|
XXIX - 02(96)
"Watchman,
what of the night?"
"The hour has come, the hour is striking and striking at you,
the hour and the end!" Eze. 7:6 (Moffatt)
RC CARDINAL IN SDA PULPIT -2
Page 2
E & C T - 1
Page 5
Editor's Preface
In the January, 1996 issue of WWN, we noted an article in the Lincoln
Journal Star which told of a three day convocation to be held on the Union College campus sponsored by the Interchurch Ministries of Nebraska. The services were held in the College View Seventh-day Adventist Church. The Religious News Editor, Bob Reeves, followed this article by a report of the first service which he personally attended. It was at this service that Roman Catholic Cardinal, William Keeler, Archbishop of Baltimore, spoke. We shall review Mr. Reeves observations as well as a third article on the three day convocation.
One year ago, we began a three-part series on "Evangelicals and Catholics
Together" (ECT) based on an accord worked out between representatives of the
two religious communities. Now a defense has been published in the form of a
series of Essays edited by the two who formed the original committee which
produced the Accord, Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus. Each Essay
needs to be carefully evaluated for at least two reasons: 1)
The Accord is not dead, nor was it simply a publicity stunt; and 2) What does it augur for Evangelicals and the ecumenical movement? From noting carefully the thrust of the Essays, it is obvious that there was severe negative criticism on the part of some concerned Evangelicals, while little came from Roman Catholic sources. This should tell one something.
Two of the Essays in the 1995 publication were written by converts to Roman Catholicism, Neuhaus and the Jesuit, Avery Dulles.
An Evangelical publication, Foundation, reveals that Charles Colson's wife is a - Roman Catholic, and that he has Catholics on his staff. A staff writer comments - "The entire evangelical movement is in deadly peril because its leaders fail to realize that the Roman Catholic Church is a false church, not a true body of believers even though they use more evangelical language than ever before." (p. 38, July-Septe
Page 2
RC CARDINAL IN SDA PULPIT - 2
p 2 -- RC CARDINAL IN SDA PULPIT - Part 2 -- A second article in the Lincoln Journal Star (October 27, 1995) by the Religious News Editor, Bob Reeves, reported on the opening service at which William Cardinal Keeler spoke from the pulpit of the College View Seventh-day Adventist Church the campus church of Union College. Actually, Cardinal Keeler read the speech which Edward Cardinal Cassidy, President of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Christian Unity had intended to give had he been able to attend as originally scheduled. Keeler, Archbishop of Baltimore, is also a member of the Council.
Reeves actually captioned his article, "Common Beliefs Noted." This was based on remarks made by Dan Davis, the executive secretary of the Interchurch Ministries which sponsored the three day convocation. Davis declared that "the ecumenical movement does not seek church unity but recognizes differences among various denominations as well as common beliefs and practices."
This calls to mind two things: One, the statement in The Great
Controversy which tells of the ultimate objective "when the leading churches of the United States [unite] upon such points of doctrine as they hold in common" (p. 445);
and two, the position taken by Cardinal Cassidy at the Seventh Assembly of the WCC in Canberra, Australia in 1991 - unity in diversity, yet "unity in faith and communion." (The Catholic Leader, Feb. 24, 1991, p. 3) This was also the basis of "the re-vision [of] the goal of visible unity" projected at the Fifth World Conference of the Faith and Order Commission of the WCC held in Spain in 1993. A report released by the conference "depicted" the "shared life of Christians as rooted in the Triune God," and that consequently "unity and diversity are inseparable." (One World, Oct., 1993, p. 15)
The Union College three-day convocation focused on the meaning "of the sacrament of baptism, which is common to all Christians." During the first service, young girls brought in bottles of water and poured them into bowls. "The celebrants dipped bunches of brightly colored leaves in [the] bowls of water, and sprinkled the water over the congregation as a symbol of baptism, which signifies the cleansing of the people from sin and the start of a new life in Christ."
Cassidy's prepared speech, read by Keeler, described baptism as "the most constant link of sacramental unity" among Christians. Though differing in mode of baptism and the time for baptism, all churches should recognize this "sacrament" as the sign that Christians all belong to "the body of Christ."
It is at this point that we need to pause and think through carefully the meaning of this position, and the objective in mind by so focusing, and the application being made by so concluding.
The Scripture does plainly state - "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body." (I Cor. 12:13) The reality which this ceremony recognizes is the act of Christ by which He reconciled both Jew and Gentile "unto God in one body by the cross." (Eph. 2:16) In this, there were not multiple crosses, but one, just so, there is "One Lord, one
faith, one baptism." (Eph. 4:5)
Baptism has but one meaning - "to dip, to immerse." Even the
new Catechism of the Catholic Church recognizes this meaning of the
Greek term. (par. 1214) This means simply that any method of performing the
ceremony required by Christ Himself other than by immersion deviant, and
violates the intended significance. Paul clearly states this significance. He writes:
"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:3-4)
The Roman Catholic Church sees in the water used for baptism, not a symbolic element, but a "creature" in and of itself "a bath that purifies, justifies, and sanctifies." Their
new Catechism reads:
"Since the beginning of the world, water, so humble and wonderful a
creature, has been the source of life and fruitfulness. Sacred Scripture
sees it as "overshadowed" by the Spirit of God." [Then the Roman Missal, Easter Vigil 42:Blessing the Water is quoted]
"At the very dawn of creation your Spirit breathed on the waters making them the wellspring of all holiness." (par. 1218)
After noting the supposed purifying, justifying, and sanctifying effect of the water, the
Page 3
Catechism states:
"Hence Baptism is a bath of water in which the' imperishable seed' of the Word of God produces its life-giving effect. St. Augustine says of Baptism: 'The word is brought to the material element, and it becomes a sacrament." (par. 1228)
The question, reduced to its basics, is: Does one perceive of baptism as a sacrament of regeneration or a testimony to regeneration? If the former, then water from the bath is ministered to the sinner; but if the latter, the sinner is buried in symbolism into the water, an element, not a "creature."
Passing by this elementary question, the Roman Catholic promoters of ecumenism, seek to emphasize that by baptism, all become one body. Avery Dulles, S.J., appeals to the Nicene Constantinopolitan Creed, stating that according to this creed, "Baptism, the basic sacrament of incorporation, is necessarily 'one,"' in other words, only one baptism, the sacramental. He continues, "By incorporating Christians into Christ, baptism makes them members of one together." (Evangelicals & Catholics Together, p. 131)
At this point two things need to be noted. First baptism is assumed to be a sacrament, and this meaning of the word has been clearly defined in the new Roman Catholic Catechism. Water from this "bath" incorporates all into one body. Thus the ceremony at the first service of the Convocation held at Union College - the sprinkling of water from the "bath" upon the whole congregation made them "one," whether Roman Catholic, Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopal, Baptist, Disciples of Christ, Presbyterian, or any others present.
It should also be observed that the Creed to which Dulles appealed is the Creed adopted by the WCC through which they hope to produce a visible unity of faith. Perhaps we need to recall the purpose of this three-day convocation. It was the first of three to be held. The basis of these convocations will be the Lima Text or what is called BEM - Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry. Baptism was the theme of this first convocation, the other concepts - Eucharist and Ministry - will follow in successive years. This BEM text has been described "as a search for a new way to approach sacramental questions that divide churches, so as to promote unity." This "search" was the work of the Faith and Order Commission of the WCC. Now it is engaged in a second study "seeking to discover whether Christians today can confess their faith together ecumenically."
"For the study, the Faith and Order Commission has chosen the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of A.D. 381 - already officially recognized by many churches - as a summary of the apostolic faith." (One World, Jan.-Feb., 1988, p. 15) [The Seventh-day Adventist Church is one of the "many churches" which has done so officially]
Returning now to the application of baptism as "a sacrament" by which all
become "one body," we find that Dulles after emphasizing this aspect of the
Creed, appeals to the "Decree on Ecumenism" from the Vatican II Council
which states - "Baptism establishes a sacramental bond of unity existing
among all who have been reborn by it." (Dulles, op. cit.) [Note the "it" as the means of the new birth, not the Holy Spirit]
It also must be observed that Neuhaus in commenting on the ECT accord states -
"The most important affirmation of ECT is this: 'All who accept Christ as Lord and Savior are brothers and sisters in Christ. Evangelicals and Catholics are brothers and sisters in Christ."'
(ETC, p. 178)
A third report in the Lincoln Journal Star October 28, 1995), by its religious news editor, carried this concept of all professed Christians as brothers and sisters in Christ a step further. Noting a presentation by Dr. Michael Kinnamon, dean of the Lexington Theological Seminary in Kentucky, a Disciples of Christ institution, the report was captioned - "Christians Seek Ways to Stop Judging Based on Baptism." In other words, the mode of baptism is not a criterion by which to judge whether one is a Christian or not. Kinnamon threw a curve at his audience. Is Mother Teresa of the Catholic Church a Christian? She as an infant was sprinkled on the head with "holy" water. The bottom line is, if you are a Christian and Mother Teresa is a Christian, what hinders united fellowship?
Before dealing with the questions raised by this "curve," we need to note some background concerning the dean. "Kinnamon served for several years with the World Council of Churches in Geneva, where he helped develop a key document in the ecumenical movement." It was the BEM Lima text, which was handed to the Religious Editor of
the Journal Star, telling him that this was what the Convocation was all about. The dean indicated that his seminary had
Page 4
two Roman Catholic professors on its staff, and that there were a number of Catholic students in attendance. He indicated that many mainline Protestant denominations now accept members regardless of how they were baptized in a different church. Kinnamon considered this a major step forward toward cooperation and understanding.
Now to the "curve" which Kinnamon threw - Is Mother Teresa a Christian? I have asked this question of several since receiving the news report on the dean's question. The answers were, "Yes," but when reminded of the fact of her infant baptism, and the use being made of this fact, the response was that we are judged only by the light we have had. Putting to one side, judgment
per se on an individual, since all judgment is committed even by the Father into the hands of the Son of man (John 5:22), let us note certain Scriptural texts on the question.
Is the answer to the question, resolved in the concept that judgment is based on one's walking in all the light one receives, or does it also involve the light that I might have received but did not avail myself of that light? (DA, p. 490) In John 3:19-21, some specific criteria are set forth upon which the judgment will turn. These verses not only define the rejection of light because one's deeds are evil, as a basis for condemnation, but also the necessity of coming to the light of truth "that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." Why is this so? Jesus plainly answers this question in the Sermon on the Mount when He declared:
"Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity." (Matt. 7:21-23)
The question revolves around doing the "will of the Father." There is no question but that doing charitable deeds for one's fellow human beings in need is a part of God's plan. Do these acts override basic truth formulated as evidence of commitment to the redemption in Christ Jesus? If we say a certain one is a Christian because of charitable deeds using those deeds as the evidence, then are there not other conclusions which can be drawn? If an individual in their devotion to Mary engages in acts of charity, does it follow that that one is a Christian, and thus the basis for acceptance as a fellow member of the "body of Christ"? The answer is No. If engagement in spiritualistic idolatry negates the Christian status, then is baptism contrary to the Scriptures exempt?
Since we cannot judge the heart, and since all judgment is reserved unto Jesus Christ because He is a Son of man (John 5:27), our judgment of what constitutes entrance into the "body of Christ" and thus common fellowship must rest on the Word of God alone. That Word says - "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body." (I Cor. 12:13) To be baptized is to be immersed in water. This is the will of God as revealed in His Word.
This subtle analogy by Kinnamon that is being used to advance the
ecumenical movement has been carried further in Adventist thinking. The
Columbian Union Visitor (June 1, 1995, p. 6) published an article captioned - "Is the Pope a Christian?" The author was Mitchell Tyner, associate general counsel for the General Conference. The objective of the article is given in a footnote - "The Visitor asked Attorney Tyner to write about the relationship between Adventist Christians and Roman Catholics."
After illustrating certain suppositions to support a premise that "if the Pope and I descended from the same Father, that makes us brothers who should not go around making personal attacks on each other." The attacks of which Tyner was writing were not spelled out beyond, "derogatory things," but can be assumed to be that the Pope was called the anti-christ, and advocates un-American concepts, such as the union of Church and State. While Tyner noted his disagreement with certain Catholic teachings, he concluded his article by stating - "I give them the benefit of the doubt on the issue of sincerity, no matter the breadth of our disagreement. After all, the Pope and I are brothers."
Since when did truth turn on the question of sincerity. Were not the prophets of Baal sincere? What has happened to the Elijahs of the last days?
After receiving a copy of the article, I wrote to Attorney Tyner. Noting
the reason for my letter - his article in the Visitor, I told him that I was "amazed at its contents and conclusion coming from an ordained minister and employee of the Seventh-day Adventist Church at its highest level." I told him that - - - "Theologically it cannot be sustained. When man
Page 5
sinned, he chose another 'father.' Only those who receive the Word made flesh are given the authority to become sons of God (John 1:12), and thus brothers in and of Him. The rest remain children of disobedience. Even Jesus in addressing certain religious leaders of His day, declared them to be of their 'father the devil.' (John 8:44)
"Prophetically, the picture is even more acute. The Pope in the continuum
of the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 ever has its roots in the "non-descript
beast" or Paganism. Paul declares him to be 'that Wicked' one, 'he in whom
all iniquity has as it were fixed its abode.' (See Thayer on anomos,
p. 48) His coming is after 'the working of Satan.' (II Thess. 2:8-9)
"By God's grace, the Pope is not my brother. If he is your brother, then who is your father?"
A REMARKABLE WEEK OF PRAYER
While the rest of the world was distracted by the pope's travels, rumors about the future of an
acquitted killer, and assorted earthquakes, hurricanes, and cease-fires, something extra-ordinary was happening here in Angwin. A Catholic was speaking for the week of prayer.
Brennan Manning is more than simply a Roman Catholic. He is an ex-priest and a recovering alcoholic. As far as anyone remembers, he is the first "non-Adventist" to be invited to take the pulpit for this special week. It may be a sign of PUC's spiritual maturity that we recognize him as a deeply committed brother in Christ. Manning likes to say - in the idiom of the
old-time Southern Christians - "I was seized by the power of a great affection."
His message here at PUC is the one he preaches everywhere: "The love of Christ is beyond all knowledge, beyond anything that we can intellectualize or imagine. It is not a mild benevolence but a consuming fire. Jesus is so unbearably forgiving, so infinitely patient and so unendingly loving, that he provides us with the resources we need to live lives of gracious response."
Some Seventh-day Adventist students will be stunned by this message, we predict. But Manning expects everyone, even believers, to be staggered by the gift of God's unconditional love. (The Campus Chronicle, Vol. 72, #2, p. 15)
E & C T - 1
After the document - "Evangelicals and Catholics Together" - was released
in March 29, 1994, it was met with withering attack from various Evangelical
leaders as a betrayal of basic positions which have marked the Evangelical
Community in its perception of Roman Catholicism, and the Community's
defense of cardinal Protestant doctrines. Now a book - Evangelicals & Catholics Together - was released by Word Publishers last year which not only seeks to defend the document itself, but also can be considered as a reply to the critics in the Evangelical Community.
The book, edited by Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus, the principals in initiating the original document, constitutes a series of essays written by leading Evangelicals, and recognized Roman Catholics. Colson and Neuhaus jointly prepare an introduction which is dated May 1995. The full text of the document follows with the listing of all the participants who joined Colson and Neuhaus in formulating the document, plus the names of all those who endorsed the document. Colson writes the first essay, and Neuhaus the last. Two Evangelicals write essays - J.I. Packer, Sangwoo Youtong Chee Professor of Theology at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia, and Mark Noll McManis, Professor of Christian Thought at Wheaton College. The two Roman Catholic writers are Avery Dulles, S. J., and Laurence J. McGinley Professor of Religion at Fordham University, and George Weigel, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.
In his Essay, "Crosscurrents among Evangelicals," J. I. Packer quickly comes to the issues of the conflict. In a subsection, "ECT Under Evangelical Fire," Packer lists seven concepts of faith which identify Evangelicals, and specific criticisms leveled by Evangelicals against the ECT document. These criticisms can be listed as follows:
1) The brotherhood between Evangelicals and Roman Catholics as proclaimed by the document is in error.
2) The question of the infallible Word of God when Catholicism has an added authority, the magisterium.
3) Is justification through faith alone, or can this be watered down to fit the Roman Catholic
Page 6
pronouncements of the Council of Trent.
4) The question of what constitutes conversion.
5) Can true spiritual growth be found in both communities.
6) The issue of proselytizing.
Neuhaus in the final essay also replies to the critics. One criticism is of telling interest. What Neuhaus has written on this point must be quoted in full so that nothing is lost:
"There are theologically serious critics who believe that ECT did not
attend sufficiently to the distinctives of Reformation Christianity. This
essay is in large part a response to those concerns. There has been little
theological criticism of the ECT from the Catholic side. The most obvious
reason for this is that Catholics are accustomed to ecumenical engagement
with other Christians, and such engagements hold no fears. By contrast, and
for perfectly understandable reasons - some of which will be addressed in
this essay - ecumenical is for many evangelicals a highly suspect term.
"As one evangelical critic put it to me, 'Our worry is about the third and hidden
'c.' By that he meant that ECT talks about 'convergence and cooperation' between evangelicals and Catholics, but the worry is that behind such talk is another 'c' - conversion. That worry, I am told is not alleviated by the fact that one of the main participants in ECT is an evangelical Lutheran who became a Roman Catholic." (p. 179)
That "evangelical Lutheran" turned Roman Catholic is none other than Neuhaus himself. He is very articulate, well read, and brilliant. If the "critic" to whom he referred in the above quotes had fear of the other "c" from reading the document, ECT, his fears will be
crystallized when he reads the essay by Neuhaus.
It is our objective in succeeding issues of WWN, to discuss the reply made to the critics by both Packer and Neuhaus as well as note certain salient observations in the other essays. What has been written in these essays should be of deep concern to anyone who is aware of the ecumenical thrust on the part of Rome. Further, we need to recognize that some of these issues are not pleasant to face, and the points made will require serious thought to refute. It is no longer "child's play" in the impending confrontation.
LET'S TALK IT OVER
It seems that the discussion of the Godhead has become the all consuming topic of certain "independent" ministries. This past weekend, I received an unsigned one page, professedly a Bible study, on confessing Christ. In noting its contents carefully, it became obvious that it was the work of a novice. Such wild assertions as - "To confess that Jesus is 'the anointed one' (the Christ) will cause you to be put out of the organized church" - are to be found on the page.
Another pronouncement is made that "Christ was the Son before He was sent
into this world." This is only a half truth. Yes, if the decree of the
"counsel of peace" is recognized as the promise of what was to occur at
Bethlehem. What if you do not believe it as this novice has stated it? "If
you do not, you are an anti-Christ." (The writer's emphasis) A text is given - I John 2:22. This text reads - "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? (Messiah, "anointed One") He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."
Let us note how John uses these terms. The Son is Jesus Christ (I John 1:7) Jesus did not become Jesus until Bethlehem (Matt. 1:21). He was "anointed" at His baptism (Acts 10:37-38). John in his epistles as well as in his gospel, begins with the eternal Word. (Compare I John 1:1 and John 1:1; the Word, the Logos) Wherever in the writings of John, the term "Son" is used, it always refers to the incarnate Jesus Christ, never to the pre-existent Eternal Logos.
The novice cites Hebrews 1:6 which uses the phrase, "firstbegotten into the world." The Greek is prototokon, and is used by Paul elsewhere as in Col. 1:18, where Christ is declared to be "the firstborn (prototokos) from the dead." The Scriptures note others who were raised from the dead prior to Jesus. What is the emphasis? Let Paul speak - "That in all things, He might have the preeminence." Thus the "first begotten" coming into the world is a statement of preeminence - He was the second Adam, the new head of the redeemed race.
Well did Paul write of such novices - "Ye have need that one teach
you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are
become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that
useth milk is un-skillful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe."
(Heb. 5:12-13)
Page 7
NEWS AND COMMENTS
On November 30, 1995, the Queen of England, supreme head of the Church of England (Anglican) made a bold gesture of ecumenism by attending a full Roman Catholic service for the first time. It is also believed to be the first time a British monarch has officially attended a Roman Catholic service since 1689. The vesper service marked the centenary of Westminster Cathedral. No mass was said. However, in his address Cardinal Basil Hume, Archbishop of
Westminster, said - recalling the Queen's receiving at Buckingham Palace, Pope John Paul II - "That was for us the healing of many ancient wounds and we were so grateful for that." He considered her presence at the centenary service "a further affirmation of the place we Catholics have in the nation." The Queen's attendance was not without protest. Outside the Cathedral about 500 protesters heckled the Queen with cries of "Betrayal." (ENI Bulletin 95-0502)
~~~~
When the 1888 Message Newsletter for November-December, 1995, came
to my desk, I observed two things: 1) An Ode to the Virgin Mary written by
Robert J. Wieland (p. 4); and 2) An action to add a member of the General
Conference to the 1888 Message Study Committee Board of Directors (p. 1).
I thought the ode a bit strange but decided to pass over it without comment,
until I received a call from Maryland. The caller asked if I had seen the
Newsletter, and inquired of what I thought about the adoration of Mary. He expressed his reaction in the form of a question - "When is Wieland going to start saying, 'Hail Mary's' and introduce his conferences with Franz Schubert's 'Ave Maria'?" He said it better than I could have. On the second point, can one ever perceive of the Apostles in the Upper Room following Pentecost, suggesting that a committee be appointed to find a member of the Sanhedrin to meet with the 12 in official business, or in any other way?
~~~~
A Roman Catholic monk has been installed at a Church of England cathedral. Dom Dominic Miroy of Ampleforth Abbey is the new prior of Chester Cathedral. The Dean of Chester, Stephen Smalley, commented - "We saw it as a wonderful way of building ecumenical bridges. We prayed together and confessed our sin of disunity." So high is ecumenism on the agenda at Chester that Dom Dominic, who is the former headmaster of the Benedictines' Ampleforth College, will be invited to teach at the cathedral. (ENI Bulletin, 95-0501)
|