Speaking of assurance of salvation, DMLJ makes the point that "The Roman Catholic Church deliberately discourages it. Obviously, were she not to do so, there would not be so much need for the priesthood, and for the power of the Church and her authorities. She deliberately keeps her people in uncertainty about their condition in this life and in the next. So the Romanist prays for the dead, and so on. But this is a gross and a terrible travesty of the New Testament teaching."
It is about time that preachers today spoke out about this 'travesty' that presents itself as a bona fide Christian church. Too many mealy-mouthed preachers will not expose Romanism for the counterfeit it really is. They think that by staying dumb, the problem and challenge of Rome will go away. But there's not fear of that happening.
One can recall how not too many years ago, Paisley and Co. would have lambasted the church of Rome for its deviant teachings and practices, but not today. Why? because Paisley and Co have joined the ecumenical bandwagon through the political back door, and are happy to say nothing in public against Rome or its doings. They would have too much to lose of they stuck to preaching the truth. They now play it safe and say nothing.
If ever there was cowardice, this is it! DMLJ in his day refused to stay silent when the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Saviour of the whole world was being undermined and attacked by Rome very existence, and, believe it or not, facilitated by every church that either owns Rome as a Christian Church, or knows better but refuses to make a big point of it.
Rome denies that Christian can be sure of their salvation, because to teach that would be to render redundant the entire Roman edifice. Christians can know they are saved and forgiven and justified; Romanists cannot. Christians can know that Christ died for them; Romanists cannot. Christians have a glorious heritage to enter into, but Romanists have NOTHING to look forward to in the next life and nothing to cheer the heart in this one.
Do you know you are saved? Do you know that you are a citizen of heaven? Are you sure of eternal life? You can be. Get into the Scriptures primarily and trust yourself and your all to the fidelity of the promises that God has given in His Word. "He who comes to Me I will not drive away (or cast out)."
1 comment:
Hazlett. You have given space to two comments by Dr DMLJ on the RC Church, and followed with much by way of criticism of the RC system.
Apart from the fact that your readership will undoubtedly already be persuaded of the nature and errors of the RC 'church', there is an element of 'motes and beams' here! (I personally do not believe the RC qualifies in any sense for designation as "church" - but let that pass)
The good Doctor also commented on the nature of the church and was also critical of current Evangelical/Reformed practice.
For example:
"Are we giving the members of the church an adequate opportunity to exercise their gifts? Are our churches corresponding to the life of the New Testament church? Or is there too much concentration in the hands of ministers and clergy? You say, "We provide opportunity for the gifts of others in week-night activities." But I still ask, Do we manifest the freedom of the New Testament church? . . . When one looks at the New Testament church and contrasts the church today, even our churches, with that church, one is appalled at the difference. In the New Testament church one sees vigor and activity; one sees a living community, conscious of its glory and of its responsibility, with the whole church, as it were, an evangelistic force. The notion of people belonging to the church in order to come to sit down and fold their arms and listen, with just two or three doing everything, is quite foreign to the New Testament, and it seems to me it is foreign to what has always been the characteristic of the church in times of revival and of reawakening"
Indeed so!
We should not forget that even now Evangelical/Reformed churches continue to deny in practice the CORPORATE dimension of the priesthood of all believers, substituting instead the priority of the clergy/pastor role as the SOLE MEANS of edifying the church when gathered.
Any comment please on the continuation of this clergy/laity dichotomy which lacks NT support?
Post a Comment