In no instance does the word convey any thought of a mere "free-offer of grace."
When Jesus stood and cried, "If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink," He no more invited the thirsty, than He invited the light when He said, Let there be light.
In the first place there is not a soul on the earth that does or can thirst for the living waters which flow from Him, until He quickens it, and makes it thirst, and when made to feel its thirst, and even when the tongue faileth for thirst, it can no more approach the living fountain than it can make a world, until Jesus applies, not the invitation, but the word, "Come unto Me." His words are spirit and they are life; and His sheep hear them, and they know His voice, and they follow Him; because they have no power or even disposition to resist their Shepherd's voice (John 10).
The calling of the saints is nowhere in the scriptures denominated an invitation. He calleth His own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. If he only invited them they would have to get out themselves, or stay behind. But when he calls, the dead hear His voice, (not His invitation,) and they that hear shall live.
How would it suit the condition of a poor, lost, helpless soul, one that feels his poverty, inability and impotence, to read the word thus: The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall be invited to live, and they who accept the invitation shall live. And when He inviteth forth His own sheep He goeth before them, provided they accept the invitation.
It is perfectly in keeping with every feature of Arminianism for workmongers to talk of invitation of the gospel, because the very term implies the willing and the doing power to be in the creature. But it is neither in harmony with the doctrine of experience of the saints of God to so speak of His communications to them as to imply that He has yielded up the government to them; that He has hinged the effect and result of His communications on their will instead of His own will. It is derogatory to His character, it reflects on His wisdom, power, and grace.
Gilbert Beebe, July 15, 1846
Showing posts with label Reformed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reformed. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Charismatic and Reformed Churches preach the gospel
As we await ascension Sunday and Pentecost, I'm glad to introduce a witness from the Association of Charismatic/Reformed Churches. Learn more by going to http://www.charismaticreformed.org/about.html
An excerpt from the above website from "Our History, Purpose and Vision for the Future" by Pastor Kirk Wetsell, Jacksonville (Arkansas) Christian Fellowship, president of the Association of Charismatic/Reformed Churches
I continued to teach and preach, and to mature in my understanding of Reformation Theology. I still, however, was resistant on some points, particularly Limited Atonement. Then, somewhere in the early 90's, I read a book that absolutely turned my theology upside down! (It has almost been like getting saved all over again!) The book was entitled The Quest for Godliness, by J.I. Packer, which introduced me to the Puritans. Nothing has been the same since! The chapter, "Saved by His Precious Blood", was especially instrumental to my theological growth. It is actually an introduction that Packer wrote for a re-release of what I believe is one of the most important works ever written, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, by Puritan John Owen.
These works by Packer and Owen were the straws that truly broke the camel's back. It was the last bit of weight that crushed any resistance I had to a full embracing of Reformation Theology. From them I learned that the Arminian way of thinking truly "limits" the Atonement! It limits it and makes it subservient to the supposed free will of man, which is thought to be able to actually trump the Sovereign will of an Omnipotent God! I also learned that while we do have a will, and we do make real decisions in our lives that have real consequences, our will is anything but free! It is in absolute bondage and slavery to sin - that apart from Grace, it has no chance of either understanding or desiring spiritual Truth!
I have further come to understand that this Limited or Effective Atonement is really "the Truth" that brings assurance and security to our hearts as Christians! We have security because the Blood of Christ was totally effective in securing all those that the Father intended it to secure. The Father, before the foundation of the world gave these "Elect" to the Son, and at that time their destiny was set. Therefore, it is Reformation Theology alone that can impart true faith through its teaching that God is Sovereign in every detail of our lives!
Another book that has been influential is No Place for Sovereignty, by R.K. McGregor Wright. In it he chronicles the history of the "Free Will" debate. I began to see that this struggle, bottom line, is simply a manifestation of the idolatry that exists in the human heart. We simply cannot bear the thought that our destiny may be in someone else's hands! Mr. Wright exposes this as the root of the current shift in evangelicalism towards the "Openness of God" theories.
As I was reading it, however, it dawned on me that this idolatry is also at the root of the "Word of Faith" heresy. In this movement there is great emphasis on our "taking of authority" and being able to control our own life and destiny. If this theology is true, my contention is, that, it actually produces fear and doubt, not faith! If I am in control of my own destiny, I'm in serious trouble! The only way this theology can produce something that even resembles faith is if we really believe we are capable of making decisions of eternal value, and that they are dependent on our will. This attitude is not however, real faith. It feeds on, and is, arrogance and pride. Again, I
Respectfully,
Pastor Kirk Wetsell, Jacksonville Christian Fellowship
Association of Charismatic/Reformed Churches
An excerpt from the above website from "Our History, Purpose and Vision for the Future" by Pastor Kirk Wetsell, Jacksonville (Arkansas) Christian Fellowship, president of the Association of Charismatic/Reformed Churches
I continued to teach and preach, and to mature in my understanding of Reformation Theology. I still, however, was resistant on some points, particularly Limited Atonement. Then, somewhere in the early 90's, I read a book that absolutely turned my theology upside down! (It has almost been like getting saved all over again!) The book was entitled The Quest for Godliness, by J.I. Packer, which introduced me to the Puritans. Nothing has been the same since! The chapter, "Saved by His Precious Blood", was especially instrumental to my theological growth. It is actually an introduction that Packer wrote for a re-release of what I believe is one of the most important works ever written, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, by Puritan John Owen.
These works by Packer and Owen were the straws that truly broke the camel's back. It was the last bit of weight that crushed any resistance I had to a full embracing of Reformation Theology. From them I learned that the Arminian way of thinking truly "limits" the Atonement! It limits it and makes it subservient to the supposed free will of man, which is thought to be able to actually trump the Sovereign will of an Omnipotent God! I also learned that while we do have a will, and we do make real decisions in our lives that have real consequences, our will is anything but free! It is in absolute bondage and slavery to sin - that apart from Grace, it has no chance of either understanding or desiring spiritual Truth!
I have further come to understand that this Limited or Effective Atonement is really "the Truth" that brings assurance and security to our hearts as Christians! We have security because the Blood of Christ was totally effective in securing all those that the Father intended it to secure. The Father, before the foundation of the world gave these "Elect" to the Son, and at that time their destiny was set. Therefore, it is Reformation Theology alone that can impart true faith through its teaching that God is Sovereign in every detail of our lives!
Another book that has been influential is No Place for Sovereignty, by R.K. McGregor Wright. In it he chronicles the history of the "Free Will" debate. I began to see that this struggle, bottom line, is simply a manifestation of the idolatry that exists in the human heart. We simply cannot bear the thought that our destiny may be in someone else's hands! Mr. Wright exposes this as the root of the current shift in evangelicalism towards the "Openness of God" theories.
As I was reading it, however, it dawned on me that this idolatry is also at the root of the "Word of Faith" heresy. In this movement there is great emphasis on our "taking of authority" and being able to control our own life and destiny. If this theology is true, my contention is, that, it actually produces fear and doubt, not faith! If I am in control of my own destiny, I'm in serious trouble! The only way this theology can produce something that even resembles faith is if we really believe we are capable of making decisions of eternal value, and that they are dependent on our will. This attitude is not however, real faith. It feeds on, and is, arrogance and pride. Again, I
Respectfully,
Pastor Kirk Wetsell, Jacksonville Christian Fellowship
Association of Charismatic/Reformed Churches
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Brother Miles McKee spreads the gospel--sing it brother, sing it!
The Wednesday Word: The Danger of our Strength
God is neither stingy with grace nor does He dispense mercy with eye drops. He’s generous and doesn’t feel put out when He has to send His Spirit to awaken the spiritually dead (Eph 2:4-6). He knows that because of our inbuilt hatred for the truth, it takes the supernatural power of the Spirit to convert us into believers. As Bonar says, “Believing is the simplest of all mental processes; yet we still need the power of God to believe from our hearts.”
Have you realized that you can neither change your heart nor do any good thing to recommend yourself to God (Romans 3:10)? It’s good for us to see the fix we’re in apart from grace. However, most of us are un-aware of the full extent of our helplessness and guilt and for this cause there is little rejoicing in the gospel. Our helplessness and guilt are far greater and far worse than we suppose (Jeremiah 17:9).
The truth is this; it is because of our warped and imperfect view of ourselves that we continually attempt to recommend ourselves to God. At times we seem very unaware of our ruin, weakness and inability and thus fail to realize that our supposed strength will actually keep us away from God.
God commands us to rest in the crucified Christ (Matt 11:28). In the light of this command, to bring something we have supposedly done for Him as a basis of acceptance is to refuse the promised rest of Christ alone. It’s sheer foolishness. Our consciences cannot be calmed by any of our works. If indeed our works have pacified our conscience, we have deceived ourselves for God is not propitiated by any of our efforts. May we put away all self-righteousness and approach the Father in the merits of Christ alone plus nothing.
Just as when we first came to Christ we came as undeserving sinners so we still cannot come to Him in our own name or righteousness----- even after many years of Christian service (Philippians 3:8-9). We continue to be saved by grace through faith, not by any efforts to induce the Father to accept us. The command to believers is to believe---to continue to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ! He alone is our sufficiency. If we do not believe the record that God has given of His Son, we make Him a liar (1 John 5:10). To rest, therefore, in something other than the person and work of Christ alone is to walk in unbelief. To walk in unbelief is to believe the lie that something more needs to be added to Christ Jesus (Gal 2:18; Gal 2:16; 2 Cor 3:5)! To walk by faith, on the other hand, is to receive the truth concerning Christ and His accomplishments on our behalf.
The deceiver, the prince of darkness, would love to take us away from the hope of the Gospel. He’s a religious sort of fellow, always encouraging us to establish an alternative righteousness to that which is found in Christ alone (Gal 2:21). If then you are building your hope on your own righteousness plus the righteousness of Christ your hope is not in Christ alone---- you are yet in unbelief.
Think about it; if our guarantee of salvation depended partially on our attainments, how could we ever be certain of salvation? How could we ever be assured that we had accomplished enough to secure our salvation (Gal 3:3)? But, the work of Christ was a work undertaken for those who could not attain (Rom 5:6-8); it was accomplished for those who could not save themselves. It was a work devised for sinners, undertaken for sinners, accomplished for sinners, finished for sinners, and received by God for sinners. And God has given assurance that this work is accepted in that He has raised Jesus from the dead (see Acts 17:31).
And that’s the Gospel Truth!
Miles
Miles McKee Ministries
http://www.milesmckee.com/
God is neither stingy with grace nor does He dispense mercy with eye drops. He’s generous and doesn’t feel put out when He has to send His Spirit to awaken the spiritually dead (Eph 2:4-6). He knows that because of our inbuilt hatred for the truth, it takes the supernatural power of the Spirit to convert us into believers. As Bonar says, “Believing is the simplest of all mental processes; yet we still need the power of God to believe from our hearts.”
Have you realized that you can neither change your heart nor do any good thing to recommend yourself to God (Romans 3:10)? It’s good for us to see the fix we’re in apart from grace. However, most of us are un-aware of the full extent of our helplessness and guilt and for this cause there is little rejoicing in the gospel. Our helplessness and guilt are far greater and far worse than we suppose (Jeremiah 17:9).
The truth is this; it is because of our warped and imperfect view of ourselves that we continually attempt to recommend ourselves to God. At times we seem very unaware of our ruin, weakness and inability and thus fail to realize that our supposed strength will actually keep us away from God.
God commands us to rest in the crucified Christ (Matt 11:28). In the light of this command, to bring something we have supposedly done for Him as a basis of acceptance is to refuse the promised rest of Christ alone. It’s sheer foolishness. Our consciences cannot be calmed by any of our works. If indeed our works have pacified our conscience, we have deceived ourselves for God is not propitiated by any of our efforts. May we put away all self-righteousness and approach the Father in the merits of Christ alone plus nothing.
Just as when we first came to Christ we came as undeserving sinners so we still cannot come to Him in our own name or righteousness----- even after many years of Christian service (Philippians 3:8-9). We continue to be saved by grace through faith, not by any efforts to induce the Father to accept us. The command to believers is to believe---to continue to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ! He alone is our sufficiency. If we do not believe the record that God has given of His Son, we make Him a liar (1 John 5:10). To rest, therefore, in something other than the person and work of Christ alone is to walk in unbelief. To walk in unbelief is to believe the lie that something more needs to be added to Christ Jesus (Gal 2:18; Gal 2:16; 2 Cor 3:5)! To walk by faith, on the other hand, is to receive the truth concerning Christ and His accomplishments on our behalf.
The deceiver, the prince of darkness, would love to take us away from the hope of the Gospel. He’s a religious sort of fellow, always encouraging us to establish an alternative righteousness to that which is found in Christ alone (Gal 2:21). If then you are building your hope on your own righteousness plus the righteousness of Christ your hope is not in Christ alone---- you are yet in unbelief.
Think about it; if our guarantee of salvation depended partially on our attainments, how could we ever be certain of salvation? How could we ever be assured that we had accomplished enough to secure our salvation (Gal 3:3)? But, the work of Christ was a work undertaken for those who could not attain (Rom 5:6-8); it was accomplished for those who could not save themselves. It was a work devised for sinners, undertaken for sinners, accomplished for sinners, finished for sinners, and received by God for sinners. And God has given assurance that this work is accepted in that He has raised Jesus from the dead (see Acts 17:31).
And that’s the Gospel Truth!
Miles
Miles McKee Ministries
http://www.milesmckee.com/
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Where the reformed often fall short... adding SEA to TULIP
Why Reductionist Five-point TULIP Calvinism is Bankrupt
by Robert R. Higby 6-2-2010
Five-point TULIP Calvinism was formulated in response to the 1610 five articles of the Remonstrants, who were followers of Jacob Arminius. At the time of its assembly, when the Synod of Dort formulated TULIP, the issue of counteracting the five articles was paramount to continuing ANY semblance of a Reformation.
The soteriology (salvation theology) of the 16th century Reformation in essence counteracted the great apostasy prophesied by Paul conceived by the late 1st and 2nd century Church Fathers. For 14 centuries men in popular religious institutions called ‘Christian’ had attempted to destroy the pristine apostolic gospel.
Though the Synod of Dort scored a huge victory for gospel truth at the time of its occurrence, the pertinence of what was achieved is mostly ignored today. The rise of evangelicalism under the immensely popular teaching of Andrew Fuller mostly destroyed the practical impact of the synod of Dort.
Though a tongue-in-cheek confession of the correctness of the 5 points still remains, for centuries Reformed Calvinists have shunned any doctrine of absolute, positive, double, and causative predestination of all events.
In reality the Reformed churches hate such teachings. They embrace Arminians as full brethren in Christ and fellow evangelicals. This is because there is a common teaching of passive, non-causative predestination of sin among both. Both strains of evangelicalism cherish and promote a doctrine of God’s general love, common grace, bare foreknowledge of rebellion that is permissive but not caused, and the free offer of the gospel to reprobates.
The 5 points deal with redemption as it occurs existentially within time. These confessional statements do not cover the broader issues of how salvation and reprobation are purposed and carried out from the Divine perspective. So we need an expansion of past fundamentals to include the greater reality of how God relates to all aspects of predestining redemptive history from the inception of time to eternity future.
Adding the points of Supralapsarianism, Eternal Justification, and Active Decree to the historic five points of TULIP will provide a new and comprehensive basis for defending the truth of the gospel in future generations. Therefore I am convinced we need to pursue this formulation in earnest. The SEA-TULIP articles will provide an 8-Point confession of Gospel Predestination that will permanently reject and stand against evangelical Fullerism and its anti-Reformation heresies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_tulip
Supralapsarian
Eternal Justification
Apermissive Decree
Total Inability
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Preservation of the Saints
Why not?...
btw, look for this original to be plagiarized elsewhere on the internet (but watered down immensely) as soon as it is posted!
by Robert R. Higby 6-2-2010
Five-point TULIP Calvinism was formulated in response to the 1610 five articles of the Remonstrants, who were followers of Jacob Arminius. At the time of its assembly, when the Synod of Dort formulated TULIP, the issue of counteracting the five articles was paramount to continuing ANY semblance of a Reformation.
The soteriology (salvation theology) of the 16th century Reformation in essence counteracted the great apostasy prophesied by Paul conceived by the late 1st and 2nd century Church Fathers. For 14 centuries men in popular religious institutions called ‘Christian’ had attempted to destroy the pristine apostolic gospel.
Though the Synod of Dort scored a huge victory for gospel truth at the time of its occurrence, the pertinence of what was achieved is mostly ignored today. The rise of evangelicalism under the immensely popular teaching of Andrew Fuller mostly destroyed the practical impact of the synod of Dort.
Though a tongue-in-cheek confession of the correctness of the 5 points still remains, for centuries Reformed Calvinists have shunned any doctrine of absolute, positive, double, and causative predestination of all events.
In reality the Reformed churches hate such teachings. They embrace Arminians as full brethren in Christ and fellow evangelicals. This is because there is a common teaching of passive, non-causative predestination of sin among both. Both strains of evangelicalism cherish and promote a doctrine of God’s general love, common grace, bare foreknowledge of rebellion that is permissive but not caused, and the free offer of the gospel to reprobates.
The 5 points deal with redemption as it occurs existentially within time. These confessional statements do not cover the broader issues of how salvation and reprobation are purposed and carried out from the Divine perspective. So we need an expansion of past fundamentals to include the greater reality of how God relates to all aspects of predestining redemptive history from the inception of time to eternity future.
Adding the points of Supralapsarianism, Eternal Justification, and Active Decree to the historic five points of TULIP will provide a new and comprehensive basis for defending the truth of the gospel in future generations. Therefore I am convinced we need to pursue this formulation in earnest. The SEA-TULIP articles will provide an 8-Point confession of Gospel Predestination that will permanently reject and stand against evangelical Fullerism and its anti-Reformation heresies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_tulip
Supralapsarian
Eternal Justification
Apermissive Decree
Total Inability
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Preservation of the Saints
Why not?...
btw, look for this original to be plagiarized elsewhere on the internet (but watered down immensely) as soon as it is posted!
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Distilling the truth--on Holy Communion
The Heidelburg Catechism differentiates between the Mass and the Lord's Supper.
LORD'S DAY 30
80. What difference is there between the Lord's Supper and the Pope's Mass?
The Lord's Supper testifies to us that we have full forgiveness of all our sins by the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which He Himself once accomplished on the cross;[1] and that by the Holy Ghost we are ingrafted into Christ,[2] who, with His true body, is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father,[3] and there to be worshipped. [4] But the Mass teaches that the living and the dead do not have forgiveness of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is still daily offered for them by the priests, and that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and is therefore to be worshipped in them. And thus the Mass at bottom is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ,[5] and an accursed idolatry.
[1]Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25-28; 10:10, 12, 14; Jn. 19:30. [2]I Cor. 6:17. [3]Heb. 1:3; 8:1. [4]Jn. 4:21-24; 20:17; Lk. 24:52; Acts 7:55; Col. 3:1; Phil. 3:20-21; I Thess. 1:9-10. [5]See Hebrews chapters 9 and 10; *Mt. 4:10.
81. Who are to come to the table of the Lord?
Those who are displeased with themselves for their sins, yet trust that these are forgiven them, and that their remaining infirmity is covered by the suffering and death of Christ; who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and to amend their life. But the impenitent and hypocrites eat and drink judgment to themselves.[1]
[1]I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-29; *Ps. 51:3; *Jn. 7:37-38; Ps. 103:1-4; *Mt. 5:6.
82. Are they, then, also to be admitted to this Supper who show themselves by their confession and life to be unbelieving and ungodly?
No, for thereby the covenant of God is profaned and His wrath provoked against the whole congregation;[1] therefore, the Christian Church is bound, according to the order of Christ and His Apostles, to exclude such persons by the Office of the Keys until they amend their lives.
[1]I Cor. 11:20, 34a; Isa. 1:11-15; 66:3; Jer. 7:21-23; Ps. 50:16-17; *Mt. 7:6; *I Cor. 11:30-32; *Tit. 3:10-11; *II Thess. 3:6.
Needed adjustments -- according to bible-based bro. Jim...
The Heidelburg is right when it comes to point 4--this is how the Roman Church changes the gospel. It sacrifices the gospel that CHrist died to win the salvation of those who believe in him to make the Mass necessary for the forgiveness of the latest sins committed on earth as well as a way to reduce the time of the "holy" souls in Purgatory.
Nevertheless, we would adjust the reformation viewpoint on 3 to reflect the true reception of Christ's body and blood (perhaps worded like below) for us BibleCatholics.
[3] and also by his glorified body is fully able to be received by us on earth through the elements of bread and wine as promised by Christ himself. --bro. Jim
LORD'S DAY 30
80. What difference is there between the Lord's Supper and the Pope's Mass?
The Lord's Supper testifies to us that we have full forgiveness of all our sins by the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which He Himself once accomplished on the cross;[1] and that by the Holy Ghost we are ingrafted into Christ,[2] who, with His true body, is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father,[3] and there to be worshipped. [4] But the Mass teaches that the living and the dead do not have forgiveness of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is still daily offered for them by the priests, and that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and is therefore to be worshipped in them. And thus the Mass at bottom is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ,[5] and an accursed idolatry.
[1]Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25-28; 10:10, 12, 14; Jn. 19:30. [2]I Cor. 6:17. [3]Heb. 1:3; 8:1. [4]Jn. 4:21-24; 20:17; Lk. 24:52; Acts 7:55; Col. 3:1; Phil. 3:20-21; I Thess. 1:9-10. [5]See Hebrews chapters 9 and 10; *Mt. 4:10.
81. Who are to come to the table of the Lord?
Those who are displeased with themselves for their sins, yet trust that these are forgiven them, and that their remaining infirmity is covered by the suffering and death of Christ; who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and to amend their life. But the impenitent and hypocrites eat and drink judgment to themselves.[1]
[1]I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-29; *Ps. 51:3; *Jn. 7:37-38; Ps. 103:1-4; *Mt. 5:6.
82. Are they, then, also to be admitted to this Supper who show themselves by their confession and life to be unbelieving and ungodly?
No, for thereby the covenant of God is profaned and His wrath provoked against the whole congregation;[1] therefore, the Christian Church is bound, according to the order of Christ and His Apostles, to exclude such persons by the Office of the Keys until they amend their lives.
[1]I Cor. 11:20, 34a; Isa. 1:11-15; 66:3; Jer. 7:21-23; Ps. 50:16-17; *Mt. 7:6; *I Cor. 11:30-32; *Tit. 3:10-11; *II Thess. 3:6.
Needed adjustments -- according to bible-based bro. Jim...
The Heidelburg is right when it comes to point 4--this is how the Roman Church changes the gospel. It sacrifices the gospel that CHrist died to win the salvation of those who believe in him to make the Mass necessary for the forgiveness of the latest sins committed on earth as well as a way to reduce the time of the "holy" souls in Purgatory.
Nevertheless, we would adjust the reformation viewpoint on 3 to reflect the true reception of Christ's body and blood (perhaps worded like below) for us BibleCatholics.
[3] and also by his glorified body is fully able to be received by us on earth through the elements of bread and wine as promised by Christ himself. --bro. Jim
Monday, November 16, 2009
Cautions against Romanism and the priesthood's proper place
(Short note from Bro. Jim...)
While the late Bishop J.C. Ryle of Liverpool (died 1900) and I may not see exactly eye to eye on the Lord’s Supper (see below), on many matters we are in very real agreement--much of the following included. It's all very worthy of consideration for BibleCatholics. We have much to thank Ryle and others in the old Anglican Church and especially those of the so-called “low church” like Ryle, who are indeed a near dead breed in the days of the ecumenical Roman takeover. Here are some important thoughts Ryle had against the creeping adoption of Roman Catholic errors among Anglican priests and some specific cautions to keep the priesthood itself in proper perspective. (I made a few comments in parenthesis)
Bishop Ryle (pictured at right) wrote:
2. For another thing, I charge you to beware of Anglo-Romanism, and do all you can to resist it.
Resist it in little things. Resist strange dresses, sacrificial garments, the eastward position in consecrating the bread and wine, idolatrous reverence of the consecrated elements, processions, banners, incense, candles on the communion table, turning to the East, crosses and crucifixes in the chancels, and extravagant Church decorations.
Resist it in great things. Oppose with might and main the attempt to re-introduce the Mass and Auricular Confession in our parishes. Send your boy to no school where auricular confession is ever tolerated. Allow no clergymen to draw your wife and daughter to private confession. Oppose sternly, but firmly, the attempt to change the Lord’s Supper at your parish churches, into the Romish sacrifice of the mass. Draw back from the communion in such churches, and go elsewhere. The laity have a great deal of power in this matter, even without going to law. They should tell the clergy their minds. They cannot do without the laity any more than officers in a regiment can do without privates. Let the English laity all over England rise in their might, and say, “We will not have the mass and auricular confession.”
Resist it for Christ’s sake. His Priestly and Mediatorial offices are being injured and dishonoured. They are offices He has never deputed to any order of ordained men.
Resist it for the clergy’s sake. The worst and cruellest thing that can be done is to lift us out of our proper places, and make us lords over your consciences, and mediators between yourselves and God.
Resist it for the laity’s sake. The most degrading position in which laymen could be put, is that of being cringing slaves at the foot of a brother sinner (the priest).
Resist it, not least, for your children’s sake. Do what in you lies to provide that, when you are dead and gone, they shall not be left to the tender mercies of Popery. As ever you would meet your boys and girls in heaven, take care that the Church of England in your day is maintained a Protestant Church, and preserves her Articles and the principles of the Reformation wholly uninjured and undefiled.
--From "What do we owe the reformation" by J.C. Ryle, Bishop of Liverpool
ON THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY AND SACRAMENTS
(3) I go on to say that Evangelical Religion does not under value the Christian ministry. It is not true to say that we do. We regard it as an honourable office instituted by Christ Himself, and of general necessity for carrying on the work of the Gospel. We look on ministers as preachers of God’s Word, God’s ambassadors, God’s messengers, God’s servants, God’s shepherds, God’s stewards, God’s overseers, and labourers in God’s vineyard.
But we steadily refuse to admit that Christian ministers are in any sense sacrificing priests, mediators between God and man, lords of men’s consciences, or private confessors (and they are certainly not "another Christ" as taught by Roman Catholicism). We refuse it, not only because we cannot see it in the Bible, but also because we have read the lessons of Church history. We find that Sacerdotalism, or priestcraft, has frequently been the curse of Christianity, and the ruin of true religion. And we say boldly that the exaltation of the ministerial office to an unscriptural place and extravagant dignity in the Church of England in the present day, is likely to alienate the affections of the laity, to ruin the Church, and to be the source of every kind of error and superstition.
(4) I go on to say that Evangelical Religion does not undervalue the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It is not true to say that we do. We honour them as holy ordinances appointed by Christ Himself, and as blessed means of grace, which in all who use them rightly, worthily, and with faith, “have a wholesome effect or operation.”
(I still maintain that we should believe that partaking of the bread and wine is the same as receiving the very body and blood of Christ, as he promised us. "This is my body...this is my blood.." Paul tells us that those who recieve without faith are guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. How can we be "guilty of the body and blood of our Lord" if it is not true? "...whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord." 1 Cor. 11:27. This is not idolatry as long as we keep to his promise in the Lord's Supper--but it most certainly is when we try to take the elements out of the context Christ gave us--as in so-called Eucharistic adoration--which is most definitely idolatry.)
--From “Evangelical Religion” by J.C. Ryle, Bishop of Liverpool
Read more Ryle at http://www.tracts.ukgo.com/john_charles_ryle.htm
Short overview at the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Charles_Ryle
While the late Bishop J.C. Ryle of Liverpool (died 1900) and I may not see exactly eye to eye on the Lord’s Supper (see below), on many matters we are in very real agreement--much of the following included. It's all very worthy of consideration for BibleCatholics. We have much to thank Ryle and others in the old Anglican Church and especially those of the so-called “low church” like Ryle, who are indeed a near dead breed in the days of the ecumenical Roman takeover. Here are some important thoughts Ryle had against the creeping adoption of Roman Catholic errors among Anglican priests and some specific cautions to keep the priesthood itself in proper perspective. (I made a few comments in parenthesis)
Bishop Ryle (pictured at right) wrote:
2. For another thing, I charge you to beware of Anglo-Romanism, and do all you can to resist it.
Resist it in little things. Resist strange dresses, sacrificial garments, the eastward position in consecrating the bread and wine, idolatrous reverence of the consecrated elements, processions, banners, incense, candles on the communion table, turning to the East, crosses and crucifixes in the chancels, and extravagant Church decorations.
Resist it in great things. Oppose with might and main the attempt to re-introduce the Mass and Auricular Confession in our parishes. Send your boy to no school where auricular confession is ever tolerated. Allow no clergymen to draw your wife and daughter to private confession. Oppose sternly, but firmly, the attempt to change the Lord’s Supper at your parish churches, into the Romish sacrifice of the mass. Draw back from the communion in such churches, and go elsewhere. The laity have a great deal of power in this matter, even without going to law. They should tell the clergy their minds. They cannot do without the laity any more than officers in a regiment can do without privates. Let the English laity all over England rise in their might, and say, “We will not have the mass and auricular confession.”
Resist it for Christ’s sake. His Priestly and Mediatorial offices are being injured and dishonoured. They are offices He has never deputed to any order of ordained men.
Resist it for the clergy’s sake. The worst and cruellest thing that can be done is to lift us out of our proper places, and make us lords over your consciences, and mediators between yourselves and God.
Resist it for the laity’s sake. The most degrading position in which laymen could be put, is that of being cringing slaves at the foot of a brother sinner (the priest).
Resist it, not least, for your children’s sake. Do what in you lies to provide that, when you are dead and gone, they shall not be left to the tender mercies of Popery. As ever you would meet your boys and girls in heaven, take care that the Church of England in your day is maintained a Protestant Church, and preserves her Articles and the principles of the Reformation wholly uninjured and undefiled.
--From "What do we owe the reformation" by J.C. Ryle, Bishop of Liverpool
ON THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY AND SACRAMENTS
(3) I go on to say that Evangelical Religion does not under value the Christian ministry. It is not true to say that we do. We regard it as an honourable office instituted by Christ Himself, and of general necessity for carrying on the work of the Gospel. We look on ministers as preachers of God’s Word, God’s ambassadors, God’s messengers, God’s servants, God’s shepherds, God’s stewards, God’s overseers, and labourers in God’s vineyard.
But we steadily refuse to admit that Christian ministers are in any sense sacrificing priests, mediators between God and man, lords of men’s consciences, or private confessors (and they are certainly not "another Christ" as taught by Roman Catholicism). We refuse it, not only because we cannot see it in the Bible, but also because we have read the lessons of Church history. We find that Sacerdotalism, or priestcraft, has frequently been the curse of Christianity, and the ruin of true religion. And we say boldly that the exaltation of the ministerial office to an unscriptural place and extravagant dignity in the Church of England in the present day, is likely to alienate the affections of the laity, to ruin the Church, and to be the source of every kind of error and superstition.
(4) I go on to say that Evangelical Religion does not undervalue the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It is not true to say that we do. We honour them as holy ordinances appointed by Christ Himself, and as blessed means of grace, which in all who use them rightly, worthily, and with faith, “have a wholesome effect or operation.”
But we steadily refuse to admit that Christ’s Sacraments convey grace ex opere operato, (I'm with that) and that in every case where they are administered, good must of necessity be done. We refuse to admit that they are the grand media between Christ and the soul,—above faith, above preaching, and above prayer. We protest against the idea that in baptism the use of water, in the name of the Trinity, is invariably and necessarily accompanied by regeneration. We protest against the practice of encouraging any one to come to the Lord’s Table unless he repents truly of sin, has a lively faith in Christ, and is in charity with all men. We protest against the theory that the Lord’s Supper is a sacrifice, as a theory alike contrary to the Bible, Articles, and Prayer-book. And above all, we protest against the notion of any corporal presence of Christ’s flesh and blood in the Lord’s Supper, under the forms of bread and wine, as an “idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians.”
--From “Evangelical Religion” by J.C. Ryle, Bishop of Liverpool
Read more Ryle at http://www.tracts.ukgo.com/john_charles_ryle.htm
Short overview at the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Charles_Ryle
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Why Christian mysticism virtually vanished from the Roman Church following the Council of Trent
(The following is from the late John A. Mackay who headed theology at Princeton from the 1930s to the 1950s--he wrote it as a side comment to a book review in 1959.)
What can only be described as a supreme aberration from Biblical and classical Christianity has resulted in two post-Tridentine manifestations. First, that glorious Christ-centered evangelical mysticism which marked the lives of so many of the medieval saints, Francis of Assisi, Theresa of Avila, John of the Cross, became condemned, was discouraged, and is no more.
The great tradition of direct, uninhibited communion with the Risen Christ, which goes back to St. Paul, disappeared progressively in the Roman communion. It was replaced by a devotional life that in a mediated way became centered in the Eucharist, or that found its supreme popular expression in an unmediated devotion to Mary. In the meantime, that profoundly evangelical Christo-centric mysticism, which marked pre-Tridcntine Catholicism passed into and enriched the devotional life of Protestant Christianity.
Second, visions of the Virgin began to replace visions of Christ, who became increasingly remote and unrelated to the events of history. The Virgin of Guadalupe appeared as an ethnic reality; the Virgin of Lourdes as a therapeutic reality; the Virgin of Fatima as a cosmic, history making reality.
Once again the Hispanic Catholic tradition, which has been under criticism in certain Roman Catholic circles in France and the United States, has provided the needed symbol for the new Mario-centric development of Roman Catholic theology and devotion in our time. For the Virgin of Fatima, in accordance with the symbolism which adorns her shrine on a Portuguese plateau, has been crowned by the Holy Trinity.
Our Lady has been constituted The Executive Director of Deity in everything that relates to humanity. She controls all life and history. Moreover, according to a distinguished Roman Catholic thinker, writing in a book which appeared a few years ago under the title Mary and Modern Man, it is the humanity of Mary and not the humanity of Christ that must be taken as the inspiration and pattern of true human selfhood.
In the new Mariology the "riddle" of Roman Catholicism reaches its highest degree of complexity. It is the potent growth of the Fatima cult, together with the progressive deposition of Jesus Christ from direct relationship to human life, that constitutes the supreme spiritual issue between Roman and non-Roman Christianity today.
By knowledge and by temperament, the distinguished author of The Riddle of Roman Catholicism is unusually fitted to lead the way in shedding light upon the particular phases of the "riddle" which, to the reviewer of his outstanding book, appear to have basic relevance.
John A. Mackay
Chevy Chase, Maryland
What can only be described as a supreme aberration from Biblical and classical Christianity has resulted in two post-Tridentine manifestations. First, that glorious Christ-centered evangelical mysticism which marked the lives of so many of the medieval saints, Francis of Assisi, Theresa of Avila, John of the Cross, became condemned, was discouraged, and is no more.
The great tradition of direct, uninhibited communion with the Risen Christ, which goes back to St. Paul, disappeared progressively in the Roman communion. It was replaced by a devotional life that in a mediated way became centered in the Eucharist, or that found its supreme popular expression in an unmediated devotion to Mary. In the meantime, that profoundly evangelical Christo-centric mysticism, which marked pre-Tridcntine Catholicism passed into and enriched the devotional life of Protestant Christianity.
Second, visions of the Virgin began to replace visions of Christ, who became increasingly remote and unrelated to the events of history. The Virgin of Guadalupe appeared as an ethnic reality; the Virgin of Lourdes as a therapeutic reality; the Virgin of Fatima as a cosmic, history making reality.
Once again the Hispanic Catholic tradition, which has been under criticism in certain Roman Catholic circles in France and the United States, has provided the needed symbol for the new Mario-centric development of Roman Catholic theology and devotion in our time. For the Virgin of Fatima, in accordance with the symbolism which adorns her shrine on a Portuguese plateau, has been crowned by the Holy Trinity.
Our Lady has been constituted The Executive Director of Deity in everything that relates to humanity. She controls all life and history. Moreover, according to a distinguished Roman Catholic thinker, writing in a book which appeared a few years ago under the title Mary and Modern Man, it is the humanity of Mary and not the humanity of Christ that must be taken as the inspiration and pattern of true human selfhood.
In the new Mariology the "riddle" of Roman Catholicism reaches its highest degree of complexity. It is the potent growth of the Fatima cult, together with the progressive deposition of Jesus Christ from direct relationship to human life, that constitutes the supreme spiritual issue between Roman and non-Roman Christianity today.
By knowledge and by temperament, the distinguished author of The Riddle of Roman Catholicism is unusually fitted to lead the way in shedding light upon the particular phases of the "riddle" which, to the reviewer of his outstanding book, appear to have basic relevance.
John A. Mackay
Chevy Chase, Maryland
Monday, July 27, 2009
Example of Christian legalism
The story below is an example of how some Christians can twist the concept of "perseverance" into using the ten commandments as a "rule of life" that appears to put them right back under the law after claiming to be saved by grace.
This is too often found among the reformed.
Paul teaches us that Christians who insist on requiring such "works" of the law as circumcision are denying the one saving work of Christ. "Behold, I Paul say unto you that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." Galatians 5:2.
The Scottish folk in the story below don't believe they are saved by observing what they see as the "Christian Sabbath," however that observation has become so much a tradition that they are insisting everyone respect and observe it. They themselves have become so like the pharisees that any witness to Christ their Sabbath observance was supposed to be has failed miserably as they try to force it on others.
Scottish island's sacred Sunday under threat
July 18th, 2009 @ 11:38am
By BEN McCONVILLE Associated Press Writer
ULLAPOOL, Scotland (AP) - An unholy row has broken out over a ferry company's decision to sail on Sunday between a remote Scottish island and the mainland.
Residents on the Isle of Lewis who keep a strict Sabbath _ no television, no housework, no shopping _ are angry that the Caledonian MacBrayne ferry company is to start running services between Stornoway, the island's capital, and Ullapool on the Scottish mainland.
The company, known as CalMac, says it has no choice because not to run the service would potentially put it in breach of European laws on equality. Presbyterian residents on the predominantly Gaelic-speaking island say the service is threatening both their faith and their lifestyle.
"This is an affront to the wishes and religious beliefs of the people of the island and CalMac has run roughshod over us," said John Roberts, spokesman for the Lord's Day Observance Society.
"The Sunday ferry service is a direct threat to this way of life which stands for Christian beliefs, the Bible and the word of God. We'll end up with Sundays like they are in the rest of the U.K. or the U.S. where it is just, go to church on Sunday morning and the rest of the day is yours."....
On the Net:
CalMac, http://www.calmac.co.uk/lewis
Lochbroom Free Church, http://www.lochbroomfreechurch.co.uk/
This is too often found among the reformed.
Paul teaches us that Christians who insist on requiring such "works" of the law as circumcision are denying the one saving work of Christ. "Behold, I Paul say unto you that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." Galatians 5:2.
The Scottish folk in the story below don't believe they are saved by observing what they see as the "Christian Sabbath," however that observation has become so much a tradition that they are insisting everyone respect and observe it. They themselves have become so like the pharisees that any witness to Christ their Sabbath observance was supposed to be has failed miserably as they try to force it on others.
Scottish island's sacred Sunday under threat
July 18th, 2009 @ 11:38am
By BEN McCONVILLE Associated Press Writer
ULLAPOOL, Scotland (AP) - An unholy row has broken out over a ferry company's decision to sail on Sunday between a remote Scottish island and the mainland.
Residents on the Isle of Lewis who keep a strict Sabbath _ no television, no housework, no shopping _ are angry that the Caledonian MacBrayne ferry company is to start running services between Stornoway, the island's capital, and Ullapool on the Scottish mainland.
The company, known as CalMac, says it has no choice because not to run the service would potentially put it in breach of European laws on equality. Presbyterian residents on the predominantly Gaelic-speaking island say the service is threatening both their faith and their lifestyle.
"This is an affront to the wishes and religious beliefs of the people of the island and CalMac has run roughshod over us," said John Roberts, spokesman for the Lord's Day Observance Society.
"The Sunday ferry service is a direct threat to this way of life which stands for Christian beliefs, the Bible and the word of God. We'll end up with Sundays like they are in the rest of the U.K. or the U.S. where it is just, go to church on Sunday morning and the rest of the day is yours."....
On the Net:
CalMac, http://www.calmac.co.uk/lewis
Lochbroom Free Church, http://www.lochbroomfreechurch.co.uk/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)