Ted wrote: Your comments re "Revelation" are quite correct. Many scholars including Bible translator J. B. Phillips have all said that "Revelation" is about the Roman Empire and not about some distant time in the future. If that is the case then such a use of "Revelation" to try to scare, literally, the hell out of people could be seen as a misuse of the sacred writings.Ted, you are, of course, correct and all modern Bible scholars agree on that. I think I may have posted this before on another thread, or possibly earlier on this one, but here again is the introduction to Revelation from the Good News Bible, subtitled 'Today's English Version', which is, by the way, a product of joint Catholic-Protestant scholarship:"The Revelation to John was written at a time when Christians were being persecuted because of their faith in Jesus Christ as Lord. The writer's main concern is to give his readers hope and encouragement, and to urge them to remain faithful during times of suffering and persecution.
For the most part the book consists of several series of revelations and visions presented in symbolic language that would have been understood by Christians of that day, but would have remained a mystery to all others. As with the themes of a symphony, the themes of this book are repeated again and again in different ways through the series of visions."I then commented:Bronwen wrote: VERY well put! Revelation is then, a book of faith, a book of encouragement, a book of LITERATURE, not prophecy, written about the events of John's time for the Christian readers of his time. It is prophetic only to the extent that in the end, the Lord will be victorious and the faithful will be rewarded.I don't think there's any question, however, that the author of Revelation expected the end of the age to come quickly, as that was the prevailing Jewish thought at the time, well-supported throughout the entire NT, including Christ's own words...I tell you the truth, there are some standing here who will not experience death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. (Mt 16:29)...the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light; the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. Then everyone will see the Son of Man arriving in the clouds with great power and glory. Then he will send angels and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.... I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. (Mk 13:24ff)And Paul also says...There is not much time left...The world as we know it will not last much longer.Of course, when these predictions went unfulfilled, Christianity began to become less and less Jewish and more and more Gentile, as most Gentiles had no such expectations.
Adventism and Catholicism
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen:-6
Well put. I concur.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Well put. I concur.
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
Adventism and Catholicism
The following is from the book, The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White. This is chapter 34, entitled, “Liberty of Conscience Threatened.†(Aims of the Papacy) Though this was written almost one hundred years ago, I have found it is amazingly prescient. Reading this book was the clincher in a long series of experiences God led me to; that made me decide to become a baptized member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Such a powerful testimony that strips the mask off the Papacy and exposes it for what it really is, I challenge you to find anywhere. It is also a potent prophetic warning to Protestants of today.
I will present it in three parts. It’s long, but very edifying and spiritually filling for any true lover of God and of His Holy Word. And now it gives me great pleasure to present to you Chapter 34, Liberty of Conscience Threatened (Aims of the Papacy) from The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White:
Romanism is now regarded by Protestants with far greater favor than in former years. In those countries where Catholicism is not in the ascendancy, and the papists are taking a conciliatory course in order to gain influence, there is an increasing indifference concerning the doctrines that separate the reformed churches from the papal hierarchy; the opinion is gaining ground that, after all, we do not differ so widely upon vital points as has been supposed, and that a little concession on our part will bring us into a better understanding with Rome. The time was when Protestants placed a high value upon the liberty of conscience which had been so dearly purchased. They taught their children to abhor popery and held that to seek harmony with Rome would be disloyalty to God. But how widely different are the sentiments now expressed!
The defenders of the papacy declare that the church has been maligned, and the Protestant world are inclined to accept the statement. Many urge that it is unjust to judge the church of today by the abominations and absurdities that marked her reign during the centuries of ignorance and darkness. They excuse her horrible cruelty as the result of the barbarism of the times and plead that the influence of modern civilization has changed her sentiments. Have these persons forgotten the claim of infallibility put forth for eight hundred years by this haughty power? So far from being relinquished, this claim was affirmed in the nineteenth century with greater positiveness than ever before. As Rome asserts that the "church never erred; nor will it, according to the Scriptures, ever err" (John L. von Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, book 3, century II, part 2, chapter 2, section 9, note 17), how can she renounce the principles which governed her course in past ages?
The papal church will never relinquish her claim to infallibility. All that she has done in her persecution of those who reject her dogmas she holds to be right; and would she not repeat the same acts, should the opportunity be presented? Let the restraints now imposed by secular governments be removed and Rome be reinstated in her former power, and there would speedily be a revival of her tyranny and persecution. A well-known writer speaks thus of the attitude of the papal hierarchy as regards freedom of conscience, and of the perils which especially threaten the United States from the success of her policy:
"There are many who are disposed to attribute any fear of Roman Catholicism in the United States to bigotry or childishness. Such see nothing in the character and attitude of Romanism that is hostile to our free institutions, or find nothing portentous in its growth. Let us, then, first compare some of the fundamental principles of our government with those of the Catholic Church.
"The Constitution of the United States guarantees liberty of conscience. Nothing is dearer or more fundamental. Pope Pius IX, in his Encyclical Letter of August 15, 1854, said: `The absurd and erroneous doctrines or ravings in defense of liberty of conscience are a most pestilential error--a pest, of all others, most to be dreaded in a state.' The same pope, in his Encyclical Letter of December 8, 1864, anathematized `those who assert the liberty of conscience and of religious worship,' also 'all such as maintain that the church may not employ force.'
"The pacific tone of Rome in the United States does not imply a change of heart. She is tolerant where she is helpless. Says Bishop O'Connor: 'Religious liberty is merely endured until the opposite can be carried into effect without peril to the Catholic world.'. . . The archbishop of St. Louis once said: 'Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as in Italy and Spain, for instance, where all the people are Catholics, and where the Catholic religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are punished as other crimes.'. "Every cardinal, archbishop, and bishop in the Catholic Church takes an oath of allegiance to the pope, in which occur the following words: 'Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord (the pope), or his aforesaid successors, I will to my utmost persecute and oppose.'"--Josiah Strong, Our Country, ch. 5, pars. 2-4.
It is true that there are real Christians in the Roman Catholic communion. Thousands in that church are serving God according to the best light they have. They are not allowed access to His word, and therefore they do not discern the truth. They have never seen the contrast between a living heart service and a round of mere forms and ceremonies. God looks with pitying tenderness upon these souls, educated as they are in a faith that is delusive and unsatisfying. He will cause rays of light to penetrate the dense darkness that surrounds them. He will reveal to them the truth as it is in Jesus, and many will yet take their position with His people.
But Romanism as a system is no more in harmony with the gospel of Christ now than at any former period in her history. The Protestant churches are in great darkness, or they would discern the signs of the times. The Roman Church is far-reaching in her plans and modes of operation. She is employing every device to extend her influence and increase her power in preparation for a fierce and determined conflict to regain control of the world, to re-establish persecution, and to undo all that Protestantism has done. Catholicism is gaining ground upon every side. See the increasing number of her churches and chapels in Protestant countries. Look at the popularity of her colleges and seminaries in America, so widely patronized by Protestants. Look at the growth of ritualism in England and the frequent defections to the ranks of the Catholics. These things should awaken the anxiety of all who prize the pure principles of the gospel.
Protestants have tampered with and patronized popery; they have made compromises and concessions which papists themselves are surprised to see and fail to understand. Men are closing their eyes to the real character of Romanism and the dangers to be apprehended from her supremacy. The people need to be aroused to resist the advances of this most dangerous foe to civil and religious liberty.
Many Protestants suppose that the Catholic religion is unattractive and that its worship is a dull, meaningless round of ceremony. Here they mistake. While Romanism is based upon deception, it is not a coarse and clumsy imposture. The religious service of the Roman Church is a most impressive ceremonial. Its gorgeous display and solemn rites fascinate the senses of the people and silence the voice of reason and of conscience. The eye is charmed. Magnificent churches, imposing processions, golden altars, jeweled shrines, choice paintings, and exquisite sculpture appeal to the love of beauty. The ear also is captivated. The music is unsurpassed. The rich notes of the deep-toned organ, blending with the melody of many voices as it swells through the lofty domes and pillared aisles of her grand cathedrals, cannot fail to impress the mind with awe and reverence.
This outward splendor, pomp, and ceremony, that only mocks the longings of the sin-sick soul, is an evidence of inward corruption. The religion of Christ needs not such attractions to recommend it. In the light shining from the cross, true Christianity appears so pure and lovely that no external decorations can enhance its true worth. It is the beauty of holiness, a meek and quiet spirit, which is of value with God.
Brilliancy of style is not necessarily an index of pure, elevated thought. High conceptions of art, delicate refinement of taste, often exist in minds that are earthly and sensual. They are often employed by Satan to lead men to forget the necessities of the soul, to lose sight of the future, immortal life, to turn away from their infinite Helper, and to live for this world alone.
A religion of externals is attractive to the unrenewed heart. The pomp and ceremony of the Catholic worship has a seductive, bewitching power, by which many are deceived; and they come to look upon the Roman Church as the very gate of heaven. None but those who have planted their feet firmly upon the foundation of truth, and whose hearts are renewed by the Spirit of God, are proof against her influence. Thousands who have not an experimental knowledge of Christ will be led to accept the forms of godliness without the power. Such a religion is just what the multitudes desire.
The church's claim to the right to pardon leads the Romanist to feel at liberty to sin; and the ordinance of confession, without which her pardon is not granted, tends also to give license to evil. He who kneels before fallen man, and opens in confession the secret thoughts and imaginations of his heart, is debasing his manhood and degrading every noble instinct of his soul. In unfolding the sins of his life to a priest,--an erring, sinful mortal, and too often corrupted with wine and licentiousness,--his standard of character is lowered, and he is defiled in consequence. His thought of God is degraded to the likeness of fallen humanity, for the priest stands as a representative of God. This degrading confession of man to man is the secret spring from which has flowed much of the evil that is defiling the world and fitting it for the final destruction. Yet to him who loves self-indulgence, it is more pleasing to confess to a fellow mortal than to open the soul to God. It is more palatable to human nature to do penance than to renounce sin; it is easier to mortify the flesh by sackcloth and nettles and galling chains than to crucify fleshly lusts. Heavy is the yoke which the carnal heart is willing to bear rather than bow to the yoke of Christ.
There is a striking similarity between the Church of Rome and the Jewish Church at the time of Christ's first advent. While the Jews secretly trampled upon every principle of the law of God, they were outwardly rigorous in the observance of its precepts, loading it down with exactions and traditions that made obedience painful and burdensome. As the Jews professed to revere the law, so do Romanists claim to reverence the cross. They exalt the symbol of Christ's sufferings, while in their lives they deny Him whom it represents.
Papists place crosses upon their churches, upon their altars, and upon their garments. Everywhere is seen the insignia of the cross. Everywhere it is outwardly honored and exalted. But the teachings of Christ are buried beneath a mass of senseless traditions, false interpretations, and rigorous exactions. The Saviour's words concerning the bigoted Jews, apply with still greater force to the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church: "They bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." Matthew 23:4. Conscientious souls are kept in constant terror fearing the wrath of an offended God, while many of the dignitaries of the church are living in luxury and sensual pleasure.
The worship of images and relics, the invocation of saints, and the exaltation of the pope are devices of Satan to attract the minds of the people from God and from His Son. To accomplish their ruin, he endeavors to turn their attention from Him through whom alone they can find salvation. He will direct them to any object that can be substituted for the One who has said: "Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." Matthew 11:28.
It is Satan's constant effort to misrepresent the character of God, the nature of sin, and the real issues at stake in the great controversy. His sophistry lessens the obligation of the divine law and gives men license to sin. At the same time he causes them to cherish false conceptions of God so that they regard Him with fear and hate rather than with love. The cruelty inherent in his own character is attributed to the Creator; it is embodied in systems of religion and expressed in modes of worship. Thus the minds of men are blinded, and Satan secures them as his agents to war against God. By perverted conceptions of the divine attributes, heathen nations were led to believe human sacrifices necessary to secure the favor of Deity; and horrible cruelties have been perpetrated under the various forms of idolatry.
(To be continued…)
I will present it in three parts. It’s long, but very edifying and spiritually filling for any true lover of God and of His Holy Word. And now it gives me great pleasure to present to you Chapter 34, Liberty of Conscience Threatened (Aims of the Papacy) from The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White:
Romanism is now regarded by Protestants with far greater favor than in former years. In those countries where Catholicism is not in the ascendancy, and the papists are taking a conciliatory course in order to gain influence, there is an increasing indifference concerning the doctrines that separate the reformed churches from the papal hierarchy; the opinion is gaining ground that, after all, we do not differ so widely upon vital points as has been supposed, and that a little concession on our part will bring us into a better understanding with Rome. The time was when Protestants placed a high value upon the liberty of conscience which had been so dearly purchased. They taught their children to abhor popery and held that to seek harmony with Rome would be disloyalty to God. But how widely different are the sentiments now expressed!
The defenders of the papacy declare that the church has been maligned, and the Protestant world are inclined to accept the statement. Many urge that it is unjust to judge the church of today by the abominations and absurdities that marked her reign during the centuries of ignorance and darkness. They excuse her horrible cruelty as the result of the barbarism of the times and plead that the influence of modern civilization has changed her sentiments. Have these persons forgotten the claim of infallibility put forth for eight hundred years by this haughty power? So far from being relinquished, this claim was affirmed in the nineteenth century with greater positiveness than ever before. As Rome asserts that the "church never erred; nor will it, according to the Scriptures, ever err" (John L. von Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, book 3, century II, part 2, chapter 2, section 9, note 17), how can she renounce the principles which governed her course in past ages?
The papal church will never relinquish her claim to infallibility. All that she has done in her persecution of those who reject her dogmas she holds to be right; and would she not repeat the same acts, should the opportunity be presented? Let the restraints now imposed by secular governments be removed and Rome be reinstated in her former power, and there would speedily be a revival of her tyranny and persecution. A well-known writer speaks thus of the attitude of the papal hierarchy as regards freedom of conscience, and of the perils which especially threaten the United States from the success of her policy:
"There are many who are disposed to attribute any fear of Roman Catholicism in the United States to bigotry or childishness. Such see nothing in the character and attitude of Romanism that is hostile to our free institutions, or find nothing portentous in its growth. Let us, then, first compare some of the fundamental principles of our government with those of the Catholic Church.
"The Constitution of the United States guarantees liberty of conscience. Nothing is dearer or more fundamental. Pope Pius IX, in his Encyclical Letter of August 15, 1854, said: `The absurd and erroneous doctrines or ravings in defense of liberty of conscience are a most pestilential error--a pest, of all others, most to be dreaded in a state.' The same pope, in his Encyclical Letter of December 8, 1864, anathematized `those who assert the liberty of conscience and of religious worship,' also 'all such as maintain that the church may not employ force.'
"The pacific tone of Rome in the United States does not imply a change of heart. She is tolerant where she is helpless. Says Bishop O'Connor: 'Religious liberty is merely endured until the opposite can be carried into effect without peril to the Catholic world.'. . . The archbishop of St. Louis once said: 'Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as in Italy and Spain, for instance, where all the people are Catholics, and where the Catholic religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are punished as other crimes.'. "Every cardinal, archbishop, and bishop in the Catholic Church takes an oath of allegiance to the pope, in which occur the following words: 'Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord (the pope), or his aforesaid successors, I will to my utmost persecute and oppose.'"--Josiah Strong, Our Country, ch. 5, pars. 2-4.
It is true that there are real Christians in the Roman Catholic communion. Thousands in that church are serving God according to the best light they have. They are not allowed access to His word, and therefore they do not discern the truth. They have never seen the contrast between a living heart service and a round of mere forms and ceremonies. God looks with pitying tenderness upon these souls, educated as they are in a faith that is delusive and unsatisfying. He will cause rays of light to penetrate the dense darkness that surrounds them. He will reveal to them the truth as it is in Jesus, and many will yet take their position with His people.
But Romanism as a system is no more in harmony with the gospel of Christ now than at any former period in her history. The Protestant churches are in great darkness, or they would discern the signs of the times. The Roman Church is far-reaching in her plans and modes of operation. She is employing every device to extend her influence and increase her power in preparation for a fierce and determined conflict to regain control of the world, to re-establish persecution, and to undo all that Protestantism has done. Catholicism is gaining ground upon every side. See the increasing number of her churches and chapels in Protestant countries. Look at the popularity of her colleges and seminaries in America, so widely patronized by Protestants. Look at the growth of ritualism in England and the frequent defections to the ranks of the Catholics. These things should awaken the anxiety of all who prize the pure principles of the gospel.
Protestants have tampered with and patronized popery; they have made compromises and concessions which papists themselves are surprised to see and fail to understand. Men are closing their eyes to the real character of Romanism and the dangers to be apprehended from her supremacy. The people need to be aroused to resist the advances of this most dangerous foe to civil and religious liberty.
Many Protestants suppose that the Catholic religion is unattractive and that its worship is a dull, meaningless round of ceremony. Here they mistake. While Romanism is based upon deception, it is not a coarse and clumsy imposture. The religious service of the Roman Church is a most impressive ceremonial. Its gorgeous display and solemn rites fascinate the senses of the people and silence the voice of reason and of conscience. The eye is charmed. Magnificent churches, imposing processions, golden altars, jeweled shrines, choice paintings, and exquisite sculpture appeal to the love of beauty. The ear also is captivated. The music is unsurpassed. The rich notes of the deep-toned organ, blending with the melody of many voices as it swells through the lofty domes and pillared aisles of her grand cathedrals, cannot fail to impress the mind with awe and reverence.
This outward splendor, pomp, and ceremony, that only mocks the longings of the sin-sick soul, is an evidence of inward corruption. The religion of Christ needs not such attractions to recommend it. In the light shining from the cross, true Christianity appears so pure and lovely that no external decorations can enhance its true worth. It is the beauty of holiness, a meek and quiet spirit, which is of value with God.
Brilliancy of style is not necessarily an index of pure, elevated thought. High conceptions of art, delicate refinement of taste, often exist in minds that are earthly and sensual. They are often employed by Satan to lead men to forget the necessities of the soul, to lose sight of the future, immortal life, to turn away from their infinite Helper, and to live for this world alone.
A religion of externals is attractive to the unrenewed heart. The pomp and ceremony of the Catholic worship has a seductive, bewitching power, by which many are deceived; and they come to look upon the Roman Church as the very gate of heaven. None but those who have planted their feet firmly upon the foundation of truth, and whose hearts are renewed by the Spirit of God, are proof against her influence. Thousands who have not an experimental knowledge of Christ will be led to accept the forms of godliness without the power. Such a religion is just what the multitudes desire.
The church's claim to the right to pardon leads the Romanist to feel at liberty to sin; and the ordinance of confession, without which her pardon is not granted, tends also to give license to evil. He who kneels before fallen man, and opens in confession the secret thoughts and imaginations of his heart, is debasing his manhood and degrading every noble instinct of his soul. In unfolding the sins of his life to a priest,--an erring, sinful mortal, and too often corrupted with wine and licentiousness,--his standard of character is lowered, and he is defiled in consequence. His thought of God is degraded to the likeness of fallen humanity, for the priest stands as a representative of God. This degrading confession of man to man is the secret spring from which has flowed much of the evil that is defiling the world and fitting it for the final destruction. Yet to him who loves self-indulgence, it is more pleasing to confess to a fellow mortal than to open the soul to God. It is more palatable to human nature to do penance than to renounce sin; it is easier to mortify the flesh by sackcloth and nettles and galling chains than to crucify fleshly lusts. Heavy is the yoke which the carnal heart is willing to bear rather than bow to the yoke of Christ.
There is a striking similarity between the Church of Rome and the Jewish Church at the time of Christ's first advent. While the Jews secretly trampled upon every principle of the law of God, they were outwardly rigorous in the observance of its precepts, loading it down with exactions and traditions that made obedience painful and burdensome. As the Jews professed to revere the law, so do Romanists claim to reverence the cross. They exalt the symbol of Christ's sufferings, while in their lives they deny Him whom it represents.
Papists place crosses upon their churches, upon their altars, and upon their garments. Everywhere is seen the insignia of the cross. Everywhere it is outwardly honored and exalted. But the teachings of Christ are buried beneath a mass of senseless traditions, false interpretations, and rigorous exactions. The Saviour's words concerning the bigoted Jews, apply with still greater force to the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church: "They bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." Matthew 23:4. Conscientious souls are kept in constant terror fearing the wrath of an offended God, while many of the dignitaries of the church are living in luxury and sensual pleasure.
The worship of images and relics, the invocation of saints, and the exaltation of the pope are devices of Satan to attract the minds of the people from God and from His Son. To accomplish their ruin, he endeavors to turn their attention from Him through whom alone they can find salvation. He will direct them to any object that can be substituted for the One who has said: "Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." Matthew 11:28.
It is Satan's constant effort to misrepresent the character of God, the nature of sin, and the real issues at stake in the great controversy. His sophistry lessens the obligation of the divine law and gives men license to sin. At the same time he causes them to cherish false conceptions of God so that they regard Him with fear and hate rather than with love. The cruelty inherent in his own character is attributed to the Creator; it is embodied in systems of religion and expressed in modes of worship. Thus the minds of men are blinded, and Satan secures them as his agents to war against God. By perverted conceptions of the divine attributes, heathen nations were led to believe human sacrifices necessary to secure the favor of Deity; and horrible cruelties have been perpetrated under the various forms of idolatry.
(To be continued…)
Look what the cat dragged in.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
Adventism and Catholicism
Part 2 of 3 (Continued from last post)
Chapter 34, Liberty of Conscience Threatened (Aims of the Papacy) from The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White
The Roman Catholic Church, uniting the forms of paganism and Christianity, and, like paganism, misrepresenting the character of God, has resorted to practices no less cruel and revolting. In the days of Rome's supremacy there were instruments of torture to compel assent to her doctrines. There was the stake for those who would not concede to her claims. There were massacres on a scale that will never be known until revealed in the judgment. Dignitaries of the church studied, under Satan their master, to invent means to cause the greatest possible torture and not end the life of the victim. In many cases the infernal process was repeated to the utmost limit of human endurance, until nature gave up the struggle, and the sufferer hailed death as a sweet release.
Such was the fate of Rome's opponents. For her adherents she had the discipline of the scourge, of famishing hunger, of bodily austerities in every conceivable, heart-sickening form. To secure the favor of Heaven, penitents violated the laws of God by violating the laws of nature. They were taught to sunder the ties which He has formed to bless and gladden man's earthly sojourn. The churchyard contains millions of victims who spent their lives in vain endeavors to subdue their natural affections, to repress, as offensive to God, every thought and feeling of sympathy with their fellow creatures.
If we desire to understand the determined cruelty of Satan, manifested for hundreds of years, not among those who never heard of God, but in the very heart and throughout the extent of Christendom, we have only to look at the history of Romanism. Through this mammoth system of deception the prince of evil achieves his purpose of bringing dishonor to God and wretchedness to man. And as we see how he succeeds in disguising himself and accomplishing his work through the leaders of the church, we may better understand why he has so great antipathy to the Bible. If that Book is read, the mercy and love of God will be revealed; it will be seen that He lays upon men none of these heavy burdens. All that He asks is a broken and contrite heart, a humble, obedient spirit.
Christ gives no example in His life for men and women to shut themselves in monasteries in order to become fitted for heaven. He has never taught that love and sympathy must be repressed. The Saviour's heart overflowed with love. The nearer man approaches to moral perfection, the keener are his sensibilities, the more acute is his perception of sin, and the deeper his sympathy for the afflicted. The pope claims to be the vicar of Christ; but how does his character bear comparison with that of our Saviour? Was Christ ever known to consign men to the prison or the rack because they did not pay Him homage as the King of heaven? Was His voice heard condemning to death those who did not accept Him? When He was slighted by the people of a Samaritan village, the apostle John was filled with indignation, and inquired: "Lord, wilt Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?" Jesus looked with pity upon His disciple, and rebuked his harsh spirit, saying: "The Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." Luke 9:54, 56. How different from the spirit manifested by Christ is that of His professed vicar.
The Roman Church now presents a fair front to the world, covering with apologies her record of horrible cruelties. She has clothed herself in Christlike garments; but she is unchanged. Every principle of the papacy that existed in past ages exists today. The doctrines devised in the darkest ages are still held. Let none deceive themselves. The papacy that Protestants are now so ready to honor is the same that ruled the world in the days of the Reformation, when men of God stood up, at the peril of their lives, to expose her iniquity. She possesses the same pride and arrogant assumption that lorded it over kings and princes, and claimed the prerogatives of God. Her spirit is no less cruel and despotic now than when she crushed out human liberty and slew the saints of the Most High.
The papacy is just what prophecy declared that she would be, the apostasy of the latter times. 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4. It is a part of her policy to assume the character which will best accomplish her purpose; but beneath the variable appearance of the chameleon she conceals the invariable venom of the serpent. "Faith ought not to be kept with heretics, nor persons suspected of heresy" (Lenfant, volume 1, page 516), she declares. Shall this power, whose record for a thousand years is written in the blood of the saints, be now acknowledged as a part of the church of Christ?
It is not without reason that the claim has been put forth in Protestant countries that Catholicism differs less widely from Protestantism than in former times. There has been a change; but the change is not in the papacy. Catholicism indeed resembles much of the Protestantism that now exists, because Protestantism has so greatly degenerated since the days of the Reformers.
As the Protestants churches have been seeking the favor of the world, false charity has blinded their eyes. They do not see but that it is right to believe good of all evil, and as the inevitable result they will finally believe evil of all good. Instead of standing in defense of the faith once delivered to the saints, they are now, as it were, apologizing to Rome for their uncharitable opinion of her, begging pardon for their bigotry.
A large class, even of those who look upon Romanism with no favor, apprehend little danger from her power and influence. Many urge that the intellectual and moral darkness prevailing during the Middle Ages favored the spread of her dogmas, superstitions, and oppression, and that the greater intelligence of modern times, the general diffusion of knowledge, and the increasing liberality in matters of religion forbid a revival of intolerance and tyranny. The very thought that such a state of things will exist in this enlightened age is ridiculed. It is true that great light, intellectual, moral, and religious, is shining upon this generation. In the open pages of God's Holy Word, light from heaven has been shed upon the world. But it should be remembered that the greater the light bestowed, the greater the darkness of those who pervert and reject it.
A prayerful study of the Bible would show Protestants the real character of the papacy and would cause them to abhor and to shun it; but many are so wise in their own conceit that they feel no need of humbly seeking God that they may be led into the truth. Although priding themselves on their enlightenment, they are ignorant both of the Scriptures and of the power of God. They must have some means of quieting their consciences, and they seek that which is least spiritual and humiliating. What they desire is a method of forgetting God which shall pass as a method of remembering Him. The papacy is well adapted to meet the wants of all these. It is prepared for two classes of mankind, embracing nearly the whole world--those who would be saved by their merits, and those who would be saved in their sins. Here is the secret of its power.
A day of great intellectual darkness has been shown to be favorable to the success of the papacy. It will yet be demonstrated that a day of great intellectual light is equally favorable for its success. In past ages, when men were without God's word and without the knowledge of the truth, their eyes were blindfolded, and thousands were ensnared, not seeing the net spread for their feet. In this generation there are many whose eyes become dazzled by the glare of human speculations, "science falsely so called;" they discern not the net, and walk into it as readily as if blindfolded. God designed that man's intellectual powers should be held as a gift from his Maker and should be employed in the service of truth and righteousness; but when pride and ambition are cherished, and men exalt their own theories above the word of God, then intelligence can accomplish greater harm than ignorance. Thus the false science of the present day, which undermines faith in the Bible, will prove as successful in preparing the way for the acceptance of the papacy, with its pleasing forms, as did the withholding of knowledge in opening the way for its aggrandizement in the Dark Ages.
In the movements now in progress in the United States to secure for the institutions and usages of the church the support of the state, Protestants are following in the steps of papists. Nay, more, they are opening the door for the papacy to regain in Protestant America the supremacy which she has lost in the Old World. And that which gives greater significance to this movement is the fact that the principal object contemplated is the enforcement of Sunday observance--a custom which originated with Rome, and which she claims as the sign of her authority. It is the spirit of the papacy--the spirit of conformity to worldly customs, the veneration for human traditions above the commandments of God--that is permeating the Protestant churches and leading them on to do the same work of Sunday exaltation which the papacy has done before them.
If the reader would understand the agencies to be employed in the soon-coming contest, he has but to trace the record of the means which Rome employed for the same object in ages past. If he would know how papists and Protestants united will deal with those who reject their dogmas, let him see the spirit which Rome manifested toward the Sabbath and its defenders.
Royal edicts, general councils, and church ordinances sustained by secular power were the steps by which the pagan festival attained its position of honor in the Christian world. The first public measure enforcing Sunday observance was the law enacted by Constantine. (A.D. 321; see Appendix note for page 53.) This edict required townspeople to rest on "the venerable day of the sun," but permitted countrymen to continue their agricultural pursuits. Though virtually a heathen statute, it was enforced by the emperor after his nominal acceptance of Christianity.
The royal mandate not proving a sufficient substitute for divine authority, Eusebius, a bishop who sought the favor of princes, and who was the special friend and flatterer of Constantine, advanced the claim that Christ had transferred the Sabbath to Sunday. Not a single testimony of the Scriptures was produced in proof of the new doctrine. Eusebius himself unwittingly acknowledges its falsity and points to the real authors of the change. "All things," he says, "whatever that it was duty to do on the Sabbath, these we have transferred to the Lord's Day."--Robert Cox, Sabbath Laws and Sabbath Duties, page 538. But the Sunday argument, groundless as it was, served to embolden men in trampling upon the Sabbath of the Lord. All who desired to be honored by the world accepted the popular festival.
As the papacy became firmly established, the work of Sunday exaltation was continued. For a time the people engaged in agricultural labor when not attending church, and the seventh day was still regarded as the Sabbath. But steadily a change was effected. Those in holy office were forbidden to pass judgment in any civil controversy on the Sunday. Soon after, all persons, of whatever rank, were commanded to refrain from common labor on pain of a fine for freemen and stripes in the case of servants. Later it was decreed that rich men should be punished with the loss of half of their estates; and finally, that if still obstinate they should be made slaves. The lower classes were to suffer perpetual banishment.
Miracles also were called into requisition. Among other wonders it was reported that as a husbandman who was about to plow his field on Sunday cleaned his plow with an iron, the iron stuck fast in his hand, and for two years he carried it about with him, "to his exceeding great pain and shame."--Francis West, Historical and Practical Discourse on the Lord's Day, page 174.
Later the pope gave directions that the parish priest should admonish the violators of Sunday and wish them to go to church and say their prayers, lest they bring some great calamity on themselves and neighbors. An ecclesiastical council brought forward the argument, since so widely employed, even by Protestants, that because persons had been struck by lightning while laboring on Sunday, it must be the Sabbath. "It is apparent," said the prelates, "how high the displeasure of God was upon their neglect of this day." An appeal was then made that priests and ministers, kings and princes, and all faithful people "use their utmost endeavors and care that the day be restored to its honor, and, for the credit of Christianity, more devoutly observed for the time to come."--Thomas Morer, Discourse in Six Dialogues on the Name, Notion, and Observation of the Lord's Day, page 271.
The decrees of councils proving insufficient, the secular authorities were besought to issue an edict that would strike terror to the hearts of the people and force them to refrain from labor on the Sunday. At a synod held in Rome, all previous decisions were reaffirmed with greater force and solemnity. They were also incorporated into the ecclesiastical law and enforced by the civil authorities throughout nearly all Christendom. (See Heylyn, History of the Sabbath, pt. 2, ch. 5, sec. 7
(To Be Continued)
Chapter 34, Liberty of Conscience Threatened (Aims of the Papacy) from The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White
The Roman Catholic Church, uniting the forms of paganism and Christianity, and, like paganism, misrepresenting the character of God, has resorted to practices no less cruel and revolting. In the days of Rome's supremacy there were instruments of torture to compel assent to her doctrines. There was the stake for those who would not concede to her claims. There were massacres on a scale that will never be known until revealed in the judgment. Dignitaries of the church studied, under Satan their master, to invent means to cause the greatest possible torture and not end the life of the victim. In many cases the infernal process was repeated to the utmost limit of human endurance, until nature gave up the struggle, and the sufferer hailed death as a sweet release.
Such was the fate of Rome's opponents. For her adherents she had the discipline of the scourge, of famishing hunger, of bodily austerities in every conceivable, heart-sickening form. To secure the favor of Heaven, penitents violated the laws of God by violating the laws of nature. They were taught to sunder the ties which He has formed to bless and gladden man's earthly sojourn. The churchyard contains millions of victims who spent their lives in vain endeavors to subdue their natural affections, to repress, as offensive to God, every thought and feeling of sympathy with their fellow creatures.
If we desire to understand the determined cruelty of Satan, manifested for hundreds of years, not among those who never heard of God, but in the very heart and throughout the extent of Christendom, we have only to look at the history of Romanism. Through this mammoth system of deception the prince of evil achieves his purpose of bringing dishonor to God and wretchedness to man. And as we see how he succeeds in disguising himself and accomplishing his work through the leaders of the church, we may better understand why he has so great antipathy to the Bible. If that Book is read, the mercy and love of God will be revealed; it will be seen that He lays upon men none of these heavy burdens. All that He asks is a broken and contrite heart, a humble, obedient spirit.
Christ gives no example in His life for men and women to shut themselves in monasteries in order to become fitted for heaven. He has never taught that love and sympathy must be repressed. The Saviour's heart overflowed with love. The nearer man approaches to moral perfection, the keener are his sensibilities, the more acute is his perception of sin, and the deeper his sympathy for the afflicted. The pope claims to be the vicar of Christ; but how does his character bear comparison with that of our Saviour? Was Christ ever known to consign men to the prison or the rack because they did not pay Him homage as the King of heaven? Was His voice heard condemning to death those who did not accept Him? When He was slighted by the people of a Samaritan village, the apostle John was filled with indignation, and inquired: "Lord, wilt Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?" Jesus looked with pity upon His disciple, and rebuked his harsh spirit, saying: "The Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." Luke 9:54, 56. How different from the spirit manifested by Christ is that of His professed vicar.
The Roman Church now presents a fair front to the world, covering with apologies her record of horrible cruelties. She has clothed herself in Christlike garments; but she is unchanged. Every principle of the papacy that existed in past ages exists today. The doctrines devised in the darkest ages are still held. Let none deceive themselves. The papacy that Protestants are now so ready to honor is the same that ruled the world in the days of the Reformation, when men of God stood up, at the peril of their lives, to expose her iniquity. She possesses the same pride and arrogant assumption that lorded it over kings and princes, and claimed the prerogatives of God. Her spirit is no less cruel and despotic now than when she crushed out human liberty and slew the saints of the Most High.
The papacy is just what prophecy declared that she would be, the apostasy of the latter times. 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4. It is a part of her policy to assume the character which will best accomplish her purpose; but beneath the variable appearance of the chameleon she conceals the invariable venom of the serpent. "Faith ought not to be kept with heretics, nor persons suspected of heresy" (Lenfant, volume 1, page 516), she declares. Shall this power, whose record for a thousand years is written in the blood of the saints, be now acknowledged as a part of the church of Christ?
It is not without reason that the claim has been put forth in Protestant countries that Catholicism differs less widely from Protestantism than in former times. There has been a change; but the change is not in the papacy. Catholicism indeed resembles much of the Protestantism that now exists, because Protestantism has so greatly degenerated since the days of the Reformers.
As the Protestants churches have been seeking the favor of the world, false charity has blinded their eyes. They do not see but that it is right to believe good of all evil, and as the inevitable result they will finally believe evil of all good. Instead of standing in defense of the faith once delivered to the saints, they are now, as it were, apologizing to Rome for their uncharitable opinion of her, begging pardon for their bigotry.
A large class, even of those who look upon Romanism with no favor, apprehend little danger from her power and influence. Many urge that the intellectual and moral darkness prevailing during the Middle Ages favored the spread of her dogmas, superstitions, and oppression, and that the greater intelligence of modern times, the general diffusion of knowledge, and the increasing liberality in matters of religion forbid a revival of intolerance and tyranny. The very thought that such a state of things will exist in this enlightened age is ridiculed. It is true that great light, intellectual, moral, and religious, is shining upon this generation. In the open pages of God's Holy Word, light from heaven has been shed upon the world. But it should be remembered that the greater the light bestowed, the greater the darkness of those who pervert and reject it.
A prayerful study of the Bible would show Protestants the real character of the papacy and would cause them to abhor and to shun it; but many are so wise in their own conceit that they feel no need of humbly seeking God that they may be led into the truth. Although priding themselves on their enlightenment, they are ignorant both of the Scriptures and of the power of God. They must have some means of quieting their consciences, and they seek that which is least spiritual and humiliating. What they desire is a method of forgetting God which shall pass as a method of remembering Him. The papacy is well adapted to meet the wants of all these. It is prepared for two classes of mankind, embracing nearly the whole world--those who would be saved by their merits, and those who would be saved in their sins. Here is the secret of its power.
A day of great intellectual darkness has been shown to be favorable to the success of the papacy. It will yet be demonstrated that a day of great intellectual light is equally favorable for its success. In past ages, when men were without God's word and without the knowledge of the truth, their eyes were blindfolded, and thousands were ensnared, not seeing the net spread for their feet. In this generation there are many whose eyes become dazzled by the glare of human speculations, "science falsely so called;" they discern not the net, and walk into it as readily as if blindfolded. God designed that man's intellectual powers should be held as a gift from his Maker and should be employed in the service of truth and righteousness; but when pride and ambition are cherished, and men exalt their own theories above the word of God, then intelligence can accomplish greater harm than ignorance. Thus the false science of the present day, which undermines faith in the Bible, will prove as successful in preparing the way for the acceptance of the papacy, with its pleasing forms, as did the withholding of knowledge in opening the way for its aggrandizement in the Dark Ages.
In the movements now in progress in the United States to secure for the institutions and usages of the church the support of the state, Protestants are following in the steps of papists. Nay, more, they are opening the door for the papacy to regain in Protestant America the supremacy which she has lost in the Old World. And that which gives greater significance to this movement is the fact that the principal object contemplated is the enforcement of Sunday observance--a custom which originated with Rome, and which she claims as the sign of her authority. It is the spirit of the papacy--the spirit of conformity to worldly customs, the veneration for human traditions above the commandments of God--that is permeating the Protestant churches and leading them on to do the same work of Sunday exaltation which the papacy has done before them.
If the reader would understand the agencies to be employed in the soon-coming contest, he has but to trace the record of the means which Rome employed for the same object in ages past. If he would know how papists and Protestants united will deal with those who reject their dogmas, let him see the spirit which Rome manifested toward the Sabbath and its defenders.
Royal edicts, general councils, and church ordinances sustained by secular power were the steps by which the pagan festival attained its position of honor in the Christian world. The first public measure enforcing Sunday observance was the law enacted by Constantine. (A.D. 321; see Appendix note for page 53.) This edict required townspeople to rest on "the venerable day of the sun," but permitted countrymen to continue their agricultural pursuits. Though virtually a heathen statute, it was enforced by the emperor after his nominal acceptance of Christianity.
The royal mandate not proving a sufficient substitute for divine authority, Eusebius, a bishop who sought the favor of princes, and who was the special friend and flatterer of Constantine, advanced the claim that Christ had transferred the Sabbath to Sunday. Not a single testimony of the Scriptures was produced in proof of the new doctrine. Eusebius himself unwittingly acknowledges its falsity and points to the real authors of the change. "All things," he says, "whatever that it was duty to do on the Sabbath, these we have transferred to the Lord's Day."--Robert Cox, Sabbath Laws and Sabbath Duties, page 538. But the Sunday argument, groundless as it was, served to embolden men in trampling upon the Sabbath of the Lord. All who desired to be honored by the world accepted the popular festival.
As the papacy became firmly established, the work of Sunday exaltation was continued. For a time the people engaged in agricultural labor when not attending church, and the seventh day was still regarded as the Sabbath. But steadily a change was effected. Those in holy office were forbidden to pass judgment in any civil controversy on the Sunday. Soon after, all persons, of whatever rank, were commanded to refrain from common labor on pain of a fine for freemen and stripes in the case of servants. Later it was decreed that rich men should be punished with the loss of half of their estates; and finally, that if still obstinate they should be made slaves. The lower classes were to suffer perpetual banishment.
Miracles also were called into requisition. Among other wonders it was reported that as a husbandman who was about to plow his field on Sunday cleaned his plow with an iron, the iron stuck fast in his hand, and for two years he carried it about with him, "to his exceeding great pain and shame."--Francis West, Historical and Practical Discourse on the Lord's Day, page 174.
Later the pope gave directions that the parish priest should admonish the violators of Sunday and wish them to go to church and say their prayers, lest they bring some great calamity on themselves and neighbors. An ecclesiastical council brought forward the argument, since so widely employed, even by Protestants, that because persons had been struck by lightning while laboring on Sunday, it must be the Sabbath. "It is apparent," said the prelates, "how high the displeasure of God was upon their neglect of this day." An appeal was then made that priests and ministers, kings and princes, and all faithful people "use their utmost endeavors and care that the day be restored to its honor, and, for the credit of Christianity, more devoutly observed for the time to come."--Thomas Morer, Discourse in Six Dialogues on the Name, Notion, and Observation of the Lord's Day, page 271.
The decrees of councils proving insufficient, the secular authorities were besought to issue an edict that would strike terror to the hearts of the people and force them to refrain from labor on the Sunday. At a synod held in Rome, all previous decisions were reaffirmed with greater force and solemnity. They were also incorporated into the ecclesiastical law and enforced by the civil authorities throughout nearly all Christendom. (See Heylyn, History of the Sabbath, pt. 2, ch. 5, sec. 7
(To Be Continued)
Look what the cat dragged in.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
Adventism and Catholicism
Part 3 of 3, continued from last post:
Chapter 34, Liberty of Conscience Threatened (Aims of the Papacy) from The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White
Still the absence of Scriptural authority for Sundaykeeping occasioned no little embarrassment. The people questioned the right of their teachers to set aside the positive declaration of Jehovah, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God," in order to honor the day of the sun. To supply the lack of Bible testimony, other expedients were necessary. A zealous advocate of Sunday, who about the close of the twelfth century visited the churches of England, was resisted by faithful witnesses for the truth; and so fruitless were his efforts that he departed from the country for a season and cast about him for some means to enforce his teachings. When he returned, the lack was supplied, and in his after labors he met with greater success. He brought with him a roll purporting to be from God Himself, which contained the needed command for Sunday observance, with awful threats to terrify the disobedient. This precious document-- as base a counterfeit as the institution it supported--was said to have fallen from heaven and to have been found in Jerusalem, upon the altar of St. Simeon, in Golgotha. But, in fact, the pontifical palace at Rome was the source whence it proceeded. Frauds and forgeries to advance the power and prosperity of the church have in all ages been esteemed lawful by the papal hierarchy.
The roll forbade labor from the ninth hour, three o'clock, on Saturday afternoon, till sunrise on Monday; and its authority was declared to be confirmed by many miracles. It was reported that persons laboring beyond the appointed hour were stricken with paralysis. A miller who attempted to grind his corn, saw, instead of flour, a torrent of blood come forth, and the mill wheel stood still, notwithstanding the strong rush of water. A woman who placed dough in the oven found it raw when taken out, though the oven was very hot. Another who had dough prepared for baking at the ninth hour, but determined to set it aside till Monday, found, the next day, that it had been made into loaves and baked by divine power. A man who baked bread after the ninth hour on Saturday found, when he broke it the next morning, that blood started therefrom. By such absurd and superstitious fabrications did the advocates of Sunday endeavor to establish its sacredness. (See Roger de Hoveden, Annals, vol. 2, pp. 528-530.)
In Scotland, as in England, a greater regard for Sunday was secured by uniting with it a portion of the ancient Sabbath. But the time required to be kept holy varied. An edict from the king of Scotland declared that "Saturday from twelve at noon ought to be accounted holy," and that no man, from that time till Monday morning, should engage in worldly business.--Morer, pages 290, 291.
But notwithstanding all the efforts to establish Sunday sacredness, papists themselves publicly confessed the divine authority of the Sabbath and the human origin of the institution by which it had been supplanted. In the sixteenth century a papal council plainly declared: "Let all Christians remember that the seventh day was consecrated by God, and hath been received and observed, not only by the Jews, but by all others who pretend to worship God; though we Christians have changed their Sabbath into the Lord's Day."-- Ibid., pages 281, 282. Those who were tampering with the divine law were not ignorant of the character of their work. They were deliberately setting themselves above God.
A striking illustration of Rome's policy toward those who disagree with her was given in the long and bloody persecution of the Waldenses, some of whom were observers of the Sabbath. Others suffered in a similar manner for their fidelity to the fourth commandment. The history of the churches of Ethiopia and Abyssinia is especially significant. Amid the gloom of the Dark Ages, the Christians of Central Africa were lost sight of and forgotten by the world, and for many centuries they enjoyed freedom in the exercise of their faith. But at last Rome learned of their existence, and the emperor of Abyssinia was soon beguiled into an acknowledgment of the pope as the vicar of Christ. Other concessions followed. An edict was issued forbidding the observance of the Sabbath under the severest penalties. (See Michael Geddes, Church History of Ethiopia, pages 311, 312.) But papal tyranny soon became a yoke so galling that the Abyssinians determined to break it from their necks. After a terrible struggle the Romanists were banished from their dominions, and the ancient faith was restored. The churches rejoiced in their freedom, and they never forgot the lesson they had learned concerning the deception, the fanaticism, and the despotic power of Rome. Within their solitary realm they were content to remain, unknown to the rest of Christendom.
The churches of Africa held the Sabbath as it was held by the papal church before her complete apostasy. While they kept the seventh day in obedience to the commandment of God, they abstained from labor on the Sunday in conformity to the custom of the church. Upon obtaining supreme power, Rome had trampled upon the Sabbath of God to exalt her own; but the churches of Africa, hidden for nearly a thousand years, did not share in this apostasy. When brought under the sway of Rome, they were forced to set aside the true and exalt the false sabbath; but no sooner had they regained their independence than they returned to obedience to the fourth commandment. (See Appendix.)
These records of the past clearly reveal the enmity of Rome toward the true Sabbath and its defenders, and the means which she employs to honor the institution of her creating. The word of God teaches that these scenes are to be repeated as Roman Catholics and Protestants shall unite for the exaltation of the Sunday.
The prophecy of Revelation 13 declares that the power represented by the beast with lamblike horns shall cause "the earth and them which dwell therein" to worship the papacy --there symbolized by the beast "like unto a leopard." The beast with two horns is also to say "to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast;" and, furthermore, it is to command all, "both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond," to receive the mark of the beast. Revelation 13:11-16. It has been shown that the United States is the power represented by the beast with lamblike horns, and that this prophecy will be fulfilled when the United States shall enforce Sunday observance, which Rome claims as the special acknowledgment of her supremacy. But in this homage to the papacy the United States will not be alone. The influence of Rome in the countries that once acknowledged her dominion is still far from being destroyed. And prophecy foretells a restoration of her power. "I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast." Verse 3. The infliction of the deadly wound points to the downfall of the papacy in 1798. After this, says the prophet, "his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast." Paul states plainly that the "man of sin" will continue until the second advent. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8. To the very close of time he will carry forward the work of deception. And the revelator declares, also referring to the papacy: "All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life." Revelation 13:8. In both the Old and the New World, the papacy will receive homage in the honor paid to the Sunday institution, that rests solely upon the authority of the Roman Church.
Since the middle of the nineteenth century, students of prophecy in the United States have presented this testimony to the world. In the events now taking place is seen a rapid advance toward the fulfillment of the prediction. With Protestant teachers there is the same claim of divine authority for Sundaykeeping, and the same lack of Scriptural evidence, as with the papal leaders who fabricated miracles to supply the place of a command from God. The assertion that God's judgments are visited upon men for their violation of the Sunday-sabbath, will be repeated; already it is beginning to be urged. And a movement to enforce Sunday observance is fast gaining ground.
Marvelous in her shrewdness and cunning is the Roman Church. She can read what is to be. She bides her time, seeing that the Protestant churches are paying her homage in their acceptance of the false sabbath and that they are preparing to enforce it by the very means which she herself employed in bygone days. Those who reject the light of truth will yet seek the aid of this self-styled infallible power to exalt an institution that originated with her. How readily she will come to the help of Protestants in this work it is not difficult to conjecture. Who understands better than the papal leaders how to deal with those who are disobedient to the church?
The Roman Catholic Church, with all its ramifications throughout the world, forms one vast organization under the control, and designed to serve the interests, of the papal see. Its millions of communicants, in every country on the globe, are instructed to hold themselves as bound in allegiance to the pope. Whatever their nationality or their government, they are to regard the authority of the church as above all other. Though they may take the oath pledging their loyalty to the state, yet back of this lies the vow of obedience to Rome, absolving them from every pledge inimical to her interests.
History testifies of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people. In the year 1204, Pope Innocent III extracted from Peter II, king of Arragon, the following extraordinary oath: "I, Peter, king of Arragonians, profess and promise to be ever faithful and obedient to my lord, Pope Innocent, to his Catholic successors, and the Roman Church, and faithfully to preserve my kingdom in his obedience, defending the Catholic faith, and persecuting heretical pravity." --John Dowling, The History of Romanism, b. 5, ch. 6, sec 55. This is in harmony with the claims regarding the power of the Roman pontiff "that it is lawful for him to depose emperors" and "that he can absolve subjects from their allegiance to unrighteous rulers."--Mosheim, b. 3, cent. 11, pt. 2, ch. 2, sec. 9, note 17. (See also Appendix note for page 447.)
And let it be remembered, it is the boast of Rome that she never changes. The principles of Gregory VII and Innocent III are still the principles of the Roman Catholic Church. And had she but the power, she would put them in practice with as much vigor now as in past centuries. Protestants little know what they are doing when they propose to accept the aid of Rome in the work of Sunday exaltation. While they are bent upon the accomplishment of their purpose, Rome is aiming to re-establish her power, to recover her lost supremacy. Let the principle once be established in the United States that the church may employ or control the power of the state; that religious observances may be enforced by secular laws; in short, that the authority of church and state is to dominate the conscience, and the triumph of Rome in this country is assured.
God's word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men. She is piling up her lofty and massive structures in the secret recesses of which her former persecutions will be repeated. Stealthily and unsuspectedly she is strengthening her forces to further her own ends when the time shall come for her to strike. All that she desires is vantage ground, and this is already being given her. We shall soon see and shall feel what the purpose of the Roman element is. Whoever shall believe and obey the word of God will thereby incur reproach and persecution.
End of Chapter.
Chapter 34, Liberty of Conscience Threatened (Aims of the Papacy) from The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White
Still the absence of Scriptural authority for Sundaykeeping occasioned no little embarrassment. The people questioned the right of their teachers to set aside the positive declaration of Jehovah, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God," in order to honor the day of the sun. To supply the lack of Bible testimony, other expedients were necessary. A zealous advocate of Sunday, who about the close of the twelfth century visited the churches of England, was resisted by faithful witnesses for the truth; and so fruitless were his efforts that he departed from the country for a season and cast about him for some means to enforce his teachings. When he returned, the lack was supplied, and in his after labors he met with greater success. He brought with him a roll purporting to be from God Himself, which contained the needed command for Sunday observance, with awful threats to terrify the disobedient. This precious document-- as base a counterfeit as the institution it supported--was said to have fallen from heaven and to have been found in Jerusalem, upon the altar of St. Simeon, in Golgotha. But, in fact, the pontifical palace at Rome was the source whence it proceeded. Frauds and forgeries to advance the power and prosperity of the church have in all ages been esteemed lawful by the papal hierarchy.
The roll forbade labor from the ninth hour, three o'clock, on Saturday afternoon, till sunrise on Monday; and its authority was declared to be confirmed by many miracles. It was reported that persons laboring beyond the appointed hour were stricken with paralysis. A miller who attempted to grind his corn, saw, instead of flour, a torrent of blood come forth, and the mill wheel stood still, notwithstanding the strong rush of water. A woman who placed dough in the oven found it raw when taken out, though the oven was very hot. Another who had dough prepared for baking at the ninth hour, but determined to set it aside till Monday, found, the next day, that it had been made into loaves and baked by divine power. A man who baked bread after the ninth hour on Saturday found, when he broke it the next morning, that blood started therefrom. By such absurd and superstitious fabrications did the advocates of Sunday endeavor to establish its sacredness. (See Roger de Hoveden, Annals, vol. 2, pp. 528-530.)
In Scotland, as in England, a greater regard for Sunday was secured by uniting with it a portion of the ancient Sabbath. But the time required to be kept holy varied. An edict from the king of Scotland declared that "Saturday from twelve at noon ought to be accounted holy," and that no man, from that time till Monday morning, should engage in worldly business.--Morer, pages 290, 291.
But notwithstanding all the efforts to establish Sunday sacredness, papists themselves publicly confessed the divine authority of the Sabbath and the human origin of the institution by which it had been supplanted. In the sixteenth century a papal council plainly declared: "Let all Christians remember that the seventh day was consecrated by God, and hath been received and observed, not only by the Jews, but by all others who pretend to worship God; though we Christians have changed their Sabbath into the Lord's Day."-- Ibid., pages 281, 282. Those who were tampering with the divine law were not ignorant of the character of their work. They were deliberately setting themselves above God.
A striking illustration of Rome's policy toward those who disagree with her was given in the long and bloody persecution of the Waldenses, some of whom were observers of the Sabbath. Others suffered in a similar manner for their fidelity to the fourth commandment. The history of the churches of Ethiopia and Abyssinia is especially significant. Amid the gloom of the Dark Ages, the Christians of Central Africa were lost sight of and forgotten by the world, and for many centuries they enjoyed freedom in the exercise of their faith. But at last Rome learned of their existence, and the emperor of Abyssinia was soon beguiled into an acknowledgment of the pope as the vicar of Christ. Other concessions followed. An edict was issued forbidding the observance of the Sabbath under the severest penalties. (See Michael Geddes, Church History of Ethiopia, pages 311, 312.) But papal tyranny soon became a yoke so galling that the Abyssinians determined to break it from their necks. After a terrible struggle the Romanists were banished from their dominions, and the ancient faith was restored. The churches rejoiced in their freedom, and they never forgot the lesson they had learned concerning the deception, the fanaticism, and the despotic power of Rome. Within their solitary realm they were content to remain, unknown to the rest of Christendom.
The churches of Africa held the Sabbath as it was held by the papal church before her complete apostasy. While they kept the seventh day in obedience to the commandment of God, they abstained from labor on the Sunday in conformity to the custom of the church. Upon obtaining supreme power, Rome had trampled upon the Sabbath of God to exalt her own; but the churches of Africa, hidden for nearly a thousand years, did not share in this apostasy. When brought under the sway of Rome, they were forced to set aside the true and exalt the false sabbath; but no sooner had they regained their independence than they returned to obedience to the fourth commandment. (See Appendix.)
These records of the past clearly reveal the enmity of Rome toward the true Sabbath and its defenders, and the means which she employs to honor the institution of her creating. The word of God teaches that these scenes are to be repeated as Roman Catholics and Protestants shall unite for the exaltation of the Sunday.
The prophecy of Revelation 13 declares that the power represented by the beast with lamblike horns shall cause "the earth and them which dwell therein" to worship the papacy --there symbolized by the beast "like unto a leopard." The beast with two horns is also to say "to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast;" and, furthermore, it is to command all, "both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond," to receive the mark of the beast. Revelation 13:11-16. It has been shown that the United States is the power represented by the beast with lamblike horns, and that this prophecy will be fulfilled when the United States shall enforce Sunday observance, which Rome claims as the special acknowledgment of her supremacy. But in this homage to the papacy the United States will not be alone. The influence of Rome in the countries that once acknowledged her dominion is still far from being destroyed. And prophecy foretells a restoration of her power. "I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast." Verse 3. The infliction of the deadly wound points to the downfall of the papacy in 1798. After this, says the prophet, "his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast." Paul states plainly that the "man of sin" will continue until the second advent. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8. To the very close of time he will carry forward the work of deception. And the revelator declares, also referring to the papacy: "All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life." Revelation 13:8. In both the Old and the New World, the papacy will receive homage in the honor paid to the Sunday institution, that rests solely upon the authority of the Roman Church.
Since the middle of the nineteenth century, students of prophecy in the United States have presented this testimony to the world. In the events now taking place is seen a rapid advance toward the fulfillment of the prediction. With Protestant teachers there is the same claim of divine authority for Sundaykeeping, and the same lack of Scriptural evidence, as with the papal leaders who fabricated miracles to supply the place of a command from God. The assertion that God's judgments are visited upon men for their violation of the Sunday-sabbath, will be repeated; already it is beginning to be urged. And a movement to enforce Sunday observance is fast gaining ground.
Marvelous in her shrewdness and cunning is the Roman Church. She can read what is to be. She bides her time, seeing that the Protestant churches are paying her homage in their acceptance of the false sabbath and that they are preparing to enforce it by the very means which she herself employed in bygone days. Those who reject the light of truth will yet seek the aid of this self-styled infallible power to exalt an institution that originated with her. How readily she will come to the help of Protestants in this work it is not difficult to conjecture. Who understands better than the papal leaders how to deal with those who are disobedient to the church?
The Roman Catholic Church, with all its ramifications throughout the world, forms one vast organization under the control, and designed to serve the interests, of the papal see. Its millions of communicants, in every country on the globe, are instructed to hold themselves as bound in allegiance to the pope. Whatever their nationality or their government, they are to regard the authority of the church as above all other. Though they may take the oath pledging their loyalty to the state, yet back of this lies the vow of obedience to Rome, absolving them from every pledge inimical to her interests.
History testifies of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people. In the year 1204, Pope Innocent III extracted from Peter II, king of Arragon, the following extraordinary oath: "I, Peter, king of Arragonians, profess and promise to be ever faithful and obedient to my lord, Pope Innocent, to his Catholic successors, and the Roman Church, and faithfully to preserve my kingdom in his obedience, defending the Catholic faith, and persecuting heretical pravity." --John Dowling, The History of Romanism, b. 5, ch. 6, sec 55. This is in harmony with the claims regarding the power of the Roman pontiff "that it is lawful for him to depose emperors" and "that he can absolve subjects from their allegiance to unrighteous rulers."--Mosheim, b. 3, cent. 11, pt. 2, ch. 2, sec. 9, note 17. (See also Appendix note for page 447.)
And let it be remembered, it is the boast of Rome that she never changes. The principles of Gregory VII and Innocent III are still the principles of the Roman Catholic Church. And had she but the power, she would put them in practice with as much vigor now as in past centuries. Protestants little know what they are doing when they propose to accept the aid of Rome in the work of Sunday exaltation. While they are bent upon the accomplishment of their purpose, Rome is aiming to re-establish her power, to recover her lost supremacy. Let the principle once be established in the United States that the church may employ or control the power of the state; that religious observances may be enforced by secular laws; in short, that the authority of church and state is to dominate the conscience, and the triumph of Rome in this country is assured.
God's word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men. She is piling up her lofty and massive structures in the secret recesses of which her former persecutions will be repeated. Stealthily and unsuspectedly she is strengthening her forces to further her own ends when the time shall come for her to strike. All that she desires is vantage ground, and this is already being given her. We shall soon see and shall feel what the purpose of the Roman element is. Whoever shall believe and obey the word of God will thereby incur reproach and persecution.
End of Chapter.
Look what the cat dragged in.
Adventism and Catholicism
tel:-6
I have no idea who E. G. White is. I do not know if she conducted any appropriate research or really knows what she is talking about. What it does appear like is she was a dissatisfied Roman Catholic who had a grudge to bear. Her words I find inflamatory and designed to promote a religious racism.
That she wrote this somewhere around a hundred years ago makes it even more suspect. I am well aware that when I was young Canada was just emerging from a very anti-catholic era with all of its horrible and attendant nonsense.
She sounds more like that reprehenseble character from the British Isles named Ian Paisley. He hardly sounds Christian to me nor does Ms. White.
I can tell you from personal experience that I have some problems with some of the doctrines and dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. I can also tell you that I know of many satisfied and devout Roman Catholics. It is not my cup of tea but I cast no aspersions on the honest and devout clergy and lay folks who are involved in the Roman Catholic Church.
As for comments re the form and the style of liturgical service it would appear that you really know little if anything of it nor do you have any desire to learn. You do not understand it or the reasons thereof and do not want to.
Best that you find some more up to date criticisms rather then relying on some obviously rigid early 20th Cent. anti-catholic sentiments.
Are you aware that in addition to the Church of Rome we also have the Eastern Orthodox and the Anglican chuch as well as the Lutheran churches that also use the liturgical form of service and refer to themselves as "catholic" which in fact means universal. Are they also to be included in the nonsensical diatribe of Ms. White?
Shalom
Ted:-6
PS. I find that I cannot bet past about the 5th Ch. in this less than journalistic diatribe.
I have no idea who E. G. White is. I do not know if she conducted any appropriate research or really knows what she is talking about. What it does appear like is she was a dissatisfied Roman Catholic who had a grudge to bear. Her words I find inflamatory and designed to promote a religious racism.
That she wrote this somewhere around a hundred years ago makes it even more suspect. I am well aware that when I was young Canada was just emerging from a very anti-catholic era with all of its horrible and attendant nonsense.
She sounds more like that reprehenseble character from the British Isles named Ian Paisley. He hardly sounds Christian to me nor does Ms. White.
I can tell you from personal experience that I have some problems with some of the doctrines and dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. I can also tell you that I know of many satisfied and devout Roman Catholics. It is not my cup of tea but I cast no aspersions on the honest and devout clergy and lay folks who are involved in the Roman Catholic Church.
As for comments re the form and the style of liturgical service it would appear that you really know little if anything of it nor do you have any desire to learn. You do not understand it or the reasons thereof and do not want to.
Best that you find some more up to date criticisms rather then relying on some obviously rigid early 20th Cent. anti-catholic sentiments.
Are you aware that in addition to the Church of Rome we also have the Eastern Orthodox and the Anglican chuch as well as the Lutheran churches that also use the liturgical form of service and refer to themselves as "catholic" which in fact means universal. Are they also to be included in the nonsensical diatribe of Ms. White?
Shalom
Ted:-6
PS. I find that I cannot bet past about the 5th Ch. in this less than journalistic diatribe.
Adventism and Catholicism
tel:-6
Does Ms. White have a bibliography. Has she credited her sources in any way? I don't see any evidence of that. I do note that she has a few. It would be nice if she could also show the research of some other scholarly folks as well. It would still be nice if it were more up to date. No it would be critical.
I am skimming a few bits. What I see is a writer who makes no attempt to understand the nature of church authority. It would appear that she is relying on the Bible as the inerrant word of God. This is a position which cannot be supported by science, history or archaeology.
Churches that call themselves "catholic" have more then one source of authority; the scriptures, tradition, common sense and the great counsels of the past up to and including the Second Vatican Counsel. Why tradition? That is simply because that is what the gospels are presenting: The developing traditions of the church. Why common sense? We realize that many of the things spoken of in the Bible if taken literally and not metaphorically or as midrash, are unrealistic and not at all plausible: The sun does not stand still for some 24 to 48 hours; the creation stories are myth and the Noah story is pure legend. . Why the counsels? For a starter is was a counsel that gave us the Bible and the traditions and generally the doctrines and dogmas that we accept today. Without the counsel we would not have the Bible, no matter how imperfect it is.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Does Ms. White have a bibliography. Has she credited her sources in any way? I don't see any evidence of that. I do note that she has a few. It would be nice if she could also show the research of some other scholarly folks as well. It would still be nice if it were more up to date. No it would be critical.
I am skimming a few bits. What I see is a writer who makes no attempt to understand the nature of church authority. It would appear that she is relying on the Bible as the inerrant word of God. This is a position which cannot be supported by science, history or archaeology.
Churches that call themselves "catholic" have more then one source of authority; the scriptures, tradition, common sense and the great counsels of the past up to and including the Second Vatican Counsel. Why tradition? That is simply because that is what the gospels are presenting: The developing traditions of the church. Why common sense? We realize that many of the things spoken of in the Bible if taken literally and not metaphorically or as midrash, are unrealistic and not at all plausible: The sun does not stand still for some 24 to 48 hours; the creation stories are myth and the Noah story is pure legend. . Why the counsels? For a starter is was a counsel that gave us the Bible and the traditions and generally the doctrines and dogmas that we accept today. Without the counsel we would not have the Bible, no matter how imperfect it is.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Adventism and Catholicism
telaquapacky wrote: The following is from the book, The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White.
[Excerpt]The worship of images and relics, the invocation of saints, and the exaltation of the pope are devices of Satan to attract the minds of the people from God and from His Son. tel, I am not an official or moderator of these forums, but I think that I am safe in saying that the forums are here for the purpose of discussion, not bloviation.
I have no problem with you calling our attention to Mrs. White's writings. Why not just post a link so that those who wish to read them can do so?
I skimmed the material briefly and it seems that, as a whole, it is as much an attack on ecumenism in general as on Catholicicsm in particular. That is significant, because it is common for sects which, really, have nothing of their own to offer except error and deception to calumnize the competition. God forbid that any Adventist be allowed to achieve a frame of mind that would lead him/her to study Church history, or for that matter the true history of the SDA, from an impartial source!
Regarding the single sentence that I excerpted above, if Mrs. White really believed that Catholics worship images and relics, then she was a fool. If she knew better, then she was a liar. Nor does our veneration of God's great heroes and heroines, and the respect we give the earthly head of our Church, detract in the slightest from our worship of God as Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.
Since you have resonded to none of my questions or challenges to you and to the material you have posted here, I will assume, as will, I'm sure, many of the other readers, that you have no answers and are unable to defend your position. But then, most of us already knew that.
[Excerpt]The worship of images and relics, the invocation of saints, and the exaltation of the pope are devices of Satan to attract the minds of the people from God and from His Son. tel, I am not an official or moderator of these forums, but I think that I am safe in saying that the forums are here for the purpose of discussion, not bloviation.
I have no problem with you calling our attention to Mrs. White's writings. Why not just post a link so that those who wish to read them can do so?
I skimmed the material briefly and it seems that, as a whole, it is as much an attack on ecumenism in general as on Catholicicsm in particular. That is significant, because it is common for sects which, really, have nothing of their own to offer except error and deception to calumnize the competition. God forbid that any Adventist be allowed to achieve a frame of mind that would lead him/her to study Church history, or for that matter the true history of the SDA, from an impartial source!
Regarding the single sentence that I excerpted above, if Mrs. White really believed that Catholics worship images and relics, then she was a fool. If she knew better, then she was a liar. Nor does our veneration of God's great heroes and heroines, and the respect we give the earthly head of our Church, detract in the slightest from our worship of God as Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.
Since you have resonded to none of my questions or challenges to you and to the material you have posted here, I will assume, as will, I'm sure, many of the other readers, that you have no answers and are unable to defend your position. But then, most of us already knew that.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen wrote: Since you have resonded to none of my questions or challenges to you and to the material you have posted here, I will assume, as will, I'm sure, many of the other readers, that you have no answers and are unable to defend your position. But then, most of us already knew that.
Please do not make an assumption on the part of others.
Please do not make an assumption on the part of others.
Adventism and Catholicism
chonsigirl wrote: Please do not make an assumption on the part of others.chon, you might like to address some of those questions and challenges yourself. There is no question that tel needs all the help he can muster here.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Adventism and Catholicism
No, I will not debate with you on this thread or on others. If the replies were written on a more impersonal level, without very personal remarks or criticisms, and more along a debate level, I would. But they are not.
I think these discussions could be very interesting and alot learned from each participant. It would be encouraging to learn from each other the differences and similarities in our belief systems. And there are major differences. Some arise from the premise of the beginning post. Others emerge as the debate continues-because I do not view it as a discussion. It has a "hostile" atmosphere to participate, and there are problems with continuing along these lines.
It is better to discontinue participation in a thread such as this, then to let bad feelings arise between FG members.
And in the spirit of the Easter season, I think we should concentrate more on the meaning behind the death and resurrection of the Lord, then cause disharmony. He came to bring peace and love.
I think these discussions could be very interesting and alot learned from each participant. It would be encouraging to learn from each other the differences and similarities in our belief systems. And there are major differences. Some arise from the premise of the beginning post. Others emerge as the debate continues-because I do not view it as a discussion. It has a "hostile" atmosphere to participate, and there are problems with continuing along these lines.
It is better to discontinue participation in a thread such as this, then to let bad feelings arise between FG members.
And in the spirit of the Easter season, I think we should concentrate more on the meaning behind the death and resurrection of the Lord, then cause disharmony. He came to bring peace and love.
Adventism and Catholicism
chonsigirl wrote: 1. I think these discussions could be very interesting and alot learned from each participant. It would be encouraging to learn from each other the differences and similarities in our belief systems. And there are major differences.
2. It has a "hostile" atmosphere to participate, and there are problems with continuing along these lines.1. I agree, chon, and that was the reason I began the thread.
If you will look back at all of the challenges I made to various of tel's claims I think you or any reasonable person would agree that most or all of them are thoughtful and reasonable. I have made no such accusations against Adventism, about which I have admitted from the start that I know very little; on the contrary, I have said that if I ever do post anything about Adventism that is unfactual I would wish to be corrected.
2. That is because tel and I differ in our motivation. I want to learn more about Adventism, he wants to slander Catholicism.
2. It has a "hostile" atmosphere to participate, and there are problems with continuing along these lines.1. I agree, chon, and that was the reason I began the thread.
If you will look back at all of the challenges I made to various of tel's claims I think you or any reasonable person would agree that most or all of them are thoughtful and reasonable. I have made no such accusations against Adventism, about which I have admitted from the start that I know very little; on the contrary, I have said that if I ever do post anything about Adventism that is unfactual I would wish to be corrected.
2. That is because tel and I differ in our motivation. I want to learn more about Adventism, he wants to slander Catholicism.
Adventism and Catholicism
Does anyone know the SDA church's attitude toward Easter? Do they celebrate Easter Sunday on Saturday, or do they, like the JW's, regard it as a 'pagan' feast? I don't know, that's why I'm asking.
In any case, in order to lighten things up on this thread for the Easter weekend, I'd like to relate a story that I have been told was invented by Ellen White, the guru of modern Adventism. It's possible, however, that the story did not originate with Mrs. White and has been unfairly attributed to her. I don't know. Perhaps tel or some other Adventist can either vouch for or deny Mrs. White's authorship. Anyway, here 'tis:
According to the claimant, it can be very clearly shown that the pope is the Anti-Christ because the popes's official title in Latin is 'Vicarius Filii Dei', which means 'Vicar of the Son of God', and, in fact, the pope wears some sort of headpiece (perhaps one of those diamond-and-ruby-encrusted tiaras that tel referred to a ways back) with that very inscription. If the values of each letter in the phrase with a numerical value (Roman numerals) are added, the sum is 666. Therefore, the pope MUST be the 'beast' of Revelation!
End of story.
Let's try it and see what happens:
V = 5
I = 1
C = 100
A
R
I = 1
U = V = 5
S
F
I= 1
L =50
I = 1
I = 1
D = 500
E
I = 1
OK, let's add 'em up: 5+1+100+1+5+1+50+1+1+500+1 = (well, whataya know) 666!
Amazing, until you know the following:
Firstly, the Catholic Church has never officially referred to the pope by the phrase 'Vicarius Filii Dei'. While it cannot be ruled out that, at some time in Church history, some writer might have used that phrase to refer to the pope, no such writing has, to my knowledge, ever been found, and in any case, it has never been either an official or even a commonly-used title of the pope.
Secondly, no such headpiece, be it tiara, mitre, or whatever, is known to ever have existed. It seems to have been purely an invention of the author of the story.
Thirdly, the author of the story is misusing the Roman numeral system. Nearly all Roman letters had numerical values. Only seven, however (I,V,X,L,C,D,M) were used IN COMBINATION. The others were used only singly. The author of the story is using them not in combination but singly, then adding them all up at the end; thus the numerical values of ALL the letters in the phrase, not just I,V,X,L,C,D,M, should be added, which would obviously produce a much different total. In combination, the number 666 is DCLXVI, not VICIVILIIDI.
Fourthly, there is not even agreement as to what number the 'number of the beast' is. Many early MSS of Revelation give the number as 616 rather than 666.
Fifthly, even allowing Mrs. White, or whoever invented the story if she did not, her slogan, her headpiece, and her numbering system, that total could apply to MILLIONS of names. Are all of them Anti-Christs? Just for fun, let's try another name, at random. Of course, to achieve a total anywhere near 666 it would have to include a 'D' (or be a very long name). That would leave out both tel and myself. How about, for want of a better candidate, ELLEN GOULD WHITE? Let's try it, going through the whole procedure again:
E
L = 50
L = 50
E
N
G
O
U = V = 5
L = 50
D = 500
W = VV = 5 + 5
H
I = 1
T
E
Now, as we did before, let's add 'em up: 50+50+5+50+500+5+5+1=??? Well, I won't spoil the fun, I'll let you add 'em up yourself.
Now I'm not trying to be disingenuous here. By asking the SDA whether this story is really the invention of Mrs. White, I realize that I am putting them on the horns of a dilemma, and a rather large, fierce one at that, because if they credit Mrs. White with inventing the story, then they are admitting that she is a liar and a slanderer.
If they deny that she had anything to do with it, then by what device or theory does the SDA equate the papacy with the 'number of the beast'?
If they insist that the story is true, despite the lack of any supporting evidence, then why does the number not refer to her also, which is to say, why is she not every bit as beastly as she accuses the pope of being?
This is food for thought, but right now my thought is for food, so I'm going to go have lunch, then run some errands. See you next week!
P.S. Playing games with words or numbers IS a lot of fun. Using such games to slander Christ and His community of believers is false witness and a sin.
Happy Easter, ev'rybody!
In any case, in order to lighten things up on this thread for the Easter weekend, I'd like to relate a story that I have been told was invented by Ellen White, the guru of modern Adventism. It's possible, however, that the story did not originate with Mrs. White and has been unfairly attributed to her. I don't know. Perhaps tel or some other Adventist can either vouch for or deny Mrs. White's authorship. Anyway, here 'tis:
According to the claimant, it can be very clearly shown that the pope is the Anti-Christ because the popes's official title in Latin is 'Vicarius Filii Dei', which means 'Vicar of the Son of God', and, in fact, the pope wears some sort of headpiece (perhaps one of those diamond-and-ruby-encrusted tiaras that tel referred to a ways back) with that very inscription. If the values of each letter in the phrase with a numerical value (Roman numerals) are added, the sum is 666. Therefore, the pope MUST be the 'beast' of Revelation!
End of story.
Let's try it and see what happens:
V = 5
I = 1
C = 100
A
R
I = 1
U = V = 5
S
F
I= 1
L =50
I = 1
I = 1
D = 500
E
I = 1
OK, let's add 'em up: 5+1+100+1+5+1+50+1+1+500+1 = (well, whataya know) 666!
Amazing, until you know the following:
Firstly, the Catholic Church has never officially referred to the pope by the phrase 'Vicarius Filii Dei'. While it cannot be ruled out that, at some time in Church history, some writer might have used that phrase to refer to the pope, no such writing has, to my knowledge, ever been found, and in any case, it has never been either an official or even a commonly-used title of the pope.
Secondly, no such headpiece, be it tiara, mitre, or whatever, is known to ever have existed. It seems to have been purely an invention of the author of the story.
Thirdly, the author of the story is misusing the Roman numeral system. Nearly all Roman letters had numerical values. Only seven, however (I,V,X,L,C,D,M) were used IN COMBINATION. The others were used only singly. The author of the story is using them not in combination but singly, then adding them all up at the end; thus the numerical values of ALL the letters in the phrase, not just I,V,X,L,C,D,M, should be added, which would obviously produce a much different total. In combination, the number 666 is DCLXVI, not VICIVILIIDI.
Fourthly, there is not even agreement as to what number the 'number of the beast' is. Many early MSS of Revelation give the number as 616 rather than 666.
Fifthly, even allowing Mrs. White, or whoever invented the story if she did not, her slogan, her headpiece, and her numbering system, that total could apply to MILLIONS of names. Are all of them Anti-Christs? Just for fun, let's try another name, at random. Of course, to achieve a total anywhere near 666 it would have to include a 'D' (or be a very long name). That would leave out both tel and myself. How about, for want of a better candidate, ELLEN GOULD WHITE? Let's try it, going through the whole procedure again:
E
L = 50
L = 50
E
N
G
O
U = V = 5
L = 50
D = 500
W = VV = 5 + 5
H
I = 1
T
E
Now, as we did before, let's add 'em up: 50+50+5+50+500+5+5+1=??? Well, I won't spoil the fun, I'll let you add 'em up yourself.
Now I'm not trying to be disingenuous here. By asking the SDA whether this story is really the invention of Mrs. White, I realize that I am putting them on the horns of a dilemma, and a rather large, fierce one at that, because if they credit Mrs. White with inventing the story, then they are admitting that she is a liar and a slanderer.
If they deny that she had anything to do with it, then by what device or theory does the SDA equate the papacy with the 'number of the beast'?
If they insist that the story is true, despite the lack of any supporting evidence, then why does the number not refer to her also, which is to say, why is she not every bit as beastly as she accuses the pope of being?
This is food for thought, but right now my thought is for food, so I'm going to go have lunch, then run some errands. See you next week!
P.S. Playing games with words or numbers IS a lot of fun. Using such games to slander Christ and His community of believers is false witness and a sin.
Happy Easter, ev'rybody!
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen:-6
Playing games with numbers and looking for secret codes in the scriptures has always been a somewhat childish game. It's like all those conspiracy theories. I have never bought into any of this nonsense.
Are you returning home to Germany? If so have a safe journey and I look forward to seeing you back when you get settled.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Playing games with numbers and looking for secret codes in the scriptures has always been a somewhat childish game. It's like all those conspiracy theories. I have never bought into any of this nonsense.
Are you returning home to Germany? If so have a safe journey and I look forward to seeing you back when you get settled.
May the peace of Christ be with you.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Adventism and Catholicism
telaquapacky wrote: I have every ability and intention to back up everything I have said...Presumably you intend to do so when Christ returns but not before. I'm not sure the thread will remain open for that long, but anything is possible.
Adventism and Catholicism
Ted wrote: Are you returning home to Germany? If so have a safe journey and I look forward to seeing you back when you get settled.
May the peace of Christ be with you.Yep, going back, God willing, next week.
Thank you and the same best wishes to you and yerz.
May the peace of Christ be with you.Yep, going back, God willing, next week.
Thank you and the same best wishes to you and yerz.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen wrote: Presumably you intend to do so when Christ returns but not before. I'm not sure the thread will remain open for that long, but anything is possible.
What a jackass you are. Do you truly think of yourself a good representative of a Christian??
What a jackass you are. Do you truly think of yourself a good representative of a Christian??
Adventism and Catholicism
Acc.:-6
Precisely what do you think a "good representative of a Christian" would be like? Just curious and nothing else. Thanks
Shalom
Ted:-6
Precisely what do you think a "good representative of a Christian" would be like? Just curious and nothing else. Thanks
Shalom
Ted:-6
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Adventism and Catholicism
I don't have a list; but if I did, taunting wouldn't be on it.
Adventism and Catholicism
Accountable wrote: What a jackass you are. Do you truly think of yourself a good representative of a Christian??.....I don't have a list; but if I did, taunting wouldn't be on it.That's jennyass to you. And so's yer muddah! So much for name calling.
I'm not here to represent anything, not even my own denomination. I think that when my Church is MISrepresented, often by those who are misinformed, or when it is slandered or calumnized, by its enemies who knowingly bear false witness while trying to pass themsleves off as Christians, I should have a right to respond. I don't consider such a response 'taunting'. The bit about the names and the Roman numerals was just a little amusement, a triviality, to pass the time while tel was busy conferring with his keepers.
I said at the outset that I knew very little about Adventism and that if I misrepresented it in any way I would wish to be corrected. I posted several questions and challenges to tel, all of which I thought were very reasonable and fair. He responded to virtually none of them, instead using his posts to slander my Church with item after item of absolute nonsense, to which I replied in full. He then simply ignored my responses and continued the slander.
Now, Acc, I invite you once again to help tel, who is obviously in way over his head here and needs all the help he can muster, by contributing, for a change, something substantial to the thread and responding to my questions in a manner that you feel would fairly represent the SDA's position, which he is unable or unwilling to do. Is that unreasonable? Is that 'taunting'? Of course, anyone else who wishes to contribute is welcome also; in fact, both chonsigirl and Ted have made some very good points here. You seem only interested in chiding and name calling.
It all boils down to this: You can't build a religion on lies, slander, and false prophecy and legitimately call it 'Christian'. That is the very antithesis of Christianity. If in all of Christian history there are two individuals who truly deserve the title 'false prophet' they are Miller and White of the SDA. The reason 'fringe' sects like the SDA are so hostile toward anyone who disagrees with them (and not just Catholics, for if you read the three long servings of crapola that tel dished up from White's writings you will see she she is slandering 'mainline' Protestantism along with Catholicism) is that they have virtually NOTHING of their own to offer. Nothing but error, falsehood, and mind control.
I'm not here to represent anything, not even my own denomination. I think that when my Church is MISrepresented, often by those who are misinformed, or when it is slandered or calumnized, by its enemies who knowingly bear false witness while trying to pass themsleves off as Christians, I should have a right to respond. I don't consider such a response 'taunting'. The bit about the names and the Roman numerals was just a little amusement, a triviality, to pass the time while tel was busy conferring with his keepers.
I said at the outset that I knew very little about Adventism and that if I misrepresented it in any way I would wish to be corrected. I posted several questions and challenges to tel, all of which I thought were very reasonable and fair. He responded to virtually none of them, instead using his posts to slander my Church with item after item of absolute nonsense, to which I replied in full. He then simply ignored my responses and continued the slander.
Now, Acc, I invite you once again to help tel, who is obviously in way over his head here and needs all the help he can muster, by contributing, for a change, something substantial to the thread and responding to my questions in a manner that you feel would fairly represent the SDA's position, which he is unable or unwilling to do. Is that unreasonable? Is that 'taunting'? Of course, anyone else who wishes to contribute is welcome also; in fact, both chonsigirl and Ted have made some very good points here. You seem only interested in chiding and name calling.
It all boils down to this: You can't build a religion on lies, slander, and false prophecy and legitimately call it 'Christian'. That is the very antithesis of Christianity. If in all of Christian history there are two individuals who truly deserve the title 'false prophet' they are Miller and White of the SDA. The reason 'fringe' sects like the SDA are so hostile toward anyone who disagrees with them (and not just Catholics, for if you read the three long servings of crapola that tel dished up from White's writings you will see she she is slandering 'mainline' Protestantism along with Catholicism) is that they have virtually NOTHING of their own to offer. Nothing but error, falsehood, and mind control.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
Adventism and Catholicism
THE ANTI-CHRIST: Is the Adventist Interpretation Still Viable?
Adventist Review, May 25, 2000
BY WOODROW W. WHIDDEN
HOW SHOULD contemporary Adventists relate to Roman Catholicism, and specifically, the Roman papacy? Is it time to reassess our traditional point of view?
Many factors have contributed to the recent upsurge in discussion of this sensitive issue. The ET satellite evangelism crusades of the last five years have proclaimed to far- flung audiences the traditional Adventist understanding of the last great crisis of history as portrayed in Revelation 12-14. At the same time there have been numerous efforts by individuals with independent ministries who have quite openly attacked the pope and Roman Catholicism in ways that were embarrassing to the denomination.
As this is being written, the Adventist Church is taking legal action to restrain one ministry from using the name of the denomination in its anti-Catholic tactics.[1] On another front, one nonofficial Adventist journal recently devoted a major portion of one issue to call for a reappraisal of Adventist attitudes toward the Papacy. [2]
Should the Traditional Exposition Change?
What is to be made of this delicate situation? Has the Roman Papacy changed to the point that Adventism needs to seriously reconsider its traditional position that the Papacy is the antichrist portrayed in the “little horn†of Daniel 7 and 8, “the man of sin†of 2 Thessalonians 2, and the leopardlike, or sea, beast of Rev. 13? Has Roman Catholicism changed to such an extent since the Vatican II Council of the early 1960s that Adventism should seriously modify or even jettison its standard antichrist interpretation?
Before Adventists wade into our prophetic expositions on the antichrist, it’s necessary to be very clear about the core issues of the nature and character of any such power. In other words, before anyone attempts an identification, the characteristics of such a person or a system must be readily apparent.
If, for instance, you are going to declare that “pandas†are bears, you must know what the characteristics of the bear family are. Although we have popularly referred to “pandas†as bears, these winsome creatures were once alleged to be more closely related to the raccoon family than the bear clan. Naturalists have carefully studied their nature and characteristics and have sought to clarify which family they belong to. [3]
For us, the first question is this: What is the nature of the antichrist? What is the very core nature of the teachings, beliefs, and practices of any power that would qualify it as an antichrist?
We must also honestly confront a second question: Has papal Rome really so changed its essential nature in the past four decades to demand that contemporary Adventism ought, in fairness, to cease and desist from its traditional prophetic interpretations? Has the alleged papal “leopard-like beast†of Revelation 13 now evolved into a domesticated, declawed, gospelpreaching, law-abiding Christian “catâ€Ââ€â€some sort of leonine Aslan of the New Israel? [4]
Rome Has Changed
Before answering these questions, we must forthrightly affirm that many positive things have taken place in Roman Catholicism. The great progress made on issues such as religious liberty, the emphasis on Bible study (both lay and scholarly), the strong calls for social justice and obedience to moral law, and the Catholic Church’s important role in the demise of Communism are all truly commendable. At bare minimum, Christian honesty demands that Adventists should commend the modern Papacy for these courageous stands.
We should also praise God that these developments have become a blessing to millions. Adventists should greatly rejoice that it’s now much easier to engage our Roman Catholic friends in Bible study than it was 40 years ago. The Vatican II statements on religious liberty have certainly helped to open the way for Protestant gospel proclamation in formerly repressive Catholic countries where evangelical denominations, including our own, previously found the going very tough.
Has Rome Had a Truly Biblical Change?
But even as we acknowledge (and celebrate) this progress, we must ask: Are these the core issues that would enable us to identify an antichrist? Are we now dealing with a biblical and renewed “gospel†church?
To get a solid biblical answer to these questions, I propose the following litmus tests for any would-be candidate for the dubious office of antichrist. What makes any power by nature an “antichrist†is that it either denies or opposes the following:
1. The eternal authority of the ten commandment law as an unchanging expression of the nature and will of God (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:17; 13; 14:12; 2 Thess. 2:3, 4, 7, 8).
2. The gospel of justification by grace through faith alone, not by works of the law (Rev. 14:6, 7; Rom. 1:16, 17; Gal. 1:8, 9; 2:16; 3:1-14).
3. The centrality of Jesus Christ as the only “mediator†between God and humanity (Dan. 8:9-14, 25; 9:24-27; Rev. 13:6; 1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 9:15).
4. And finally, when such a power denies these great truths, it will ultimately seek to gain adherents by either “false miracles†(2 Thess. 2:7-12; Rev. 13:11-14; 16:12-15) or through compulsory force (Dan. 7:21, 25; 8:9, 10, 23-25; Rev. 13:7-10, 15-17).
On these points, has the Roman papal power actually experienced a biblical conversion?
The issue needs to be clearly drawn: before Adventists identify the Papacy as the antichrist, we should be able to clearly identify the eternal authority of the law of God as binding on all professed believers, and also define the gospel of salvation by faith alone through the work of Christ as the believer’s one and only mediator. Only then can the “lawless one†be identified. Only then can credible predictions be made that any power that denies these great truths will likely use miracles and coercive force to gain adherents to its false laws, distorted gospel, and human mediators.
Doctrine, Not Behavior, Is the Real Test
Adventist interpretation and identification of the antichrist has never been based primarily on the alleged moral failures and corruptions of any religious organization. For 150 years we have held that the core issue is what is being taught about Christ as saving mediator and the closely related issues of the holy law and the “everlasting gospel.â€Â
The Roman Papacy, like any human organization, is a mixed bag morally and ethically. There have been good popes and bad ones, along with great saints and great sinners. But the moral or ethical practice of a given religion is not the central issue for Adventists. All human organizations (including our own “enfeebled and defective†denomination [5]) are sadly sinful. Neither was moral perfection the issue for the Protestant Reformers and their successors, who consistently identified the Roman Papacy as an antichrist.
I vividly recall an incident when I was a graduate student at an ecumenically oriented, mainline Protestant seminary. During a seminar on the thought of eighteenth century American theologian and revivalist Jonathan Edwards, we focused one day on a discussion of Edwards’ anti-Catholic writings.
The very liberal and ecumenical professor walked into the seminar room and laid out a folder full of
Adventist Revelation Seminar brochures. To my dismay, he promptly proceeded to call Edwards an anti-Catholic bigot because his position on the antichrist was very similar to that espoused in the Adventist brochures.
As calmly as I could, I suggested to him that if he was going to call Edwards a bigot, he must do the same to me. I went on to remind him that what drives purported “cranks†like Edwards and Adventists is not prejudicial bigotry and religious hatred but a deep concern for the issues of law, salvation, and the centrality of Christ as interceding high priest.
I don’t know that I convinced him, but I would like to convince Adventists that these are the issues that compel us reluctantly to identify any anti-Christian perversion of the biblical gospel.
Rome, the Bible, and the Law
It’s very clear from the Bible passages that describe the antichrist that this power seeks to do violence to the law of God, especially the law that deals with “time†and clearly identifies the great Creator/Redeemer God (Dan. 7:25; 2 Thess. 2; Rev. 12:17; and chapter 13).
Why is the biblical law, especially the Ten Commandments, so important to Seventh-day Adventists? Simply because the Bible is very clear that without the law the world is hopelessly prone to moral anarchy. Without law, personal salvation is in jeopardy. Where there is no law, there is no sin. If there is no sin, there is no need of a divine Savior. Conversely, if there is only a human law, then all we need is a human “savior†to save us from something less than real sin.
Seventh-day Adventists believe that the only way that Jesus can truly be exalted is to spotlight the darkness of our desperately sinful situation relative to the law. Yet the features of the law that seem to be most in the “crosshairs†of the antichrist are precisely those commandments of the law that have to do with the proper worship of God. The central issue of Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 is one of worship: Will humans worship the Creator, or will they worship the “beastâ€Â? Furthermore, all three “beast†powers of Revelation 13 are clearly making war on the first four commandments â€â€the very ones that regulate and define the worship of the true God. [6]
How does papal Rome measure on this first litmus test? The evidence is simply overwhelming. This biggest of all Christian denominations is a vast engine of opposition to the sacred unity and wholeness of the Ten Commandments, and it has especially centered its attack on the laws of the first table of the Ten Commandments.
This “anti-law†stance is certainly evident in the older catechisms of Roman Catholicism, but is this also true of the post-Vatican II church? The answerâ€â€againâ€â€is unequivocally “Yes.†Evidence abounds in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church [7] and the recent “apostolic letter,†Dies Domini, which addressed Sunday sacredness. [8]
Reading these straightforward messages from the Papacy makes it clear that while Rome retained “ten commandments,†they are not the Ten of Exodus 20 and the Ten that Jesus and Paul discoursed onâ€â€the very Ten that Jesus died to vindicate. Based on the most authoritative documents available â€â€the new and definitive catechism of the church developed under the direction of Pope John Paul IIâ€â€it is clear that papal Rome has not changed.
Rome and Justification by Faith
Why is the doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone so important?
Though we often forget the point, the Protestant Reformation was not originally about the issue of the Bible and the “Bible alone†principle (sola scriptura); the Reformers were most concerned with how a person is reconciled to God. The primary reason that Luther began to call papal Rome the antichrist was his belief that the Papacy’s path to justification was unbiblical and destructive of Christian peace and security. [9]
The Roman Catholic way of justificationâ€â€clearly articulated in the sixteenth-century Council of Trentâ€â€says this:
Persons are certainly justified through the grace of God. But it is the sanctifying grace of God, infused into the believer through the sacraments of the church, which produces an inner (or subjective) manifestation of the righteousness of Christ. This inner, “infused†righteousness forms the meritorious basis of the penitent believer’s justification.Put simply, papal Rome supplants justification by faith alone, which accounts or reckons the sinner as righteous for Christ’s sake, with a justification that makes a sinner righteous through an inner, sanctifying or transforming grace. Through this transforming grace, the sinner is declared to be justified. The Bible teaching of justification by grace through faith alone is hopelessly confused with and swallowed up by this inner, sanctifying grace. Put still another way: Rome teaches that the sinner is justified because of what grace does in him or her.
Against this view, the sixteenth century Protestant Reformers raised the great battle cry of “justification by faith alone, not by works of the law†(sola fide). They were not saying that the law was done away with by grace. [10] They were simply declaring that the only way for a person to be truly justified is not by works of obedience, but by faith in the imputed merits of Christ’s righteousness, which are mediated to the believer by Christ in heaven. The believer stands forgiven and accepted for Christ’s sake and has a new, objective legal standing as sinless before God.
The Reformers never denied sanctifying or transforming grace: It was held to be the inevitable result of receiving Christ by faithâ€â€a fruit of the justifying root of Christ’s imputed righteousness.
Why is this issue so crucial today? If I am saved because of what Christ does in me, rather than what He did for me, how can I ever be sure that my obedience and good works will be enough to satisfy the infinite justice of God?
Two closely related tragedies usually result from a distorted “gospelâ€Â:
1. Without the assurance that they are accounted righteous by an objective act of God, sensitive believers almost always succumb to despair. This discouragement causes many to simply “throw in the towel†and abandon the discipline of God’s law. “Since the law can’t be perfectly obeyed,†they conclude, “we should give in to our lusts and get as much as we can out of life.â€Â
2. Knowing that they are never in full conformity with the law of God, some believers are tempted to “slice†the law down to size to convince themselves that they have now met its scaled-down demandsâ€â€a condition correctly identified as “pharisaism.â€Â
The pharisaic route to justification is the most subtle way of degrading the law of God. If the basketball basket were only seven feet high, I could become a great slam-dunk artist! Believers caught in the grip of pharisaism become preoccupied with meeting the mere “letter†of the law in a sterile, mechanical obedience. Not realizing the infinite nature of the righteousness of the law of Christ, they easily convince their desperate souls that the law’s demands have been met. In fact, all they have done is go through the motions in Christless selfdeception. [11]
Does papal Rome, in fact still teach that we are justified by the inner, transforming grace of God instead of by the imputed righteousness of Jesus? Yes, it most certainly does. The conclusions of the Council of Trent are still the standard cited by the new Catechism. The official papal way of justification is still one grand system of works righteousness. [12]
Many Protestants have become confused about this topic in recent months because of the highly publicized “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification†signed by the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1999. (For a detailed analysis, see the forthcoming article, “By Grace Alone?†by Clifford Goldstein in the June Anchor Points Edition.) [Look for this article in an upcoming post from Telaquapacky]
While the Joint Declaration has some Lutheran-sounding language, it’s very clear that Rome has not renounced its classic positions outlined above. Nothing in this document denies the theology voted at the Council of Trent 400 years ago or presented in the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Second, the Joint Declaration is a classic example of ecumenical diplomacy, in which the participants seek to find vague agreement without really facing the nasty realities of disagreement. As one astute observer has pointed out, “the Catholic Church now concedes that, as far as justification is concerned, the Lutheran position is acceptable and not a church-dividing doctrine. This does not mean that Roman Catholics have now adopted the Lutheran position. They have only condoned it and will likely continue to articulate their own view of justification in fairly traditional Catholic terms.†[13]
Adventists could wish that Rome had truly embraced the great Lutheran understanding of justification. But until Rome repudiates the conclusions of the Council of Trentâ€â€still articulated in its new Catechismâ€â€no breakthrough has been achieved. Is papal Rome still engaging in its subtle opposition to biblical justification? The Roman Catholic Church’s most authoritative documents provide
conclusive evidence that it is.
Jesus the Only Mediator and Rome
The Roman Catholic way of salvation not only collapses justification into sanctification, but it also tends to deny the centrality of Christ as saving mediator.
The Catholic way of salvation is a vast sacramental system that sees grace as being mediated through the sacraments administered by ordained priests. The sacraments and the human priests (vicarsâ€â€those who represent the pope, the “vicar of Christ†on earth) are the channels of saving grace. The most important sacraments are the Eucharist (the Lord’s Supper) and penance.
The emblems of the Lord’s broken body and shed blood aren’t merely signs filled with the spiritual presence of Jesus; through the words (“This is my bodyâ€Â) of the officiating vicar/priest these “hosts†become the very true body and blood of Jesus. And in partaking of these, Catholics partake of Jesus and His saving grace.
The necessity of other mediators than Christ in the Roman system becomes especially apparent when we look at the sacrament of penance. When a person goes to confession, the penitent receives absolution (forgiveness) of sins from the priest/confessor. The guilt of sin and its eternal penalties are absolved (remitted) by the priest, but the temporal (earthly, time-based) penalties are not. These latter penalties must be satisfied, or “worked off,†through indulgences. These indulgences draw upon the so-called treasury of merit, a vast reservoir of excess merit that Jesus and the saints have gained through their righteous lives. Access to this treasury is the prerogative of the church and is obtained by the faithful through various actions, observances, or financial purchases.
What is to be made of all of this? [14] The New Testament knows nothing about any such unique human priesthood of sacramental intercession (including Mary, the mother of Jesus). The Bible is quite clear that penitents may by faith “come boldly unto the throne of grace†through the intercessions of Christâ€â€the “one mediator between God and men†(Heb. 4:16; 1 Tim. 2:5).
This vast, complicated system has totally taken the focus off of Christ’s mediation in the heavenly sanctuary and has placed it on an earthly sacrifice, created by an earthly, human priesthood, drawing at least partly on the merit of human accomplishment to produce a human righteousness.
When Rome fully repudiates this sacramental understanding of saving grace, so closely bound up with human merit, then, and only then, can we be quite sure that we are on the way to a
truly biblical, Christ-centered breakthrough.
Unrighteous Persuasion
The last identifying mark of any antichrist has to do with its unrighteous attempts to persuade others of its claims, often by purported miracles or through manipulating the power of civil government.
Rome is certainly not now the persecuting power it used to be. But has its essential character actually changed? Are the more moderate developments of the present period actual indications of a new commitment to freedom of conscience and human choice?
Here Ellen White’s oft-quoted warning still rings with terrible clarity: “Let the restraints now imposed by secular governments be removed and Rome be reinstated in her former power, and there would speedily be a revival of her tyranny and persecution.†[15]
Rome is certainly using false miracles to gain adherents. We have only to note the numerous reports of the sightings of the virgin Mary throughout the world to find evidence of this. These sightings, to which tens of thousands of the devout flock, are nothing but a type of spiritualism dressed up in the garb of the apparently pious cult of Mary. According to Scripture, Mary is neither a mediator nor even alive. She is dead, and the rumors of her appearances are either fraudulent, human trickery, self-deception, or a demonic miracle. Yet multitudes are awed by reports of her appearances. Millions
seek the miracles that she supposedly works for the hurting and oppressed.
What cannot be accomplished by spectacle is often attempted by force. While it’s true that the Papacy is not presently engaged in overt physical persecution, we dare not forget this truism: Any earthly power, political or religious, that doesn’t have the love of God as the motive power for obedience will inevitably have to resort to force to get agreement with its beliefs and practices. Two instructive biblical examples come immediately to mind:
1. When Cain’s false, bloodless sacrifice was rejected (in contrast to the blood sacrifice offered by Abel), Cain resorted to force.
2. When the Jews of Christ’s day who played fast and loose with the sacredness of God’s law (Mark 7:7-13) and salvation by grace through faith aloneâ€â€couldn’t overcome His teaching, they ultimately put to death the very One who was the author of both
the holy law of God and the plan of salvation.
When the law of God is distorted, when the grace of Jesus is transformed into human merit, when the unique mediation of Jesus is supplanted by human mediators, we can be sure that false miracles and governmental tyranny are just around the corner.
Learning to Exalt Jesus
When these four key tests are applied to the Roman Catholic religious system, the sad but inescapable conclusion is that papal Rome is still the great power envisioned in Daniel 7 and 8; 2 Thessalonians 2; and Revelation 13. I write this with no sense of triumphalism or glee, for this is an extremely sad portrait that the Bible paints.
The key question is not whether Adventists should now mount a fresh campaign to figure out new and inventive ways to give the Papacy a good roasting. The challenge is rather for this prophetic movement to earnestly pray and study new ways to exalt Jesus, His law, and His gracious salvation as we have never done before.
If we have not clearly presented the “good news,†I fear that our Roman Catholic friends won’t be able to receive, in good grace, the bad news about the antichrist. This is the ultimate core issue for all peoplesâ€â€be they non-Christians, Catholic Christians (both Greek and Latin), or Protestants: Do we love the “only mediator,†the “lawgiver,†enough that we would willingly die for those caught
up in the antichrist system?
Our objective cannot be simply to win a debate over the identity of the antichrist. We must make certain that our witness to Jesus and His marvelous plan of salvation effectually calls honest-hearted seekers out of the “Babylonian†system. If we lovingly witness for Jesus and His “once for all†sacrifice for sin, the antichrist will be exposed as never before.
Footnotes:
1. A case is now pending in a Florida court in which the Seventh-day Adventist Church is urging the court to require that an offshoot congregation no longer use the name of the church in its billboard attacks on the Papacy and Roman Catholics.
2. “Adventism and Catholicism,†Spectrum 27, issue 3 (Summer 1999): 30-52.
3. During a recent visit to the panda exhibit at the world-famous San Diego Zoo we learned that naturalists now lean to the theory that pandas are, after all, members of the bear clan, not the raccoon rabble.
4. The reference here to Aslan draws upon the imaginative Christ figure in C. S. Lewis’s classic children’s story The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.
5. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, p. 15.
6. See the very perceptive discussion of this issue in Jon Paulien’s What the Bible Says About the End-Time (part 4), especially chapter 11,
pages 121-129.
7. Catechism of the Catholic Church (Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1994), pp. 498-611.
8.Issued from the Vatican on May 31, 1998.
9. See James M. Kittleson’s very readable and insightful biography of Martin Luther entitled Luther the Reformer: The Story of the Man and His Career (Minneapolis: Augsburg Pub. House, 1986), pp. 152ff.
10. This is the false teaching of antinomianism, from the Greek words anti (against or taking the place of) and nomos (law). That is, justifying grace does away with the law. 11This was Paul’s sad state before he caught a vision of Christ’s righteousness; see Philippians 3:1-15, especially verses 5-7.
12. Catechism, pp. 366-370. Especially see the authoritative citation on page 367 from the Council of Trentâ€â€the definitive word on justifying grace that denied the Reformation doctrine of “faith alone, without works of the law.â€Â
13. Douglass A. Sweeney, “Taming the Reformation,†Christianity Today, Jan. 10, 2000, pp. 63-65.
14. Catechism, pp. 384-399 (on the Eucharist and priesthood); pp. 481-490 (on grace and justification), and pp. 370-374 (on indulgences).
15. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 564.
Woodrow W. Whidden is a
professor of religion at
Andrews University, Berrien
Springs, Michigan.
Look what the cat dragged in.
Adventism and Catholicism
...which, of course, proves my point. No response, just more apologist crapola.
Anybody going to rush out and buy this book?
Anybody going to rush out and buy this book?
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen:-6
I simply can't be bothered reading all that cut and paste. One comment I must respond to is "Doctrine, not behaviour is the real test." That is pure nonsense. Doctrine can never replace the human response to God. Ultimately what matters is neither doctrine or dogma but a developing, transforming relationship with the risen Lord.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I simply can't be bothered reading all that cut and paste. One comment I must respond to is "Doctrine, not behaviour is the real test." That is pure nonsense. Doctrine can never replace the human response to God. Ultimately what matters is neither doctrine or dogma but a developing, transforming relationship with the risen Lord.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Adventism and Catholicism
Ted wrote: One comment I must respond to is "Doctrine, not behaviour is the real test." That is pure nonsense. EVERYTHING in Adventism, with the exception of their advocacy of bodily health which I praised at the outset, is pure nonsense.
They are, really, little more than a cult, and a very dangerous one as proven by the Branch Davidian affair.
They are, really, little more than a cult, and a very dangerous one as proven by the Branch Davidian affair.
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen:-6
Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten that they were SDA or related.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten that they were SDA or related.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen wrote: EVERYTHING in Adventism, with the exception of their advocacy of bodily health which I praised at the outset, is pure nonsense.
They are, really, little more than a cult, and a very dangerous one as proven by the Branch Davidian affair.
Having been brought up SDA, and involved in the "church" (I use that term VERY loosely) for the first 15 years of my life, I gotta say....
BINGO!!!!
They are, really, little more than a cult, and a very dangerous one as proven by the Branch Davidian affair.
Having been brought up SDA, and involved in the "church" (I use that term VERY loosely) for the first 15 years of my life, I gotta say....
BINGO!!!!
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
Adventism and Catholicism
By Grace Alone?
Adventist Review June 23, 2000
BY CLIFFORD GOLDSTEIN
The May 25 edition of the Adventist Review carried an important article about Seventh-day Adventist assessment of the Roman Catholic Papacy (see “The Antichrist: Is the Adventist Interpretation Still Viable?â€Â)(Reproduced in post 71 of this thread]. The following article is a companion piece that explores recent developments between Protestants and the Roman Catholic Churchâ€â€Editors.
WHEN, AFTER 30 YEARS OF DIALOGUE, Lutherans and Roman Catholics last year signed a common declaration on justification by faith, they did so on October 31â€â€Reformation Day, which commemorates Martin Luther’s posting of his 95 theses on the church door in Wittenberg. Yet October 31, 1999, was also Halloween, and no day in the calendar better symbolizes the nature of this document.
Endorsed by dignitaries from the Vatican and from the Lutheran World Federation (which represents 58 million of the world 61.5 million Lutherans) The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ) states that, despite “remaining differences,†[1] Roman Catholics and Lutherans have the same fundamental understanding of justification by faith, the doctrine that spawned the Protestant Reformation. “The present declaration has this intention,†declares the JDDJ document, “namely to show that on the basis of their dialogue the subscribing Lutheran churches and the Roman Catholic Church are now able to articulate a common understanding of justification by God’s grace through faith in Christ . . . and that the remaining differences in its explication are no longer the occasion for doctrinal condemnations.†[2]
Do Lutherans and Catholics really have a common view of “justification by God’s graceâ€Â; or is JDDJ he latest and most dramatic manifestation of the truth of these words: “And all the world wondered after the beast†(Rev. 13:3)? “It is not without reason that the claim has been put forth that Catholicism is now almost like Protestantism. There has been a change; but the change is in Protestants, not in Romanists.â€Â[3] The answer, after a comparison of their views, will be sadly obvious.
The View From Wittenberg
However divergent Catholic and Protestant (including Lutheran) theology is on numerous issues, the crucial split occurs along one sharp divideâ€â€justification by faith. What is justification, and what does it mean for the justified? On this issue hangs, if not the law and the prophets, then certainly the gospel and the church. (For Martin Luther, justification by faith was the doctrine upon which the church stood or fell.) [4]
Since the Reformation, Lutherans along with almost all Protestants have insisted that justification by faith is an act by which God declares us righteous. Using such verses as “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law†(Rom. 3:28) and “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight†(verse 20), the Reformers taught that justification was something that God does for us, not in usâ€â€a crucial distinction. By the Lord’s gracious act, we have the perfect righteousness of Jesusâ€â€the righteousness wrought by His sinless life and absolute obedience to God’s lawâ€â€credited (or imputed) to us, as if that sinlessness and absolute obedience were now our own. Christ’s history, Christ’s obedience, Christ’s righteousness, become, legally, our history, our obedience, our righteousness, and these provide the only means by which we, as sinners, can be accepted by a holy and perfect God.
However good the news, it gets even better: this legal declaration of righteousness comesâ€â€by faith alone. It can’t come to us by works, because we’re already sinners, and thus no matter how obedient and law-abiding, we can never achieve the perfect righteousness that a perfect God demands. Nothing that happens in us gives us merit that can, in any way, justify us in God’s sight. We’re justified only by what Christ did for us, apart from us, outside of us. “
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt†(Rom. 4:3, 4). God counted Abraham as righteous, not because of Abraham’s works, but because of Christ’s righteousness, which Abrahamâ€â€through faith had credited to him. Otherwise the reward would have been reckoned not through grace, but because Abraham earned it. If salvation were earned through works, it would be owed, and what’s owed is what we deserveâ€â€and how can any of us deserve Christ’s perfect righteousness? We can’t deserve what only Christ can give us, and that’s why our salvation has to be by grace alone through faith alone.
“Every soul may say,†wrote Ellen White, that “‘by His [Christ’s] perfect obedience He has satisfied the claims of the law, and my only hope is found in looking to Him as my substitute and surety, who obeyed the law perfectly for me. By faith in His merits I am free from the condemnation of the law. He clothes me with His righteousness, which answers all the demands of the law. I am complete in Him who brings in everlasting righteousness. He presents me to God in the spotless garment of which no thread was woven by any human agent.’†[5]
The View From St. Peter’s
In Roman Catholic teaching, justification isn’t just an act, an extrinsic declaration of righteousness, but also includes an ongoing process that is continually making a Christian righteous. Justification isn’t just a change in stature but a change in human nature itself. What Protestants understand as sanctificationâ€â€the fruit, the personal subjective experience of justification Roman Catholics subsume under the name of justification, which includes not just what God does for us but what He also does in us. This difference isn’t mere semantics; on the contrary, it gets to the heart of the most crucial teaching in all Scripture: How are we saved?
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “justification includes the remission of sins, sanctification, and the renewal of the inner man.†[6] Justification, in Rome’s opinion, is what happens inside a person as well as outside. Christ’s merits, the merits that He wrought out in His perfect life by His perfect obedience to the law, are not just credited to a person but are actually infused into the life of the believer through the sacraments administered by the Roman Catholic Church itself. Rome teaches that this saving merit doesn’t remain outside of us but becomes something that happens inside a person, a change that gives that person merit before God.
“The merits of man before God in the Christian life,†according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “arise from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace .. … so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful.â€Â
The italics in that statement are Rome’s, and shouldn’t be overlooked. Rome’s teaching that God somehow associates man “with the work of his grace†leads it to an understanding of justification that Protestantism has rejected. Though Scripture does use the term “grace†in ways that include God working in us, Rome melds the grace that saves us with that grace that works in us until “the merit of good works†belongs not just to Christ but also “to the faithfulâ€Ââ€â€whose good works do, then, grant them merit before God.
“Moved by the Holy Spirit,†says the Catechism, “we can merit for ourselves and for all others the graces needed to obtain eternal life.†[7] Yet if we can “merit for ourselves . . . the graces needed to obtain eternal life,†then doesn’t justification become something different than when it’s based only on Christ’s merits credited to us by faith alone? Of course it does, which is why at the sixteenth-century Council of Trent (still viewed as authoritative by the Roman Church), Rome denounced justification by faith alone: “If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification . . . let him be anathema†[8]â€â€a denunciation that, after more than 450 years, the church has never repudiated.
Word Games
Protestants understand “the grace of justification†as purely a legal declaration; for Rome justification is a process of inner renewal, something that happens in us. Considering these fundamental contradictions, how can The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification show a “common understanding of justification by God’s grace through faith in Christ†between Catholics and Protestants?
The answer, of course, is that it can’t. JDDJ is, instead, a twentieth-century linguistic philosopher’s dream, 44 paragraphs of crude proof that language can be so ambiguous, so fluid and slippery that two groups reading the same words can take away from those words meanings as diverse as the difference between Christ and antichrist.
For example, The Joint Declaration declares: “By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God.†[9] Sounds nice, but even the clerics at Trent who cursed the Reformers could have signed their names to that sentence. Rome has no problem accepting salvation by “grace alone.†For Rome it has always been God’s grace, and God’s grace alone, that saves us. It’s even God’s grace alone that gives to the faithful “merit for ourselves . . . to obtain eternal life.†Therefore, technically, because it is God’s grace working in usâ€â€it’s never, as the document says, “merit on our part.â€Â
“Through Christ alone,†JDDJ declares, “are we justified, when we receive this salvation in faith.†[10] Again, Rome has not denied that it’s through Christ alone that we are justified, or that salvation comes by faith (just not by “faith aloneâ€Â). For example, Rome teaches that the church “bears in herself and administers the totality of the means of salvation†[11] or that Mary in heaven “did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.†[12] Because everything the church or Mary does is derived only from Christ, Rome can still insist that all the church does toward saving souls, and all that Mary does in her “saving office,†come to the believer “through Christ alone.â€Â
According to JDDJ, justification tells “us that as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts as a gift we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way.†[13] Here too Rome can sign on the dotted line without conceding anything, even its age-old practice of granting indulgences, which bring to the sinner “the remission before God of the temporal punishment due for sin already forgiven as far as their guilt is concerned.â€Â[14]
What does that mean? According to Roman Catholic belief, when sins are “forgiven†the sinner still faces a “temporal punishment†for those sins, which need to be expiated before or after death. Because the debt from the sin remains, “an indulgence,†says The Catholic Encyclopedia, “offers the penitent sinner the means of discharging this debt during his life on earthâ€Ââ€â€as opposed to “expiating sins in purgatory.†[15]
How do the faithful obtain indulgences? Though the practice has varied over the years, John Paul II, in the “Bull of Indiction of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000,†announced special indulgences for the penitent during the Jubilee. According to Rome, the faithful can “make a pious pilgrimage to one of the Patriarchal Basilicas . . . and there take part devoutly in Holy Mass . . . or if they visit, as a group or individually, one of the four Patriarchal Basilicas and there spend some time in Eucharistic adoration and pious meditations, ending with ‘Our Father’ . . . or abstaining for at least one whole day from unnecessary consumption . . . and donating a proportionate sum of money to the poor; supporting by a significant contribution works of a religious or social nature.†[16] (See sidebar below)
Doesn’t the practice of indulgences contradict what JDDJ says about forgiveness being “a gift we receive in faith, and never can merit in any wayâ€Â? Not if one understands the terms as Rome does. For Rome, no matter how many indulgences the penitent obtains, either from pilgrimages or paying money, it’s still never a person’s own merit that pays the debt. Instead Rome teaches that the church possesses a treasury of the “merits of Christ and the saints,†which includes the “prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary,†and it’s from this treasury that the penitent “obtain from the Father of Mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins.†[17] In other words, even though the people make pilgrimages, or pay money to “works of a religious or social nature,†forgiveness comes only from the merit of Christ and the saints. Forgiveness, therefore, is something the sinner can never “merit in any wayâ€Â; and because we can never merit itâ€â€it’s a “gift we receive in faith.â€Â
JDDJ also said: “We confess together that sinners are justified by faith in the saving action of God in Christ.†[18] No problem, even if (for Rome) that saving action is manifested through the sacraments, which are “efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the church, by which the divine life is dispensed to us.†[19] These signs of grace, which come “by the action of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit,†[20] must be administered for salvation. “The church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation,†[21] and they include “Baptism, Confirmation or Chrismation, Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony.†[22]
Again, nothing here contradicts The Joint Declaration. Everything that happens to the believer through the sacramental system happens only through “the saving action of God in Christâ€Ââ€â€even if it’s all mediated to the believer through the church itself, which is “the sacrament of Christ’s action at work in her through the mission of the Holy Spirit.â€Â[23]
In Place of Christ.
Because salvation is always by “grace alone,†received “in faith†(and “never any merit on our partâ€Â), and because salvation happens only through “the saving action of God in Christâ€Ââ€â€Rome could sign the document without changing any practices that, at their core, deny the essence ofjustification by faith alone. No wondermany Protestants have protested JDDJ, including 200 German theologians
who expressed their “weighty objections†because, they said, the document brings the “Lutheran Doctrine of Justification by faith into question [and] presupposes an ecumenical notion of purpose which is irreconcilable with Reformation criteria.†[24]
Perhaps the most interesting, and revealing, statement came from Jesuit scholar Avery Dulles. Writing in a publication that supported JDDJ, Dulles noted that on the issue of justification by faith alone, “it is very difficult to make out a consensus since the Lutheran position is based on the assumption that faith is the means whereby we are clothed with the merits of Christ, in whom we believe. Lutherans reject justification as interior renewal because in their view such renewal is always imperfect and presupposes justification. Here again, no agreement has been reached.†[25]
No agreement has been reached! One would think that the whole point of a document titled The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification would be to reach an agreement on the doctrine of justification.Yet, according to this Jesuit, there was no agreement. And he was right; in factâ€â€there can’t be one. Rome will never accept justification by faith alone because to do so would, in effect, undo its whole purpose for its existence.
The Roman Catholic system is based on the crucial notion that all that Christ has done or does for a person comes mediated through the church itself. In other wordsâ€â€salvation, through all God’s grace, and always through Christ aloneâ€â€is dispensed to the faithful only through the church and its sacraments and priesthood. Rome sees itself as the sole dispenser of grace. The Roman system, therefore, at its core, at its very essence, has usurped the ministry, sacrifice, and high priesthood of Christ. “Antichrist†does not mean just “against Christ†but also “in the place of Christ.â€Â
These statements, drawn directly from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, reveal Rome’s usurpation of prerogatives that belong only to Christ. “Indeed bishops and priests, by virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders, have the power to forgive all sins ‘in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.’ †[26] “The Church, who through the bishop and his priests, forgives sins . . .†[27] “Basing itself on Scripture and tradition, the council teaches that the church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation.†[28] “Were there no forgiveness of sins in the church, there would be no hope of life to come or eternal liberation.†[29] “Through the liturgy, Christ, our redeemer and high priest, continues the work of redemption in, with, and through the church.†[30] “The Church is catholic: she proclaims the fullness of faith. She bears in herself and administers the totality of the means of salvation.†[31] No wonder Rome fears justification by faith alone. Any system that claims to bear in itself “the totality of the means of salvation†must, of necessity, reject a doctrine that claims that the totality of salvation exists only in Christ Himself, and that this salvation comes to the believer by faith alone not mediated by any institution, liturgy, or priesthood. If Catholics were to embrace biblical justification, Rome’s present structureâ€â€as the vehicle through which grace and salvation are dispensedâ€â€would crumble under the weight of its own false redundancy. For this reason Rome has, for almost 500 years, been an avowed enemy of justification by faith alone. She has to oppose it because no biblical teaching threatens her more.
The Prophetic Element
If, then, no agreement exists on justification, why this much-ballyhooed document claiming that one does? Though the answer is complicated, a few crucial factors seem to have helped prepare the soil for JDDJ.
First, due to the inroads of futurism, Rome is no longer seen by many Protestants as the antichrist (a helpful development in fostering ecumenical dialogue with it). Second, the philosophical climate of the past 40 years has made the notion of “truth†less absolute, more subjective, opening the way for the kind of semantic fog that JDDJ and other documents purporting doctrinal unity with Rome must have. Third, many Protestants simply don’t understand justification by faith alone and Rome’s utter usurpation of it; if they did, documents like JDDJ wouldn’t get past the first line.
Whatever the immediate causes, this document represents one of the most stunning prophetic signs that Adventists have witnessed in the past 50 years. It’s almost as if these two religious groups, having read the The Great Controversy, decided to perform it onstage. And though, in this particular scene, the actors weren’t wearing masks and costumes, they didn’t need to, because the words and phrases uttered in their lines and dialogue wore the masks and costumes instead. Which is whyâ€â€againâ€â€the signatories of The Joint Declaration couldn’t have picked a better day than October 31, Halloween, to play their parts.
[1] Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ), N. 5
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ellen White, The Spirit of Prophecy
(Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Press, 1884), vol. 4, p.
388.
[4] What Martin Luther Says: An Anthology, ed.
Ewald Plass, 3 vols. (St. Louis: Concordia,
1959), vol. 2, p. 704, W. 5.
[5] Ellen White, Selected Messages, book 1, p.
396.
[6] Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)
(New York: Doubleday, 1995), n. 2019. (Italics
supplied.)
[7] CCC, n. 2027.
[8] Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent,
Rev. H. J. Schroeder, O.P. (Rockford, Ill.: Tan
Books), canon 9, p. 43.
[9] DDJ, n. 15.
[10] Ibid., n. 16.
[11] CCC, n. 868.
[12] Ibid., n. 969.
[13] JDDJ, n. 17.
[14] Enchiridion of Indulgences, Authorized
English Version, William T. Barry, C.SS.R., n. 1.
[15] CCC, n. 1475.
[16] Conditions for Gaining the Jubilee Indulgence.
William Wakefield Card. Baum, Major
Penitentiary. Given at Rome, at the Apostolic
Penitentiary, Nov. 29, 1998.
[17] CCC, n. 1478.
[18] JDDJ, n. 25
[19] CCC, n. 1131.
[20] Ibid., n. 1084.
[21] Ibid., n. 1129.
[22] Ibid., n. 1113.
[23] Ibid., n. 1118.
[24] Position Statement of the Theological
Instructors in Higher Education to the Planned
Signing of the Official Common Statement to the
Doctrine of Justification, quoted in Christian
News, Nov. 15, 1999, p. 10.
[25] Avery Dulles, “Two Languages of Salvation:
The Lutheran-Catholic Joint Declaration,†First
Things, Dec. 1999, p. 28. (Italics supplied.)
[26] CCC, n. 1461.
[27] Ibid., n. 1448.
[28] Ibid., n. 846.
[29] Ibid., n. 983.
[30] Ibid., n. 1069.
[31] Ibid., n. 868. (Italics supplied.)
Clifford Goldstein is the author of 13 books about Bible prophecy, interpretation, and current issues. He also edits the Adult Sabbath School Study Guide.
Look what the cat dragged in.
Adventism and Catholicism
tel:-6
I'm only going to make a few comments on that diatribe re the Pope as Ant-Christ.
The suggestion that the pope is the Anti-Christ is both arrogant and a judgment that is to be left up to God unless the one making the judgment is to be judged with the same judgment.
Still relying of Ms. White. sigh
Matt. 16:19 and 18:18 very clearly establishes that God has built Church on Peter and Peter has been told that whatever he binds on earth is bound in heaven and of course the opposite-loosed. It also says that He has given to Peter the Keys to the Kingdom. This is the interpretation that the RC Church has taken.
In many ways that sounds very clear. I don't completely agree but for vastly different reasons then SDA. However, God has given to his ministers and apostles the right to declare sins forgiven. Now, this is not taken lightly by the church. That the church would declare that one's sins are forgiven depends upon a real transormation not just an attempt to get brownie points.
I am hoping that Bronwen will respond in more detail but that is up to her.
I think that the SDA would do well to look after the plank in their own eye and leave the spec in someone elses alone. Leave the judging to God where it belongs and to Him alone.
The rest of the article displays a very clear lack of knowledge of not only the RC Church but others as well. One cannot understand another unless one knows as much as possible about the other.
Pope=Anti-Christ--pure nonsense.
Shalom
Ted:-6
I'm only going to make a few comments on that diatribe re the Pope as Ant-Christ.
The suggestion that the pope is the Anti-Christ is both arrogant and a judgment that is to be left up to God unless the one making the judgment is to be judged with the same judgment.
Still relying of Ms. White. sigh
Matt. 16:19 and 18:18 very clearly establishes that God has built Church on Peter and Peter has been told that whatever he binds on earth is bound in heaven and of course the opposite-loosed. It also says that He has given to Peter the Keys to the Kingdom. This is the interpretation that the RC Church has taken.
In many ways that sounds very clear. I don't completely agree but for vastly different reasons then SDA. However, God has given to his ministers and apostles the right to declare sins forgiven. Now, this is not taken lightly by the church. That the church would declare that one's sins are forgiven depends upon a real transormation not just an attempt to get brownie points.
I am hoping that Bronwen will respond in more detail but that is up to her.
I think that the SDA would do well to look after the plank in their own eye and leave the spec in someone elses alone. Leave the judging to God where it belongs and to Him alone.
The rest of the article displays a very clear lack of knowledge of not only the RC Church but others as well. One cannot understand another unless one knows as much as possible about the other.
Pope=Anti-Christ--pure nonsense.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Adventism and Catholicism
Ted wrote: 1. Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten that were SDA or related.
2. I am hoping that Bronwen will respond in more detail but that is up to her.1. I'm quite sure that the SDA disavows 'Koresh' as they should, but if you compare the orientation, the rants about Daniel, Revelation, and the 'end times', you can see that the man, sane or insane, was a product of the same mind control that afflicts tel. (Those who have escaped from the SDA refer to this as 'White-washing')
2. I think the fact that tel refuses to respond to the comments of other posters but simply misuses the forum to post reams of nonsense speaks for itself. Anyone who wishes to voluntarily subject themselves to SDA propaganda can certainly find SDA-specific websites where they can wallow in such muck to their hearts' content. Anyone who wants to run out and join the SDA on the basis of how tel has presented it here is certainly free to do so. I don't see a large throng heading in that direction.
Edited a bit later to add the following link:
Anyone interested in learning LOTS MORE about the SDA from an outside source is urged to visit this extremely interesting website. Do so when you have some time to spend as it is VERY extensive:
http://www.truthorfables.com
I cannot personally vouch for the accuracy of everything on the site. I would hope that if anything is stated incorrectly, tel or another SDA member would provide a DOCUMENTED correction.
Also, I would hope that tel would follow my example here and post urls rather than waste the FG's web space by inflicting long cut-and-paste jobs on us. I think that is just common courtesy.
2. I am hoping that Bronwen will respond in more detail but that is up to her.1. I'm quite sure that the SDA disavows 'Koresh' as they should, but if you compare the orientation, the rants about Daniel, Revelation, and the 'end times', you can see that the man, sane or insane, was a product of the same mind control that afflicts tel. (Those who have escaped from the SDA refer to this as 'White-washing')
2. I think the fact that tel refuses to respond to the comments of other posters but simply misuses the forum to post reams of nonsense speaks for itself. Anyone who wishes to voluntarily subject themselves to SDA propaganda can certainly find SDA-specific websites where they can wallow in such muck to their hearts' content. Anyone who wants to run out and join the SDA on the basis of how tel has presented it here is certainly free to do so. I don't see a large throng heading in that direction.
Edited a bit later to add the following link:
Anyone interested in learning LOTS MORE about the SDA from an outside source is urged to visit this extremely interesting website. Do so when you have some time to spend as it is VERY extensive:
http://www.truthorfables.com
I cannot personally vouch for the accuracy of everything on the site. I would hope that if anything is stated incorrectly, tel or another SDA member would provide a DOCUMENTED correction.
Also, I would hope that tel would follow my example here and post urls rather than waste the FG's web space by inflicting long cut-and-paste jobs on us. I think that is just common courtesy.
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen:-6
In addition to Matt. 16:19 as a source for the clergy forgiving sins we also have Luke 24:47 presenting the same message. Just an observation as I was reading, preparing the sermon or homily for this coming Sunday.
Shalom
Ted:-6
In addition to Matt. 16:19 as a source for the clergy forgiving sins we also have Luke 24:47 presenting the same message. Just an observation as I was reading, preparing the sermon or homily for this coming Sunday.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Adventism and Catholicism
Ted wrote: In addition to Matt. 16:19 as a source for the clergy forgiving sins we also have Luke 24:47 presenting the same message. Just an observation as I was reading, preparing the sermon or homily for this coming Sunday.
Ted, these are both fine references for the conferring of the power to bind and loose in general, which would include not only sins but, as we have recently discussed in another thread, things like how the sacramants should be administered. The most specific reference for forgiving sins remains John 20:22-23.
By the way, you'll be happy to know that I arrived safely in Germany Thursday morning and am now in the process of getting back in gear, so to speak.
Ted, these are both fine references for the conferring of the power to bind and loose in general, which would include not only sins but, as we have recently discussed in another thread, things like how the sacramants should be administered. The most specific reference for forgiving sins remains John 20:22-23.
By the way, you'll be happy to know that I arrived safely in Germany Thursday morning and am now in the process of getting back in gear, so to speak.
Adventism and Catholicism
Bronwen:-6
Happy to see you had a safe journey home. Blessings.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Happy to see you had a safe journey home. Blessings.
Shalom
Ted:-6