as a joint confessional agreement.  That this event is important is seen in the many comments on it that imply that the Catholic Church has indeed changed and that the Vatican now accepts Reformation truths.  Thus for example in the area of ecumenism it has been said that “the most significant development to date is the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, published in 1999 and signed by the Vatican and the Lutheran World Federation.  

The document, with a jointly signed annex attached which offered genuine clarification to the JD, included the acceptance by Rome of the sola fide formula!  In the Joint Declaration it is affirmed that ‘the doctrine of justification is the measure or touchstone for the Christian faith. . .an indispensable criterion.’   The JD specifically states that both Catholics and Lutherans jointly believe that ‘whatever [works] in the justified precedes or follows the free gift of faith is neither the basis of justification nor merits it.’   It acknowledges that Lutherans hold the Reformation understanding of grace alone by faith alone (sola fide), and the imputed (alien) righteousness of God to the sinner (‘at the same time righteous and sinner’).  And most significantly, the JD explicitly states that ‘the mutual condemnation of former times do not apply to the Catholic and Lutheran doctrines of justification.’”[1] 

If this were indeed true it would mean that the Catholic Church is now fundamentally changed, in that it now accepts the very principles that made the Reformation.  However, because we know that the Vatican continually claims that it is  “semper eadem’ (always the same) and that her Popes’ teachings are “irreformable by their very nature,”[2] we must analyze just what was jointly accepted on the 482nd anniversary of Martin Luther’s pivotal posting of the ‘95 theses’.   What we will see is totally different than what many claim.  In fact, the Lutherans of Lutheran World Federation have now embraced the doctrine of the Council of Trent, and in so doing have officially and formally denied the Gospel and the righteousness of Christ.  Significantly, of the three Lutheran Synods in the USA; the Missouri Synod (7 million), the Wisconsin Synod (c. 0.5 million) and Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (20 million), only the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America signed this accord with Rome.

Elite Untouchable Joint Declaration?

The Joint Declaration was the result of thirty years of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue.  This fact alone might dissuade many from daring to challenge it.  The document itself is about nineteen pages in length depending on which printing one reads.  Arrayed with many footnotes, a sizable appendix, the official response of the Lutheran World Federation, the Roman Catholic response, the clarifications to the document, and the added accouterment of John Paul II’s comment on the Joint Declaration; the document appears very much like the robes of those who devised it: all very “haut couture” meant to stun anyone who might dare to analyze it.              

In addition to the first rate showmanship with which the Joint Declaration has been presented, it appears that there is neither grub nor gnat that has not been strained out of this cleverly worded document and addenda.  Dare anyone be so bold as to ask if a camel has been swallowed? Daunting circumstances notwithstanding, the Christian, committed to Scripture as his sole authority, and in the same Holy Spirit that gave the Scripture, is able to sift error from truth, discerning that which is in accord with Scripture in the Official Common Statement in which the Joint Declaration is ratified and approved by both parties.

Heretical Landmines

There are presuppositions upheld in the Joint Declaration itself which are not stated as such in the Official Common Statement.  Some of these presuppositions totally negate Biblical justification as, for example, the idea that justification is by means of the sacrament of baptism.  Both parties to the agreement accept such a tradition of men.  This is listed under the heading called “4.4 The Justified as Sinner,” the Joint Declaration states: “28. We confess together that in Baptism the Holy Spirit unites one with Christ, justifies, and truly renews the person.”  This heresy is in line with the teaching of the Council of Trent,

Can. 8  “If any shall say that by the said sacraments of the New Law, grace is not conferred from the work which has been worked [ex opere operato] but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace: let him be anathema.”[3] 

Biblical truth, however, is that the believer’s faith cannot be based on any physical works of men whatsoever, as true faith is in Christ Jesus’ perfect life and sacrifice alone.[4]  To attempt to claim causative effects, therefore, for that which was given to testify to the Lord’s grace and His finished work is “to preach another gospel.”[5]  

While such deadly landmines as this permeate the Joint Declaration, this analysis is limited mainly to examining the Official Common Statement ratified by both parties.  

The Joint Declaration and the Judgment of the Sovereign God

Because God is All Holy and man is dead in trespasses and sins, an immense gulf exists between the Creator and the human creature.  Because of Adam’s sin, mankind is born spiritually dead.  God justifies His own Holiness in graciously providing the believer’s rectitude by imputing to the sinner the perfect righteousness of Christ and His perfect propitiation-sacrifice.  The Scriptures proclaim the Holiness and Righteousness of God in the flawless life and death of the God-man the Lord Christ Jesus.  Justification in the first place has to do with God Himself, to show that He is just in justifying the sinner in Christ.  

The Gospel has to do with who God is in His Holy and Righteous nature.  The Gospel demonstrates that because of who God is, He alone justifies.  Thus Romans 3:26 states, “To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”  The final cause of justification is the glory of the Divine Holiness, Justice and Goodness.  Thus the one who preaches any other gospel is accursed by God, as the Apostle clearly stated in Galatians chapter one.  

Perversion of the Gospel is an enormous crime.  It debases the perfect righteousness and sacrifice of Christ, and in so doing stands against the very nature of God’s Holiness.  Through the prophet Isaiah the Lord warns, “But the Lord of hosts shall be exalted in judgment, and God that is holy shall be sanctified in righteousness.”[6]  

It must be carefully observed that it is not possible for those who pervert the Gospel to continue unpunished or for God to permit His glory to be set aside.  The time frame is not known; however, the certainty is inevitable.  God who is Holy “shall be sanctified in righteousness.”  God is God, and those who teach a false gospel may not, by a false fancy, assure themselves of uninterrupted tranquility.  God is Holy by nature.  He must be sanctified in judgment, for God cannot deny Himself.

The Joint Declaration’s Claim

The document alleges, ...”that a consensus in basic truths of the doctrine of justification exists between Lutherans and Catholics...” and ...”that the mutual condemnations of former times do not apply to the Catholic and Lutheran Doctrines of justification as they are presented in the joint declaration.”[7] 

These statements notwithstanding, the relevant “condemnations” by the Church of Rome on those who hold to the biblical Gospel have never been revoked or recanted.  The present day dogma of the Catholic Church upholds the teaching of the Council of Trent and declares that it is infallible.[8]  From Sixth Session of the Council of Trent, the following curses still stand,

Canon 9.  If anyone shall say that by faith alone the sinner is justified, so as to understand that nothing else is required to cooperate in the attainment of the grace of justification, and that it is in no way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will: let him be anathema.[9]

Canon 11. If anyone shall say that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity, which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Spirit and remains in them, or even that the grace by which we are justified is only the favor of God: let him be anathema.[10] 

Two Important Points:

1. From a Roman Catholic perspective, as will be seen, these condemnations do in fact stand because the Joint Declaration does not contradict either. 

2. From a Biblical and historical Lutheran viewpoint, however, these anathemas of Trent fall under the wrath of God.

The Contents of the Joint Declaration

The Joint Declaration consists of five main divisions with the entirety subdivided into forty-four numbered paragraphs.  The fourth main division, the lengthiest of the five, is broken down into seven sections, an overview being as follows:

Preamble (7 paragraphs the Joint Declaration (JD) 1-7)

1. Biblical Message of Justification (JD 8-12)

2. The Doctrine of Justification as Ecumenical Problem (JD 13)

3. The Common Understanding of Justification (JD 14-18)

4. Explicating the Common Understanding of Justification (JD 19-39) This 20-paragraph section has seven subheadings.

1. Human Powerlessness and Sin in Relation to Justification (JD 19-21)

2. Justification as Forgiveness of Sins and Making Righteous (JD 22-24)

3. Justification by Faith and through Grace (JD 25-27)

4. The Justified as Sinner (JD 28-30)

5. Law and Gospel (JD 31-33)

6. Assurance of Salvation (JD 34-36)

7. The Good Works of the Justified (JD 37-39)

5. The Significance and Scope of the Consensus Reached (JD 40-44)

The Official Common Statement ratifies the Joint Declaration.  This begins with three paragraphs (OCS 1-3) followed by the words, “By this act of signing The Catholic Church and The Lutheran World Federation Confirm the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in its entirety.”  The Official Common Statement has an Annex with four sections.  Finally, Section 2 has five subsections, A-E.

Stumbling at the Rock of Offence

The Joint Declaration must be analyzed in the light of Biblical truth.  What was true for Israel in the Apostle Paul’s analysis applies in this instance. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.  Wherefore?  Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law.  For they stumbled at that stumbling stone; As it is written, Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed...For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.[11]  

The Biblical “rock of offence” is Christ Jesus Himself, the Rock on which one believes for extrinsic justification, that is, imputed righteousness.  One must remember from the outset that the issue at hand is “Justification.”  Error always cloaks itself in reasonable sounding phrases and often makes use of the scheme of the evil one to twist the Scriptures.  The Joint Declaration is replete with “Reformation-like” language and Scripture quotations.  A characteristic vagueness and impreciseness permeates the document.  Certain sentences can be read and assented to by a Biblical Christian, but when the slant of meaning is examined each is seen to be the opposite of what it first seemed to say.  The conclusions arrived at are similar to the deception of Jacob in Genesis Ch. 27, “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.”  “The voice” of the Joint Declaration is distinctly that of the Scriptures; “the hands,” however, are the hairy hands of Rome.  The document is excelsior of doublespeak.  It claims to explain a common understanding of the doctrine of justification, and then adds encumbrance upon impediment to the purely Scriptural, wholly objective, wholly juridical nature of the doctrine.  There is no better way to assess the guile of the Joint Declaration in its attendant Official Common Statement than by comparing it to what the Scripture, the Word of God, declares to be truth.

Trent in New Garments

In the Joint Declaration, imputed righteousness is cleverly sidestepped for the old lie of establishing one’s own righteousness.  The central point that separated the Reformation from Rome was the Biblical doctrine of extrinsic justification.  A person is accepted by the All Holy God only “in the beloved” “to the praise of the glory of his grace.”[12]  The doctrine of imputed righteousness struck at the very heart of the Roman Catholic insistence on one being made inherently just, i.e., just within oneself.  In the Joint Declaration, the doctrine of extrinsic or imputed righteousness has been wiped out in favor of the Catholic Church doctrine of inherent righteousness.  Clearly, the Joint Declaration is an attempt to do away with the biblical Gospel.  Thus the Official Common Statement  2. A) reads, 

“We confess together that God forgives sin by grace and at the same time frees human beings from sin’s enslaving power ” (JD 22).  “Justification is forgiveness of sins and being made righteous, through which God “imparts the gift of new life in Christ” (JD 22).  “Since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God” (Rom 5:1).  We are “called children of God; and that is what we are” (1 Jn 3:1).  We are truly and inwardly renewed by the action of the Holy Spirit, remaining always dependent on his work in us.  “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new!” (2 Cor 5:17).  The justified do not remain sinners in this sense.” 

This is a convoluted mixture of the doctrines of justification and sanctification rather than merely a problem of semantics.  Justification nowhere in Scripture ever means inherent righteousness (i.e. “being made righteous”).  The believer’s justification is not based on a single iota of anything in him: it is based wholly in his standing in Christ.  This is the crux of the matter in the Joint Declaration.  One goes the way of all flesh to the judgment of hell if he adds anything to the pure and perfect righteousness of Christ.  One needs to be, “afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity of Christ”[13]  Justification is not “being made righteous,” but the Joint Declaration follows such statements as these with numerous Scriptural quotations and phrases cloaking its errors in the semblance of truth.  It is quite like Rebecca’s word to Jacob, “Now therefore, my son, obey my voice according to that which I command thee.”[14]  Thus “Rebecca took goodly raiment of her eldest son Esau, which were with her in the house, and put them upon Jacob her younger son.”[15]  In the Joint Declaration, the voice of some of the best Scripture texts on justification is heard.  The conclusion, however, is similar to what Isaac discerned, “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.”[16]  The hands of the Joint Declaration are distinctly those of Rome; the material that is manipulated, however, is that of Scripture.[17]

 “Being Made Righteous”

In the justifying act of God, He imputes Christ's perfect righteousness to the individual.  It is a legal and one time, finished, irrevocable act which cannot be misconstrued to be a process or ongoing occurrence, such as the term “being made righteous” will allow.  The simple truth of Scripture is stated Romans 3:22, “Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe.”  God’s demonstration of His own righteousness is the faithfulness of Jesus Christ in His perfect life and sacrificial death.  The great news is that this absolute righteousness is by imputation “unto all and upon all them that believe.”  Being “called children of God” and “a new creation” is the fruit.  It is what follows on this act.  “Being made righteous” here is just a rewording of the old lie of the Council of Trent in which it was officially declared, “Justification…which is not merely remission of sins, but also of the sanctification and renewal of the interior man…whereby an unjust man becomes a just man.”[18]  In this final word of the Joint Declaration Official Common Statement is the age old Roman Catholic mixing of sanctification with the act of justification, returning to the age old fabrication that righteousness is supposedly within the soul, rather than to the biblical truth that by Holy God the believer is credited with the everlasting righteousness that is in Christ Jesus.  “Surely, shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength....”[19] 

What is proposed in the Joint Declaration as the “doctrine of justification” is deficient in two essential ways.  It neither upholds the perfect standard of God’s Holiness nor does it demonstrate the perfect righteousness of Christ in life and death.  In the words of the Apostle Paul, “For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.”[20]  The Bible emphasizes and declares the righteousness of God, “the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith”[21].  This is not proclaimed nor taught in the Official Common Statement on the Joint Declaration.  Destitute and sinful human beings need the perfect righteousness of Christ.  This is what the Scripture clearly says is now manifest, “But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested.”[22]

Manifested in Scripture, Missing in the Joint Declaration

What precisely is omitted in the Joint Declaration is “the righteousness of God without the law the righteousness which is of God by faith” of Philippians 3:9, “the righteousness of the one”, “the obedience of the one” of Romans 5:18-19[23], the righteousness of Jesus Christ “the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” of 2 Peter 1:1.  The verdict act of God in declaring that a sinner is acquitted and counted righteous because of the obedience and death of Jesus Christ alone is not contained in the Joint Declaration.  What is proposed in its place is a combination of some Biblical truths (such as grace alone, faith alone) with the old lying definition of “justification” being seen as a quality of the soul within the believer.

Because righteousness is of and from God, it is absolutely perfect.  The one-time act of God in justifying a sinner in Christ Jesus is perfect.  Because man in himself cannot be perfect, righteousness can only be communicated through imputation or reckoning.  God’s provision of the perfect righteousness of Christ is acquired by faith alone.  This faith, in itself, is not seen, rather it is “the evidence of things not seen.”[24]  The “righteousness of God without the law” is not to be seen on earth.  The fruitfulness of such righteousness is indeed seen; nevertheless, the righteousness itself is in heavenly places in Christ.[25]

What is proposed to be “justification” in the Official Common Statement on the Joint Declaration is to be seen here on earth, and not the Scriptural, declarative justification “in heaven.”  Rather justification is presented as taking place “on earth” in the believer, as for example, in Annex Para 2, 

“Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works” (JD 15).  (Emphasis added.)

The simple truth of Scripture is that God never accepts an individual as such.  Rather, he is accepted only in the Beloved,[26] in the righteousness of the One, Christ Jesus, that is, in the righteousness of faith.  Receiving the Holy Spirit and the renewal of hearts is the old confusion of justification with sanctification.  Because the purpose of these statements is to define justification, such stupefaction is studied deceit.

The phrases, “being made righteous” and “we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit” both make room for what is to be concluded, i.e., that “justification” is within the person and a quality of the soul within the believer.  Basically the Biblical truth is this: the perfect righteousness of Christ imputed to the believer is an act of God in Christ.

Sophisticated Sophistry

The official statement ratifying the Joint Declaration states,

C) Justification takes place “by grace alone” (15 and 16), by faith alone, the person is justified “apart from works” (Rom 3:28, cf. JD 25).  “Grace creates faith not only when faith begins in a person but as long as faith lasts” (Thomas Aquinas, S. Th II/II 4, 4 ad 3). 

The use of the phrase “Justification takes place” rather than the Biblical concept, “to whom it shall be imputed,”[27] is studied deceit because the word “justification” is be made to imply a process rather than a one-time act of the God.  In Scripture justification is a one-time declarative act in which God pronounces the sinner just or righteous, as it is stated, “God…not imputing their trespasses unto them.”[28] And as the Apostle specifically states, “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.”[29]

The Joint Declaration and the Official Common Statement on the Joint Declaration use the noun “justification” and carefully avoid the verb “justifies.”  The Greek word “justifies” (logizomai) means to count esteem, impute, number, reason, reckon.  It is a verb denoting a one-time action.  The repetition of the noun “justification” in the Joint Declaration and in the Official Common Statement on the Joint Declaration conveys the concept of a quality within a person that totally contravenes the Scripture.  Not mentioning “imputed righteousness” and continually speaking of “justification” is seductive sophistry.

Thus in the Official Common Statement’s endorsement of the Joint Declaration, the basis for the Gospel is given as within man rather than the perfect righteousness of the God-man, Christ Jesus.  This is speaking against God and is worse than anything proposed by Israel or the Pharisees.  The words of the Lord Christ Jesus therefore apply, “for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.”[30]

The Mindset of Rome in the Joint Declaration

The Roman Catholic Church cannot conceive of the act of justifying in which man remains a sinner.  Catholic theology understands justifying as “justification,” something that God graciously pours into a man’s heart, displacing sin and sinfulness in the process.  Biblically speaking, however, justifying righteousness is something that always resides in the person of Christ alone.  The imputation of this righteousness is what makes a believer acceptable to God.  As long as the believer lives, he is in himself guilty, but in Christ He is righteous and accounted precious in God’s sight.

An Astonishing Quote from Aquinas

It is a surprising thing that a section of Thomas Aquinas’ teaching is affirmed in this final word confirming the conclusion of the Joint Declaration and the Official Common Statement.  The question Aquinas was answering in S. Th II/II 4, 4 ad 3 is, “Whether Formless Faith Can Become Formed or Formed Faith Formless?”[31]  The abstruseness of the question itself gives one a taste of the intricacies of scholastic theology.  Why quote from a most intricate question in Aquinas rather than simply giving the words of Scripture that are referred to in the brackets?  The Romans 3:28 text given in brackets before the Aquinas quote states, “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”  The word “conclude” in this text is the Greek word “logizometha” meaning, we esteem, impute or reckon “that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”  Had the Scripture been cited rather than the words of Aquinas, “righteousness reckoned” would have been obvious, and the sophistry exposed.  The official statement, however, chose the words of Aquinas to suppress biblical truth and to uphold the concept of inherent righteousness.

The statement agreed on says,

C) Justification takes place “by grace alone” (JD 15 and 16), by faith alone, the person is justified “apart from works” (Rom 3:28, cf. JD 25). “Grace creates faith not only when faith begins in a person but as long as faith lasts” (Thomas Aquinas, S. Th II/II 4, 4 ad 3). 

Biblically speaking it ought to say,

The righteousness of Christ is credited to the believer “by grace alone” and by faith alone, and thus the person is justified in Christ alone, “apart from works.”  As is stated by the Apostle Paul, “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” (Rom 3:28) 

Cancerous Cuisine

Earlier in the same work cited, Aquinas teaches that grace is a quality of the soul.  In the “Treatise on Grace,” he asks the question “Is Grace a Quality of the Soul?”  In the body of his article, he cites Aristotle’s physics saying, “motion is the act of the mover in the moved.”  Then in Reply Obj. 1, he states, “Grace, as a quality, is said to act upon the soul not after the manner of an efficient cause, but after the manner of a formal cause, as whiteness makes a thing white, and justice, just.”[32]  The whole idea of grace being moral justice located inside a person, rather than Holy God imputing Christ's righteousness to each person whom He places in Christ, blatantly contradicts Biblical truth.  Such teaching is a negation of consistent Biblical teaching of positional legal righteousness in Christ alone.[33] 

Complete Perfection in Christ, Not in the Individual

Endorsing the teaching of Aquinas and all such teaching in the Joint Declaration as “Justification takes place,” “being made righteous,” and “we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit” is quite cleverly teaching “inherent righteousness” without using those words.  Such teaching opposes both the Gospel and the righteousness of Christ.

The distinction between the righteousness of faith (justification) and the righteousness of the law (i.e., sanctification) was foundational in Luther’s understanding of the Gospel.  After Luther, the Formula of Concord of 1577 reiterated the basic Biblical insights of double righteousness.  This was bedrock of historical Lutheranism.  It was recognized that if active righteousness (sanctification) were brought into the definition of the passive righteousness by faith, then both the glory of Christ and the Gospel are denied and one returns to the old lie of Satan that what is inside a man makes him right before God.  “Ye shall be as gods” (Genesis 3:5).

The written Word of the Lord continually shows the believer where he or she is eternally and splendidly saved.  “And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power.”[34]  The Roman Catholic Church does not rest satisfied with Christ alone, her process program in fact nullifies the grace of God.[35]  What is literally damming in the Official Common Statement of the Joint Declaration is that an attempt has been made to masquerade the perfect righteousness of Christ as inherent righteousness.  What was truly Biblical in Luther’s understanding of imputed righteousness is now subsumed under Rome’s idea of “inner” righteousness, the source of her power over the minds and hearts of men, which power she covets.  What is most serious, the very truth of the Gospel is thus made void.  The “inner” process system is a hopeless practice born of a blasphemous idea.  Rather, “It is God that justifieth.”[36]

The Wrath of God is Revealed

The Lord forewarned of stumbling at the Rock of offence, “unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner.” [37]  The Catholic Church and Lutheran World Federation in publicizing their apostasy in the Joint Declaration have to fear a revelation of something much more serious; the very wrath of God. “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.”[38] 

The intent to continue dialogue “to reach full church community” is a conclusion mentioned in paragraph 3 of the Official Common Statement.  The actual words are as follows,

“The two partners in dialogue are committed to continued and deepened study of the biblical foundations of the doctrine of justification.  They will also seek further common understanding of the doctrine of justification, also beyond what is dealt with in the Joint Declaration and the annexed substantiating statement.  Based on the consensus reached, continued dialogue is required specifically on the issues mentioned especially in the Joint Declaration itself (JD 43) as requiring further clarification, in order to reach full church communion, a unity in diversity, in which remaining differences would be ‘reconciled’ and no longer have a divisive force.”

It is quite revealing that the stated conclusion here is one of the primary goals as defined in the Church of Rome’s conditions for dialogue.   

The Dart Through the Liver: Rome's Own First Basis

For the Catholic Church the first basis on which ecumenical dialogue works is not Sola Scriptura[39], “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35); rather it is a “community of spiritual goods.”  This basis is exactly the same as the premise on which the Catholic Church builds her doctrine and which is spelled out in her latest official Catechism,

Para. 80  “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together and communicate one with the other.  For both of them, flowing out from the same divine wellspring, come together in some fashion to form one thing and move towards the same goal.” 

Thus, the first basis for all the dialogue with the Lutheran World Federation was the Catholic Church’s own measure of “truth.”  The rules following on this first basis were also her own rules of engagement. Some of the rules are these:  

“Each partner should seek to expound the doctrine of his own community in a constructive manner, putting aside the tendency to define by opposition.... [Interestingly, the Bible teaches much by means of contrast.]  The partners will work together towards a constructive synthesis, in such a way that every legitimate contribution is made use of, in a joint research aimed at the complete assimilation of the revealed datum.”[40]   

The words “revealed datum” are carefully chosen.  For a Bible believer, the term would mean just the Written Word; for the Catholic Church, however, the term “revealed datum” consistently refers to Scripture plus Tradition as her first basis.  Proceeding from this impure base, the “constructive synthesis” rules are simply the old line of evolution, “truth” by synthesis, or relative “truth.” Excluded from start to finish is the principle of Sola Scriptura.  To the Catholic Church who by so exquisite an application of her rules of engagement has “thrust through” the Lutherans, the words of the Lord speak directly, “[You are] making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered.”[41] 

According to Vatican Council II Document No. 42, the final goal of the dialogue between the Lutherans and the Roman Catholic Church is that the Lutherans be brought “into that unity of the one and only Church...This unity, we believe, dwells in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose.”  For the Catholic Church, the final conclusion has not yet been attained until her stated objective is secured.  Until then, “continued dialogue is required…in order to reach full church communion.”  And to this, the Lutherans apparently have agreed fully--snared by thirty years of hearing her “much fair speech...till a dart strike through his liver,” as indeed it has.  The Catholic Church has been clear in laying out her agenda toward all Christians who are not part of her organization.  She has applied her method skillfully, relentlessly since Vatican Council II.  Ought one to be surprised by the conclusions to which she and the Lutheran World Federation have come? 

For those who are the Lord’s own within the Lutheran Churches, the warning of the Lord is clearly given, 

“Hearken unto me now therefore, O ye children, and attend to the words of my mouth. Let not thine heart decline to her ways, go not astray in her paths. For she hath cast down many wounded: yea, many strong men have been slain by her. Her house is the way to hell, going down to the chambers of death.”[42] 

The Joint Declaration as ratified in the Official Common Statement is indeed outwardly stunning, but the message is dead men’s bones in that it attempts to cleverly establish man’s own righteousness.  The words of the Lord are indeed appropriate, “I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.”[43]  ¨

[1] http://www.apologeticsresctr.org/veritas_may_jun_04.htm  12/11/04

[2] “The Roman Pontiff … enjoys this infallibility…For this reason his definitions are rightly said to be irreformable by their very nature...” From Vatican Council II Documents, Lumen Gentium p. 380 Austin Flannery, Ed., 1981 ed. (Northport, NY:  Costello Publ. Co., 1975)

[3] Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. by Roy J Deferrari from Enchiridion Symbolorum, 30th ed. (St. Louis, MO: B. Herder Book Co., 1957), #851.  Bolding in any quotation indicates emphasis added in this work.

[4]  John 6:29; Romans 2:28, 29; Ephesians 2:8, 9; Colossians 2:11; Romans 3:21-26

[5]  Galatians 1:9

[6]  Isaiah 5:16

[7] Annex to the official common statement part 1 page 43

[8]  Catechism of the Catholic Church (Ligouri, MO:  Ligouri Publications, 1994) Para. 891

[9] Denzinger, #819

[10]  Ibid., #821.

[11]  Romans 9:31-10:3

[12]  Ephesians 1:6

[13] II Corinthians11:3

[14]  Genesis 27:8

[15]  Genesis 27:15

[16]  Genesis 27:22

[17]The Apocryphal books are also quoted.  These are whole books added to Scripture and also include additions to existing Old Testament books of the Scripture.  This was done the Roman Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in 1546.  The Catholic Church itself refers to these books as the “deuterocanonical books”, the term meaning second canon.

[18] Denzinger, #799

[19] Isaiah 45:24

[20] Romans 10:3

[21] Romans 1: 17

[22] Romans 3:21

[23] "Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”

[24] Hebrews 11:1

[25] Ephesians 1:3

[26] Ephesians 1:6 “To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.”

[27] Romans 4:23-25 “Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.”

[28] 2 Corinthians 5:19

[29] Romans 4:8

[30] Matthew 23:13

[31] Summa Theologica, Tr. by Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Rev. by Daniel J. Sullivan, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. (USA: Wm. Benton, Publisher, 1952) Vol. II, p. 405

[32] Ibid., p. 349

[33] Psalm 32:2, 71:15-16, 130:3; Isaiah 45:24-25, 54:17, 61:10; Jeremiah 23:6, 33:16, 51:10; Daniel 9:24; Luke 18:14; Romans 1:17, 3:21-22, 4:6, 11, 5:18-19; I Corinthians 1:30; II Corinthians 5:21; Ephesians 1:6; Colossians 2:10, 3:3; II Peter 1:1, and elsewhere.

[34] Colossians 2:10

[35] “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.”  Galatians 5:4

[36] Romans 8:33

[37] 1 Peter 2:7

[38] Romans 1:18

[39] The principle of “sola Scriptura” is consistent with the very way in which the word of truth that comes from God, is to be interpreted, as Psalm 36:9 explains, “For with thee is the fountain of life; in thy light we see light.”  God's truth is seen in the light of God’s truth.  This is exactly the same as the Apostle Paul says, “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (I Corinthians 2:13).  It is precisely in the light which God’s truth sheds, that His truth is seen.

[40] Vat. Council II Doc., No. 42, p. 548

[41] Mark 7:13.

[42] Proverbs 7:24-27

[43] Matthew 5:20

Vatican Prepares to Control Through Civil Law

Dear Friend,

In mid the nineteenth century, Lord Acton one of the greatest Roman Catholic historians of described the Papacy as “the fiend skulking behind the Crucifix.”[1]  Acton, famous for his saying, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” clearly pinpointed Papal Rome as the academic and legal cause of the more than six hundred years of the Inquisition and other atrocities such as the St. Bartholomew’s Massacre, which began in Paris August 24 1572, and spread throughout France.  Quiet, calculated, and premeditated legal agreements between Papal Rome made these horrors of history possible.  In these dreadful centuries the Roman Catholic Church proclaimed that salvation was only by means of her sacramental system, and therefore of necessity, she needed a legally engineered force to silence the true Gospel.  Her apostasy from the Gospel has not changed in the 198 years since the Inquisition as the Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly show.  

The article below is intended to stimulate an interest in history so as not to repeat its misery and to inform believers of the calm deliberate and designed civil agreements taking place between the Vatican and most nations in our own day.

Yours in the Lord’s grace and truth,

Richard Bennett

 Vatican Control through Civil Law

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

By Richard Bennett

The Earth Charter and the United Religions Initiative are two instrumental pieces in the international networking of movements across the world that is leading to a one-world religion.  Because of the Vatican’s worldwide authority through civil law and the number of Roman Catholic priests, nuns, and influential persons engaged in these movements (official sources remaining aloof), Bible believers need an informed perspective on where events are leading. 

The Earth Charter

After eight years of planning, which has involved more than 25 global leaders and 100,000 people in environment, business, politics, religion, and education in 51 countries, the Earth Charter was formalized on March 15, 2000.[2]  It is a comprehensive document of global ethics and a political blueprint for world government.  The Earth Charter process was initiated by a former Prime Minister of The Netherlands and was carried out under the direction of Mikhail Gorbachev and Maurice Strong, the Chairman of the Earth Council.  The principles of the Earth Charter include built in global governance as defined by the United Nations (UN) Commission on Global Governance (1995) and other UN commissions.  Something of the desire for legal power is seen in one of its statements, “In order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Earth Charter principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development.”[3]

United Religions Initiative. (Uri)

The philosophy behind the Earth Charter is fully incorporated into the United Religions Initiative (URI).[4]  URI is designed to evolve into a United Nations for Religions, with the United Religions Charter being signed on June 26, 2000, three months after the Earth Charter.  URI to date has held three summit conferences, with the June 2000 conference marking the birth of a truly global organization that stands as a mother ready to embrace into her bosom all the religions of the world.  While the whole emphasis is “spiritual” it is quite interesting that the desire for the same legal power club is as evident in the documents of URI as it is in the Earth Charter.  For example, according to the Preamble to the Charter, URI plans a Worldwide Movement “…to support freedom of religion and spiritual expression, and the rights of all individuals and peoples as set forth in international law.” 

Power Through Civil Law

Control of civil law and law among European nations is what the Catholic Church thrived on through the Dark and the Middle Ages.  This control was the primary underpinning of her power during the six hundred years of the Inquisition and in the growth of her religious power system generally throughout the centuries.  Her ability to grow in strength and numbers is always in proportion to her legal agreements with any nation.  In the nations where she has legal concordats with the civil governments, she succeeds both in holding down the Gospel and in simultaneously furthering her position as keeper of the ubiquitous, highly sensuous, and most effective sacramental system known to modern man.  The latent control mechanisms in international law that can be seen in The Earth Charter and in URI are of precisely the kind that enables Catholicism to thrive.  In time past it was through legal agreements that Rome brought kings and princes to heel.  Without the Gospel, Catholics through their fear of death were all their lifetime subject to her bondage, for Roman Catholic Church teaching both then and now is that there is no salvation outside the Church.  Woe to the ruler who resisted the papal will!  Subjects could be, were, and can still be released from their oaths of allegiance; whole states could be, and were placed under interdict.  Since early in the 20, century under Pius XII, however, the legal strategy has become even more autocratic.

Power Refined in Concordats

A “concordat” is an international contract, which legally binds the nation involved, and the Vatican.  It guarantees the Roman Catholic Church and Catholics the right of freedom of religion and worship.  A concordat also secures rights such as that of defining doctrine, establishing Roman Catholic education, negotiating laws regarding property, appointing bishops, and recognizing Roman Catholic law regarding marriage and annulment.  Such legal issues are agreed on in civil law between the “Holy See” (as she in her position as a sovereign state is legally called) and the other nation. 

Prior to 1989, the Holy See signed international agreements primarily with European and Latin American countries.  Vatican control can be seen very clearly in those nations where concordats have long been established as, for example, in Germany under the extant concordat worked out between under Pius XII and Hitler.  The Vatican’s desire to maintain civil relations with other nations is now greater than ever.  From 1950 to 1999, 128 concordats were signed between Rome and various states.  In the course of nine years, 43 concordats were signed between the Holy See and other nations.  Even nations of the Middle East, Asia, and Africa are entering juridical agreements with Rome.  Moreover, the Church of Rome has much influence in national and international laws, particularly in the nations in which she has papal nuncios as ambassadors.  At present she maintains diplomatic relations with 172 countries at embassy level.  According to the Catholic Almanac, papal representatives “receive from the Roman Pontiff the charge of representing him in a fixed way in the various nations or regions of the world.”  “An apostolic nuncio has the diplomatic rank of ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary.  Traditionally, because the diplomatic service of the Holy See has the longest uninterrupted history in the world, a nuncio has precedence among diplomats in the country to which he is accredited and serves as dean of the diplomatic corps on state occasions.”[5]         

The Vatican, desiring to maintain official diplomatic intercourse with all nations, woos Libya, all the while maintaining relations with Israel.  She has had uninterrupted relations with Cuba while having great difficulties with China, Korea, and Vietnam.  Some Islamic countries have failed as yet to sign agreements with the Holy See.  This becomes more difficult in 2006, even though Pope Benedict took steps on October 9th toward mending relations with Muslims, saying he understood their indignation over his controversial comments and assuring them of his respect for their “great religion.”

Through her many Roman Catholic representatives in government, her own direct influence as a civil power, and in particular through her concordats, Papal Rome is now able to influence substantially civil rulers and civil policy in many nations.[6]  Should she gain control of the international criminal court, she would be again fulfilling the Scripture, “And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.”[7]

Effective Legal Structures

To establish legal structures effective to her purposes is the goal of Rome.  Understanding this, the remarks of Archbishop Martino, Rome’s a permanent observer to the United Nations, bear all the more weight, “As [the late] Pope John Paul stated, ‘Within the international community the Holy See supports every effort to establish effective juridical structures.’”[8]  It can be argued that the Roman system has no official position in URI and other like organizations.  This is true, but the Church of Rome has always worked in such a way so as technically to keep her hands clean while having her laws and mindset implemented by others, particularly civil power.  This is how she operated in the Dark and Middle Ages, particularly during the Inquisition when the civil powers in the name of civil law prosecuted millions under her murderous church law.  The structure of the Roman system makes her capable not only of gaining a predominant position but also capable of maintaining the upper hand so that in fact “Holy Mother” takes all into herself.  For example, “Holy Mother Church” is only one of 154 sovereign states participating in the International Criminal Court; yet she is much more.  Her citizenry, whose allegiance is first to the Roman Catholic Church, dwells within each of these nations.  Many of her citizens have access to positions in the ruling structure of that nation where, as Roman Catholics, they are enjoined by the Roman Catholic Church to use their influence and position to bring that nation into line with papal desires on any issue.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) is very clear on the issue,

 “The initiative of lay Christians is necessary especially when the matter involves discovering or inventing the means for permeating social, political, and economic realities with the demands of Christian [i.e., Roman Catholic] doctrine and life.  This initiative is a normal element of the life of the Church: Lay believers are in the front line of Church life; for them the Church is the animating principle of human society.  Therefore, they in particular ought to have an ever clearer consciousness not only of belonging to the Church, but of being the Church, that is to say, the community of the faithful on earth under the leadership of the Pope.”[9]

Due to the totalitarian nature of the Roman Catholic Church, however, none of the non-Catholic citizens of other nations have positions of power within her ruling structure.  Thus, although the Holy See has formal diplomatic ties with the various states, Catholic power can be brought to bear covertly against that nation which refuses to defer to her views, particularly those regarding matters of faith and morals.  So it is that such power over individuals, held in place by concordats that legally guarantee the teaching, for example, of Canons 752 and 333 of the Vatican Code of Canon Law and paragraph 882 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church eventually can hinder the freedom of religion and worship of those the Holy See deems to be false churches.[10] 

“Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely”

The Emperor Justinian in the sixth century was the main architect who established the foundation for Rome’s ability to impose external unity.[11]  Moreover, “During the ninth century, there was a concerted effort to renew society and centralize Western civilization.  It is usually called the Carolingian Reform after its initiator, Charlemagne, who was crowned Roman Emperor by the Pope on the feast day of Christmas in the year 800.  Its intention was to stabilize the structures of Christendom, and one of its chief tools was reliance on church law.”[12]  The famous Hildebrand Pope Gregory VII nailed down the legal power base of papal canon law so that it became incorporated into Western civilization in the legal system of nations in the eleventh century.  All this made possible the Inquisition from 1203 A.D. (in person of Pope Innocent III) until its dissolution in Spain and Portugal in 1808.  The Vatican’s persecution of believers they deemed heretics, was done by legal civil means.  It involved incarceration, confiscation of property, torture, internment without trial, and death.  Pope John Paul II by means of the decree on infallibility of Vatican Council I, the 1917 adoption of the Code of Canon Law, and the revision of the Code under his authority in 1983, was able to work no less autocratically than Pope Pius XII.[13]  Although kept in bounds presently by other forces, papal power now has become so consolidated that it is able to surpass what Hildebrand Pope Gregory VII did in his day.  Then the known world was much smaller and the only international system was Rome herself and the Holy Roman Empire.  Now the stage is set for a one-world government.  Perplexingly, many Christians simply want to escape.  While some Christians are well informed and aware of the seriousness of the present move to a world religion, nonetheless, most of what is published falls in within the norms of political correctness in which Roman Catholicism is not mentioned.  Many present day Evangelicals seem totally ignorant of the laws still standing in the Roman Catholic dogma.  For example the statement, “The Church is to be separated from the state, and the state from the Church.” was condemned as an error by “His holiness, our Lord Pope Pius XI” and still is.[14]  The extent to which Rome claims a right to judge and impose chastening has not changed since the days of the Inquisition.  In present day canon law she states, Canon 1405 (Sect.1)  “It is the right of the Roman Pontiff himself alone to judge in cases mentioned in Can. 1401: 1. those who hold the highest civil office in a state....”  Not for nothing, then, is the interest with which the Church of Rome involves herself in promoting the International Criminal Court and like measures.

Her History of Persecution of True Believers

The Roman Church has employed kings and princes in her work of persecution.  Her courts first tried and condemned the believers, after which they were delivered over to the civil authority to be executed.  In the Papacy’s crusades against Bible believing cities, towns and territories, Rome enlisted the civil power of kings and potentates to carry out her cruel deeds.  In those many years, the Papal system was “drunken with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs.”

The Crusades against the Albigenses, the Vaudois, and the Waldenses were replete with outrageous slaughters and barbarities.  The individual hounding down of true believers that resulted in atrocious torture and death is the documented history of the state religion of the Papacy.  For centuries through her Office of the Inquisition, she organized wars against Bible believing cities and territories.  In the middle of the thirteenth century, Pope Innocent IV devised in detail for the many inquisitors how torture was to be perpetrated.  “Innocent IV gave comprehensive instructions regarding how torture was to be applied in his bull At Extirpanda (1252).  This was revised and reissued by subsequent Popes.  Torture is prescribed, but it was to stop short of pulling off limbs or causing death...Ruinous punishments are enacted on all who harbor or give advice or favor to a heretic.  How completely the abominable system was the direct achievement of the Papacy is show by the clause that no change could be made without the special authority of the Apostolic See.”[15] 

“From the birth of Popery in 600, to the present time, it is estimated by careful and credible historians, that more than fifty millions of the human family,[16] have been slaughtered for the crime of heresy by popish persecutors, an average of more than forty thousand religious murders for every year of the existence of Popery.”[17]  Roman Catholic author, Peter de Rosa, wrote of the atrocities of the Roman Catholic torture machine, 

“The record of the Inquisition would be embarrassing for any organization; for the Catholic Church, it is devastating.  Today, it prides itself, and with much justification, on being the defender of natural law and the rights of man.  The papacy in particular likes to see itself as the champion of morality.  What history shows is that, for more than six centuries without a break, the papacy was the sworn enemy of elementary justice.  Of eighty popes in a line from the thirteenth century on, not one of them disapproved of the theology and apparatus of Inquisition.  On the contrary, one after another added his own cruel touches to the workings of this deadly machine.”[18] 

The Papacy has shockingly fulfilled the image from Revelation of the woman blood-drenched from six centuries of her murderous rampage.  In the Bible, the Holy Spirit foretold of her lust for power and blood.  History has recorded some of the gruesome details.

The State of Affairs as It is at the Present Day

Papal Rome has stood in direct opposition to the Gospel of Christ and the judgment of God will come upon her. There never was a clearer duty than that of withdrawing from Papal Rome and her ecumenical followers.  Her iniquity is corrupting and intoxicating the nations with a counterfeit head of the Church, a sham gospel, and will make her utter ruin the just and righteous act of God!  The voice of the Lord comes back in thunder from the course of ages and reverberates throughout the world. “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.”[19]  The Woman sitting upon the scarlet-colored beast will continue and wax strong and draw to her bosom multitudes, and nations and power and glory of the world, as the Lord said she would.  However, the final condemnation of her and those within her is already written, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.”[20]  God’s reserved wrath, His punishing justice, and His enmity to sin, will be revealed to the entire world.  The destruction of Papal Rome will proceed from the glory of His power.  “The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation;”[21]

In the meantime, the victory of the Gospel Word is seen for those who wait on Him.  His power has always been greatest in the day of utmost need.  Our prayerful duty is to fear the All-Holy God, to obey His great commission, and to trust His victory now and hereafter, and to earnestly pray and desire that we are more and more conformed to be like unto Him the Lord!  “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.”[22]  Holiness consists in the believer’s conformity to the image of Christ.

Bible believers of old recognized the Apostate Church from the pages of Scripture and were prepared to both expose her and to face her, in the strength and wisdom of the Lord.  Among others there were, Dante, John Wycliff, John Huss, and Savonarola.  During the Reformation, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, John Bradford, and John Foxe.  In the 17, and 18, centuries such as John Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible, and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist Confessions of Faith.  Sir Isaac Newton, Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, John Wesley.  In more recent times there were such as Charles Spurgeon, Bishop J. C. Ryle and Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones.  All these men and many more knew the precision of Scriptures regarding both the true bride of Christ and the Apostate woman “drunken with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs.”  The Written Word has been fulfilled in history, in both light and darkness.  Like those believers of old we can enter into battle, because we have the secure proof that the Lord God is with us, and we will have the final victory.  The words of the Apostle we repeat, “…having done all, to stand.  Stand therefore.”[23]  The certainty of the final triumph should animate us in our efforts, and encourage us in our struggles.  “For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.”[24]  ♦

Richard Bennett of “Berean Beacon” Website: http://www.bereanbeacon.org

Permission is given by the author to copy this article if it is done in its entirety without any changes.

[1] Acton, Correspondence, 55; as quoted in Himmelfarb, Lord Acton, p. 151

[2] The Earth Charter can be read on the Internet at http://www.earthcharter.org/draft/charter.htm

[3] Bolding in any quotation indicates emphasis added in this report.

[4] URI website is:  http://www.uri.org/ 

[5] Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Almanac, 2001, p. 277.

[6] See Ecclesiastical Megalomania: The Economic and Political Thought of the Roman Catholic Church by John W. Robbins (The Trinity Foundation, 1999) for in depth study.  http://www.trinityfoundation.org

[7] Revelation 17:18.

[8] Catholic International August, 1998, Vol. 9, No. 8, p. 350.

[9] Catechism of the Catholic Church Para 899

[10] Canon 752“Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.”  Can. 333, Sec. 3“No appeal or recourse is permitted against a sentence or decree of the Roman Pontiff.” Code of Canon Law, Canon Law Society of America, 1988And Catechism of the Catholic Church  Para 882“…the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”

[11] LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (Hagerstown, MD 21740: Review and Herald, 1950) Vol. I, pp. 505, 506.

[12]The Code of Canon Law: A Text and Commentary, James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green, Donald E. Heintschel, eds. (Mahwah, NJ:  Paulist Press, 1985) p. 2.

[13]  John Cornwell, Hitler’s Pope:  The Secret History of Pius XII (NY 10014:  Viking, 1999) pp. 348, 361, 371.

[14] The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. By Roy J. Deferrari from the Thirtieth Edition of Henry Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum, revised by Karl Rahner, S. J., published in 1954 by Herder & Co, Frieburg (St. Louis 2, MO:  B. Herder Book Co., 1957) # 1755 title “His Holiness, our Lord Pope Pius XI”, p. 435.

[15] William Shaw Kerr, A Handbook on the Papacy (Edinburgh:  Marshall Morgan & Scott, 1950) pp. 232-233.

[16] “A million of poor Waldenses perished in France; nine hundred thousand orthodox Christians were slain in less than thirty years after the institution of the order of the Jesuits.  The Duke of Alva boasted of having put to death in the Netherlands, thirty-six thousand by the hand of the common executioner during the space of a few years.  The Inquisition destroyed, by various tortures, one hundred fifty thousand within thirty years.  These are a few specimens, and but a few, of those which history has recorded; but the total amount will never be known till the earth shall disclose her blood, and no more cover her slain” Scott’s Church History in John Dowling, The History of Romanism, 1881, Classic Reprints No. 57 (Pensacola, FL:  Vance Publications, 2002) Book VIII, Ch. 1, p. 542.  Emphasis in the original.

[17] Dowling, p. 541.  Emphasis in the original.

[18] Peter DeRosa, Vicars of Christ:  The Dark Side of the Papacy (New York, NY: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1988) p. 175.

[19] Revelation 18:4

[20] Revelation 14:10

[21] Revelation 14:10

39 Romans 8:29

[23] Ephesians 6:13,14

[24] Romans 8:16-17

Rome Exalts Her Throne: A Kiss of Death for the Ecumenists

On September 5th 2000, the RC document “Dominus Iusus”[1] (DI) was issued by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.[2]  Carrying the full authority of an official Vatican decree, it declares the Roman Catholic Church to be the only “instrument for the salvation of all humanity.”[3]  DI has been “ratified and confirmed” by “The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II.”[4]

Timothy George, who launched the lie of ECT II on the December 8, 1997 in Christianity Today now has written his approval of the Vatican’s Document.  Mr. George, by his validation of Rome continues to betray the Lord and His Church.  He begins by saying that he welcomes DI and then declares, “In an unusual way it is an encouragement to the kind of ecumenism we ought to be engaged in.”  Curious and unusual, indeed, since DI itself proclaims, “…the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense.”[5]  These two standards disqualify Timothy George’s own Southern Baptist Church and all Churches except the children of that Rome.  In consequence of this Mr. George is in a Church that is not a Church “in the proper sense” It is bizarre that he should accept this document, let alone applaud it!

“Valid Episcopate”

For a Church to be considered proper in the eyes of Rome, the first litmus test that DI demands is the “valid Episcopate,” (i.e. the priestly power office of the Bishop).  That power is possessed neither by Mr. George nor his Church.  The power of the Bishop, Rome claims, comes through the physical laying on of hands and the right words of incantation.  That is but a tradition and is clearly expressed in Rome’s official words of Vatican II:

“In fact, from tradition, which is expressed especially in the liturgical rites and in the customs of both the Eastern and Western Church, it is abundantly clear that by the imposition of hands and through the words of the consecration, the grace of the Holy Spirit is given, and a sacred character is impressed in such wise that bishops, in a resplendent and visible manner, take the place of Christ himself, teacher, shepherd and priest, and act as his representatives (in eius persona).”[6]

In contrast the Scripture teaches that no elder takes Christ’s place as priest. All believers have immediate access to God in Christ Jesus; all share in the royal priesthood of praise. (1 Peter 2:9).   Rome’s sixth sacrament, “Holy Orders,” which claims to pass on Christ’s sacrificial priesthood by laying on of hands, is a tradition of men that contradicts Scriptural truth.  In the Bible Christ’s unending priesthood cannot be transferred to any other person, as stated in Hebrews 7:24 “But this man [Jesus Christ], because He continueth ever, hath an unchangeable[7]priesthood.” Rome does not have Christ’s New Testament sacrificial priesthood, [8] let alone its higher grade of Episcopacy.   The whole office of Rome’s Episcopate is that of sacrificial bishop and priest.  Rome needs its Episcopacy to maintain her seven physical sacraments. The whole life of the Church of Rome, revolves around her Bishops and Priests and the sacraments that they perform. Thus the Church of Rome officially states:

“The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation . 'Sacramental grace' is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament. ” [9]  

Looking to physical signs to give “Sacramental grace” and calling that “the grace of the Holy Spirit” is literally a blasphemy against the All Holy God.  It not only takes from Character of God whose person alone gives grace, but it presupposes that His power can be controlled in the Rome’s seven sacraments. Rome’s sacramental system and the Episcopacy from which it flows, is a soul-damning tradition of men.  Far from being a test of a true Church it is the hallmark of those who sit in Satan’s seat exalting themselves as the dispensers of “light.”

Eucharistic Mystery

The second litmus test, for Mr. George and all studying this “unusual” document, is what DI calls “the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery.”  This is clearly defined in the Catholic Catechism:

“The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: ‘The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.’ ‘This divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner.’” [10]

This teaching is sacrilegious.  That Christ needs (or ought) to offer Himself more than once is blasphemous.  Such a concept attempts to reduce Christ’s sacrifice to imperfection. The reason being that it assumes that His one offering, made once, was not good enough to make complete atonement.  What is absolutely perfect and consummated cannot be repeated since repetition is a proof of imperfection.  To this end the Holy Spirit teaches precisely, "Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.” [11]  Before the all Holy God and His Written Word Rome does not have a valid Communion table nor the priestly power of the Episcopate.  The Pope’s two standards for defining the validity of Churches are both lying traditions.  In the words of Christ Jesus the Lord, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”[12]  If Mr. George wishes to stand hand-in-hand with this system seeking unity he had better begin praying to the Roman Catholic Saint Jude, the patron of hopeless cases!  

Clearly, then, Mr. George, J.I. Packer, Bill Bright, Os Guinness, Max Lucado, T.M. Moore, Bishop Williams Frey, Charles Colson, and other signers and endorsers of ECT I & II are now not in limbo but rather in no man’s land.  Did George and his fellow-ecumenists really believe that the Pope will simply fade into the shadows and allow “evangelicals” to exercise themselves independently of his will?  Do they think the rhetoric of the Vatican and the witness of history to be empty forerunners; are they as hoodwinked as that generation which had Mein Kampf in their hands and Hitler in their midst, but saw no connection?

Roman Catholic Supremacy

Clearly, then, Mr. George, J.I. Packer, Bill Bright, Os Guinness, Max Lucado, T.M. Moore, Bishop Williams Frey, Charles Colson, and other signers and endorsers of ECT I & II are now not in limbo but rather in no man’s land.  Did George and his fellow-ecumenists really believe that the Pope will simply fade into the shadows and allow “evangelicals” to exercise themselves independently of his will?  Do they think the rhetoric of the Vatican and the witness of history to be empty forerunners; are they as hoodwinked as that generation which had Mein Kampf in their hands and Hitler in their midst, but saw no connection? Rome in 2000 spoke, as did the infamous Boniface VIII in 1302,

“Furthermore we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they, by necessity for salvation, are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”[13]

The dominant presupposition of Rome is that the Lord set up a totalitarian hierarchy of Pope, cardinals, patriarchs, major archbishops, archbishops, metropolitans, coadjutor archbishops, diocesan bishops, coadjutor bishops, etc.  This is the spirit of Diotrephes, “who loves to have the preeminence,” gone mad.  The Biblical organizational structure of the bride of Christ is utterly different. In the true body of Christ, those ordained as elders and deacons are still only brothers within the same body and the one Master is Jesus Christ the Lord.  “For one is your master even Christ and ye are all brethren.”[14]

Part of the same hierarchical presupposition is expressed in DI, Section 16, “…the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him…..”  Presumed in this declaration is the idea that Peter went to Rome, was her first bishop, and subsequently, the bishops of Rome have by “apostolic succession” retained his prerogatives and more.  The assumption is groundless.  In Biblical history there is no mention of Peter ever visiting Rome.  The RC position is completely inconsistent with the recorded commission that the Apostle Peter was to take the Gospel to the Jews [15], as was the Apostle Paul to the Gentiles [16], including those in Rome.

Nowhere in Scripture is there any suggestion of the existence of an “apostolic succession.”  In the New Testament, the Apostles appointed elders[17] and deacons, not a line of apostles.  There are no Biblical texts for these power-endowing statements of DI.  Rather, the papacy declares by fiat that it is so.  The papacy now is nothing less than the head of the Apostate Church depicted in Scripture, ravenous for power, the Woman who is seated upon the beast reigning “over” peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.[18]  Such arrogance, as the presumed “Primacy, which…the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church,” is mind-boggling.  

Submission of Intellect and Will

In Section 4, in one sentence of 170 words, DI states that the root of the problem to unity and salvation is “the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church.”  This means that the bottom line of DI is the stipulated demand to submit one’s entire mind to an earthly fallible authority that claims to be infallible.  The official word of Rome states,

“A religious respect of intellect and will, even if not the assent of faith, is to be paid to the teaching which the Supreme Pontiff….enuntiate[s] on faith or morals….”[19]

Moreover, she pronounces that the consequence for not obeying is punishment with a “just penalty.”[20]  The Lord himself looked to the authority of the Scriptures alone, as did His Apostles after Him.  The Biblical message breathed out by God is revelation in written form (II Tim. 3:15-16).  The Biblical claim is that what God has inspired was His written word (II Pet. 1:20-21).  When the Lord Jesus Christ said, “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), He was speaking of God’s authoritative written Word.  The events, actions, commandments, and truths from God are given in propositional, i.e. logical, written sentences.  God’s declaration in Scripture is that it, and it alone, is the final authority in all matters of faith and morals.  Thus there is only one written source from God; there is only one basis of truth for the Lord’s people.  Against this precept of not believing “outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church” is the command of the Scripture not to think above what is written:  “…that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.” (I Cor. 4:6).  “God….in these last days hath spoken unto us through His Son”, and not through the Pope’s ex cathedra pronouncements nor through the Magisterium of the Church of Rome!

Engineering of Concepts

The key catchword of DI is the word “salvific.”  It is repeated in obtuse yet clever sentences 39 times!  Many of the statements concerning the role of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in salvation are Biblically correct.  However these truthful concepts are used as a camouflage behind which Rome manufactures her claim that Christ’s “salvific” work is in the RC Church.  Thus Section 16 of DI asserts, 

“Therefore, the fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery belongs also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord.”  And, “The Lord Jesus, the only Saviour, did not only establish a simple community of disciples, but constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: he himself is in the Church…”  

This claim that Christ’s salvation belongs to and is in the RC Church is a lie. RC “salvation” is claimed inner righteousness bestowed through her Baptism.  Thus Rome teaches:

“Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith.  It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy.”[21]

Such a concept of a supposed righteousness within the soul by means of a physical sacrament is a lie of Satan.  The words of the risen Christ in giving the gospel are crystal clear. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be damned “ (Mark 16: 16) Faith is the key of saving grace, and unbelief the chief damning sin. Faith is absolutely necessary to life; baptism is an ordinance that follows it.  The alleged “fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery” as belonging to the Church of Rome is a soul-damning lie.

The Lie as Lived Out

As Catholics live it out, the “salvific mystery…in the church” is a long journey through the Sacrifice of the Mass, sacraments, good works, merit, worship of Mary and the saints, etc.  One is required to partake of the “salvific mystery” in order to be good enough to die in “sanctifying grace” and then to be saved, or at least, for the majority, to land for a time in purgatory.  One is left to wonder how “full” is that measure of grace found within the Catholic Church; how ‘perfect’ is her sacrifice of the Mass; how hopeful are “the last rites” if their accomplishments are such as to send souls to a pseudo-hell called purgatory.  The same Section 16 states, 

“This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.” 

It is the constant ploy of the RC Church to focus a person’s faith for salvation to the RCC herself.  In her official words she states: 

“There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive. ‘There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest.”[22]

In Scripture, salvation is mediated through Jesus Christ alone, the only mediator between God and man (John 14:6; Acts 4:12, 1 Tim. 2:5).  The instrument of salvation is not a Church but rather faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”[23]  “However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.”[24]  The boundaries of salvation are all of God, and not that of any Church, to demonstrate in the words of the Apostle that He is “just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”[25] 

The precincts of salvation are outlined in Romans 3: 24, “being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,” showing that God’s grace is the efficient cause, and the payment is “through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”  To attempt to bring the RC Church into the nature of the salvific work of the Godhead, indeed to make it the fount of that work is gross blasphemy.  In Scripture, salvation is in Christ Jesus alone, “to the praise of the glory of his grace.”[26]

Rome’s Sacraments Displace the Gospel

In Section 21, she now has the same effrontery, as during the Inquisition and the Council of Trent, to state that there is a “divine origin” and salvific power to her sacraments.  Thus DI states, “One cannot attribute to ‘various religious traditions’ a divine origin or an ex opere operato salvific efficacy, which is proper to the Christian sacraments.”  This is in accord with what she claims in her “infallible” council of Trent [27]:

“If anyone shall say that by the said sacraments of the New Law, grace is not conferred from the work which has been worked [ex opere operato] but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace: let him be anathema.”[28]  

The central point of the God of the gospel is that God saves the ungodly by faith alone. In the words of the apostle Paul, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” To officially reject “faith alone in the divine promise” and uphold “the work which has been worked” of Rome’s physical sacraments is formal apostasy, damning the adherents to eternal Hell.  The warning of Scripture still stands, “As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” (Gal. 1: 9) 

Outside Rome, No Church!

In the ecumenical context in which this document has been published, its arrogance is summarized in what we first saw in Section 17, 

“On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery, are not Churches in the proper sense.…”  

Indeed this is ominous; as the Nazis declared non-Aryans to be non-humans, so now Rome declares other churches “not Churches in the proper sense.”  In the words of the Apostle Peter, indeed this sounds as the voice of “a roaring lion.”  The statement is directed against all post-Reformation churches, including the Lutherans and Anglicans, including the Churches of Timothy George, J.I. Packer, Bill Bright, Charles Colson, and other false messengers of ECT I and II.  Had those being drawn into ecumenism and dialogue done any serious study of her major documents and history, they would have found that the RC Church has had this ironclad mindset all along.  For her, the only true Church sits on the Seven Hills of Rome; the only successful dialogue is to come back into her arms.  Thus Vatican Council II’s post conciliar Document No. 42 on ecumenism had already stated:

“…dialogue is not an end in itself …it is not just an academic discussion.” Rather, “ecumenical dialogue...serves to transform modes of thought and behavior and the daily life of those [non-Catholic] communities.  In this way, it aims at preparing the way for their unity of faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible.”[29]  

Transform them it must, for there is no “equality” in the “doctrinal content” that other Churches and their ecumenical cohorts have bring to the table.  The Papal Primacy, in a forceful inquisitorial manner, is saying: come back to “Holy Mother,” otherwise we will treat you as a non-church.  Confident ecumenizers ought to rethink their position.  Their base in groups defined by Rome as “Churches not in the proper sense” leaves them without power because they have already compromised the gospel and the authority of Scripture alone.  Will Charles Colson, and J.I. Packer, both known for continued defense of their ecumenical lies, follow Mr. George?  Will these men like Mr. George embrace the guillotine that is to behead them?  Logically the next step after that would be to apply for membership in her whose official colors are scarlet and purple.

Ecumenists Come to the Table Empty Handed

The table is set for a most interesting response to DI. One leading ecumenist has bowed the knee and we await the response of the others.  In face of the continued discussion of the DI document and the stand that has been made in Canada by a group of reformed pastors, silence is not good enough.  To continue to ecumenize with Rome footless on her authoritarian ground is illogical and obtuse. The self exalted Rome in DI defines even the  “equality” she offers to her suitors. Sect. 22 of DI states, “Equality, which is a presupposition of inter-religious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the parties in the dialogue, not to doctrinal content.”  In other words she grants them “personal dignity” as human beings, but when it comes to “doctrinal content, ” the other Churches and Religions, the J.I. Packers and Chuck Colsons are non-entities until they enter her arms.

The Oiled Words Mr. George

The second paragraph of Mr. George’s acceptance of DI begins with the words, “Seventy-five years ago evangelical leader, J. Gresham Machen, observed that Bible-believing Protestants and faithful Roman Catholics shared more in common with one another than they did with others who denied the deity of Christ, the miracles of Jesus, the Holy Trinity, or the second coming of Christ. That is still true today, and we must continue to work for greater mutual understanding on the basis of a shared commitment to the core of orthodox Christian belief.”

Mr. Georges alleged common ground with Rome is sinking sand.  In Rome’s teaching Christ’s deity is severely tarnished when such deity is officially taught to be in her communion bread.  The Trinity is brought to naught if one accepts Rome’s All Holy Mother as proclaimed in her teaching,

“By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the ‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One.”[30]

True Christians have more with Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing Christmas carols than with Roman Catholic doctrine that smears the Holiness of the Godhead, the deity of Christ, and the very Gospel His finished work. “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”   We inquire of Mr. George and other ecumenists who applaud him where common ground can be found with the worship of “Mary” and her “Immaculate Conception’ and  “Assumption,” the veneration of statues, the bloodless sacrifice of the Mass, auricular confession to a priest, baptismal regeneration, Purgatory, Indulgences, Celibacy and other doctrines of devils that including an infallible Pope who demands submission of intellect and will.  Even John Armstrong who published such a ludicrous statement of George ought to be rebuked for lack of discernment in his publication having George as featured speaker at Reformation & Revival Ministries’ Reformation Oct 25-27 2001.

Then in his final paragraph Mr. George states, “I dare to say that there are countless Roman Catholics who know Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, just as there are, no doubt, (in my denomination) many Southern Baptists who have been duly dunked but are still spiritually dead.”

“Dare to say” is mere speculation. Ones eyes are distracted from the tangible evidence of heretical, blasphemous papal doctrine, and focused on conjecture.  The difference between Roman Catholicism and Biblical Truth is that of chalk and cheese. It is one thing to unwittingly baptize unconverted souls while it is indeed quite another thing to baptize countless infants declaring to the world,

“The [Roman Catholic] Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude...”[31]

Climax in Conclusion

Mr. George’s main thesis is “Evangelicals who care about the gospel should welcome the Vatican’s spurning of religious relativism.”  This is like a modern little red ridding hood remarks to the Wolf.  “What wonderful absolutism you have” and Rome replies “All the better to eat you my dear” How can one “Care about the gospel” and  “welcome the Vatican.” in the same breath?  

Decisive Moment of History

We have reached a real crossroads in the whole ecumenical compromise of our own times.  It is time for those who really love the Lord of glory and His written Word to make a strong campaign for His truth.  What George has done in upholding Rome’s self-glorification is a gauntlet laid down before those who call themselves Biblical Christians.  Where do you stand?  Do you stand with those running into the arms of her who sits on the Seven Hills, calling herself “Holy Mother,” while in Biblical terms, her doctrines are of the Whore of Babylon, or those who stand to expose her?  One is commanded by the Lord to contend for the faith; to simply ignore the present battle is to deny the Lord of glory.  His great commandment to give the Gospel is laid on those of us who call ourselves Biblical Christians.  To uphold His gospel of truth based on His written Word is what is laid before us.  We pray that we may do this, speaking the truth in love but without compromise.  In the same way that our precious Lord castigated the Pharisees, we who are Christians must oppose modern Rome and her daughters.  Those who claim to be in Christ Jesus the Lord must expose not simply Rome, but those who flirt with her even as sits as a queen disparaging them. 

The Lord, Himself, warned us of “other Christs” as did Peter of “false teachers” and Paul “wolves” within the flock.  It is not simply that these apostates existed in former days.  A Biblical Christian must have the courage of the Lord Jesus Christ.  The disciple is not to be less than his master.  The Lord exposed Pharisees establishing their own righteousness and making the written word of no effect, the disciples of our day is ought to oppose an apostate system that officially gainsays the glorious truths of our God.  

These things are written with deep respect and care because the salvation of many is involved.  The Lord faced the sincere and devout Pharisees with a very strong word.  They, like many present-day Catholics, were making tradition equal to the authority of the written Word and were not counting on God’s grace alone.  The Lord said to those Pharisees of His own day, “ if you believe not that I am He, you shall die in your sins.”  If anyone continues to hold to the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching authority, and her “salvific” righteousness, he, likewise, will die in his sins.  The Lord Christ Jesus died in place of the believer, the One for the many. His life and finished sacrifice alone are the ransom for the believer.  As He declared, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.” ¨

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article.

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/

[2] Formerly known as the Office of the Inquisition, then the Holy Office, it is still housed in the same building in Rome as it had been during those horrendous centuries of torture and death when it carried out the papal decrees.

[3] Dominus Iusus Para 22

[4] Scriptures speak of One Supreme Sovereign Head of the Church:  the All Holy, Unchangeable, All-Powerful, All Knowing, All Wise Lord Jesus Christ.

[5] Dominus Iusus Para 17

[6] Vatican II documents No. 28, Lumen Gentium, 21 November 1964, Vol. I, Sec. 21, pp. 373-374

[7] Aparabatos (Greek) meaning: not transferable, not passing on to others.  In the New Testament, no sacrificial priests are mentioned, only elders and pastors.  In Christ Jesus, all believers are part of the royal priesthood.

[8] See our article on the “The Priesthood” on our WebPage. 

[9] Catechism of the Catholic Church  (Liguori, MO:  Liguori Publications, 1994), Para. 1129  hereafter referred to as the Catechism

[10] Catechism Para. 1367

[11] Hebrews 7:27

[12] Matthew 15:8-9

[13] Denzinger, Henry, “Unam Sanctum”, Nov. 18, 1302, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. By Roy J. Deferrari, 30th Ed. of Enchiridion Symbolorum, rev. by Karl Rahner, S. J. (St Louis, MO:  B. Herder Book Co., 1957) #469

[14] Matthew 23:8

[15] Galatians 2:7-8

[16] Acts 13:46-48, 18:6; Rom:1:5, 11:13; Gal:1:16; I Tim 2:7; 2 Tim 1:11

[17] The terms overseer and elder/pastor are used interchangeably (Acts 20:17, 28; I Peter 5:1-4)

[18] Revelation 17:15

[19] Code of Canon Law, Eng.-Latin ed. (Wash., DC:  Canon Law Soc. of America, 1983) Can. 752  All canons taken from this work unless so stated.

[20] Canon 1371, Para. 1 The following are to be punished with a just penalty: 1 a person who…1, teaches a doctrine condemned by the Roman Pontiff, or by an Ecumenical Council, or obstinately rejects the teachings mentioned in canon 750, [Para.] 2 or in canon 752 and, when warned by the Apostolic See or by the Ordinary, does not retract….”

[21] Catechism Para.1992

[22]Catechism, Para. 982

[23] Acts 16:31

[24] Romans 4:5

[25] Romans 3:26

[26] Ephesians 1:6

[27]Catechism, Para. 891

[28] Denzinger, #851, Canon 8

[29] Ibid., pp. 540-1

[30] Catechism #2677

[31] Catechism Para. 1257 

Encounters in the Confession Box

In my first year of ministry as a priest in Park Street Catholic Church, Port of Spain, Trinidad, I remember in vivid detail what a difficult time I had with the Saturday confessions.  Each Saturday from 3:00 to 6:00 p.m., many Catholics queued up outside the confession box waiting their turn to enter to tell us their sins.  I recall how profusely I sweated in those days, not just because I was living in the tropics, but rather it was the first time in my life that I was experiencing how horrific it is to have peoples’ sins poured over oneself, sometimes in intimate detail, for three hours at a stretch.  We had one final hour of this, after our evening meal, from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m.  At 8:00 p.m. Carlton, the sexton of the Church, had to close the doors on people who still desired to come in to confess their sins to the priests.  I used to feel how nervous people were in telling me of their sins, particularly young women explaining their sexual misconduct.  I could see the perspiration just above the lips of many of those who confessed.  The task became more difficult as, week after week, people returned confessing the same sins.  

In that first year I did not at all doubt that I had power to say, “I absolve you from all your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” which words we spoke in Latin.  It was only in later years that serious doubts arose in my mind, although even in my first parish in Mayaro, in southeast Trinidad, I began to have some fleeting doubts.  This happened particularly in the outstations where people came back week after week with the same plethora of sins, fornications, adulteries and thefts.  To add to this difficulty, confessions had to be heard before the Mass, and each Sunday I had three different Masses to say.  Sometimes I had to go through the confessions quickly, giving very little counsel and advice to those who confessed because I had other Masses to do, and these were at set times.  A growing problem was that after hearing confession, I felt as if I had been in a garbage pit where garbage had been thrown over me until I was nearly succumbing to the sheer weight of the knowledge of sin that had fallen on me.  Encumbered as I was with this awful stuff and without any relief personally, I had then to go say Mass.  The difficulty continued to grow, for I found the Mass to be of no help for my own increasingly burdened state.

Many years later in my final parish in Sangre Grande in northeastern Trinidad, I had real reservations about confession.  From the Scripture, I had learned that forgiveness of sins came as one believed on Christ Jesus.  I knew also that the Scripture declared, “Who can forgive sins but God only?”[1]  At that time, I stopped hearing confessions with the exception of elderly women who simply recited the list of sins they had memorized from their youth (I knew that they would be offended if I did not hear their confessions).  In refusing to hear the confessions of the people generally, I was, of course, reported to the Archbishop.  That was only one of the many problems that accrued as I began dealing with issues biblically in my last seven years as a parish priest.  With this testimony in mind, perhaps one can more readily understand my plight as a priest who had studied the Catholic teaching, who had put it into practice as a parish priest, and who knew the frustration that the sacrament of Confession caused in the lives of the people as well as in my own. 

Sins are only truly forgiven when people believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, “Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins.”[2]  In believing on the finished work of the Lord Christ Jesus, a soul has both the forgiveness of sins and perfect right standing with God credited to him.  “But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested.”[3]  “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.”[4]  Thus the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation, as the Apostle Paul proclaimed.  When one does sin after salvation, it is a relationship problem with the Father in heaven to be resolved as one directly confesses his sin to God.  “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”[5]

Catholic Forgiveness

In stark contrast to the clear teaching of the Lord through Scripture, the Catholic is taught to look for forgiveness by confessing his sin not to God through the Lord Jesus Christ[6], but rather to an intermediary human priest.  This is what devout Catholics practice.  The thought behind the practice requires some explanation.  In the Catechism of the Catholic Church, there are seven sacraments to be explained rather than the two scriptural sacraments of baptism and communion.  “The Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation” has five names[7], each name defining a particular element within the whole ritual.  The first defining name is “the sacrament of conversion” while the second is “the sacrament of Penance,” which is declared to be necessary for salvation.  The official words of Rome are,

“It is through the sacrament of Penance that the baptized can be reconciled with God and with the Church…This sacrament of Penance is necessary for salvation for those who have fallen after Baptism, just as Baptism is necessary for salvation for those who have not yet been reborn.”[8]

The reason that the sacrament of Penance is “necessary for salvation” is given also, 

“Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance [sic] for all sinful members of his Church:  above all for those who, since Baptism, have fallen into grave sin, and have thus lost their baptismal grace…It is to them that the sacrament of Penance offers a new possibility to convert and to recover the grace of justification.  The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament as ‘the second plank [of salvation] after the shipwreck which is the loss of grace.’”[9]

Such teaching as this—that justification can be lost—flies directly in the face of Romans 8:29-39, I Peter 1:2-5, Romans 11:29, Numbers 23:19, etc.  Thus, Catholics have no assurance of their salvation.

The third name by which the sacrament of Penance is called is “the sacrament of confession, since the disclosure or confession of sins to a priest is an essential element of this sacrament….”[10]  While the Catholic Church acknowledges that only God can forgive sins, confession to a priest is essential because her doctrine states that “by virtue of his divine authority he [Jesus] gives this power to men to exercise in his name.”[11]  The biblical reference cited here is John 20:21-23 when the Lord Jesus Christ in person was commissioning His Apostles.[12]  The position of His Apostles was unique to them and to Paul—all directly chosen by Christ Jesus with no hint of succession.  The judgment of sins (v. 23) was basically to be made through the preaching of the Gospel, as for example, when Peter preached to the men of Judah and Jerusalem,[13] and when the Apostle Paul preached to the Thessalonians and to the Athenians of Mars Hill.[14]  

Failing to understand apostleship biblically, the Catholic Church continued to expand on her own idea regarding the forgiveness of sins.  She states, “But he [Christ] entrusted the exercise of the power of absolution to the apostolic ministry which he charged with the ‘ministry of reconciliation’ (2 Cor. 5:18).”[15]  By this statement, it is clear that the Catholic Church has wrongly understood the priesthood of Christ because Hebrews 7:24 states that His priesthood is not transferrable.  

Nevertheless, the next step in the Catholic Church’s error is the development of the notion of apostolic succession.  It is found in the section entitled “The Minister of This Sacrament,” 

“Since Christ entrusted to his apostles the ministry of reconciliation, bishops who are their successors, and priests, the bishops’ collaborators, continue to exercise this ministry.  Indeed bishops and priests, by virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders, have the power to forgive all sins ‘in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’”[16]

Having seemingly wrested power from its rightful Owner, the bishops now use it according to their own ideas of penitence and forgiveness, 

“Since ancient times the bishop, visible head of a particular Church, has thus rightfully been considered to be the one who principally has the power and ministry of reconciliation:  He is the moderator of the penitential discipline.  Priests, his collaborators, exercise it to the extent that they have received the commission either from their bishop (or religious superior) or the Pope, according to the law of the [Catholic] Church.”[17]

Catholic thinking thus runs counter to the Scripture because their leaders, through their notion of apostolic succession, have taken to themselves the idea that they can forgive the sins of the people.  From there, they claim the right to administer penance to all their people.  This is an un-biblical idea.  

Forgiveness, the fourth name in this sacrament, is defined as follows: “It is called the sacrament of forgiveness, since by the priest’s sacramental absolution God grants the penitent ‘pardon and peace.’”[18]  The teaching on forgiveness goes much further than just stated.  All offenses, no matter how grave are proclaimed to be in the power of the priests of the Church.  In the Vatican’s own words,

“There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive. ‘There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest.’”[19]

The power of the priests is said to be greater than even the power given to angels and archangels.  Rome states,

“Priests have received from God a power that he has given neither to angels nor to archangels...God above confirms what priests do here below.  Were there no forgiveness of sins in the Church, there would be no hope of life to come or eternal liberation.”[20]  

It would be difficult to conjure up words of greater arrogance.  It is blasphemy for any creature to undertake the pardon of sin because that is God’s prerogative.  “I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.”[21]  This Scripture passage is a gracious assurance that sins are blotted out for God’s own name’s sake.  The pronoun is repeated to make it emphatic that He alone can forgive sins. 

The last defining name by which this sacrament is called is “the sacrament of Reconciliation.”  Supposedly, it “imparts to the sinner the love of God who reconciles,”[22] although no priest through this sacrament gives the Gospel, “which is the power of God unto salvation.”[23]  The “word of reconciliation,”[24] which is the Gospel, has been left out of Catholic forgiveness and in its place has been put confession to a priest and the rituals of penance.

Obligation to Confess

Rome’s insistence that her people confess is seen in her laws.  Samples of these rulings are the following,

“One who desires to obtain reconciliation with God and with the Church, must confess to a priest all the unconfessed grave sins he remembers after having carefully examined his conscience.”[25]  

“Individual and integral confession and absolution constitute the only ordinary way which the faithful person who is aware of serious sin is reconciled with God and the Church.”[26]

“A member of the Christian faithful is obliged to confess in kind and in number all serious sins committed after baptism and not yet directly remitted through the keys of the Church nor acknowledged in individual confession, of which one is conscious after diligent examination of conscience.[27]

The humiliating experience of the confessional is obligatory in Catholicism.  This system of confession in the ear of a priest cannot but corrupt the Gospel by encouraging and promoting a ritual unknown in Scripture.  A pure contrition of the heart as a requirement for forgiveness, minute detailing of “the kind and number all grave sins” to a priest is a degrading practice that often leads to sin.  

Forgiveness of Sins as a Judicial Act of a Priest

The rite of Confession in the Catholic Church has necessary words going with it that the priest must use.  These are the following,  

“God, the Father of mercies, through the death and the resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”[28]

The absolution that is necessary for the Catholic to obtain is not a declaration that God Himself has forgiven the person confessing, but it is rather a judicial act of the priest who says, “I absolve you from your sins.”  It is, therefore, the priest himself who acts as judge in forgiving the sins.  In the words of the Council of Trent,

“However, although the absolution of the priest is the dispensation of the benefaction of another, yet it is not a bare ministry only, either of an announcing the Gospel or declaring the forgiveness of sins, but it is equivalent to a judicial act, by which sentence is pronounced by him as a judge [can 9].”[29]

This “divine power” for priests judicially to forgive sins is also claimed in the Catechism,

“Only God forgives sins.  Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, ‘The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins’ and exercises this divine power:  ‘Your sins are forgiven.’  Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name.”[30]

It is mind-boggling arrogance to claim that divine judicial power is given to sinful men to forgive sins.  It is made worse in that the basis for such a false claim is cited in Matthew 16:19, in the account of the Lord’s personal commission to the Apostle Peter.  But the Catechism continues,

“In imparting to his apostles his own power to forgive sins the Lord also gives them the authority to reconcile sinners with the Church.  This ecclesial dimension of their task is expressed most notably in Christ’s solemn words to Simon Peter: ‘I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’  ‘The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of the apostles united to its head.’”[31]

The Lord said to the Apostle Peter, “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19).  “Unto thee” relates this promise to Peter alone.  This declaration of the Lord was literally fulfilled to Peter, as he was made the first instrument of opening the kingdom of heaven by preaching the Gospel to the Jews (Acts 2:41) and to the Gentiles (Acts 10:44-47).  The power of the keys was twofold, to the Jews and to the Gentiles.  It was fulfilled in the Apostle Peter and in him alone.  There can be no successors to this prophetic commission, since there was but one first opening of the kingdom for the Jews as for the Gentiles.  The binding and loosing of Matthew 16:19 and 18:18 has to do with the decisions of a church congregation in matters of discipline reached through prayer, the Word, and the Spirit, that will be ratified in heaven.  It does not include the Lord’s divine right to forgive sins.  The concept of a sinful human being having been delegated divine authority to forgive judicially the sins of others is totally offensive to God and a denial of the truth of the Written Word of the Lord.  Nonetheless this is exactly what the Church of Rome claims for her priests.  

Church of Rome Claims a Biblical Base for Forgiveness Through a Priest

The scriptural backing claimed by Rome for the priest purportedly being able to absolve others of sin is found in Paragraph 1485 of her Catechism:

“‘On the evening of that day, the first day of the week,’ Jesus showed himself to his apostles.  ‘He breathed on them, and said to them: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.  If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’” (John 20:19, 22-23).

The biblical response to this claim is found in the actual words of John 20:23, “Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.”  The Apostles were sent not to be priests but only witnesses to the truth.  They were not mediators of the reconciliation, but rather preachers and publishers of it.  Unquestionably the Lord Jesus Christ declared in a few words the sum of the Gospel.  The Lord gave authority to His disciples to declare forgiveness to those whom God had already forgiven.  The commission given in this passage in John is a parallel to similar passages such as Luke 24:47, Matthew 28:18-20, and Mark 16:15-16.  This is the way the Apostles understood and obeyed the commission, as evidenced throughout the Acts of the Apostles, for Christ did not appoint confessors to probe intimately into each sin of people in whispers in a confession box.  Rather He commissioned preachers of his Gospel and He caused their voice to be heard.  Thus the Apostle Peter proclaimed, “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”[32]  If we believe in Him, He shall justify us.  This is the great remission of sins that all need, without which each of us is still spiritually dead.  The manner of forgiving sins in Scripture is the proclamation of the Gospel.  It is not the whispering of sins committed into the ear of a mortal man in a confession box.

Dangers Involved in Confession

The real sadness that breaks my heart is the emptiness and wickedness that comes out of what is claimed to be the means to forgive sin.  The engineered artifact of a confessional box, with two sinners inside, one claiming to be the overlord of conscience, is substituted for that personal and private spiritual communion with God by the one seeking His mercy and grace, made possible through the faithfulness of Christ Jesus.  Souls have been trained to forsake the preciousness of true faith and grovel before another creature in a dangerous ritual.  Salvation and forgiveness are no longer flowing to the sinner through the pure Word from the very heart of God, but rather men in their ignorance are attempting to siphon forgiveness into a processor, from which it is to be dispensed to the sinner through sacramental spigots by the mediation of priests.  

In the Catholic system, therefore, intimate proximity to a man has been substituted for the work of the Holy Spirit and the joy of knowing forgiveness before the living God.  The real vulnerability of boxed confession, however, is that it can be an occasion of sin and even of false accusations.  These dangers are all admitted in the rules that go with the sacrament in Catholic system.  In the Vatican laws on confession, Canon 977 declares,

“The absolution of an accomplice in a sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue is invalid except in danger of death.”  [“Thou shalt not commit adultery” is counted as the sixth commandment in the Catholic Church.] 

This is such a problem that Pope John Paul II decided that some offenses by priests involving the sacrament of reconciliation and pedophilia are be judged exclusively by a Tribunal in Rome.  The document addresses 

“The grave offenses against the sacrament of reconciliation:  ‘To give absolution to someone who is an accomplice [of the priest] in a sin against the Sixth Commandment; to invite on the occasion, at the moment, or with the pretext of confession to sin against the Sixth Commandment; to violate directly the secret of confession.’  Pederasty is the crime against customs.  It is a ‘sin against the Sixth Commandment committed between a minor younger than 18 years, and a priest.’”[33]

Such legislation may curb the dissemination of the scandals involving Confession on a local level, but it does nothing to curb inordinate desires of unregenerate men facing the abnormal situation of the close proximity of the confession box.  To decree that men are so adorned with power that they by a judicial act absolve sins, and then to place them in an intimate and hazardous proximity with women and boys while expecting them to continually refrain from disgraceful sinful conduct is crass and supine arrogance on the part of the Church of Rome.  In the ordinary business world, a company who thus treated its executives would be exposed immediately as criminal and citizens would be warned to cease to invest in its activities.

Further, Canon 984 §1declares, “Even if every danger of revelation is excluded, a confessor is absolutely forbidden to use knowledge acquired from the confessional when it might harm the penitent.”  The law regarding secrecy that has been maintained as a priest’s right to secrecy, can itself be another great occasion of sin for a priest.  Particularly in small groups, such as hearing nuns’ confessions, it is most difficult, if not impossible, to abstain from letting the information obtained in confessional influence one’s actions afterwards when socializing with those whose confessions have been heard.  Another of the general Vatican laws regarding confession is Canon 979, “The priest in posing questions is to proceed with prudence and discretion, with attention to the condition and age of the penitent, and he is to refrain from asking the name of an accomplice.”  This law shows the pitfalls that can await the posing questions in the confession box.  The fact that the priest is forbidden to ask the name of a partner in crime shows also the propensity to sin that is encompassed in these confidential encounters in the confession box.  These are just a sample of the grim laws designed to anticipate and limit the potential moral chaos arising from the practice of boxed private confession.  If the ordinary rules of biblical counseling were observed, and the priest not left alone with someone to solicit or to be solicited, things would not be so hazardous.  The Word of God teaches by precept and example that the knowledge of evil is always a source of pollution to a creature who possesses it.  

One of the principal joys of heaven toward which true believers yearn in the depths of their being is to be finally free from the presence, power, and knowledge of sin.  The very reason why the Lord God reserved the knowledge of good and evil to Himself in the Garden of Eden was because only an All-Holy, Infinite Being of unlimited power and goodness can retain that knowledge without contracting pollution from it.  It is, therefore, the height of spiritual stupidity and silly presumption to devise and mandate a private ritual wherein the depths of human depravity and weakness are explored under a cloak of seeking forgiveness and grace.  Nevertheless, it is even a law in the Church of Rome that confessions are to be heard in the confessional box, and not in another place.[34]

It is a tremendous burden to see that under the pretense of forgiving sins, there is the undermining of the unique office of Christ Jesus that can end up as a serious occasion for sin.  Sincere priests doing their duty, and devout Catholics seeking to alleviate guilt, can find themselves prey to sin in the very rite through which it is purported they may be delivered from sin.  The scandals that have resulted from the confessional and other close encounters within the Catholic system have reached such horrendous proportions that it is difficult to keep up with the documented evidence.[35]  Our hearts ought to grieve in anguish and our desire increase to give the pure Gospel to Catholics so that they can come to the Lord Himself, and know the freedom and joy it is to be His very own.  “If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.”[36]

It is a gracious promise of the Lord to all who continue in His Word that they shall know the truth and that truth will set them free.  The Gospel truth frees one from the yoke of the ceremonial rites that routinely deceive and ensnare but do nothing to free a man’s conscience before God.  The soul trusting on the Lord alone for salvation, and for His mercy day by day for forgiveness, beholds the glory of the Lord, and is changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.  Our prayer is that God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, would shine forth into the hearts of those sitting in the gloomy darkness of man-made traditions to give “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”[37]

Biblical Forgiveness

In Scripture, forgiveness is mediated through Jesus Christ alone, the only Mediator between God and man.[38]  The instrument of forgiveness is not a church, but rather faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”[39]  “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted forrighteousness.”[40]  

The forgiveness of all sins is of God and not that of any church.  This is so in order that we come to understand that it is He, God, Who is “just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”[41] To attempt to bring the Catholic priest and the sacrament of Confession into the nature of the saving work of the Godhead, indeed to attempt to make the priest and the sacrament the fount of forgiveness is gross blasphemy.  In Scripture, forgiveness and acceptance are in Christ Jesus alone.

The God of All Grace

In spite of clear biblical teaching, the Catholic Church claims that a mere man, with the right formula of words, is an effective means of grace in a judicial act of forgiveness.  The rite of Confession, in particular, claiming that, “by virtue of his [Christ’s] divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name”[42] is sufficiently serious to merit the full wrath of God for those who have invented and practice this evil parody on the forgiveness of the Lord.  In Scripture “the God of all grace”[43] by means of His Word directly seeks, finds, and saves His people.  Forgiveness is God’s gift to the believer.  It is granted to the believer based on Christ’s finished work on the cross.[44]  God’s action in Christ Jesus shows His graciousness to believers so that their eyes of faith are fixed on Him alone.  “For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.”[45]  ♦

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article.  

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: 

http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

1 Mark 2:7

[2] Acts 13:38-39

[3] Romans 3:21

[4] Ephesians 1:7

[5] I John 1:9

[6] I Timothy 2:5

[7] Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), Para. 1423, 1424

[8] Ibid., Para. 980

[9] Ibid., Para. 1446.  Square brackets are in the original.  Para. 1447 states that the practice of penance originated in Eastern monastic tradition.  Thus Para. 1447 contradicts Para. 1446, which states that Christ instituted the sacrament of Penance.

[10] Ibid,. Para. 1424.

[11] Ibid., Para. 1441.

[12] The criteria for apostleship are given in Acts 1:21-22.  In the New Testament the Apostles did not appoint other apostles.  They appointed elders.  (The terms overseer and elder/pastor are used interchangeably, Acts 20:17, 28; I Peter 5:1-4.)

[13] Acts Ch. 2

[14] Acts Ch. 17

[15] Catechism, Para. 1442  Although their proof text states, “And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation”, they have overlooked the fact that in this epistle the Apostle Paul is not addressing the other Apostles.  Rather he is writing to “the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia.”[15]  In verse 19, which is not cited, the Apostle Paul explains very clearly the ministry of reconciliation entrusted to these believers, “To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.”  This ministry does not state or carry with it the idea that there is any “exercise of the power of absolution” accompaning “the word of reconciliation” (i.e., the Gospel).  Instead it explicitly denies that idea since the Apostle states that it is “the word of reconciliation” which has been entrusted to the believers.  

[16] Ibid., Para 1461

[17] Ibid., Para. 1642

[18] Ibid. 

[19] Ibid., Para. 982

[20] Ibid., Para. 983  

[21] Isaiah 43:25

[22] Ibid., Para. 1424

[23] Romans 1:16

[24] II Corinthians 5:19

[25] Catechism, Para. 1493 

[26] Code of Canon Law, Latin-English Ed., New English Tr. (Canon Law Society of America, 1983) Canon 960.  

[27] Ibid., Canon 988 §1.

[28] Catechism, Para. 1449

[29] Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, Tr. by Roy J Deferrari from Enchiridion Symbolorum, 30th ed. (St. Louis, MO:  B. Herder Book Co., 1957) # 902.  Because the Catholic Church claims that she is “irreformable”(Vatican Council II Document No. 28 Lumen Gentium, §25, p.380) and her popes infallible, the Council of Trent still officially stands and can in no way be abrogated by any official statements to the contrary.

[30] Catechism, Para. 1441

[31] Catechism, Para. 1444

[32] Acts 10:43

[33] www.mgr.org/PedoVat.html  7/26/03

[34] Code of Canon Law, Canon 964 §3: “Confessions are not to be heard outside a confessional without a just cause.”

[35] See the summary report of Massachusetts Attorney General p 2 www.ago.state.ma.us  7/23/03.  Many Roman Catholic WebPages show the bad fruit that arises from wrong doctrine and practice.

[36] John 8:36

[37] II Corinthians 4:6

[38] John 14:6; Acts 4:12, I Timothy 2:5

[39] Acts 16:31

[40] Romans 4:5

[41] Romans 3:26

[42] Catechism, Para 1441

[43] I Peter 5:10

[44] Romans 4:5-8; II Corinthians 5:19-21; Romans 3:21-28; Titus 3:5-7; Ephesians 1:7; Jeremiah 23:5-6; I Corinthians 1:30-31; Romans 5:17-19

[45] Romans 5.17

Evangelicals Embark to Papal Rome

Many Evangelicals in our day know little of what the true Gospel really means.  As a result, many New Evangelicals hasten Rome-ward at the expense of their heritage.  The New York Times on May 30, 2004, carried news of the alliance called “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” (ECT) showing it as a movement that is changing the face of Christianity.  

Timothy George, a leading Reformed man of the Founders Movement, has fully endorsed ECT.  He has also written about it and has implemented it in other fields of activity.  His most successful endeavor, however, is that after a conference with John Armstrong, the whole Reformation and Revival magazine, and web page, have now espoused the philosophy of ECT. 

The ministry now has a new name “ACT 3.”  On the ministry’s web page the name is explained as, “ADVANCING THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION, IN THE THIRD MILLENIUM”

Timothy George not only upholds the Catholic Church, but also has high praise for Ratsinger, Pope Benedict XVI.  Mark Noll has co-authored a book with Carolyn Nystrom, called “Is the Reformation Over?  An Evangelical Assessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism.”  This book attempts to undermine all that the true Gospel stands for.  This is the same Mark Noll who was one of the signers of ECT. 

There is also a new movement called “Christian Churches Together.”  It is a movement of what are called “the historical churches” including Catholicism, and it is being carefully organized for exactly the same purposes as ECT.  Much more ominous is, “The Coming Home Network,” whose stated purpose is, “to provide fellowship, encouragement and support for pastors and laymen of other traditions (Protestant, Orthodox, etc.) who are somewhere along the journey or have already converted to the Catholic Church.”  

Over and above the previously stated, there are the false doctrines propagated by the New Perspective that have engulfed much of the Reformed Presbyterian and Reformed circles causing much confusion, and like the ECT movement tending towards Rome.

The very Gospel is being ruthlessly attacked by former Presbyterians.  Former Presbyterian pastors who have apostatized into Roman Catholicism are now in full time work defending Roman Catholicism in books, videos, conferences, and on the Internet.  Of such are Scott Hahn, Jeff Cavins, Larry Lewis, Marcus Grodi, and Jerry Matatics, just to mention a few.

Now, there are also a great many churches embracing both the Emerging church movement and that of “contemplative prayer.”  These are in human terms highly successful; yet, biblically they contradict the true Gospel of grace.  To answer these and other aberrations from biblical faith, we need know solidly what the true Gospel really is.  It is only by the Gospel that one is made right in Christ before the all Holy God. 

The first and second National Evangelical Anglican Conferences met at Keele and Nottingham in the UK in 1967 and 1977, respectively.  Leading Evangelicals, such as John Stott and J. I. Packer, endorsed the statements from these.  John Stott, who chaired the first conference at Keele, made it clear that the conference was accepting not only Anglo-Catholics and liberals, but Roman Catholics also.  The declaration was in the following words, 

“All who confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the glory of one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit have a right to be treated as Christians, and it is on this basis that we wish to talk with them.”  

The conference at Nottingham went further than Keele, giving the compromise already proclaimed a complete seal of approval.  Nottingham also endorsed and praised the Charismatic movement and is remembered for David Watson’s reference to the Reformation as “one of the greatest tragedies that ever happened to the church.”  The Times newspaper on February 19th 2007 in an article headlined, ‘Churches Back Plan to Unite Under Pope’ brought the whole agenda of ARCIC again before the public.  More negotiations however are needed before the actual submission of Anglo Catholics to Papal Rome takes place. 

Evangelicals and Catholics Together

Some seventeen years after the Nottingham Conference in England, the most drastic departure from true Evangelicalism took place in the United States in 1994.  At the end of March 1994, a group of twenty leading Evangelicals and twenty leading Roman Catholics produced a document entitled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together:  The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium,” (ECT). 

The two main instigators of this ecumenical thrust were Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus, a Lutheran pastor turned Roman Catholic priest.  The writing of the document began in 1992. Larry Lewis of the Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, Jesse Miranda of Assemblies of God, John White of the Geneva College and National Association of Evangelicals, and others, including two Jesuits, Avery Dulles and Juan Diaz-Vilar, assisted Colson and Neuhaus.  Cardinal Idris Cassidy, the head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, was said by Richard John Neuhaus to have given “very active support throughout the process.”  The Evangelical signatories included J. I. Packer, the late Bill Bright of Campus Crusade for Christ, Mark Noll of Wheaton College, and Pat Robertson of The 700 Club.  Roman Catholic signers included such well-known figures as the late Cardinal John O’Connor, Archbishop Sevilla, Archbishop Stafford, and Bishop Francis George, now Archbishop of Chicago. 

The Gospel According to ECT

The signers of ECT readily admit to “differences that cannot be resolved here.”  Nevertheless, motivated by the desire to face important moral issues together, the authors of ECT flatly state that Evangelicals and Catholics are one in Christ, and that all are truly Christians.  

In a similar manner, an addition had to made to the Gospel.  The ECT addition that redefines faith is, “living faith active in love.”  “Living faith” implies works and to Catholics, baptism in particular.  This is documented in present day official teaching of the Church of Rome where Rome teaches, “the very root of the Church’s living faith [is] principally by means of Baptism.”[2]  The theology of the Church of Rome always comes back to the concept of “living faith” so as to include “works righteousness” and particularly in her sacraments, which she defines as necessary for salvation.[3] 

The Evangelical signers of ECT have concurred with the Roman Catholic definition of “living faith active in love,” and thus they have formally agreed to an addition to the Gospel that nullifies its message.  By endorsing Roman Catholic teaching, therefore, they have denied the clear teaching of Scripture, “But after that the kindness and love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.”[4]

Disturbing Effects of ECT

The devastating effect of the Evangelical compromise with the Gospel is to put a stop to evangelizing Roman Catholics across the world.  If this compromise of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ is accepted, then Bible-believing churches will refrain from evangelizing Catholics.  The impact on the true Church in third world Catholic countries of Central and South America, in Africa, as well as in Spain, Portugal, and the Philippines, is already apparent.

If this anti-evangelical trend continues unchecked, it will restrain mission work and evangelism.  But this is exactly the policy the ECT signatories promote when they state, “...it is neither theologically legitimate nor a prudent use of resources for one Christian community [church] to proselytize [evangelize] among active adherents of another Christian community.”[5]  Since when has it been theologically illegitimate to expose error and heresy? 

Compounded Endorsement of Rome

On November 12, 1997, a second document entitled, “The Gift of Salvation,” was signed and published by Evangelical and Roman Catholic leaders.  It is also called “Evangelicals and Catholics Together II.”  Its expressed intention was to demonstrate the “common faith” of Evangelicals and Roman Catholics, and further, to “acknowledge one another as brothers and sisters in Christ.”  It was published in the December 8, 1997 issue of Christianity Today. 

Explicitly, the Roman Catholic signatories, such as Richard John Neuhaus and Avery Dulles, S. J., state in the document that they are “Catholics who are conscientiously faithful to the teaching of the Catholic Church.”  The Roman Catholic doctrine of conferred justification is taught as the Gospel.  The Evangelicals are now joined together in not only giving a clouded Gospel-Justification message, but also in a distinctively erudite manner, endorsing Rome’s doctrine of conferred inner righteousness. 

A Studied Denial of the Gospel

This second ecumenical document states, “Justification is central to the scriptural account of salvation, and its meaning has been much debated between Protestants and Catholics.”  Then it claims that the signers have reached agreement.  Their statement of accord is,

“We agree that justification is not earned by any good works or merits of our own; it is entirely God’s gift, conferred through the Father’s sheer graciousness, out of the love that he bears us in his Son, who suffered on our behalf and rose from the dead for our justification.  Jesus was ‘put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification’ (Romans 4:25).  In justification, God, on the basis of Christ’s righteousness alone, declares us to be no longer his rebellious enemies but his forgiven friends, and by virtue of his declaration it is so.”

The subject under review is stated clearly in the first sentence.  “We agree that justification…is conferred through the Father’s sheer graciousness.”  But it is only by careful reading that one comes to see what the two pivotal sentences state grammatically, “it [justification] is entirely God’s gift, conferred [rather than imputed]…and by virtue of his [God’s] declaration it [justification conferred] is so.” 

This is traditional Roman Catholic doctrine.  To employ the Roman Catholic word “conferred” instead of the biblical word “imputed” is tantamount to putting aside the authority of Scripture on the issue of justification.  Since medieval times, the Roman Catholic Church has clearly distinguished between the concept of imputation and the Thomist concept of God’s grace conferred as a quality of the soul.  Since the Council of Trent, she has condemned the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone.  Present day dogma of the Roman Catholic Church not only upholds the teaching of the Council of Trent but also declares that such Councils are infallible.[6]  

The Roman Catholic Church’s persistence in using the word “conferred” is an attempt to substitute her sacraments for the sovereign grace of the Holy Spirit.  The concept that the sacraments automatically convey the grace of the Holy Spirit to people is pivotal to Papal Rome.  However, what is proclaimed in Scripture is that the Holy Spirit is infinite, supreme, omnipotent, and all sufficient in convicting of sin and in bringing a person directly to new life in Christ Jesus.  “He [The Holy Spirit] will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”[7]  Nevertheless Rome will not repudiate the concept of “conferred” because for her the sacraments are “necessary for salvation.”  Without her seven sacraments, she has no function as a Church in the lives of people.

Defense of “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” 

The most serious apologetic for these documents called “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” is in the book of the same title Evangelicals & Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission.  Hereafter, we refer to the book by the subtitle as Common Mission.  The architects of ECT were well aware of the crucial distinctions concerning the Gospel separating Catholics and Evangelicals, but they chose both to deny and to bypass them.  

J. I. Packer writes in Common Mission, “Neither evangelicals nor Roman Catholics can stipulate that things they believe, which the other side does not believe, be made foundational to partnership at this point; so ECT lets go Protestant precision on the doctrine of justification and the correlation between conversion and new birth.”[8]  That such compromise is unbiblical is seen from his statements earlier in the same article when he said, “Roman teaching obscures the Gospel and indeed distorts it in a tragically anti-spiritual and unpastoral manner….”[9]  He further states, “Rome’s official doctrinal disorders, particularly on justification, merit, and the Mass-sacrifice, so obscure the Gospel that were I, as a gesture of unity, invited to mass—which of course as a Protestant I am not, nor shall be—I would not feel free to accept the invitation.”[10]

Towards the end of the article, Packer speaks of the evils of “humanism, materialism, hedonism and nihilism.”  To rebuild a Christian consensus, he proposes that “…domestic differences about salvation and the Church should not hinder us from joint action in seeking to re-Christianize the North American milieu….”[11]  These are amazing words from the author of Knowing God.  The “orthodox Evangelical J. I. Packer” of old spoke of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, sola fide, as “like Atlas, it bears a world on its shoulders, the entire evangelical knowledge of saving grace!”  Now the same saving faith is downgraded to the “domestic differences about salvation.”  In a 1994 article, “Why I Signed It,” he refers to sola fide (faith alone) as “small print.”  

Packer, in setting aside precision on the doctrine of justification, has denied biblical faith.  The Apostle Paul contended for the “faith alone” issue against the Judaizers, and likewise, the Reformers contended for the “faith alone” issue against the Roman Catholics of their day.  It was the burning issue for many thousands of Evangelicals who gave their lives at the stake: John Huss, William Tyndale, John Rogers, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, Anne Askew, John Bradford, and John Philpot, to name but a few.  Packer has reduced the crucial and fundamental element of the Gospel to “domestic differences about salvation” or “small print.”  However, Christ Jesus’ righteousness is the crown jewel of biblical faith.  It is the pivotal doctrine of truth revealed again by the Lord God in the pages of His written Word.  Packer has denied biblical faith and the testimony of the multitudes of true believers who under the Roman Catholic Inquisition gave their lives, not for “domestic differences about salvation” but rather for their faith in Christ Jesus alone.  

Separation for the Sake of the Gospel is Not Necessary

In the same book, Richard Neuhaus stated emphatically, “If, at the end of the twentieth century, separation for the sake of the gospel is not necessary, it is not justified.”[12]  What Neuhaus was effectively saying is that the Gospel is no longer relevant to Christian unity.  This seems to be the precise intent of the 1994 ECT document and equally the 1997 “The Gift of Salvation” document.  If true Evangelicals do not combat this heinous attack on the Gospel, then Neuhaus’ anti-scriptural words “separation for the sake of the gospel is not necessary or justified” might well fall on them and their children after them.  If the lie is swallowed, that separation for the sake of the Gospel is not justified, then the logical conclusion is that churches should cave in and submit to the Church of Rome.  This has always been the avowed goal of the Roman Catholic Church, as her documents verify.  Neuhaus argues that “to declare it [justification by faith alone] to be the article by which the Church stands or falls in a manner that excludes other ways of saying the gospel is to turn it into a sectarian doctrine.”[13] 

In this statement, the true Gospel of grace has not simply been declared unnecessary, it has also been labeled a “sectarian doctrine.”  This statement by Neuhaus shows the intent of Catholics who have planned and fostered the entire deceitful compromise with Evangelicals.  Their purpose is to make the true Gospel of grace through faith in Christ alone to be irrelevant, all the while promoting as truly Christian the Catholic “salvation by works-gospel” which is no gospel.  Charles Spurgeon’s timely words apply now even more than in his own day, “Since he was cursed who rebuilt Jericho, much more the man who labors to restore Popery among us.  In our fathers’ days the gigantic walls of Popery fell by the power of their faith, the perseverance of their efforts, and the blast of their gospel trumpets…” The Gospel trumpet is the very issue at stake.  The Roman Catholic and Evangelical signers of ECT I and II first give the false message of Rome, and then in defense of what they have written, declare that the Gospel of Christ is a “domestic matter” or even “a sectarian doctrine.” 

Other Major Movements on the Path to Papal Rome

Over and above the previously stated, there are the false doctrines propagated by “The New Perspective” movement that have engulfed much of the Reformed Presbyterian and Reformed circles.  A notable exception is the Free Presbyterian Churches that have been strong and outspoken against these movements.  

“The New Perspective,” like ARCIC and the ECT movement, is tending towards Rome.  “The New Perspective” as a denial of the doctrine, biblical justification, actually began in 1997 with Professor Norman Shepherd of Westminster Theological Seminary.  Shepherd was not the only member of the Westminster faculty who taught justification by faith and works.  The majority of the seminary faculty and Board of Trustees approved of Shepherd’s teaching and defended him against his critics.  Westminster Seminary has taught this false doctrine to many hundreds of men who now occupy positions of influence.  The New Perspective movement also embodies what is called “Auburn Theology” with well-known writers and pastors as Steve Wilkins, Douglas Wilson, Steve Schlissel, and R. C. Sproul, Jr.  As a result of the New Perspective and its offshoots, many have abandoned the true faith, churches and families have been split, and some Presbyterians have become Roman Catholics.  Most of all Christ Jesus and His Gospel have been dishonored. 

Former Presbyterians and others who have apostatized into Roman Catholicism are ruthlessly attacking the very Gospel.  Some of these are now in full-time work defending Roman Catholicism in books, videos, conferences, and on the Internet.  Of such are Scott Hahn, Jeff Cavins, Marcus Grodi, and Jerry Matatics, just to mention a few.  There is also a movement called “Christian Churches Together.”  It is a movement of what are called “the historical churches” including Catholicism, and it is being carefully organized for exactly the same purposes as ECT.  Much more ominous is “The Coming Home Network.” Its stated purpose is, “…to provide fellowship, encouragement and support for pastors and laymen of other traditions (Protestant, Orthodox, etc.) who are somewhere along the journey or have already converted to the Catholic Church.”  

There are also a great many churches embracing the Emerging church movement.  This movement has become a dangerous threat at the present time affecting the USA, the UK, France, and other parts of Europe.  The leadership of the Canadian Atlantic Baptist Convention gave their full and steadfast endorsement to the movement’s main leader Brian McLaren’s teachings.  They actually declared that the teachings of Brian McLaren to be orthodox.[14]  On February 28, 2007 in Toronto there was a workshop called “The Evolving Church a natural selection.”  The workshop leaders included Sylvia Keesmaat, co-author of Colossians Re-mixed and professor at the Toronto School of Theology.  Her workshop was entitled Justice and Creation Care.  The keynote speaker was Shane Claiborne.[15]

Brian McLaren and Tony Jones are chief leaders of the movement that essentially markets Catholic mysticism.  Another leader, Anglican Alan Jones, takes the movement further into the Roman Catholic fold.  His audience is large.  It is important to study his stratagem.  He also has endorsed the United Religions Initiative, which includes an acceptance of Islam that has become a terrorist menace in recent times.  Christianity Today published an article entitled “The Emergent Mystique”[16] It stated, “Not since the Jesus Movement of the early 1970s has a Christian phenomenon been so closely entangled with the self-conscious cutting edge of U.S. culture.”  While this new movement is permeating modern Evangelical circles in the USA, it has had disastrous effects also in France and in Ireland and is beginning to infiltrate England.  It is vitally important to understand the essential modus operandi of the Emerging church movement before it leads more and more astray into the mystic clutches of Papal Rome and Greek Orthodoxy.  The constant deadly deception of the movement is that it arrogantly advertises a way of direct access to God and thus repudiating any need of the Lord Jesus Christ as the One Mediator between God and men.  This is documented in four articles on the Emerging church movement that are posted on the Berean Beacon website.  Christ Jesus as Savior and the One Mediator is exalted high above “all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.”[17]  He alone has been given all authority in heaven and in earth, not the mystical charms of Papal Rome, Greek Orthodoxy, or the Emerging church movement. 

The Present Day Consequences and Our Response

The Evangelical apostates that we have documented in this address have a name of being Christian but in fact are a danger to those who have remained true to the Gospel.  What is so disheartening is that so many true believers have remained silent as the apostasy increases in numbers and influence.  Well-known Evangelical leaders have attempted to trample under foot the blood of the everlasting covenant and are hastening more and more towards acceptance of Papal Rome.  We are to separate from those who promote heresy and “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”[18]

What we might expect has indeed happened with serious consequences in legislation.  Legislation termed “hate crimes” has been in existance in England since the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998, and The Criminal Justice Act of 2003.  However, such legistation became stronger and more explicit in 2006.  I quote from the UK government home office webiste,  “Parliament approved a bill on 31 January 2006 that made it a criminal offence to use threatening words or behaviour with the intention of stirring up hatred against any group of people defined by their religious beliefs or lack of religious beliefs.  The bill gained Royal Assent on 16 February.  Any prosecutions under the Act, when commenced, will require the consent of the Attorney General.”[19] 

A bill in the US Congress, introduced by Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas in January 2007, would expand the scope of current US federal hate-crime laws.  The legislation is similar to measures passed by the House in 2005 and by the Senate in 2004.  The bill seeks to establish a new Federal offense for hate crimes and would mandate a separate Federal criminal prosecution for state offenses tried under its provisions.  A sentence of life imprisonment could await those convicted.  In Canada the definition of hate crime has evolved out of the Criminal Code sections for Hate Propaganda and the Purpose and Principles of Sentencing.  Hate crimes are offences “motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour religion sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor.”  These are three examples that show the direction in which legislation in the UK, USA, and Canada is headed.  As apostasy increases, it seems inevitable that more and more laws will be enacted which can be turned against true believers. 

In Face of Apostasy We Present the Gospel

The greatness of the Gospel is that each one exalts the Person and work of Christ Jesus; He is the exalted Head of His Church.  In the Gospels, Christ Jesus appears as the “Christ,” the anointed One.  His purpose was His work of obedience and death, in which He received for Himself, i.e., in His humanity, the perpetual fullness of the Holy Spirit.  Pentecost declared Him to be the exalted Prince and Savior as the abundance of pouring out of the Holy Spirit was not for Himself, but for the Church, which is His body.  As the Apostle Peter preached, “Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.”[20]

Our primary and permanent duty consists of faith in Christ Jesus and in His Word.  To withstand and counter the apostasy we have documented we need to see principle given us in the Lord’s Word and to apply it.  “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.”[21]  Grace reigning through righteousness is not only possible it the essential core factor of the Gospel.  “But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe; for there is no difference.”[22]  Righteousness is found in and of Christ.  It is the demonstration of His faithfulness[23] even unto death.  Such perfect rectitude is of God, and from God, “even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ.”  The great news is that this absolute righteousness is “unto all and upon all them that believe.”  Since the true believer has a legal identification with righteousness of Lord Jesus Christ, how ardently ought we to pray Christ Jesus’ own words, “O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee; but I have known thee”[24] The Lord Jesus Christ made His will and testament and now shows for the righteousness of it all.  “O righteous Father” has a double force.  First God is not only merciful, but He is just in sanctifying His people.  His grace reigns through righteousness.  It expressed the Savior’s confidence in His Father as righteous.  The Lord continued in prayer, “And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them”[25]

Here the Christ Jesus the Lord briefly sums up what He had done and would still do for His own people. He would make known the Father to them.  Christ Jesus is now, by the Spirit, revealing the Father, and He will continue so to do throughout eternity.  Then He states why He is proclaims of the Father’s name, “that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.  Where Christ is known as the Father’s sent One, the deepest blessing and the highest privileges are even now given, and not merely what awaits His people at His coming.  If ever there was one capable of estimating another, it was Christ in respect to His Father.  The declaration of who the Father is with equal competence is now made known to us.  He gives us a consciousness of the same love of the Father, which rested on Himself. 

God is faithful awaken a consciousness of His love for His people, “Faithful is he which calleth you, who also will do”[26]  Sanctification and revival depend totally on Him.  As He has begun a work of grace in our lives, we may depend on His faithfulness to complete it!  Our confidence in praying for true revival in face of Apostasy is that the Lord God treats us not on the ground of our merits, of which we have none, but for His own name’s sake.  God is unchangeable in His own purpose of grace, “whom he called... them he also glorified”[27] The inexhaustible wealth of divine grace is flowing.  The only begotten Son became flesh is the One who is “full of grace and truth.”  Because we have been made joint heirs with Him it is written, “and of his fullness have all we received, and grace for grace.”[28]  Stand firm on God’s love to revive His people and to bring new life to those dead in trespasses and sins.  There is no reserve in the outflow of God’s love to us so unlikable objects.  He has loved us with an everlasting love, so our confidence in looking for revival stands firm!  The Lord God gives a full expression of the dependability of His everlasting love toward His own, by effectually calling us of darkness into His marvelous light.  This should fully assure us of the certain continuance of it.  It is His purpose that we be revived!  

All the powers of darkness and apostasy cannot shake these promises, they stands firm.  “The foundation of God standeth sure”[29]  The Apostle Paul rested on the faithfulness of God when he said, “I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day”[30] and so should we be in our day.  Please pray for and expect the display of His power in the grace that we so badly need in our day.  Then indeed will grace reigns in our personal lives and churches with sovereign freedom, power, and bounty!  

Permission is given to copy and distribute this article.  

Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at: http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/212

[1] Jeremiah 23:6; Romans 3:22-28; Romans 4:5-8; Romans 5:17-19; 1Corinthians 1:30, 31; 2Corinthians 5:19; 21, Ephesians 1:7; and Titus 3:5-7

[2] Catechism of the Catholic Church (Liguori Publications, 1994) Para 249.  Hereafter referred to as Catechism

[3] Catechism, Para. 1129

[4] Titus 3:4, 5

[5] ECT, §V, “We Witness Together”

[6] Catechism, Para. 891

[7] John 16:8

[8] Common Mission p. 167 

[9] Ibid.,  p. 153

[10] Ibid.,  pp. 162, 163

[11] Ibid.,  p. 172

[12] Ibid.,  p. 199

[13] Ibid.,  p. 207

[14] www.takebackcanada.com/emergingchurch.html

[15] www.emergentcanada.blogspot.com

[16] http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/011/12.36.html  1/18/06

[17] Ephesians 1:21

[18] Jude 3

[19] http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-victims/reducing-crime/hate-crime

[20] Acts 2:33

[21] Romans 5:20

[22] Romans 3:21-22

[23] Greek pistis.  There are many contexts where this is necessarily translated faithfulness Matthew 23:23, Romans 3:3, Galatians 5:22, Titus 2:10, etc.  There are several passages in which faithfulness of the Lord is mentioned.  In each case, name of Jesus Christ is in the genitive case indicating that faithfulness is a character quality which He processes (Galatians 2:16, 3:22; Ephesians 3:12, Philippians 3:9).

[24] John 17:25  

[25] John 17:26

[26] 1 Thessalonians 5:24

[27] Romans 8:30

[28] John 1: 16

[29] Timothy 2:19

[30] II Timothy 1:12

Fellowship with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

Spiritual communion with God is our essential life as Christians.  It is the prerequisite to all revival.  This fellowship is the work of the Holy Spirit as He is the Spirit of all grace and sanctification.  The beauty and the glory of our communion with God show the emptiness all the attractiveness of the world.  The glory and excellence of this spiritual communion is our worship of Him and is our lifeblood or our faith that the Lord God delights in.  Our church services have a proper place, and they truly have an influence on our increase of faith and grace and are part of our communion with God and our fellowship with one another as believers.  These services, however, presuppose our personal walk with the Lord God.  This personal communion with God is that for which Christ Jesus prayed in John’s gospel, chapter seventeen.  The communion with God already exists; His intercession was a prayer to the Father in Heaven to preserve it.  Therefore, He prayed, “Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me that they may be one, as we are.”[1]  

The Lord compares Christian unity and fellowship to the ultimate unity and fellowship in the Trinity.  It has always existed between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: three Persons, yet, one God.  There is not any more profound and exact definition of the essence of our spiritual communion than that which He proclaimed in prayer, “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.”[2]  That one Spirit might vitalize all His own people is what is plainly implied in the prayer, “that they may be one in us.”  Union with the Father and Son is obtained and maintained only by the Holy Spirit.[3]  The prayer of Christ, for all who are His, includes the profound concept that, as one, they may have fellowship with the Father and Son.  Thus, the Lord began His prayer in stating, “this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Christ Jesus, whom thou hast sent.”[4]  We are encouragingly reminded by the Lord about this profound fellowship that is of the essence of our Christian walk.  Thus, we are told, “because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, ‘Abba,Father!’”[5]  Therefore, because we are sons of God we should joyfully live each day in fellowship with Him.  The Lord’s command to “abide in me” finds an echo in the commands to be “led by the Spirit,” “live in the Spirit,” and “walk in the Spirit”[6]  That is, believers who are already united with Christ, and indwelt by the Spirit, must enter increasingly into the reality and experience of that union.

The points characterized by this experiential fellowship with God are highlighted by the Apostle Paul in the following words, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.”[7]  The fellowship desired in this prayer ascribes different features to each distinct Person of the Trinity.  First, it is love that is peculiarly assigned to the Father.  Second, grace is assigned to Christ Jesus.  Third, the fellowship of the Spirit is highlighted.  This fellowship of the Holy Spirit is essential, as it is by the Spirit alone that we have fellowship with Christ in grace, and with the Father in love.  Thus, we will joyfully unfold the splendors of our communion with God under these different features. 

Fellowship With the Father

We begin this tremendously profound and encouraging topic by considering first what it is to fellowship with the Father.  The word “Father,” signifying personal love, was on the lips of the Lord no less than one hundred and seventy times.  As Christ Jesus has revealed Him, He is distinctively the Father, our Abba Father.  The Lord prayed, “Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.”[8]  The apostle Paul uses the same term teaching us how to commune with the Father in prayer.  “For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.”  All Christ’s prayers were addressed to the Father, with the exception of His prayer on the cross when He quoted Psalm Twenty Two.  The Father is the great fountain and spring of all gracious intercommunication and fruits of love.  This is whom Christ came to reveal, namely, God as the Father to you, even in the loving, endearing term, “Abba Father.” 

We are emphatically instructed, “God is love.”[9]  The name of God in this statement is taken personally for the Father.  This is evident from the following verse where He is distinguished from His only begotten Son whom He sent into the world.  So, the Word of God proclaims, “The Father is love.”  Not only is God graciously tender and compassionate as He had proclaimed Himself in the Old Testament,[10] but He eminently portrays Himself to us as love.  Thus, His Word continues, “He loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”[11]  The Father loved us individually and corporately.  The Holy Spirit unmistakably shows this love, demonstrated before the sending of Christ.  The love of the Father is, in fact, declared to be before the foundation of the world, “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Christ Jesus to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.  In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.”[12]

Our beloved Savior Himself told us, “I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you; for the Father himself loveth you.”[13]  The Father Himself loves each one of us eminently, therefore, we must resolve to hold communion with Him in His love and never be in doubt or troubled about His love for us.  

The Personal Assurance of the Father’s Love

Christians walk sometimes with troubled hearts concerning the thoughts of the Father towards them.  They are convinced of the Lord Jesus Christ and His love; the difficulty lies what to think regarding the Father’s love.  They ought rather to see the Father as the fountain from which all other kindnesses flow.  Thus, the Apostle portrays Him, “after that the kindness and love of God our Savior toward man appeared.”[14]  In the same context the Apostle also says, “we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.”[15]  Thus, the love of the Father is the hinge on which all these great changes and blessings of believers revolve.  The whole source of man’s recovery was from the love of the Father.  When the kindness and love of the Father appeared, then these changes resulted.  To utterly convince us of His love, the Father compared Himself to all that is endearing and tender in the world.  He is portrayed as a father, a mother, and a shepherd, even as a hen over her chicks.[16]  Thus, for example, He promises, “As one whom his mother comforteth,so will I comfort you.”[17]  This is love in the Person of the Father peculiarly held out to you His own, and in which He holds communion with you.  Now, to experience communion with the Father in love, two things are required of us.  Firstly, that we receive it and rejoice in it.  Secondly, that we attempt to make suitable returns to Him.

Fellowship consists in giving and receiving; until the love of the Father is received, we have no experiential communion with Him.  How, then, is this love of the Father to be received, so as to hold fellowship with him?  By faith!  The receiving of it is the believing of it.  God has so fully, so eminently, revealed His love, that we may be received by that love through faith.  “Ye believe in God,”[18] Christ declared, that is, you believe in the Father.  And what is to be believed first of all in Him?  It is His love, because He is “love.”[19]

It is by and through Christ we have an access to the Father and we are able to see the love that He peculiarly bears to us.  As the Lord so clearly told us, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”[20]  The men which the Son describes are those who were given to Him, “I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.”[21]  Thus, by Christ, and by faith through Christ, we are brought, as it were, into the bosom of God.  We are certain of the Fathers’ love, and there we repose and rest.  The first thing we are to do in our communion with the Father is to be fully persuaded that God personally loves us, that He may be beloved in our sight.  Therefore, He commands us, “My son, give me thine heart.”[22]  When we see the Father in His endowment of love,[23] and rest on and delight in Him as such, then we have communion with Him in love.  Love is an affection of union, nearness, and contentment.  As long as the Father is looked upon in any other way than acting in love towards us, our souls can remain spiritually lukewarm.  To love God is to obey Him, and He commands us to rest and delight in His love.

Resting in the Father’s Love

To rest in the Father’s love, believers of old, such as John Owen, dwelt on and relished the prophecy of Zephaniah, “The LORD thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy, he will rest in his love; he will joy over thee with singing.”[24]  Both rest and delight are here assigned to God in His love.  First, rest, because He is settled in His love over us.  To rest with satisfaction is expressed by being silent, without sorrow, and without complaint.  On account of His own love being so full and in every way complete and absolute, He can rests in His own love.  He will not remove His love; He will not, nor need not, seek any further for other persons to love.  His love is from everlasting to everlasting; as He proclaims, “Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with loving kindness have I drawn thee.”[25]  Then delight in knowing, “he will joy over thee with singing.”  That is, He is fully satisfied in those on whom He has fixed His love.  This also expresses the delight that He has in His love, denoting an inward affection of the mind and joy of heart.  To have joy of heart is the highest expression of delight in love.  It denotes not the inward affection alone, but also an outward demonstration of it.  An outward demonstration of delight is as when men leap for joy when overcome with some joyful surprise.  Therefore, the Father is said to do this “with singing.”  To rejoice with gladness of heart, to exult with singing and praise, shows forth the greatest delight and contentment possible.  Thus, we see profound significance of what it means to be “accepted in the beloved.”[26]  Yes, indeed we are, and because of this we also are beloved in His sight.  This is His Love for you; His free, undeserved, and eternal love.  The Father fixes His love upon you.  You are His beloved in Christ.  You are immediately to see, to receive, to rest, and delight in His love.  Together, in our beloved Savior, we joyfully praise Him, our Abba Father.  “How excellent is thy loving kindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings.  They shall be abundantly satisfied with the fatness of thy house; and thou shalt make them drink of the river of thy pleasures.  For with thee is the fountain of life: in thy light shall we see light.”[27]

Fellowship With the Lord Jesus Christ

The Word of God instructs that “God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Christ Jesus our Lord.”[28]  This is also the fellowship into which we are called.  As our Lord and Master Himself invites us, “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”[29]  This fellowship is obtained by grace, in order to receive more of grace.  This fellowship also reveals how gracious Christ is.  He it is who “dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.”[30]  All that went before Him was but typical and in representation of Him.  The truth and substance of grace comes only by Christ.  “Grace and truth came by Christ Jesus,” “and of his fullness have all we received,and grace for grace.”[31]  That is, we have communion with Him in grace; we receive from Him all manner of grace, and in grace we have fellowship with Him.  “Grace be with you,” and “The Lord Jesus be with you,” are equivalent expressions.  Grace is first of all the personal attractiveness and comeliness of our Lord.  Nearly half of the Song of Solomon is devoted in outlining Him as the most graceful and comely Person.  As when it is proclaimed, “Thou art all fair, my love; there is no spot in thee.”[32]  Thus, also the psalmist sings, “Thou art fairer than the children of men;grace is poured into thy lips.”[33]

His fullness to save by grace is the effect of His excellence.  His grace is free; therefore, the consequences are of the utmost.  Thus, His Word declares, “He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him.”[34]  He had all fullness of the attributes of the Godhead to Him for this purpose, “for it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell,”[35] and He received the Spirit without measure.[36]  In addition, from this fullness He gives a supply of grace to all His people, “grace for grace.”  Had the Spirit been given to Him by measure, we would have exhausted it.  This “grace for grace” is the fruit of the Spirit, sanctifying and renewing our natures, enabling us to excel in goodness and prevent us from doing evil.  We are His garden; the rest of the world is a fallow wilderness.  “A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.”[37]  We are His inheritance; the world, such as it is, has no regard of Him.  Christ Jesus is the means of grace.  The Lord’s ordinances in our church services point to our Lord, to commune with Him.  The Lord uses His written Word and the preaching of the Gospel to directly convict the sinner of sin and to bring about salvation.  He also uses His written Word and preaching to instruct us as to how to abide in Him.  Our obedience is a fruit and not a cause of our abiding in Him.  Since this abiding in Him is His training of us, we must carefully examine what it means.  

Abiding in Christ

The Pauline concept of “in Christ” finds its counterpart in the Lord’s own commandment, “abide in me.”  The New Testament theme looks not inward for sanctification, but to the Person of Christ.  Sixty-six times in the Apostle John’s writings the believer is told to look to Christ and not within himself.  In John’s writings, the concepts are developed into distinctive statements concerning the lasting relationship between God and Christ, and Christians and Christ.  This is equally as strong as the apostle Paul’s teaching of being “in Christ.”  Both men using expressions as “remain in” and “abide in” maintain biblical truth and utterly avoid the assertions of identity found in Greek mysticism and the modern Emerging Church movement.  

To “remain in” and “abide in” Christ Jesus have a deeper significance than simply to continue to believe in Him, although it includes this.  The expressions connote continuing to live in friendship with Him because we are a new creation in Him through the power of the Spirit.  It is no accident that the “I am the vine” passage of John chapter 15 is set in the context of Christ’s teaching on the Spirit in chapters 14 and 16.  The same is true in the first letter of 1John where the discussion of abiding is closely associated with the work of the Spirit.  For example, “And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us.”[38] And, “By this we know that we abide in him, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit.”[39] The Spirit is the “Spirit of Christ,” and His presence makes possible a real and experienced communion with Christ Jesus, an inward, enduring, and personal fellowship.  The true Christian does not deny in any way the rational thought processes,[40] but bathes such thoughts in communion with God.  Those who are totally convinced of their powerlessness to do anything without Christ will develop the habit of an awareness of the Lord’s presence.  

The Christian writer, C. Campbell, expressed it so well when he wrote, “Thousands of Christians are complaining of barrenness; but they fail to trace their barrenness to its right source — the meagerness of their communion with Christ.  Consequently, they seek fruitfulness in activities, often right in themselves, but which, while He is unrecognized, can never yield any fruit.  In such condition, they ought rather to cry, ‘Our leanness!  Our leanness’; and they ought to know that leanness can only be remedied by that abiding in Christ, and He in them, which ‘fills the soul with marrow and its fatness.’” [41]

The Way His Grace Works in Our Lives

Christ Jesus came to give His life for the sake of the people whom He loves.  His life and death are not only the pattern of ours; more important is the fact that they are the source of our living fruitful lives.  Thus, we must examine His command to us in this regard.  He declared, “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.”[42]  The key word in this commandment is the word “as.”  The Greek word for ‘as’ is ‘kathos’ meaning “the pattern” and “by means of.”  The commandment, therefore, fits the whole characteristic of the grace of Christ.  We love one another by means of His love.  Christ Jesus’ death is not just held up as an example but as the source of our love.  It is clearly to be a model of the intensity of our love, but most importantly, it is the means for us to show our love for our brothers.  “Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”[43]  This is accomplished only because He laid down His life for us; by means of His grace, we also lay down our lives for our brothers.  The call of Christ Jesus to “deny yourself, take up your cross and follow me” is possible only by means of the same love with which He loved us.  Thus, it is only as His love is perfected in us that we can love one another.  “No one has seen God at any time.  If we love one another, God abides in us, and his love has been perfected in us.”[44]  His love accomplishes what it was designed and adapted to do, to be the power by which we love one another.  We love by means of His faithfulness and His love.  

Bearing Fruit in Christ

A non-fruit-bearing disciple is a contradiction in terms.[45]  Thus, the Lord instructs us, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit.”  No one can become a disciple without an active faith, one that is fruit-bearing.  Such fruit is guaranteed by His choosing and sustaining grace.  The logic is that the relationship between Christ Jesus and the Father is a pattern for our relationship with Christ.  This pattern stands behind all of Christ’s teaching on the Christian life in John’s gospel.  The pattern is Father–Me and I–you.  This pattern is not a mere style but gives reinforcement to the message.  The reality that shapes the incarnate Jesus’ relationship with the Father is the example for our relationship with Christ Jesus. Thus, regarding the pattern of His love, He assures us, “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you.”  This is a remarkable expression of His grace.  As the Father loved Him, who was most worthy, He loved us, who were most unworthy.  The Father loved Him as Mediator, as the head of the church, and the great supplier and supply of divine favor.  As the Father has committed His love to Christ, so He transmits that love to us.  Therefore, the Father was well pleased with Him, that He might be well pleased with us in Him.  He loved Him, that in Him (as the Beloved), He might make us accepted in Him.  The same pattern applies Christ’s joy.  Thus, He assures us, “These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.”[46]  Our joy is full and complete as we abide in Him.  

Abiding in the Lord brings the privilege of asking the Father for whatever we wish.  The Lord promises, “If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.”[47]  Abiding in Christ means we will ask according to God’s will.  Nonetheless, He warns us “without me ye can do nothing.”[48]  There are many of us who believe the Lord’s assurance that our prayers will be answered in a general way, but we fail to apply it in detail.  We know that we cannot do the important things without Christ’s assistance, but how many of the little things we attempt in our own strength!  No wonder we fail so often.  

Failing to Bear Fruit 

The Son of God was the original source of life, and now by His work as Mediator, gives life and grace to all true believers.  The commandment to abide in Him is a most serious one, since if we fail to abide in Him in the pattern of His grace, love, and joy, then we are apt to live lives stripped of gifts and opportunities.  The warning “without me ye can do nothing” is similar to the salt “losing its savor.”  It parallels the Lord’s forewarning, “And, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have.”[49]  What is at stake is the frightening concept that we can live lives with dead works: “wood, hay, and stubble.”  What is to become of these “dead works”?  The Word of God tells us, “If any man’s work shall be burned he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.”[50]  This is a most solemn warning and heart-searching prospect for every Christian.  Either our life is as the result of continuous fellowship with Christ, bringing forth fruit to the glory of the Father, or because of our neglect of communing with Him, we are in great danger of being set aside as His witnesses on earth, to bring forth only that which the fire will consume in the last day. 

Fellowship With the Holy Spirit

The Comforter has been sent by the Father, but in the name of Christ.  Just as the Savior came in the Father’s name, so the Holy Spirit was sent in the Son’s name.  Just as the Son had made the Father known, so the Holy Spirit shows Christ to His people.  Just as the Son glorified the Father, so the Spirit glorifies Christ.  Just as the Savior supplied all the needs of His people so the Comforter fully provides for us believers.

Before He left the world our blessed Lord knew how discouraged His disciples were when He spoke about His departure.  Therefore, He promised them the Spirit of sanctification and consolation.  The promised Holy Spirit would abide with the disciples forever, unlike the temporary presence they had experienced of the Lord Himself.  In the flesh, the Savior had been with them for a little while, and now was leaving them, and returning to His Father.  He had been their comforter for a season, but now on His departing He promised them another comforter.  

The Spirit often works tender consolations to us.  When we do not receive them, He is still present, and we do not discern it; we refuse to be comforted.  The Spirit came with power to convict and conquer our unbelieving hearts at the time of our salvation.  In contrast, the Spirit as a comforter comes with kindness and gentleness to be received in our believing hearts.  He speaks, and it is possible that we believe not that it is His voice.  He proposes the things of consolation and we receive them not.  As David lamented, “my sore ran and my soul refused to be comforted.”  The Holy Spirit never absolutely and universally leaves a believing soul without consolation.  A believer may be gloomy and refuse comfort, actually finding none and feeling none.  Radically, however, he has a foundation of consolation, which in due time will be felt when God promises that He will heal His own and restore comfort to them.  Hence we are commanded, “grieve not the Holy Spirit,whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.”[51] That is, such passions of bitterness as wrath, anger, evil speaking, and malice, grieve the Holy Spirit.  By this we are not to understand that the Holy Spirit is properly grieved as we are.  

The design of the commandment is that we act not towards the Holy Spirit in such a manner as to be grievous and disquieting to our fellow-creatures.  We must not do what is contrary to His holy will.  Most of all, we must not provoke the Spirit of God to withdraw His presence and His gracious influences from us.  The reason why we should not grieve Him is that by Him we are sealed unto the day of redemption.  There is to be a day of redemption.  Our bodies are to be redeemed from the power of the grave on the day of resurrection.  Then we will be delivered from all the effects of sin, as well as from all sin and misery.  We are sealed to that day.  The Lord God has distinguished us having set His mark on us.  He gives us the earnest and assurance of a joyful and glorious resurrection; and the Holy Spirit is the seal.  Wherever that blessed Spirit is as a sanctifier, He is the earnest of all the joys and glories of the redemption-day; and we should be undone should God take away His Holy Spirit from us.

The Holy Spirit as the Earnest of Our Inheritance

The Holy Spirit is given to us as the choice part our inheritance itself.  The earnest is the same kind as the whole, as an earnest ought to be.  The full inheritance promised, is the fullness of the Spirit in the enjoyment of God in heaven, when that Spirit will have perfectly taken away all sin and sorrow.  Then He will have made us able to enjoy the glory of God in the full presence of God.  That is the full inheritance promised.  The Holy Spirit is given to us to equip us to enjoy in some measure the presence of God in this world.  While we are in this world He is the earnest of the whole that is to come.

The Lord has given us of the Holy Spirit; in Him we have the first-fruits of glory.  The utmost pledge of His love is the earnest of the eternal life that we now have.  “Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.”[52]  Thus, the Holy Spirit gives us an inner assurance of the love of God.  He makes known to us our favor in His sight that He is our Father; He deals with us as His children.  The Holy Spirit has been sent to our hearts, “crying Abba Father.”[53]  The result is, “then we are not servants, but sons; and if sons, then heirs of God.”[54]  The Holy Spirit opens to us the fact that we have an inheritance and an assurance of it.  “If children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ.”[55]  That inheritance is His favor here and now and eternal life hereafter.  This is an honor infinitely higher than to be heir to the most generous earthly inheritance.  Christ Jesus is heir to the full honor and glory of heaven.  We are united to Him as his brothers, thus we are presented as destined to partake with Him of His glory.  We are the sons of God in a different sense from what He is.  He is Son by His nature, and we are sons by adoption.  Still, the idea of being a son exists in both; hence, both will partake in the glories of the eternal inheritance. 

Quench Not the Spirit

We are commanded by the Lord to “quench not the Spirit”[56]  The Holy Spirit was typified by the fire that was always kept alive on the altar.  He is also called a “Spirit of burning.”[57]  The reasons of this allusion are manifold.  Hence, any opposition given to the workings of the Holy Spirit is called “quenching of the Spirit.”  Thus, also are also using the same metaphor, to ‘stir up with new fire’ the Spirit’s gifts that are in us.  The Holy Ghost is striving with us bringing forth fruit suited to the new creation that we are in Christ.  We have been brought into relationship with the whole Trinity, “For through Christ we have access by one Spirit unto the Father.”[58]  

Through our blessed Savior, we have a Divine Person with us day by day.  The Person who quickens us, indwells us, loves us, leads us; who gives us assurance of our being God’s adopted children, who helps us in infirmities by making intercession for us, and who has sealed us unto the day of redemption.  May we grieve Him not; rather, as “we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.”[59]  May we recognize His indwelling presence day by day in acting accordingly, thus availing ourselves of His Divine fullness and power.  We must expect a struggle between flesh and spirit as long as we are in the world.  But if the prevailing mood of our lives is to be led by the Holy Spirit, making the Word of God our rule, and the grace of God our principle, it will be apparent that we are living in the Spirit.  “For there is now no condemnation to those that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit; for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.”[60]  In all of this, the entire work of the Holy Spirit, Christ Jesus is glorified.  “He shall glorify me; for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you.”[61]

In our fellowship with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit we have a foretaste of the eternal life to come.  The profound concept that, as one, we may have fellowship with the Father and Son was the Lord’s prayer, and ought to be our greatest desire, until more and more we see fulfilled that multitude of boundless blessings that have been pledged to us.  “This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Christ Jesus, whom thou hast sent.”[62]

[1] John 17:11

[2] John 17:21

[3] I Corinthians 6:17

[4] John 17:3

[5] Galatians 4:6-7

[6] Galatians 5:25

[7] II Corinthians 13:14

[8] Mark 14:36

[9] I John 4:8

[10] “The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,”

Exodus 34:6, 7

[11] I John 4: 10

[12] Ephesians 1:4-7 

[13] John 16:26, 27

[14] Titus 3:4

[15] Titus 3:3

[16] Psalm 103:13; Isaiah 63:16; Matthew 6:6; Psalm 23:l; Isaiah 40:11; Matthew 23:37

[17] Isaiah 66:13

[18] John 14:l

[19] I John 4:8

[20] John 1:18

[21] John 17:6

[22] Proverbs 23:26

[23] That is, Christ is sacrificed on the Cross for God’s chosen ones

[24] Zephaniah 3:17

[25] Jeremiah 31:3

[26] Ephesians 1:6

[27] Psalm 36:7-9

[28] I Corinthians 1:9

[29] Revelation 3:20

[30] John 1:14

[31] John 1:17 & 16

[32] Song of Solomon 4:7

[33] Psalm 45:2

[34] Hebrews 7:25

[35] Colossians 1:19

[36] John 3:34 “For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.”

[37] Song of Solomon 4:12

[38] I John 3:24

[39] I John 4:13

[40] Many Emerging Church leaders would have us shut down the brain in order to know to experience God.  The Lord God however says “ Come now, and let us reason together” Isaiah 1:18

[41] http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/John/john_51.htm

[42] John 15:12

[43] I John 3:16

[44] I John 4:12

[45] See “fruit of the Spirit.”  (Galatians 5:22 and Ephesians 5: 9)

[46] John 15:11

[47] John 15:7

[48] John 15:7

[49] Luke 8:18

[50] I Corinthians 3:15

[51] Ephesians 4:30

[52] 2 Corinthians 5:5

[53] Galatians 4:6

[54] Galatians 4:7

[55] Romans 8:17

[56] I Thessalonians 5:19

[57] Isaiah 4:4

[58] Ephesians 2:18

[59] Galatians 5:25

[60] Romans 8:1,14

[61] John 16:14

[62] John 17:3

God’s Institution of Marriage not Papal Rome’s

The old adage that states, “the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world” could more aptly be declared as “the hand that controls marriage rules the world.”  Before we can critique the Catholic Church’s legal control of marriage, we must first examine the biblical source of marriage and establish that it is of divine origin.  As creator and sovereign over His creation, God in His wisdom instituted marriage in the commandment that male and female should at a proper time leave mother and father and cleave one to another, “therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”[1]  

Scripture shows from the beginning that both believers[2] and unbelievers[3] married because the ordinance of marriage applies to all mankind.  Mankind cannot overthrow or nullify this creation command.  God has used families, clans, tribes, kingdoms, and states as instruments to facilitate, promote, and enforce the institution of marriage.  However, because man is fallen and his nature is sinful, these organized institutions in varying degrees have not followed the divine command of permanent monogamy as the law of marriage.  Too many of God’s people have followed the corrupted norms of society rather than the law of God.  God’s judgment is upon human institutions and governments that allow the divine pattern of marriage to fall into disrepute.[4]  The Lord Jesus Christ reinforced the creation command and explained how it was God’s will for His people, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”[5]  The relationship between married believers should be a reflection, dim though it might be in this life, of their union with Christ.[6]  The true people of God should be the preeminent instrument that God uses to uphold marriage, because they have the revelation of Scripture and the power of the Holy Spirit.  No church or so-called church, such as the Roman Catholic Church has authority to make laws concerning the validity of marriage or its abrogation.  Marriage is a divine creation ordinance applying to all mankind. 

The Word of God does not prescribe anything in respect to the form a marriage ceremony might take.  Ceremonies differ in various nations but should never be regarded as anything more or anything less than a public recognition of a relationship entered into by a man and woman before God their creator.  Yet, as marriage is a matter of important consequence involving public as well as private obligations, it is appropriate and necessary that some public ceremony should be performed publicly so that the reality of the marital union should be without doubt.  

Rome’s Alleged Absolute Power Over Marriage

While the Catholic Church gives lip service to marriage as fashioned by God in its basic meaning and structure, what she practices and enforces as law stands in stark contrast.  The Catholic Church claims to have absolute authority over marriage and legislates its validity and annulment.  For example, Pope Leo XIII tried to vindicate the Catholic Church’s usurped authority over the institution of marriage when he declared, 

“When Christ, therefore, renewed matrimony and raised it to such a great [i.e., sacramental] excellence, He gave and confided to the Church the entire legislation in the matter.”[7]

In Papal Rome’s Code of Canon Law she states, “Marriage cases of the baptized belong to the ecclesiastical judge by the proper right.”[8]  Rome is unapologetically clear as she makes her claim that marriage belongs to her.  Thus she officially proclaims,

“But the grace which was to perfect that natural love, and confirm the indissoluble union, and sanctify those united in marriage, Christ Himself, institutor and perfector of the venerable Sacraments, merited for us by His passion.  The Apostle Paul intimates this, when he says:  ‘Men, love your wives as Christ loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it’, directly adding: ‘This is a great Sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church.’”[9]

This statement is a fabricated lie in the face of the very text of Scripture itself when it states, “This is a great mystery:  but I speak concerning Christ and the church.”[10]  The Apostle gives express warning that no man should understand him as speaking of marriage.  The subject that the Apostle was exalting is “Christ is the head of the church.”[11]  He explains that this truth is more fully expressed as “a great mystery,” that is to say, that Christ breathes into the church His own life and power.  Twisting this to mean that marriage is “a great sacrament” is one the grossest examples of the perversion of Scripture and gives a foothold to the Catholic claim to power over marriage.  Because of Jerome’s translation of the Latin Vulgate Bible, the Roman Catholic Church substitutes the word “Sacrament” for the word “mystery.  Thus, on the mistranslation of a single Bible word, the Catholic Church has constructed a whole theology whereby she claims absolute power over the most intimate and private relationship of millions of people.  This error is no small thing when one sees the havoc it wreaks upon the lives of those who belong to the Catholic Church and the great pain and difficulty it brings to those who are trying to live out their marriage under her jurisdiction.  Nevertheless, the Catholic Church is so adamant in maintaining her claim that she puts a curse on anyone who denies that marriage is truly a sacrament, 

“If anyone says that matrimony is not truly and properly one of the seven sacraments of the evangelical Law, instituted by Christ the Lord, but that it has been invented by men in the Church, and does not confer grace:  let him be anathema.”[12]

Megalomaniac Power Even in Civil Law

The Roman Catholic laws on marriage should shock anyone knowing its divine source as coming from the creator Himself.  In Scripture it is declared to be respectable in all its facets, “Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled.”[13]  Marriage is the institution of God so designed that it frees men and women in every part of the habitable world to be united in this bond.  Marriage is God’s ordinance and falls under the jurisdiction of no church.  It should be esteemed by all and denied by none for whom God created it.  Marriage is honorable because God instituted it for man from the beginning.  He married and blessed the first couple, the first parents of mankind, to direct all to look to God in this great institution.  This is so abundantly clear that one would think that all humankind would be in agreement.  Nevertheless, the Church of Rome does not agree.[14]  All of the secular features of marriage expressed above are strongly opposed by the Roman Catholic Church.  This opposition was first expressed in the twelfth century when Papal Rome took control over marriage and began legislating on the validity or invalidity of all marriages, whether kings or peasants.[15]

This takeover of marriage by Rome proved to be one of her most powerful tools in her quest for power over Catholics worldwide.  In her 1983 Code of Canon Law, the Vatican has taken steps to consolidate her power over marriage.  For example, the Vatican sets the age at which a person may enter marriage when it legislates that “a man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age cannot enter into a valid marriage.”[16]  Further, according to Catholic law, the marriage of a Catholic with an unbaptized person is legally invalid:

“A marriage between two persons, one of whom has been baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it and has not defected from it by a formal act and the other of whom is not baptized, is invalid.”[17]

The same Vatican also legislates that sexual impotence on the part of a man or wife makes a marriage legally invalid.  Thus she decrees, “Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have intercourse, whether on the part of the man or the woman, whether absolute or relative, nullifies marriage by its very nature.”[18]

The Pope further reserves the right to dissolve a non-consummated marriage, even if a person is unwilling.  Thus the Vatican in Canon 1142 legislates, 

“For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.”

While public recognition of a relationship is essential to marriage, the Vatican in Canon 1130 legislates even for secret marriages, “For a grave and urgent cause, the local ordinary [the bishop] can permit a marriage to be celebrated secretly.”  This “secret marriage” is so covert and surreptitious that the Vatican solemnly declares, “A marriage celebrated secretly is to be noted only in a special register to be kept in the secret archive of the curia.”[19]  This is only a small portion of the more than 110 laws concerning marriage that the Cardinals and Bishops of the Church of Rome legislate for Catholic people around the world.[20]  

On the issue of marriage, the Vatican acts as if she has the power of God.  For example, this power is assumed in the above quoted statement regarding the Pope’s alleged power to dissolve a non-consummated marriage regardless of both parties’ willingness.  If this alleged power were confined just theoretically and strictly to the Papal Church, it would still be unacceptable although predictable.  However, the difficulty is that the Vatican power is that of both a Church and a civil state.[21]  As a sovereign state, the Vatican is recognized by one hundred seventy-four other nations with whom she exchanges ambassadors.  With some of these nations she also legally enters into what is called a “concordat,” which is an international contract legally binding her with the nation involved.  It guarantees to the Roman Catholic Church and Catholics within that nation such “rights” as worship, instruction of their people in their religion, and the acceptance of Roman Catholic law regarding marriage and annulment.  This last factor, the control of marriages within nations, is recognized even by secular academic writings.  We quote from The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, 

“The Catholic Church [in most Latin American countries] was basically the only church with a legal presence, and it did not operate under the aegis of governmental laws or regulations.  The law applicable to the Catholic Church was its own canon law.  The Catholic Church’s dealings with governments were not regulated by legislation or executive decree, but by treaties or agreements with the Vatican.  Other churches, to the extent they existed or operated at all, could not enter into such treaties because they were not independent sovereigns.”[22]  

The age-old ambitions of the Vatican have not changed, including the desire to control her people even in the most intimate aspects of their lives.  Consequently, her hold on Catholic marriages will not be relinquished without the power of the Gospel.  Under the Gospel, men and women are brought into a state of liberty in which they are freed from the burden of the rigorous control of Roman Catholic marriage law.  It is, therefore, the glorious duty of men and women to stand fast in this liberty and to adhere to the Gospel of grace and the freedom it brings.  This is the basic and essential way for Catholics to be rid of this yoke of marital bondage.

Mixed Marriages

The Vatican’s control over marriages and the marriage bed becomes especially manipulative in the way she handles “mixed marriages.”  Mixed marriages have been and continue to be one of the more successful ways of increasing the numbers of those who submit to Catholic ways.  I remember in all my twenty-one years as a priest in Trinidad how stringently I insisted on the Catholic laws.  I performed marriage after marriage in which the papers were filled with the resolution that all children born of the union would be brought up in the Catholic Church.  This is the Catholic law, “Without express permission of the competent authority, a marriage is prohibited between two baptized persons of whom one is baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it after baptism and has not defected from it by a formal act and the other of whom is enrolled in a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the Catholic Church.”[23]  The real clinching law is Canon 1125,

“The local ordinary [i.e., a bishop] can a grant permission of this kind if there is a just and reasonable cause.  He is not to grant it unless the following conditions have been fulfilled.  1. The Catholic party is to declare that he or she is prepared to remove dangers of defecting from the faith and to make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power so that all offspring are baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church; 2. The other party is to be informed at an appropriate time about the promises which the Catholic party is to make, in such a way that it is certain that he or she is truly aware of the promise and obligation of the Catholic party; 3. both parties are to be instructed about the purposes and essential properties of marriage, which neither of the contracting parties is to exclude.”

When Rome first began its campaign to win Protestants to Catholicism in the United States, one strategy of its plan was to entice them by mixed marriages.  In 1810, Roman Catholic Bishop Brute wrote a report to be sent back to Rome in which he mentions under the topic of “Conversion of Protestants” that “It is necessary to consider the conversions: By direct teachings. By education among Catholics. By mixed marriages…”[24]  Regrettably, these humanistic plans, by means of mixed marriages, have been quite successful in augmenting the power of Rome.  Such unbiblical practices, however, are in total opposition to the means of establishing the kingdom of God as taught in the Scriptures.  Christ Jesus declared, “My kingdom is not of this world.”[25]  His kingdom is not a political institution regulated by worldly laws to gain more subjects.  Rather, His kingdom is a spiritual regime, regulated by the Truth, and His gracious Gospel is the means He uses for its enlargement.  

Divorce

Biblically, when it comes to divorce, there are four important and relevant statements made by the Lord Jesus Christ.  Two of these reflect total opposition to divorce while two others indicate acceptance of divorce on the grounds of sexual unfaithfulness and accordingly the right to remarriage for the innocent party.  Before God, marriage is a lifetime relationship that should never be brought to an end by human action.  The fundamental divine law of marriage is that a man shall leave father and mother and shall cleave to his wife.  The nature of the marriage contract is that the two persons joined in such a union become one flesh, “Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh.  What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”[26]  Husband and wife, being joined together by the ordinance of God, are not to be separated by any decree of man.  God says that He hates divorce.[27]  God’s perfect will is the safeguarding of society and future generations by the preservation of marriages.  God will give anyone great help in sustaining a marriage of estranged marriage partners.  Only two biblical grounds exist for divorce and remarriage.  When sexual unfaithfulness has taken place, a divorce can be obtained because adultery has already severed the marriage relationship and divorce is a formal acknowledgment of what has already taken place.  “Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery:  and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”[28]  The law of Christ reinstated man in his initial integrity; i.e., the institution and preservation of marriage between a man and a woman was from the beginning.  When we consider what evil is perpetrated on families and nations through Papal laws on annulment of marriage, and the arbitrary civil divorces that are prevalent in society, we shall see how much this law of Christ stands in the interest of all mankind. 

Divorce—Annulment Style

The Catholic Church declares that marriage between baptized people is in fact a sacrament.  This is reiterated in canon law, “…a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament.”[29]  What the Roman Catholic Church means in declaring marriage a sacrament is that it is an institution by which God gives grace and over which Rome has control.  Rome sets up a hierarchy of marriages whereby the Catholic marriage takes precedence over other marriages.  Marriages that are civilly valid can be considered null and void from the point of view of Catholic law.  For example, a marriage of a Catholic to a non-Catholic that did not take place before a Catholic priest is considered null and void and it is only a matter of time before the parties can be released from their marriage covenant.

The necessary consequence of marriage as a sacrament is the establishment of a system whereby Catholic marriages surpass and take precedence over all other marriages.  Catholics are conditioned from childhood to accept the idea that marriage must be done before a priest and to look down on marriages that have not been so performed.  The way that this teaching is applied under Catholic law is very serious because it is quite easy to get a decree of annulment when a marriage was not performed before a priest.  It is much more difficult to get an annulment for those marriages that have been carried out before a priest and are called Sacramental.

The Catholic Church continually enunciates that there can be no divorce for a marriage that is lawfully performed between consenting baptized man and woman.  However, study of the Roman Catholic laws regarding an annulment shows that great technical skill and ingenuity is used in dispensing ecclesiastical annulments.  An annulment, in actual fact, amounts to exactly the same thing as a divorce in practice.  In law, it goes beyond the concept of a divorce.  The Catholic Church, in granting an annulment, declares legally that a marriage never was.  This means that one can end up in the absurd situation of having been married and having had children from that marriage—a tangible evidence of the marriage—and yet the marriage is declared to never have been!  Furthermore, without an annulment the Catholic Church does not recognize civil divorce as valid.  Having a civil divorce in turn keeps Catholics from taking the Eucharist, which, after baptism, is the central means of obtaining ongoing grace that purportedly flows through the sacrament.  Being cut off from the Eucharist has extreme consequences when Catholics think of dying without that necessary sacramental grace in which they have been taught to trust.

One of the chief implements used in gaining an annulment is called a “diriment impediment.”  A diriment impediment is an impediment that is serious enough to nullify a marriage automatically.  One such impediment could be a lack of consent of either party or a deficiency in “the form of marriage.”  The required form of marriage according to Rome is that it is performed before a priest and two witnesses.  Many marriages are declared null because of the laws the Catholic Church has regarding “diriment impediments.”  Then, too, the Catholic Church has evolved a terminology that outclasses even the Pharisees.  An example of this is a “radical sanation.”[30]  A radical sanation is a decree that is retroactive and can stabilize and make a marriage valid that had started out invalidly.  Present-day canon law states,

“The radical sanation of an invalid marriage is its convalidation without the renewal of consent, which is granted by the competent authority and entails the dispensation from an impediment, if there is one, and from canonical form, if it was not observed, and the retroactivity of canonical effects.”[31]

Even the Pharisees would have marveled at this intricate legislation that is purportedly able to retroactively make a marriage valid that had not been valid.  The same canon continues, “Convalidation occurs at the moment of the granting of the favor.  Retroactivity, however, is understood to extend to the moment of the celebration of the marriage unless other provision is expressly made.”[32]  Such destruction and production of marriages contravenes Divine law.  It is done by the same Papal Rome that outlaws marriage for her priests.  

Papal Destruction and Production of Marriage

The Catholic Church claims apostolic power to both annul marriages and declare their legitimacy.  The Catholic Church exercises such power even if both parties know nothing of what is being done.  Thus Rome proclaims in her law, “A sanation can be granted validly even if either or both of the parties do not know of it; nevertheless it is not to be granted except for a grave cause.”[33]  This mysterious power she declares is held in the heart of Rome herself, “The Apostolic See can grant a radical sanation.”[34]  In reality, marriage is not validated at the command of Rome; scripturally, marriage is regulated according to the will and counsel of God.  The Lord Christ Jesus said, “a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife.”[35]  This alone is how a marriage becomes valid before God.  To decree that celibate prelates in Rome, even though the involved parties themselves do not know of it, can make a marriage legitimate is pharisaic totalitarianism gone wild!  This bizarre power is claimed because Rome claims that marriage is a sacrament, and therefore within her power to make or break marriages according to her own will and purposes.  

The unmaking of marriages is sometimes done by what is called “interior consent,” that is, the consent that either the man or woman had or did not have from the beginning.  On different ecclesiastical investigations, this can be produced in an ecclesiastical court, either to make or to break a marriage.  Catholic annulments are a big business inside the Catholic Church, and in the United States it is known in which of the states it is easiest to get an annulment.  

“The statistics are interesting.  In 1968 there were in the US a total of 338 annulments.  In 1992 there were no less than 59,030, that is one hundred and seventy-five times as many.  Another interesting figure is that the total number of annulments in the Catholic Church world wide in 1992 was 76,286, which means that no less than 75% of all annulments were from the US, that is from a little over 5% of the world’s Catholic population.  Moreover, not only do one in two Catholic marriages here in the States end up with a divorce, but one in five is officially annulled, 90% of the demands for annulment being successful.”[36]

The Catholic “Family Life Center International” states the following, 

“American tribunals have been mass producing annulments without interruption for a generation.  The criticism does not emanate mainly from benighted pre‑Vatican II Catholics still living in the past. Indeed, the most trenchant and sustained criticism has come from the Roman Rota, the Apostolic Signatura, and the Holy Father himself.  Vatican displeasure with the American way of annulment is not of recent vintage.  It has existed for at least a quarter of a century.”[37]

The procedure for obtaining an annulment is explained by local Roman Catholic dioceses across the world.  For example the diocese of Saint Cloud, Minnesota USA, state, “The annulment process, in its most simple form, involves any person coming to the Church and asking to be heard.  Information is gathered by us and in the end, we answer that person’s request: the marriage was invalid or valid according to the laws of the Church.”[38]

The casual and arrogant manner of dealing with marriage is not surprising.  All is done “according to the laws of the Church.”  Bishops and priests, all of them celibate, are the ones who make judgments on these matters.  Like indulgences, the whole annulment industry of the Roman Catholic Church—from the propounding of the laws to the sale of the contraband article—is in total violation of Scripture. 

Marriage and the Catholic Travesty Against It

The Lord Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, clearly spoke of the dignity and sanctity of marriage.  When questioned about marriage, He went back to the narrative in Genesis, “Have you not read that he which made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh’?”[39]  Christ Jesus’ endorsement of the sanctity of marriage was simply a re-endorsement of the original revelation given by God.  Marriage is a creation ordinance, unlike baptism and the Lord’s Supper, which are ordinances of the New Testament directly from Christ Himself and for believers only.

Marriage is from the beginning and it comes under the jurisdiction of the civil state as instituted by God.  For Christians, the laws regarding marriage are clearly laid out in the Bible, both in the Old and New Testaments.  A Christian pastor can counsel a couple regarding their marriage according to these biblical norms.  He is never to take jurisdiction over their marriage to make or break it.  The Lord Jesus Christ is abundantly clear when He states that what God has joined together, no man should put asunder.  The only biblical cases that can be found for divorce is that which the Lord Himself allows for in the case of sexual unfaithfulness and the case that of the desertion of a believer by an unbelieving spouse as described I Corinthians 7:12-15.[40]

Nevertheless, the Catholic Church has manufactured a whole set of rules and regulations that requires a Roman Catholic canon lawyer to fully understand.  They are such that even the Pharisees would blush.  Papal Rome says she upholds the sanctity of marriage, but she allows marriages to be declared null and void based upon a terminology of her own making.  For example, “validity” when granted by Rome’s ecclesial courts is not just a simple statement.  It allows for different interpretations.  For example Canon 1684 states,

“After the sentence which first declared the nullity of the marriage has been confirmed at the appellate grade either by a decree or by a second sentence, the persons whose marriage has been declared null can contract a new marriage as soon as the decree or second sentence has been communicated to them unless a prohibition attached to the sentence or decree or established by the local ordinary [the bishop] has forbidden this.”

Thus, the very decree that a marriage is null and void is muddied by theological terminology whereby, if someone is to act on Catholic teaching, he needs trained lawyers to lead him through the labyrinth of canon law.  In total contrast, the Bible gives a clear message that God, who is the All Holy One, has decreed what makes a marriage.  This is wonderful for both the people of God and for all mankind.  It is a common blessing of God’s grace.  The Catholic Church has abducted this divine institution and used it for its own purposes.  Papal Rome has granted hundreds of thousands of annulments and allowed remarriage.  Many of these unions, called marriages, are in fact, before the Lord and His Word, nothing more than officially blessed whoredoms.  Such sinful unions take away the hearts and souls of men and women.  These are real situations, blessed by the priest and the Church of Rome; they are like a deep ditch and a narrow pit, out of which it is almost impossible to escape.  

An Example from Early American History

John Adams, the second president of the United States, addressed ecclesiastical tyranny as he asked the question, “Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?”[41]  He so clearly saw the dangers that he called “Catholic Christianity” “Cabalistic Christianity.”[42]  In his “Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” Adams pinpointed the problem when he wrote of the early Christian Puritans in America, 

“[that their] greatest concern seems to have been to establish a government of the church more consistent with the Scriptures, and a government of the state more agreeable to the dignity of human nature, than any they had seen in Europe, and to transmit such a government down to their posterity, with the means of securing and preserving it forever….  They saw clearly, that of all the nonsense and delusion which had ever passed through the mind of man, none had ever been more extravagant than the notions of absolutions, indelible characters, uninterrupted successions, and the rest of those fantastical ideas, derived from the canon law, which had thrown such a glare of mystery, sanctity, reverence, and right reverend eminence and holiness, around the idea of a priest, as no mortal could deserve, and as always must, from the constitution of human nature, be dangerous in society.”[43]  

In this day of false ecumenism with the same Roman Catholic Church, John Adams’ question should again be asked.  Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic marriage laws? 

Conclusion

The extravagant demands of Roman Catholic law impinge on the freedom of any nation.  If Christian people are truly informed, they must become aware that marriage, the very basis of society, is being controlled and manipulated for millions of Catholics.[44]  It applies to not only the millions of Catholics in United States, in different Western nations, and across the world, but it also applies to the millions of Christians and others who are also deeply ensnared by Papal canon law as they enter into a marriage with a Catholic.  If Catholicism is to be addressed seriously, the infringement on marriage must be dealt with scripturally, as it stands at the very heart and structure of civil society as given by God.  

The true believer can understand that the difference between the Church of Rome and the true Church is parallel to the difference between a wanton woman adorned with gold and jewels, scarlet and purple, and a pure virgin chastely and modestly adorned, about to be united in bonds of love to an upright husband.  The Scripture declares, “Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb.”[45]  The true believer has washed his robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb; the wedding blessings he did not purchase by any price of his own, but received them as the gift and inheritance of his blessed Lord.  Great and awe-inspiring events are before the true believer.  Now is not the time for flabby Christianity that will not face the legal consequences of faith.  It is time to fully investigate the social price tag of Papal law on marriages.  

We cannot maintain a biblical and evangelical testimony for the Gospel of salvation by faith alone in Christ alone while granting legitimacy to Roman Catholic laws on marriage.  It is impossible to claim to be a Bible-believing, Evangelical Christian who accepts both the inspiration and authority of the Word of God while still giving legality to Roman Catholicism; a system that rejects the final authority of Scripture, as their laws on marriage show.  Such behavior is an affront to Christ in His work of redemption and likewise to the Holy Spirit in His ministry of convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment.  The Apostle Paul wrote under the direction of the Holy Spirit, “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.”[46]  

Who can bear the devouring fire of God’s everlasting wrath?  The good news is that personal faith and salvation is also from His hand, “Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Savior, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.”[47]  The Scripture proclaims, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.”[48]  The Lord Himself declared, “He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be damned.”[49]  The Lord will always be merciful to those who turn to Him in faith for the remission of sins.  “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.  Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart:  and ye shall find rest unto your souls.  For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”[50]  Before the all-holy God, according to the Bible, an individual is saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.  Following on this, all glory and praise is to God alone!  ♦

[1] Genesis 2:24

[2] For example, see Genesis 5

[3] For example, see Genesis 4:16-17

[4] “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18).  The word “ungodliness” includes all crimes against God and all crimes against fellowmen in marriage or otherwise. 

[5] Matthew 19:6

[6] “Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing…  This is a great mystery:  but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Ephesians 5:24, 32).

[7] Neuner and Dupuis, Para. 1821  

[8] Code of Canon Law, Canon 1671  

[9] Denzinger, # 969  Emphasis is not in original.

[10] Ephesians 5:32

[11] Ephesians 5:23

[12] Denzinger, # 971  

[13] Hebrews 13:4  

[14] Marriage in Muslim societies is unfeasible in biblical terms, and there are other exceptions such as Communist China where the State dictates even the number of children that a couple is allowed to have. 

[15] For most of its history from the sixth century to the time of the Reformation, the Catholic Church controlled religion, morals, politics, art, and education in what was known as the Holy Roman Empire.  In all those centuries of the Dark Ages, it was the priest and bishop who governed peoples’ lives in regards to morality and therefore, marriage.  It was not until the Reformation that the institution of marriage achieved any freedom from Roman ecclesiastical control.  In the 18th and 19th centuries, some governments established an independent civil institution of marriage for all people on an equal basis.  There were, of course, Christian groups independent of the Catholic Church throughout all of the Christian era, as, for example, the Vaudois, the Waldenses, and others.  From its beginning, the United States as a nation built its governmental structures in both church and state upon the Reformation understanding of separation of religious and civil jurisdictions.  Because of this biblical understanding, the United States was free from Catholic dominion from the very beginning.  The United States is compromised however by the fact that it now has civil relations with the Vatican.  The general state of affairs in Europe for most of its history was that the Catholic law was the moral law.

[16] Canon 1083, §1

[17] Canon 1086 §1

[18] Canon 1084 §1

[19] Canon 1133

[20] So comprehensive are these laws that they are organized into chapters.  Canons 1055 – 1165:  Ch. I. Pastoral Care and Those Things Which Must Precede the Celebration of Marriage.  Ch. II. Diriment Impediments in General.  Ch. III. Specific Diriment Impediments.  Chapter IV. Matrimonial Consent.  Ch. V.  The Form of the Celebration of Marriage.  Ch. VI. Mixed marriages.  Ch. VII. Marriage Celebrated Secretly.  Ch. VIII. The Effects of Marriage.  Ch. IX. The Separation of Spouses, Art. 1. Dissolution of the Bond.  Art. 2. Separation with the Bond Remaining.  Ch. X. The Convalidation of Marriage, Art. 1. Simple Convalidation.  Art. 2. Radical Sanation.

[21] The term “Holy See” always refers to the Roman Catholic Church as a political entity and is used in her relationships with other nations.  

[22] The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, Vol. Six, Issue One Sept 2003 p 3

http://www.icnl.org/JOURNAL/vol6iss1/rel_isaacsonprint.htm 5/28/05

[23] Canon 1124  Emphasis added

[24] Documentary Reports on Early American Catholicism selected and introduced by Philip Gleason (New York:  Arno Press, 1978) p. 229

[25] John 18:36

[26] Matthew 19:6

[27] Malachi 2:16

[28] Matthew 19:9

[29] Canon 1055, §2

[30] The Latin words ‘sanatio in radice’ leterally mean‘healing in the root’. It is Papal Rome’s attempt to heal a marriage without securing a renewal of consent.  Such ‘sanatios’ can be granted only by her.

[31] Canon 1161

[32] Canon 1161, §2

[33] Canon 1164

[34] Canon 1165

[35] Matthew 19:5

[36] http://www.sspx.org/Canonical_Commission/august_1995_ltr.htm 11/18/2008

[37] http://www.familylifecenter.net/article.asp?artId=64   11/18/2008

[38] http://www.stcdio.org/annulment.htm   11/18/2008

[39] Matthew 19:4-5

[40] “If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.  And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.  For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband:  else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.  But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart.  A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases:  but God hath called us to peace.”

[41] John Adams, Letter to Thomas Jefferson, May 19, 1821  www.historicist.com/articles2/historicwarnings.htm

[42] Ibid., John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, July 16, 1814.  “Cabalistic Christianity, which is Catholic Christianity, and which has prevailed for 1,500 years, has received a mortal wound….”  

[43] John Adams, “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” printed in the Boston Gazette, August 1765.  Text is on: www.ashbrook.org/library/18/adams/canonlaw.html  5/30/05

[44] On September 12, 2005 FoxNews.com brought to light one of the insidious tactics used by the Roman system to gain greater control of Catholic marriage through civil law in its article, “Ontario Rejects Use of Islamic Law”.  “Ontario, the most populous province in Canada, has allowed Catholic and Jewish faith-based tribunals to settle family law matters on a voluntary basis since 1991.  The practice got little attention until Muslim leaders demanded the same rights.  Officials had to decide whether to exclude one religion, or whether to scrap the religious family courts altogether.  McGuinty [Premier of Ontario] said such courts ‘threaten our common ground,’ and promised his Liberal government would introduce legislation as soon as possible to outlaw them in Ontario.  ‘Ontarians will always have the right to seek advice from anyone in matters of family law, including religious advice,’ he said, ‘But no longer will religious arbitration be deciding matters of family law.’”  The Catholic Church’s foothold into Canadian civil law has suffered a set-back for the moment by this decision of Premier McGuinty.

[45] Revelation 19:9

[46] Romans 1:18

[47] Acts 5:31

[48] Acts 16:31

[49] Mark 16:16

[50] Matthew 11:28-30

Has the Church of Rome Changed?

Many Evangelicals will tell you, “The Catholic Church has changed.”  This is because the Catholic Church has enticed Evangelicals—calling them “separated brethren” and dialoguing with them as if the Catholic Church respected their beliefs. 

Quite a number of people who call themselves Evangelical accept as fact that Papal Rome has changed and are willing to work together with her.  However, they do this without examining the present-day official teachings of the Catholic Church. 

The Church of Rome declares, in her present-day Vatican II Documents, that her laws (including those defining heresy) are “irreformable.”[1]  Thus, while some Evangelicals will say she has changed, the Church of Rome declares officially that her teachings cannot change. 

The Anathemas

The Council of Trent convened from 1545 to 1563 with the aim of destroying the progress of the Reformation.  The Council denied all the key Reformation doctrines, including “Scripture alone, grace alone, and faith alone.”  Trent cursed Bible-believing Christians with anathemas[2] one hundred and twenty five times. 

So, has Rome repudiated Trent?  No, quite the contrary.  Present-day dogma of the Catholic Church not only upholds the teachings of the Council of Trent but also declares that such councils are infallible.[3]

The Council of Trent proclaimed the following curses, which are called “infallible” by the present-day catechism of the Catholic Church. 

“If anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified: let him be anathema.”[4]

“If anyone shall say that by the said sacraments of the New Law, grace is not conferred from the work which has been worked [ex opere operato] but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace: let him be anathema.”[5]

It is logical for Papal Rome today to uphold these curses on those who hold to “justification by faith alone” because of what she still refuses to concede.  For her, justification is not an immediate declaration of God received by faith alone.  Rather, Rome teaches that grace is given through her sacraments.  Thus, she is able to secure a place for herself as a necessary means through which inner righteousness is given.

The Sacraments

This so-called “change” Papal Rome promotes, yet she continues to teach that internal righteousness with God is granted exclusively through her sacramental system.  Thus she states, 

“The Most Holy Trinity gives the baptized [person] sanctifying grace, the grace of justification…”[6]  And, “Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy.”[7]  Her present-day dogma is that her sacraments are necessary for salvation.  Thus, she states, “The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation. Sacramental grace is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament.”[8]

These claims regarding the effect and efficacy of the sacraments constitute frontal attacks on the truth of God’s written Word—which tells us that the believer is justified in Christ alone.

“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”[9]

The Beloved

To be chosen in Christ shows that justification is not of any person’s doing, nor is it a recognition of anything that a person deserves.  Rather, it declares that the heavenly Father has chosen persons in Christ before they have done anything good or bad, and even before the world was created. 

Papal Rome’s affirmation that the basis of justification is “infused” righteousness obtained by works, is a negation of consistent biblical teaching that righteousness is credited to the believer in Jesus Christ alone.[10]

Ephesians 1:6 clearly declares where the assurance of the believer is positioned. The location of God’s favor is revealed.  One’s acceptance is in Christ and stands, “To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.”[11]

The supreme and conclusive purpose of God’s electing love is immediately added—that everything is to the praise of His glorious and abundant grace.  The present-day doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church attempts to destroy entirely the biblical doctrine of justification.  It endeavors to rob the All-Holy God of the glory that flows from the salvation of sinners.

The Ignorance

Beware of the Roman Catholic Church and of her pretence to have changed.  Beware also of those Evangelicals who are affiliating with Rome today and who speak of Rome’s errors in a soft manner. 

They teach that non-Catholics should join hands with Catholics to solve the social-political issues of our day, but they do not understand her doctrines.  The Word of God clearly tells us, 

“Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him, for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.”[12]  And again: “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.”[13]  “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?”[14]

The ignorance of many Evangelicals is astounding.  Prevailing at the present day are such movements as Evangelicals and Catholics Together, Christian Churches Together, the New Perspective, the Coming Home Movement, and many other apostate associations.  Rather than compromise the gospel, we are to separate from those who promote such heresy and “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints.”[15]

The Response

How can we respond in a positive way?  By taking hold of the Bible as the Lord’s Word and promise to us.  Like Israel of old, present-day Evangelicalism has in many ways become a wilderness and desolation.  The Lord promises, however, that

“Where sin abounded grace did much more abound: that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.”[16]

If we ardently stand for biblical truth, and exalt the Lord Jesus Christ as Sovereign Head of the Church, God will take the stony hearts out of our flesh, and will give us hearts of flesh, to fear and serve him alone.  Let us pray urgently that the Lord God will again breathe the Holy Spirit into the valley of dry bones that is modern Evangelicalism!  Our permanent duty consists of faith in Christ Jesus and in his Word.  The Father has willed that Christ should “in all things ... have the pre-eminence.”[17]  “For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”[18]

We must not only believe intellectually that “of his fullness have all we received, and grace for grace.”  We must also pray with true doctrine and expectation of the Holy Spirit, that this verse will become a reality—controlling how we live as Christians at the present day and what we perceive as his answer to our present needs. 

[1] Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Section 25, Nov. 1964

[2] Anathema means eternal damnation, or cursed.

[3] Catechism of the Catholic Church  Para. 891

[4] Henry Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, # 822, Canon 12

[5] Denzinger loc. cit. # 851, Canon 8

[6] Catechism of the Catholic Church, Para. 1266

[7] Ibíd.. Para. 1992

[8] Ibíd.. Para. 1129

[9] Galatians 2:16

[10] Psalm 32:2, 71:15-16, 130:3; Isaiah 45:24-25, 54:17, 61:10; Jeremiah 23:6, 33:16, 51:10; Daniel 9:24; Luke 18:14; Romans 1:17, 3:21-22, 4:6, 11, 5:18-19; I Corinthians 1:30; II Corinthians 5:21; Ephesians 1:6; Colossians 2:10, 3:3; II Peter 1:1; and elsewhere.

[11] Ephesians 1:6

[12] II John 9-1

[13] Ephesians 5:11

[14] II Corinthians 6:14-15

[15] Jude 3

[16] Jude 3

[17] Colossians 1:18

[18] Colossians 1:9