Beza's Motto
1 day ago
Martyred for the Gospel
The burning of Tharchbishop of Cant. D. Tho. Cranmer in the town dich at Oxford, with his hand first thrust into the fyre, wherwith he subscribed before. [Click on the picture to see Cranmer's last words.]
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Gerald Bray Speaks On Issues, Etc. About the Crisis in Anglicanism
Click on Gerald Bray on Issues, Etc. to hear this audio mp3.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Calvin: Why We Should Avoid the Term "Free Will"
7. In this way, then, man is said to have free will, not because he has a free choice of good and evil, but because he acts voluntarily, and not by compulsion. This is perfectly true: but why should so small a matter have been dignified with so proud a title? An admirable freedom! that man is not forced to be the servant of sin, while he is, however, ἐθελοδουλος (a voluntary slave); his will being bound by the fetters of sin. I abominate mere verbal disputes, by which the Church is harassed to no purpose; but I think we ought religiously to eschew terms which imply some absurdity, especially in subjects where error is of pernicious consequence. How few are there who, when they hear free will attributed to man, do not immediately imagine that he is the master of his mind and will in such a sense, that he can of himself incline himself either to good or evil? It may be said that such dangers are removed by carefully expounding the meaning to the people. But such is the proneness of the human mind to go astray, that it will more quickly draw error from one little word, than truth from a lengthened discourse. Of this, the very term in question furnishes too strong a proof. For the explanation given by ancient Christian writers having been lost sight of, almost all who have come after them, by attending only to the etymology of the term, have been led to indulge a fatal confidence.
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II.2.7
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
The Indicative Versus the Imperative in Scripture: Who You Are in Christ and What You Are Commanded to Do
"So many of us cavalierly gloss over what he has done and zero in on what we're to do, and that shift, though it might seem slight, makes all the difference in the world. Our obedience has its origin in God's prior action, and forgetting that truth results in self-righteousness, pride, and despair."
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
BibleWorks 8.0: Graphical Search
The BibleWorks program has three different ways to search. There is the command line search, the command line search assistant and the graphical search window. All three of these tools allow for sophisticated searches, including original language and morphological searches. While it does take time to learn how to utilize these tools, seminary students and pastors will find them useful for exegesis. BibleWorks has many lexicons with the base package and includes much more for less money that one will get with the Logos 4 package. Logos is much more expensive and requires continual upgrading to keep one's library investments current. As someone else said, it is better to have a hardcopy of commentaries and other books unless you use them frequently.
I particularly like the diagramming module since it helps one to see the syntactical and grammatical relationships of words within sentence structures. Additionally, the vocabulary modules have sound files which read out the correct pronunciation of both Hebrew and Greek vocabulary words. Also the verb charts have sound files with them with the correct pronunciation of both the Hebrew and Greek verb and parsing charts. Nouns, pronouns, articles and adjectives are also pronounced in audio files. This is a great learning aid for seminary students attempting to learn the biblical languages.
I'm still learning the many feature of BibleWorks. Although the unabridged version of the Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich lexicon is not included, the abridged version is included. Thayer's unabridged Greek New Testament lexicon is part of the base package and so is the unabridged Brown Driver and Briggs Hebrew lexicon.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
From The Heidelblog: Tiger Woods, True Repentance?
[The following is from The Heidelblog by R. Scott Clark: Crouching Tiger, True Repentance].
There is an argument that Tiger's sexual immorality is private and none of our business. Fine. His very public apology, however, gives us an opportunity to think about the nature of repentance and faith. During his apology Tiger made reference to his wandering from his childhood faith, Buddhism. He apologized to all those people, including his fans, whom he offended and whom he disappointed. He pledged to do better, to return to the laws of Buddhism, including, one imagines, its requirement for various forms of self-denial. There is one, however, to whom Tiger did not apologize and there is a law to which he did not pledge obedience.That law is God's law: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything which is written in the book of the law (Gal 3:10; Deut 27:26). The law of God requires "perfect and personal obedience" (WCF 7.2). The one to whom Tiger did not apologize, of course, is the thrice-holy God. However much Tiger may fear losing his wife, his family, or his endorsements, he has much more to fear from God who is a "consuming fire" (Deut 4:24).
Scripture does not know anything about apologies to God. Scripture only knows about perfect righteousness as the way to acceptance with God. As has been said often enough, God does not grade on a curve. Indeed, he does not.
Consider the wholly horizontal orientation of Tiger's apology and the rather more, if you will, vertical orientation of David's confession of sin in Ps 32. Discovered for the adulterer (and murderer) he was, David did not hold a press conference. Convicted by God's Spirit of his sin against God (and Bathsheba and Uriah) he turned his face to God his judge. "Blessed is the man against whom Yahweh counts no iniquity" (Ps 32:2). The God-wardness of David's repentance is perhaps even more pointed in Ps 51: "Have mercy upon me, O God…blot out my transgressions (Ps 51:1). "Against you only have I sinned" (Ps 51:4). In these moments David understood that sin is lawlessness (1 John 3:4) and "the day you eat thereof you shall surely die" (Gen 2:17). "The wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23).
True repentance, as distinct from mere apologies, begins with a recognition of reality, of who and what God is and of who and what we are. It begins with the knowledge of the greatness of our sin and misery. True repentance reckons with the law as the perfect expression of God's perfect and unyielding righteousness. True repentance drives one to Christ, the only righteous man, the only man who ever actually kept the law, and true faith trusts in that one righteous man and in his "one act" of righteousness (Rom 5:18; i.e., his whole, perfect obedience) for his elect.
True repentance, i.e., genuine sorrow for sin against God and heartfelt desire to turn away from it, is born of true faith. Unbelievers don't repent. Believers do. They know the greatness of their sin and misery. Tiger does not yet appear to know that yet. He seems to think that if he just focuses a little harder, is more disciplined, if he denies himself the pleasures of this world (his language), he can get everything back on track. Perhaps he can—as far as we can see. At the last day, however, it will not matter that Tiger recovered his public image, that he built more schools, that he regained the trust of his family and followers. At the last day it will only matter if he has satisfied the righteousness of God and I guarantee you that, as remarkable as Tiger is, he cannot do it. No sinner can.
The great good news for Tiger and for you is that Jesus has already done it and everyone who trusts in him and in his obedience for sinners is reckoned as if he himself had done all that Jesus did. God accepted Jesus' righteousness. Jesus was vindicated by his resurrection (1 Tim 3:16). As certainly as Jesus was raised from the dead, so certainly will God and accept Tiger and you and whoever turns to Christ in true faith, i.e., a certain knowledge and a hearty trust that Jesus obeyed and died "for me."
From that true faith, a believer begins daily to die to his own desires and to live to Christ. He continues to sin for the rest of his life but now we know what sin is and we know what grace is. We know that in God's free acceptance of sinners for Christ's sake there is power and new life and real hope for real change; not perfection in this life but free acceptance with God (grace) and mercy and the work of the Spirit in our hearts, minds, and wills. By his grace the same Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead unites us to Christ, through faith, and is at work in us making us slowly, imperceptibly like Jesus.
Tiger pledged to do better. That won't be good enough. Pray that Tiger and everyone else who heard his apology realizes the difference between "doing better" and doing "everything written in the book of the law" and that Christians understand the difference between an apology and true repentance.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Dutch Reformed on the Covenant with Adam
The word Testament is a Latine word, whereby the Greek word Diakethe is rendered, which the Greek translators use to express the Hebrew word Berith, that is Covenant. And thereby I properly understood the Covenant itself, which God hath made with mankinde upon certain conditions to give them everlasting life: which Covenant is twofold, the Old and the New. The Old is that which God made with the first man before the fall, wherein eternal life was promised upon condition of a thoroughly perfect obedience, and keeping of the Law; and is thereby called the Legall Covenant, which God again propounded to the Israelites, that from thence they might learn to understand (seeing this condition is transgressed by all men, and can now be fulfilled by no man) that they must seek their salvation in another Covenant, which is called the New [Covenant,] and consisteth in this: That God hath appointed his Son for a Mediator, and promiseth eternal life upon condition that we believe in him; and is called the Covenant of Grace.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Quote of the Day: Archbishop Thomas Cranmer
The following quote is from the homilies established as standard sermons during the English Reformation. The homily is called, A Short Declaration of the True, Lively and Christian Faith.
I will first post the original text which uses archaic spelling and then I will transliterate the archaic spelling into modern English spelling. Once you get the hang of it the original is quite easy to read and understand.
First, the quote from the original:
Such is the true faith, that the Scripture doeth so much commend, the which when it seeth and considereth what GOD hath done for vs, is also mooued through continuall assistance of the Spirit of GOD, to serue and please him, to keepe his fauour, to feare his displeasure, to continue his obedient children, shewing thankefulnesse againe by obseruing or keeping his commandements, and that freely, for true loue chiefly, and not for dread of punishment, or loue of temporall reward, considering how cleerely, without deseruings wee haue receiued his mercy and pardon freely.
And now my transliteration into modern spelling:
Such is the true faith, that the Scripture doth so much commend, the which when it seeth and considereth what God hath done for us, is also moved through continual assistance of the Spirit of God, to serve and please him, to keep his favor, to fear his displeasure, to continue his obedient children, showing thankfulness again by observing or keeping his commandments, and that freely, for true love chiefly, and not for dread of punishment, or love of temporal reward, considering how clearly, without deservings we have received his mercy and pardon freely.
Archbishop Thomas Cranmer
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Friday, February 19, 2010
J. C. Ryle Quote of the Day
“Our Lord tells us that true Christians must make up their minds regarding trouble in this world. Whether we are ministers or hearers, whether we teach or are taught, it makes little difference. We must carry ‘a cross.’ We must be content to lose even life itself for Christ’s sake. We must submit to the loss of man’s favor, we must endure hardships, we must deny ourselves in many things, or we shall never reach heaven at last. So long as the world, the devil and our own hearts are what they are, these things must be so.”
~ J.C. Ryle
~ J.C. Ryle
Join the Facebook Group: Exposing the False Prophets—Reformation Christians Against TBN
[Click on the title to go to the Facebook group].
The one positive thing about the false prophets and TBN is that sometimes God uses this to push folks in a more Reformed direction. This is what happened to me. I remember I kept noticing similarities between what I knew about Christian Science and what the false teachers were saying. Then at an Assemblies of God college a professor named Terris Neuman recommended that I read a book called, A Different Gospel, by D. R. McConnell. It was a real eye opener. Anyone who wishes to understand the theological roots of the Word of Faith, prosperity, health and wealth gospel should read A Different Gospel. It traces the teaching back to E. W. Kenyon who first introduced doctrines of Christian Science into the healing revivals of the 1940s. Kenneth Hagin then plagiarized E. W. Kenyon. This book clearly shows that Pentecostalism is a heterodox mix of classical Arminianism, classical Pentecostalism, mainline Charismaticism, and outright cultic teachings of the Word of Faith prosperity gospel.
Make no mistake about it, the Word of Faith movement is a cult as much as any other cult like the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. This is why I believe the entire Pentecostal and Charismatic movement should be shunned by all Evangelicals, especially those who are reformed. The pentecostal/charismatic movement has become so infected with the Word of Faith doctrines that classical Arminianism and classical Pentecostalism have faded into the background.
While I'm not a big fan of Jimmy Swaggart, I have to say that Swaggart at least represents the more classical Pentecostal side of things. But even Swaggart has had discrediting moral failures. This is the problem with Arminianism in general. Arminianism makes man the center of its theology. It is a form of idolatry to lift up self rather than acknowledging God as the source of all grace, mercy, and salvation.
Albeit, McConnell is himself a charismatic--he was a professor of New Testament at Oral Roberts University--his book is well written and irrefutable. BTW, after the prayer tower fiasco many of the United Methodist charismatics left Oral Roberts University.
Reformed Christians have lessons that can be drawn from all this. First, put obedience to Scripture in first place in matters of doctrine and morality. In other words, faithfulness to denominational affiliations is secondary to biblical truth. Do not be afraid to challenge those in theological chairs of seminaries, those in ecclesiastical and denominational positions, and pastors of local congregations when they are not being faithful to the Gospel, the Scriptures, and the principles of the Protestant Reformation.
An example of this is the recent endorsement of the Manhattan Declaration by the Sydney Anglicans. I was quit to point out the contradiction in this action. Such blind obedience to denominational endorsements is what leads to liberalism in the future. I also opposed the Sydney Anglicans resolution invoking full communion with the Anglican Church-North America for similar reasons. It is a deliberate attempt to water down the differences between Reformed Christians and the Anglo-Catholic heresies of works and merits as a means of justification before God. The Manhattan Declaration is in fact a sign that the ecumenical movement means more to Sydney than biblical truth. Those of us on the Reformed side of things must not be afraid of being skewered by Evangelicals. Rather we should stand courageously and boldly against the onslaught of compromise, tolerance, and whatever else comes to tempt people to become "man pleasers" rather than "God pleasers." (See Galatians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:4).
For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ. (Galatians 1:10 ESV)
...but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts. (1 Thessalonians 2:4 ESV)
Charlie
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Is Faith a Work?
[This comes from the Reformation Theology blog].
Is Faith a Work?
We confess with the Bible that our regeneration or new birth in Christ is monergistic (a work of God alone) and not synergistic (i.e. a cooperation of man and God in regeneration). Thus our faith in Christ arises out of a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit to change and soften our natural hostile disposition toward God. We likewise affirm that only by upholding monergistic regeneration do we faithfullly herald the biblical doctrine of 'Sola Gratia', or salvation by grace alone. All other schemes in which unregenerate man either takes the initiative or cooperates to be regenerated (by a faith produced or drawn from their native ability), should be considered synergistic. Some may be unhappy with being called a 'synergist' because it implies that they believe man and God work together toward salvation which clearly is a form of semi-pelagianism. So to defend themselves many synergists may respond as follows:
"Why do you call our belief that faith precedes regeneration synergistic? How can this be, unless faith is understood to be a work? Faith is not a meritorious work, by definition. In essence, the two are mutually exclusive. Accepting a gift is not a work, therefore it can't be considered synergism. If salvation is by faith, then works are nowhere to be found in the process. Again, to argue that faith precedes regeneration is synergistic would only be valid if faith = works."
I might respond to this line of reasoning by saying something like the following:
"You are correct that the Bible teaches that faith is not a work, but we make it into a work as soon as we view it as something we can autonomously come up with, apart from any work of the Holy Spirit. Those who believe we can, from our own resources, change our naturally unregenerate hardened hearts in some way that is independent of God are promoting rank Pelagianism. Ask yourself, in light of Scripture, can you believe the gospel apart from ANY work of the Holy Spirit? (see 1 Thes 1:4,5). God commands us to come to Him but unregenerate man is naturally faithless. The reason for this is that he is by nature unspiritual (i.e. w/o the Holy Spirit). We cannot grasp spiritual truth without the Holy Spirit. To claim we might do so would be a contradiction, for spirituality is a condition of spiritual understanding. In 1 Cor 2:12 Paul affrims this by writing, "We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us." ( i.e. the gospel). That is why through the prophet Jeremiah, God makes the promise, "I will heal your faithlessness" (Jer 3:22). With this in mind do you think we can heal our own faithlessness?
The question we need to be asking ourselves is, "what makes us to differ from other men who do not believe?" ... the grace of God or the will of man? If we say "the will of man" it is a boast and therefore not the kind of faith that is contrasted with works in the Bible. For Eph 2:8,9 speaks of faith that is the gift of God, a faith which leaves no room for boasting. True faith is seen as God's merciful gift which then looks away from its own resources and looks unto Christ for all spiritual blessings, including the very ability to believe. This is utterly distasteful to the natural man, not to mention humbling. And as Spurgeon said, "...no one natually submits to the humbling terms of the gospel". Elsewhere to strengthen this point Spurgeon said,
"...did you ever meet a Christian man who said, "I came to Christ without the power of the Spirit?" If you ever did meet such a man, you need have no hesitation in saying, "My dear sir, I quite believe it-and I believe you went away again without the power of the Spirit, and that you know nothing about the matter, and are in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity."
In the synergists understanding, what ultimately makes us to differ from unbelievers is the will of man, not the grace of God. For, in that system, God has given all men equal grace ('grace' meaning nothing more than something freely offered to them), so God's blessing hinges upon a condition we meet, our action, our wisdom, our spiritual sensitivity. But it was for this very reason God sent His Son, to do for us what we could not do for ourselves, (that is, including providing us with the spiritual resources to meet God's demand of faith and repentance.)
What makes men to differ to the synergist, therefore, is not grace, for, to them, all have grace, so the difference is how one man uses that grace better than another. Grace no longer, therefore, has anything to do with it, for ultimately it depends on a fallen person creating a right thought or affection about Christ thus believing in our ability to believe in Him. That our moral inability to exercise faith, due to a corruption of nature, does not itself need to be redeemed. Why, then, do some believe but not others? In answer to this most synergists say "because some believed" ... but notice that we did not ask what they did, but why they did it.
In John 10 Jesus said some do not believe BECAUSE they are not My sheep, and "My sheep hear my voice". Who they are in essence, therefore, precedes how they respond. Jesus explains this in detail when he says that Spirit gives birth to spirit but flesh gives birth to flesh...for this reason I said that no man can come to me UNLESS God grants it (John 6:63, 65). To believe in Christ God must grant it, and further, the Bible says ALL to whom God grants it, will believe (John 6:37).
It is true that the Bible contrasts faith and works, but biblical faith is never seen as something we, in our unregenerate condition, had to autonomously (apart from the Holy Spirit) contribute. Can the synergist thank God for his faith? How? Consider this prayer, "God I thank you for your salvation, except for my faith, the one thing I exercised on my own." Or consider this prayer, "Thank you Lord I am not like other men who do not have faith. While you extended grace to all men, some did not make use of it, BUT I DID." Such boasting, whether unconsciously or not is the result of believing that what makes you to differ from others is not God's grace but your faith. But the work of Christ redeems us unto faith, not on the condition of faith.
In the synergists' system, all men have grace, but only some have faith, yet because that faith does not comes from God's gift (since not all men have faith), is therefore, something we produce naturally on our own, apart from the Holy Spirit. That is why, after the Rich Young Ruler when away sad when called to repent and follow Jesus, the Lord answered his disciples' question "who then can be saved" with "what is impossible with man [i.e. faith and repentance] is possible with God."
Most of you who visit this site are convinced that the Bible teaches that salvation is by the grace of Jesus Christ alone, that is, that man and God do not cooperate in salvation. Most would further affirm that faith is not produced by our unregenerated human nature but comes about as the result of a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit who turns our heart of stone to a heart of flesh, opens our spiritually blind eyes and unplugs our deaf ears to the gospel. We believe the gospel can only be heard by those God has spiritually granted to hear it (John 6:63, 65). This is not only what the Bible teaches from beginning to end, but this safeguards the reality that all glory goes to God for our salvation.
We affirm that our blindness and deafness to the gospel cannot be changed by mere human persuasion, (just as light itself does not make a blind man see) but rather it is by God doing a work of grace in our heart to change our naturally hostile disposition to one of love for Christ. We believe the Bible teaches this because, without the Holy Spirit, the natural man does not understand spiritual things (1 Cor 2:14) but thinks of them as foolish. He naturally loves darkness and hates the light and will not come into the light (John 3:19, 20) The human will as a 'slave to sin' does not, therefore, by liberty obtain saving grace, but by saving grace obtains liberty.
I would like to leave you with the following bit of the Hebrew Scripture: Sometimes in the Old Testament and the New, God reveals behind the scenes how He enabled particular persons to obey his Word when they were called to repent: In 2 Chronicles chapter 30 when couriers with a message of repentance passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh, and as far as Zebulun, those who heard laughed them to scorn and mocked them when they were called to repent,
"Nevertheless [the Bible says] some men of Asher, Manasseh and Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem. The hand of God was also on Judah to give them one heart to do what the king and the princes commanded by the word of the LORD." (2 Chronicles 30:11-12)
The text says some resisted the call, but all those tribes which the hand of God gave a heart to obey the Word, repented.
- J.W. Hendryx
Posted by John on March 21, 2006 04:20 PM
The Sovereignty of God in the Apostolic Fathers: BibleWorks 8.0 Apostolic Fathers Module
The following is from BibleWorks 8.0's search of the Apostolic Fathers in English. BibleWorks also has the Apostolic Fathers in Greek. I did a search for "Scripture" or "Scriptures" and had 50 hits in 47 verses of the Apostolic Fathers. E-mail me and I will be glad to send you the verse list with references.
Since then all things are seen and heard by God, let us fear Him, and forsake those wicked works which proceed from evil desires; so that, through His mercy, we may be protected from the judgments to come. 2 For whither can any of us flee from His mighty hand? Or what world will receive any of those who run away from Him? 3 For the Scripture saith in a certain place, Whither shall I go, and where shall I be hid from Thy presence? If I ascend into heaven, Thou art there; if I go away even to the uttermost parts of the earth, there is Thy right hand; if I make my bed in the abyss, there is Thy Spirit. 4 Whither, then, shall any one go, or where shall he escape from Him who comprehends all things? (1 Clement 28:1-4)
Let us then draw near to Him with holiness of spirit, lifting up pure and undefiled hands unto Him, loving our gracious and merciful Father, who has made us partakers in the blessings of His elect. 2 For thus it is written, When the Most High divided the nations, when He scattered the sons of Adam, He fixed the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God. His people Jacob became the portion of the Lord, and Israel the lot of His inheritance. 3 And in another place the Scripture saith, Behold, the Lord taketh unto Himself a nation out of the midst of the nations, as a man takes the first-fruits of his threshing-floor; and from that nation shall come forth the Most Holy. (1 Clement 29:1-3 APE)
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Re: Calvinists Against the Manhattan Declaration
The following is an e-mail response from an Anglo-Catholic papist who belongs to the Anglican Church-North America. I have labeled his remarks and my responses.
From: Bruce Atkinson
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:02 PM
To: Charlie J. Ray
Subject: Re: Calvinists Against the Manhattan Declaration
<Bruce>You say: "Stop following the traditions of men" and I agree. Catholicism is certainly a tradition of men. Now, even Calvinism is a tradition of men. Even the reformed view in general has become a tradition. Do you deny it?
<Charlie's answer> Bruce, you betray your ignorance of basic Evangelical and Protestant doctrine. Everyone knows that the difference between Roman Catholic "tradition" and Protestant "tradition" is so great as to be as far apart as one end of the universe from the other. The Protestant Reformers were "magisterial" reformers. They sought to reform the Roman Catholic Church until they were forced to leave on pain of death. So the difference between the RCC view and the Protestant view is that Rome considers "Holy Tradition" to be revelation from God on equal status with Holy Scripture. The Reformers, Lutheran and Calvinist alike, say that tradition is to be submitted to Holy Scripture. In other words, both the church and "tradition" are to be tested by Scripture and the church has no authority to ordain anything that is "repugnant" to Scripture. The Thirty-nine Articles say:
Article XX
Of the Authority of the Church
The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God's word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ: yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of salvation.
<Bruce>I don't find the same sola fide emphasis in the writings of the Early Fathers. And only a small minority of Pauline scripture talks about it.
And yet I do believe that we are saved by grace though faith and not by works, really I do -- but not in the radical, cultist way that you do. In NT scripture, behavior (following from faith) is regarded as important too; its just that behavior/works of the law are not what saves/justifies. I have no argument with these basics of Christianity.
<Charlie's reply>I find it interesting that you claim to believe the Bible but yet you deny that the Bible is the final and only authority. Instead you follow the church and trust men who claim to have equal authority with Scripture. It is truly amazing that you claim to be "Anglican" yet deny the 39 Articles, which is the confession of faith of the English Reformation!
Bruce, no, you do not believe that justification is by grace alone through faith alone. You have already said that Roman Catholics are Christians. The Council of Trent in the 16th century officially condemns the doctrine of justification by faith alone and that has never been reversed. Read the canons of the Council of Trent sometime. If you do not believe that works justify, then you ought to be trying to convert every Roman Catholic, Anglo-Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox person you know. They are as lost as any Muslim.
Secondly, you obviously do not understand the difference between justification and sanctification. Rome confuses the two and says that justification is not a legal declaration but is in fact infused in the heart and is the same thing as sanctification. But the Bible and the 39 Articles and all the Reformed Confessions say that justification is one thing and sanctification is another. Justification is objective and outside of us on the cross. Sanctification is infused in the heart and is always imperfect. Sanctification can therefore never be the ground or basis for salvation. Sanctification is the evidence we give to other men that we have a "true and lively faith." It is nothing more than this and adds absolutely nothing to our salvation. The 39 Articles say the same:
Article XI
Of the Justification of Man
We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort; as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification.
Article XII
Of Good Works
Albeit that good works, which are the fruits of faith and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins and endure the severity of God's judgement, yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith, insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.
I stand with the Protestant Reformers and the Reformed confessions. If you wish to label the Protestant Reformation as a "cult" then you simply reveal yourself to be the papist that you are.
<Bruce>Charlie, you promote Calvinism like it was the Law. You are quick to judge and disrespect people who disagree with your views. Now you are accusing me of being a false prophet! What did I write that would cause you to say that? I never claimed to be a prophet, anyway. But as for your accusation, I'm in good company; they did that to Jesus, too.
<Charlie>You have it backwards, Bruce. You're the Pharisee. You're the one promoting good works and traditions of men. I stand on Scripture alone and it is Holy Scripture that will judge you in the last day, not me or any of the Reformers. You're confused. You seem to think I follow the reformers. Far from it! I follow the Bible and radically so. The "law" has only one purpose that matters. That purpose is to expose you and everyone else as the low down rotten sinners they actually are. You and I both deserve hell whether you will admit it or not.
Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it-- 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. (Romans 3:19-25 ESV)
ESV John 12:48 The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.
<Bruce>Which one of us is being legalistic and judgmental? For you, verbal acquiesence to the reformed sola fide point of view is a "work" that you require for acceptance into your exclusive 'true faith' club. Before you accuse me, take a look at yourself. Verbal behavior ("saying" you have faith) is a work like any other. It won't get you saved, only heart-based faith following Spirit-inspired conviction will accomplish that, only trust in Jesus Christ. And only God really knows who has true faith and who is just spouting the right formulaic words.
<Charlie's response> Bruce, you really do not understand the Bible at all, do you? I am not saying that behavior saves. That is your position. My position is that "right belief" saves. In other words, doctrine matters more than your moral behavior! Who cares if you're opposed to abortion and homosexuality! So are the Mormons, the Muslims, and the Buddhists! But Jesus said,
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6 ESV)
The Bible over and over again says that doctrine matters and the Bible teaches justification is imputed, not infused. Justification is a legal declaration of not guilty. The fact that you do not understand the distinction between the two only proves my point. This has absolutely nothing to with Calvinism and everything to do with the Gospel and the Holy Scriptures, which you do not know or understand.
But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29 ESV)
My answer to you, Bruce, is that you are judging the Gospel as evil and as a "cult". You think you're good and righteous and refuse to admit that your works are nothing but dirty rags in God's sight. (Isaiah 64:6) You're judgmental and you think "Calvinism" is evil and a "cult." But really I am only speaking what the Bible says. I follow Paul and Jesus and the prophets. They were "Calvinists" in your view because they are the ones who teach the sovereignty of God and salvation by grace alone apart from works. Jesus is the end of the law to everyone who believes. (Romans 10:3-4).
<Bruce>How do we know who has the real thing or not?
<Charlie>Well, Bruce, I am glad you asked. We know by what you say and what you write. The Bible clearly says that what is in your mind/heart is what proceeds out of your mouth. (Matthew 12:34-37). You reveal what you believe by what you say. From what I can understand from your comments you are totally ignorant of biblical doctrine, the 39 Articles, and the Protestant Reformation. Good works follow true faith but they do not save and never will. They are merely the window dressing, the fruit of someone who has true faith. When we have done all there is still more to do because God never lowers his standards. (Luke 17:7-10). You will always fall short of the mark. This is why every believer is a saint. We're sanctified by the blood of Jesus through faith and not by doing above and beyond the call of duty. You're a miserable sinner, Bruce. Until you recognize this you will never come to saving faith. Even AFTER conversion we remain miserable sinners who sin in thought, word and deed--no matter how holy we "think" we are. (Romans 3:23).
<Bruce> Actually, where you are concerned, it is none of my business. I'm happy to leave that to the Lord. [ I believe in the Word of God and know that that God knows my heart; I have peace with God. ] But if pressed, I would remind us that Jesus told His disciples that we would know the tree by its fruit. And then I would point to Galatians 5:22 and 1st Corinthians 13 to explain the fruit. Scripture doesn't lie anywhere, but let's not elevate Paul's statements about faith above those of Christ and above those made by Paul about love being greater than faith. But of course, your course is set, you will continue to denigrate James and 1 Corinthians 13. Enjoy your Cult of Calvin!
<Charlie>Wow, Bruce! You're right up there with God. You love "perfectly"? It really is funny that Paul wrote 1 Corinthians 13 to people who thought they were holier than everyone else. Paul says that we have not arrived. You are not saved by your love. You're saved and so you are then obligated to love as a result of your being forgiven. But this distinction escapes you as well. Do you not know the parables? (See Matthew 18:23-35). The last I checked Paul spoke under authority from Jesus. Trying to pit Jesus against Paul is just silly. All Scripture is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16).
Unfortunately, Bruce, I belong to the cult of "Christ." You, on the other hand, are a part of the cult we know as the "papists". Why not go the whole way and emasculate yourself? (Galatians 5:11-12). Better yet, join up with Rome. You would fit right in. I, on the other hand, would gladly be burned at the stake by you and your fellow papists. I actually care about "the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:4) while you, on the other hand, care about pleasing men and being part of the worldly denominations. Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer all died for the "cult" you so despise. But that fact you would not understand either.
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-- 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6-8 ESV)
For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough. (2 Corinthians 11:4 ESV)
May God grant you the grace to turn from your wicked and false doctrines of works and turn to the Gospel of grace,
Charlie
We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified. (Galatians 2:15-16 ESV)
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Charlie J. Ray <cranmer1959@hotmail.com> wrote:
Well, at last you admit that you either don't understand the Gospel or else you don't believe it. Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox preach justification by works. The Gospel stands or falls with the doctrine of justification by faith ONLY. Sola fide. Luther said that. The Protestant Reformation is a call to return to the Scriptures and stop following the traditions of men. Jesus condemned the Pharisees for preaching "traditions" rather than Scripture. I stand with Jesus and against false prophets like you.CharlieFrom: Bruce AtkinsonSent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:24 AMTo: Charlie J. RaySubject: Re: Calvinists Against the Manhattan DeclarationHow horrible of them to combine Catholics, Orthodox, and Evangelicals all under the umbrella category of "Christians"! They should be ashamed! Don't they know that only Calvinists can be true Christians?
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Charlie J. Ray <cranmer1959@hotmail.com> wrote:
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Ash Wednesday from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer
Commonly called Ash-Wednesday.
ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who hatest nothing that thou hast made and dost forgive the sins of all them that are penitent; Create and make in us new and contrite hearts, that we, worthily lamenting our sins, and acknowledging our wretchedness, may obtain of thee, the God of all mercy, perfect remission and forgiveness; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
TURN ye even to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning: And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the Lord your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil. Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the Lord your God? Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly: Gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children, and those that suck the breasts: let the bridegroom go forth of his chamber, and the bride out of her closet. Let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thine heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them: wherefore should they say among the people, Where is their God?
WHEN ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly. Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Re: Calvinists Against the Manhattan Declaration
Well, at last you admit that you either don't understand the Gospel or else you don't believe it. Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox preach justification by works. The Gospel stands or falls with the doctrine of justification by faith ONLY. Sola fide. Luther said that. The Protestant Reformation is a call to return to the Scriptures and stop following the traditions of men. Jesus condemned the Pharisees for preaching "traditions" rather than Scripture. I stand with Jesus and against false prophets like you.
Charlie
From: Bruce Atkinson
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:24 AM
To: Charlie J. Ray
Subject: Re: Calvinists Against the Manhattan Declaration
How horrible of them to combine Catholics, Orthodox, and Evangelicals all under the umbrella category of "Christians"! They should be ashamed! Don't they know that only Calvinists can be true Christians?
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Charlie J. Ray <cranmer1959@hotmail.com> wrote:
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Calvinists Against the Manhattan Declaration
Richard Bennett: www.bereanbeacon.org/articles/Catholic_Agenda_Embedded_in_the_Manhattan_Declaration.pdf
Michael Horton: www.whitehorseinn.org/archives/250.html
John MacArthur: www.gty.org/Resources/Print/Articles/A390
R.C. Sproul: www.ligonier.org/blog/the-manhattan-declaration/
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Catholic Agenda Imbedded in the Manhattan Declaration
[For the PDF of this article click on the title below].
Catholic Agenda Imbedded in the Manhattan Declaration
By Richard Bennett
Roman Catholic Dual Purpose Behind the Manhattan Declaration
On November 20th, 2009, more than 150 people portraying themselves as Christian leaders of Orthodox, Catholic, and Evangelical backgrounds declared their unity because of moral issues. The signers who are uniting themselves together in the Mahattan Declaration (MD) identify themselves under the signed statement, "We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good…."1 The Website of MD states that the purpose of the document is "simply to speak with one voice on the most pressing moral issues of our day…[MD is] simply a statement of solidarity about only the social issues it addresses."2 And the document itself may not appear to have any objective other than quoted. However, under the Website section entitled, "Message to all signers of the Manhattan Declaration," the clearly stated purpose is a call for a political movement. This shows that, in fact, the Manhattan Declaration is only the latest step in the downgrade into implementing Catholic social doctrine. There is yet another purpose; one primarily stated in Vatican Council II and post-Vatican Council II documents. Through the use of social issues, the Roman Catholic Church seeks to draw true Evangelical Bible-believers into itself so that there can be no opposition by them on the fundamental issues of the authority of the Bible alone and the Gospel.
In order to soften up the Evangelicals in their separation from the Catholics on biblical doctrinal issues, particularly the authority of the Bible alone and the Gospel, the Catholic modus operandi calls for using social issues on which both Evangelicals and Catholics agree as preliminary common ground. The major social issues selected by MD are acceptable, but what gives away the underlying Catholic far left political agenda is some of the vocabulary used. This vocabulary has a general meaning, to be sure, but in the context of Roman Catholic social doctrine, it means something quite specific. As Evangelicals are drawn together with Catholics on social issues – like the social issues mentioned in this document – the ensuing ecumenical dialogue "serves to transform modes of thought and behavior and the daily life of their [Evangelical] communities [churches]. In this way, it [ecumenical dialogue] aims at preparing the way for their unity of faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible: thus 'little by little'…all Christians will be gathered"3 into the Roman Catholic Church with its dual authority base, false gospel, and accompanying far left agenda. The Roman Catholic Church's primary goal is to make enforceable its claim that it is the only true church of Jesus Christ and its pope, the claimed "Vicar of Christ," has the right to judge everybody, as he did during the Middle Ages. In order to accomplish this, the Papacy must do away with the supreme authority of the Bible and the Gospel and it must silence all who stand against it in this endeavor. This is the Roman Catholic context in which the Manhattan Declaration is set.
1 Main Website, second paragraph; http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/
2 http://www/manhattandeclaration.org/faqs 1/14/2010 Q. 4
3 Doc. No. 42, "Reflections and Suggestions Concerning Ecumenical Dialogue", S.P.U.C., Aug.15, 1970 in Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, Austin Flannery, Gen Ed., 1981 Edition; II, Para. 2 (d).
4 Catechism of the Catholic Church Para 1129, "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." Also "What Do Orthodox Christians Believe?" Lamp: 1996 9 Serbian Orthodox Church
5 MD website, faqs, Q. 2. 1/14/2010
6 Catechism, Para. 82
Ambiguous Preamble
The Preamble of the Manhattan Declaration itself lacks a stated purpose. Instead, it proclaims that Christians are "heirs of a 2,000-year tradition" ambiguously defined as "proclaiming God's word, seeking justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering." The statement certainly does not mean a 2,000-year tradition of proclaiming the truth of God's Word seen in Scripture – because both the Catholic Church and Orthodoxy deny the sole authority of Scripture as well as the Gospel.4 Equally important, the Preamble does not identify who is meant by the general term "Christians." That is given only far down in the second section of MD. These two signal factors alone ought to make any Evangelical wary.
Named Drafters of MD
The named drafters of MD are Robert George, an ardent Roman Catholic taking the place of the now deceased Richard John Neuhaus; Timothy George, Dean of Beeson Divinity School, and Chuck Colson of Prison Fellowship Ministries and now of Center for Christian Worldview. In order to achieve the solidarity among the parties of which the Website spoke, clearly all the compromises have been made by Timothy George as the Evangelical representative. This is required by the Roman Catholic drafter and those behind him. Indeed, it was to that end that Timothy George was invited by the organizers of the project to be the drafter from the Evangelical side. He is a leader whose "public witness on behalf of justice, human rights, and the common good"5 is in line with the Roman Catholic political and ecumenical purposes. "Justice, human rights, and the common good" are all buzz words for Roman Catholic far left doctrine as spelled out in the "Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the [Roman Catholic] Church."
Timothy George's Major Compromises
Timothy George's first compromise was to agree to the authority base of the document. That base is not the Bible alone; but instead, it is hard-core Roman Catholic tradition and Scripture.6 This corrupted authority base makes it possible to settle on ambiguous terminology which does not align doctrinally with the Bible, particularly regarding the Gospel.
Equally important is the total compromise by Timothy George on the Gospel. Although the Preamble states that "Christians today are called to proclaim the Gospel of costly grace," there is a vagueness of expression and confusion regarding the meaning of "costly grace." Man's position as a sinner under the vengeful wrath of Holy God is not explained. On the authority of the Bible alone, salvation by God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, is not explained. Yet MD's bland expression, the "Gospel of costly grace," is the closest the Declaration gets to the Gospel. Obviously, MD's flexible phrase is meant to cover up the lack of "solidarity" among the signers—because there can be no solidarity of unbelievers with those who have been saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and in Christ alone.
2
7 MD, Section entitled "Declaration"
8 Ephesians Ch 1, 2:1-9.
In another section MD states, "It is our duty to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season."7 This is a sop to Evangelical Christians, but one which, if they actually did their duty, requires them to confront the Roman Catholic and Orthodox signers with the supreme authority of the Bible and with the Gospel. Both Catholic and Orthodox churches officially deny the Gospel and in its place actively teach and practice a false gospel. Only those who actually are saved and "in Christ," those who actually believe the Gospel, are charged with proclaiming it.8
Roman Church History Whitewashed
Another major compromise, to which Timothy George bowed, regards the history of Evangelical Christians and the Roman Catholic Church. The historical facts of the Roman Catholic Church's centuries of Inquisition against millions of Bible-believers and others cannot be air-brushed away with a brief statement that institutions have made mistakes, as MD tries to do. Neither can the drafters, by claiming to speak exclusively as individuals, exonerate themselves from this outrage. The most important part of the Preamble's summary on Christian history is what it fails to say.
The Preamble presents a few bits of history to support its claim to the heritage of Christian "tradition" but remains silent on the two most significant events of European history. The first is the six hundred year reign of terror by the Roman Catholic Papacy enforced by its murderous Inquisition. The second and equally important event is the Reformation of the sixteenth century – due to the recovery of the Bible and the Gospel in the hands of ordinary people. These two signal omissions were necessary because even to allude to either of them would destroy the supposed solidarity that MD purports to express.
For example, the Preamble states, "It was Christians who combated the evil of slavery: Papal edicts in the 16th and 17th centuries decried the practice of slavery and first excommunicated anyone involved in the slave trade…." However, by the start of the 16th century, three hundred years of enforced Papal edicts had already been enslaving Europe by robbing, torturing, and murdering millions of Bible believers and others throughout the Holy Roman Empire. The Inquisition was the Papal tool by which people were terrorized and forced into professing faith in the Roman Catholic false gospel and accompanying practices. It would be another three hundred years before the Inquisition was finally halted at the end of the eighteenth century. It is an outrage, and an utter disgrace, that Timothy George in particular, and Robert George as an educated man, allowed such whitewashing of the Roman Catholic Church's bloody history be touted here.
Beginning in 1203, with "ethnic cleansing" of the Bible-believing Albigenses in France, the Papacy instituted its murderous system of Inquisition. In 1572, the Papacy, under edict from Pope Pius V before his death, was instrumental in the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre, in which as many as 70,000 French Huguenots were "ethnically cleansed" from France. In the seventeenth century, the Papacy was heavily invested in "ethnic cleansing" of the Bible-believing Vaudois, or "people of the valleys" of the Cottian Alps. During World War II, the Roman Catholic state of Croatia, with the approval of the Papacy, wrecked "ethnic cleansing" on the Serbian Orthodox and others. The Papacy, too, was instrumental in preparing the way for the
3
9 John Cornwell, Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII (Viking Penguin, 1999)
10 The wording of Papal Rome's tactical change are given in her official documents "Reflections and Suggestions Concerning Ecumenical Dialogue" in Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, Austin Flannery, O.P., editor (Northport, NY: Costello Publishing Co., 1981)
11Compendium Sect. 83
Holocaust of World War II, and it stood silently by while millions of Jews were murdered.9 The Papacy has not changed in spite of its new tactic of calling Evangelicals "separated brethren" rather than heretics.10
Further down in the same paragraph, the Preamble states, "In Europe, Christians…successfully fought to establish the rule of law and balance of governmental powers, which made modern democracy possible." Certainly the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches cannot be included in this statement. Rather, it was the Protestants of the Reformation—who had the Gospel and the Bible—that successfully dismantled the Holy Roman Empire in which the Pope, being head of the church of the civil state, could enforce his anti-biblical doctrine by means of civil law. In its place, the Protestants of the Reformation instituted the rule of law, and in America they powerfully shaped the Constitution which was an entirely new kind of government, a representative republic based on the rule of law, the basis of which was the Bible. Without the Reformation of the sixteenth century, the American Experiment of a new kind of civil government, in which having neither a state church nor a ruler claiming both temporal and spiritual authority, as the Pope does, could not have taken place. Many immigrants from Europe, England, and Scotland fled to the American colonies in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries because of the terrors that the Roman Catholic Church continued to perpetrate on their homelands. For Catholics, including Robert George, to claim a 2,000-year tradition of "seeking justice in our societies, [and] resisting tyranny" is simply a blatant lie.
Thus the drafters of the opening statement of the preamble to MD, by refusing to define there who is meant by "Christians," are able to present insignificant bits of Catholic information that promote an outright falsehood regarding any Catholic claim for a history of "seeking justice" and "resisting tyranny." The history of Orthodoxy's oppression, while in no way matching that of Papal Rome, has fully opposed other forms of Christianity amounting to persecution of true believers in Orthodox nations. It is incredible that anyone who understands that Catholics and Orthodox are included in the Declaration's definition of "Christian" could endorse this opening statement.
Robert George Obligated to Roman Catholic Social Doctrine
Robert George is morally obligated under the dictates of the Papacy to evangelize people, particularly Evangelicals and Orthodox, into the Roman Catholic Church by means of propagating its social doctrine. His duty as a Roman Catholic is laid out as follows, "The Pope as the 'supreme teaching authority' of the Roman Catholic Church has decreed the following for its lay people.
"In the tasks of evangelization, that is to say, of teaching, catechesis and formation that the Church's social doctrine inspires, it is addressed to every Christian [i.e., Catholic]…By fulfilling these responsibilities, the lay faithful put the Church's social teaching into action and thus fulfill the Church's secular mission." 11
4
12 Compendium, Sect. 80. Emphasis is in original.
13 Manhattandeclaration.org/for_signers_whats_next 1/14/2010
14 National Conference of Catholic Bishops, www.osjspm.org/rights_and_duties.aspx 2/10/2010
The Papacy has put real teeth into its dictates on this issue: "Insofar as it is part of the Church's moral teaching, the Church's social doctrine has the same dignity and authority as her moral teaching. It is authentic Magisterium, which obligates the faithful to adhere to it."12 The duty of all lay Catholics to evangelize by teaching and implementing Roman Catholic social doctrine everywhere in secular society is obligatory on pain of excommunication. This means that the Papacy has a dependable "fifth column" in every nation where Catholics are found. Robert George, by his profession as a Roman Catholic and by his drafting of MD, shows that he is part of the Pope's fifth column, whether or not he acknowledges it.
Political Objective of MD
The Website makes it very clear that MD has a political objective. Under the Website section entitled, "Message to all signers of the Manhattan Declaration," that purpose is stated; namely, "We are seeking to build a movement – hundreds of thousands of Catholic, Evangelical, and Eastern Orthodox Christians who will stand together alongside other men and women of goodwill in defense of foundational principles of justice and the common good."13
It is here that Christians are defined as Catholic, Evangelical, and Eastern Orthodox. Thus, true Evangelical Christians are to be yoked together with Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, neither of which is Christian. Furthermore, this newly formed "Christian" group is then to be yoked together with "other men and women of goodwill," presumably meaning atheists, pagans, animists, and such as Buddhists and Hindus. This is exactly the world group that the "Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the [Roman Catholic] Church" targets as those who are to move the Catholic far leftist agenda forward into global implementation. Quite overtly the movement is to propagate the Roman Catholic social agenda, which comes to light by the words "justice and the common good." Justice in Roman Catholic social doctrine is specifically defined. It now includes "economic" justice, which is a buzz word for the call for "redistribution of wealth from richer countries to poorer ones." 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.'"14 However, in Scripture, God does not speak in terms of rights. The biblical mandate safeguards against injustice and grants men responsibility both in owning private property and in making their own economic decisions. It allows men the freedom to act with the dignity of beings created in God's image. It also allows men the freedom to fail in their endeavors. The importance of true economics is that it does not primarily offer riches and extravagance, but rather its primary offer is one of freedom and personal responsibility to exercise one's role before God in His universe. Such responsibility puts him face to face with God's law, or his own law, and his own inevitable failure to live up to either. It gives him a chance to move beyond what he can see and control, and to seek for real truth. It is here that the supreme authority of the Bible and the Gospel bring to him the truth that he needs. The Bible alone teaches him truthfully of God's sovereignty and shows him his need for a Savior. He then can understand that his dependence ought to be on God through Jesus Christ. Conversely, the thrust behind "economic rights," – i.e., the "redistribution of wealth" for which the Roman Catholic social agenda calls – seeks to transfer an individual's responsibility
5
15 Compendium Sect. 178 Emphasis not in original.
16 Compendium, Sect. 167
17 http://www.vatican.va/.../encyclicals/.../hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html
18 "Charity in Truth", Sect. 67
19 "Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium", First Things 1994, p. 1.
20 MD, First sentence
before God and, therefore, his dependence on God to a demoralizing dependence on the civil state or on the Roman Church. These two institutions then become either a god or the unauthorized intermediary for the true God.
The term "the common good," mentioned eight times in MD, is a Roman Catholic social agenda buzz phrase. Thus, the official papal Compendium states,
"The Church's social teaching moreover calls for recognition of the social function of any form of private ownership that clearly refers to its necessary relation to the common good….The universal destination of goods entails obligations on how goods are to be used by their legitimate owners…From this there arises the duty on the part of owners not to let the goods in their possession go idle and to channel them to productive activity, even entrusting them to others who are desirous and capable of putting them to use in production. 15
What very few realize is that this concept of "the common good" in Roman Catholic teachings involves enforcement by the civil governments in which every person is required to participate.16 It is this that Pope Benedict called for in his encyclical, "Caritas in Veritate" of June 29, 2009,17 and for which the official Papal Compendium also calls.18 How many of the Evangelicals who have signed MD have understood that what appears to be a convervative, Bible-based concern over "justice and the common good" —words that in America unmistakenly hearken back to the Preamble to the U. S. Constitution—have here been formed into a deceptive tool to be used against them. When Evangelical Christians sign MD, Roman the Catholic social agenda with its enforced moral obligations is being advanced. That agenda stands diametrically opposed to the Bible, to the U.S. Constitution, and to the Bill of Rights. When fully formed, the larger political-religious global institution envisioned by the Papacy will be fully coercive, as it has been in every totalitarian regime. Thus, when MD speaks of how Roman Catholicism has stood for freedom when it does not, and never has, it is clear that Robert George and his Roman Catholic advisors have laid a trap for unsuspecting Evangelicals in particular.
The Ecumenical Purpose
It is no coincidence that the ecumenical agenda of the Pope appears in the Manhattan Declaration. This Declaration is as important as the proclamation that launched the "Evangelicals and Catholics Together" (ECT) movement in 1994. The words at that time were, "This statement cannot speak officially for our communities [churches]. It does intend to speak responsibly from our communities and to our communities."19 On this occasion, however, the leaders claim Christian unity "as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations, but speaking to and from our communities."20 Again, the same words are not a coincidence; rather, they are evidence of the same purpose, namely, both Catholics and Evangelicals are to be accepted as "Christian." Part of the reason for the terminology change from "speaking from our communities" is that the Catholic Church has offically stated that Evangelical churches are not
6
21 Pope Benedict's 2007 decree stated, Q. "Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church" with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?" A. "…These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense." In "Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church."
www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html
"churches" in the proper sense.21 Therefore, while denying recognition to the Evangelical churches, the Roman Church uses this document to make a not-so-subtle display of its institutional power in order to ecumenize the Evangelical Christians and the Orthodox. When the two cardinals, seven archbishops, and five bishops of the Roman Catholic Church signed MD, they did so as representatives of the Roman Catholic Church and the Papacy. This was done by using their full titles, rather than only their given names and the denominations from which they come; as for example, the cardinals sign as "His Eminence Adam Cardinal Maida, Archbishop Emeritus, Roman Catholic Diocese of Detroit, MI" and "His Eminence Justin Cardinal Rigali Archbishop, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Philadelphia, PA." The same can be said of most of the original signatories to the document. This means that although the signers claim to be speaking "as individuals, not on behalf of our organizations…" clearly they are using their titles to identify their status and power in the religious world. The list of signatories is meant to impress ordinary people so that on the basis of who's who – or identity politics – they will also sign. Herein the Roman Catholic false ecumenism has accomplished a larger step in drawing Bible believers "little by little…" into thinking that the Roman Catholic Church is not so different from their own Evangelical churches.
One basic tactic of MD is to leave out of the Declaration the things on which the parties do not agree. This tactic is part of a "divide and conquer strategy." It was enunciated in 1994 in Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), which sought to identify Roman Catholics as Christians. According to ECT, Roman Catholics were to be identified as Christians on the things about which they agreed with Evangelicals rather than on the authority of the Bible alone as regarding the major defining doctrinal issues that anyone who claims to be "in Christ" must believe. About these major doctrinal issues there is as yet no agreement.
The legacy of ECT fifteen years later is that in MD the defining issues regarding the identity of Christians is not addressed per se. Nevertheless, the drafters of MD were careful about how and when they would make it clear that Roman Catholics and Orthodox were to be included as Christians. To that end, the Preamble to MD simply makes statements about "Christians" and their heritage according to tradition, most of which could be accepted by the hasty, biblically ignorant, or naive Evangelical reader. But in the final paragraph of the section entitled, "Declaration," after speaking about Catholics, Orthodox, and Evangelical Christians, the drafters flatly state, "We are Christians who have joined together across historic lines of ecclesial differences…" No argument has been made regarding the issue of whether historic "ecclesial differences" had been solved. Rather, the compromise of calling Roman Catholics and Orthodox "Christians" is stated as if it is a huge accomplishment, which it is for the Roman Catholic Church, but to the shame and disgrace of the Evangelicals who have compromised themselves.
MD itself must be read in the context of its Website if one is to comprehend what one is about to sign. The Declaration itself is fairly innocuous as a statement and of little political significance – except to the Roman Catholic Church with its far left agenda, particularly for the
7 8
22 Galatians 6:7
U.S. In recognizing and signing onto MD, Evangelicals are sanctioning the Roman Catholic system and Orthodoxy as "Christian." This is something they should have refused to do. Regarding the imbedded Roman Catholic social agenda, however, many Evangelicals have simply been deceived by this cunning document.
The Scripture emphatically states, "God will not be deceived and He will not be mocked for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."22 True Christians therefore must make a stand, the Lord God will not be mocked, His glory and His Gospel of grace are at stake! ♦
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.
Permission is also given post this article in its entirety on Internet WebPages.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost;
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
