#ive written so many things ive never published jesus christ | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

christianmarkchristian · 6 years

Text

N A K E D in H O L L Y W O O D

my autobiography, to be published daily or weekly, AS IT IS WRITTEN.

BEYOND SELF PUBLISHING: this is a 100% OPEN BOOK PROJECT

-where I publish (share) AS (not after) I write, allowing readers to experience not just an autobiography but the experience of WRITING the autobiograpy as well.

on TUMBLR will be the BOOK in progress and eventualy, finished.

on FACEBOOK will be daily or weekly chapters/installments.

____________________________________________________________

PART 1

WHY WRITE AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY? Of course, its about the life of Christian Mark Christian but I intend to go into deeper themes as well:

1. God. If you are averse to God or Judaeo-Christian concepts about God, I hope you will not be “put off” by occasional references I will have to make in the course of remembering my life. My plan is not to be IN YOUR FACE about God but spiritual seeking has always been a huge part of my life and to omit this part would be to make the whole story a big lie.

2. VALUE - how we value our lives and our identity is critical to me and my development as a man. There is a fine line between thinking we are “so great that someone needs to write a book about us” and “our lives dont matter.” I have struggled GREATLY my whole life with feelings that my life isnt important, that I dont matter, that Ive been rejected and abandoned. Writing this will be the greatest therapy I can imagine. Writing this is telling myself, reminding myself, that I AM IMPORTANT and SO ARE YOU.

3. Autobiography in the age of Interactivity. I’m not sure how many projects like this have been published online or in print but the thought occured to me that an autobiography can be, for the first time in history, more than a “book;” it can be an interactive EXPERIENCE. I can include links in my writing that take the reder to the places I am referencing.

4. “To know is to love.” Honestly one thing that has always frustrated and disappointed me is that I feel like many or even MOST people “dont get me.”

Too often I hear the word “weird” to describe me, when I would prefer to hear “unique” or “unusual.” I really am not even a fan of the word “eccentric.”

Was Steve Jobs “weird?” Was Van Gogh “weird.”? Is Elon Musk “weird?”

My feeling is that “weird” is considered a negative connotation or description, one I do not want and one that is hurtful when used to describe me. I dont feel like anyone who really knows me would ever call me “weird.” So,one huge function of this book is to eradicate the word “weird” as a description of Christian Mark Christian, once and for all and replace it with UNIQUE or RARE.

Yeah, through no choice of my own, I’ve endured some things that are not typical of most lives.

My dad’s suicide and that, co-inciding with the loss, at the same time, (divorce) of my Step-Dad.

Millions have lost a Dad or a step dad through divorce or suicide but not as many have suffered both losses in the same year.

Genius level IQ at age 7.

Grew up around the world.

Shared a 2-bedroom apartment with my Mom, until I got married at age 44.

Living with my ex-wife in an apartment in Hollywood, in an effort to heal and reconcile.

Yeah-these are not typical of todays American “man”. I’m not “proud” of these things; nor am I ashamed of these things; I never planned on my life going the way it did.

Regardless-when I became a Christian, at age 36,when I was “Born again,” I Iearned that God (if you choose to believe) “makes all things new” and “uses everything-even negative things, for eventual and ultimate good.”

Regardless of the pain and tragedy I’d experienced, I was taught that it would all be used in a positive way, in time.

Maybe this BOOK is that “positive way.” Maybe some who can relate will get a degree of emotional healing by reading; thats certainly my hope.

But “to know is to Love.” I feel confident that many of my friends, in reading this book, will get to know me much better and in that, will be able to love me more. And who doesnt want to be loved.... and loved some more?

____________________________________________________________

part I

I was a second and final son, born seven years after my brother, into a USAF family, in Altus, Oklahoma. WWII was far enough behind but had left scars on my pilot Dad's psyche.

James (Jim) Charles Ralph, my Dad, dreamed of being an artist/illustrator for Foote, Cone & Belding, a top advertising agency. His creative dreams were cut short when the US let go of an isolationist foreign policy, geared up for war and he was drafted as a 19 year old, into the skies over his ancestral homeland (Germany.)

As I understand it, Pearl Harbor "woke" us to the need to become involved again in foreign wars. Isolationist foreign policy would become a relic of the past; we quickly entered a war on several continents.

Dad had grown up in Glendale, CA. a suburb that has since become a major Armenian cultural enclave in L.A. Ironic that I sit here typing this around eighty years later--a few miles west in another little enclave (part of Hollywood) officially called "Little Armenia." It really shows me that the themes and threads and patterns of life are stronger than we might think. In my case, I’ve been told that the Apple hasnt fallen far from the tree.”

Armenia was, historically, the first place in the world where the name "Christian" was used to denote a follower of Christ. My primary care physician is Armenian and I am friends with several Armenians, so there seems to be a connection here, maybe one that will be explored in more depth as I write this...

-or maybe not.

The marriage was tempestuous. Jim, returning from the war and stationed at McDill AFB in Tampa, was driving a convertible and, the story goes, saw my Mom, Terry-a pretty young teen who modeled fashions for a local Department store. He was a handsome "flyer" or "Airman" and she fell for him, unaware of a Church background that would eventually drive a wedge between her his family.

My paternal Grandmother, Carolyn Care, was a devout "Christian Scientist” as my Aunt still is, at age 90-something.

She would insist that my Mom, who was a typical American mainstream Protestant Christian, submit to her and the Churches doctrine. "Science" is about the idea that all things are merely the projection of "mind" and that evil or sickness cant exist unless we agree with it and "project" it (wrongful thinking) on ourselves. I always questioned this growing up. Even at a young age, I sensed something about it I had trouble with. Later, as an adult who accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior through various “Word of Faith” ministries, I saw that there was at least partial truths in “Science” even though I still could not follow Mary Baker Eddy’s doctrine in it’s entirety.

Apparently, several months pregnant with me, my Mom contracted pnuemonia or a similar ailment. Carolyn insisted that Terry not see the physician at the Altus Air Force base hospital but turn to a "Christian Science" practitioner instead. Rebelling finally, my Mom went to see the doctor at the base. He supposedly told her that, had she waited even another day, she might have lost the baby (me.)

Only a few years later, at a Base in San Antonio, Texas, the troubled marriage fell apart with my Mom falling in love with my Pediatrician. I had asthma, most likely something that was brought on by the stress of my parents troubled marriage and she routinely brought me to see him at the base. Regardless of whether I chose to make these things a focus or no

t, they did shape who I choose to be today. I was raised from age 6-7 to 18, by a Pediatrician step-Dad (with my Mom) but my Paternal families Christian Science also had a strong influence on my thinking.

It was an incredible duality and one I'm doubtful that many (or any?) others have experienced: a parental control and influence struggle between the ideals of Big pharm/modern medicine and "christian science," between the medical establishment and the "alternative healing" movements that originated in Christian metaphysical camps in19th century America.

Today, Health Care is probably the biggest debate in America. And the debate rages around the same two poles- alternative healing vs traditional medicine. Having deep experiential knowledge of both, puts me in a very unique position. Seeking, finding and practicing right doctrine ("righteousness") is central to my life and you can see why: wrong doctrine might have aborted me before I was born. RIght doctrine might have saved my life. The truth about God, his Love and his healing power, is not just "armchair theology" or something I engage in on special Holidays; its always at the core of every decision I make, every day of my life.

PART II

After surviving my Moms sickness and coming into this world as "Mark James Ralph," my first memory of infancy comes from our two story home in Cambridge, UK. where we moved when I was about 2?

My Dad was stationed at Alconbury AFB, about 25 miles away from Cambridge. I actually remember climbing out of my 2nd floor crib and crawling down the stairs, into the living area where my parents and 8 or 9 yr old brother were gathered!

Eventually I started walking and my best friend, a Brit, Andrew lived across the street.

We lived near open land where some Cows lived. I remember a Harvester machine that was called a “Combine” for some reason that I dont know. I guess seeing it up close-the machinery, the complexity, the sheer power. The blades and the wheat being “threshed”. -All biblical themes, impressed me greatly...

We lived in a suburb of Cambridge, near some farmland and near a stand of trees called "the woods."

My first "naked" (sexual) experiences were in Cambridge. I saw a male cow on the other side of the fence I was standing by, attempting to mate, jump up on top of a female cow. I was only a few feet away, on the other side of the fence--what the male cow did was so sudden, so unexpected and seemed -I dont have the word for it- not "brutal" (because it was "love" but invloved thousands of pounds of weight and muscle that could have killed a small child had I been involved!) but maybe just “alarming.” I was only about 4 or 5.

Now I’m going to bring up some very personal, private things that most people only reveal to their therapist. They may or may not end up in the final edit however I feel obligated, because of the name of the book-obligated to include them here...

I also initiated a "curious" childhood intimate encounter with Andrew in my bathroom at that time. I mention this only to bring up the topic of gay indocrination. I have no idea why, to this day but this "gay" encounter did not result in my growing up gay.

A few years later, in Wichita Falls, Texas, I initiated another "curious" encounter with a girl my age. We knelt down beside the wheel well of a car in the parking lot of our Apt complex, "TheTimbers" in the dark, at night, where I lifted her skirt to investigate her private parts.

She seemed to go along with it; at least there were no protests, as there had been none with Andrew. Apparently, I preferred the "female" more than the male because I never again had a sexual encounter with a male. Interesting that I remember Andrews name but not the girls name! Is this kind of thing just wired into our DNA? I think so.

I'm not sure what this says about the "born gay" issue but there it is... The result (I think) of these encounters, was this: even as a very young child, I had strong sexual urges which I had no trouble acting on when the opportunity arose. I dont remember sexual feelings ever becoming obsessive ( a good thing) but they were for sure there.

On another note, I remember walking off with Andrew (I think) into the local "woods." Woods is a cool name that has returned as the Church (M O S A I C) I attend locally uses the word in place of "Hollywood." They have several Campuses and use the term "The Woods" for the Hollywood Campus.

Andrew and I apparently, around age 4-5? decided to go on a hike into the woods one day, without telling anyone. My parents (not sure about his) were pretty upset. When I returned, they were happy I was safe. I never did anything so "adventurous" again. I think that was because I didnt want my parents to be so stressed.

I also remember a somewhat traumatic event around the time I was in my crib: my brother had caught a minnow, in a local stream. He had kept it in a jar aqaurium placed on my windowsill. The disturbing thing was that the fish jumped out of its "cage" (the jar) one day and out the window, falling two stories to its death on the concrete (or something hard) surface below.

By age 4 or 5, I had already seen and/or experienced both sex and death. Hollywood, here I (decades later) came.

Part III

Ahhh, England. I have such fond memories of the years I spent there as a child-truly formative years and I am so deeply thankful that my formative years were spent there. To my best recollection, I spent my 2nd, 3rd and 4th years in Cambridge.

When I began to speak (at a precocious young age) I spoke with an English accent. I remember my Mom dropping me off at "Shrubbery School" for the first time and the fear of abandonment I felt.I remember my first teacher, a wonderful Lady named "Mrs Clark" and how I related that to a candy bar that existed around that time, known as a "Clark Bar."

My Mom dropped my off in our English Sports car-I think it was red, a "Sunbeam Alpine." That car was shipped all the way to Texas eventually and my Mom kept it even through her divorcing my Dad. Cambridge was rich with experience and wonder. I cant imagine a more perfect place for my early years and it left a deep appreciation for Brits in my soul, still there to this day. I would go so far as to even call myself an "Anglophile."

At school, we memorized the multiplication tables and began to learn the alphabet-at age 4! When we moved to San Antonio, TX, -when I was five-the school system there wanted to place me in Kindergarten!

Thank god for the Mt Olive Lutheran School (off the 410 "loop") -where my parents eventually enrolled me. They were still not as advanced as Shrubbery School back in Cambridge, did but at least a better option than public schools.

My mind is flooded with lush beautiful imagery from Cambridge:

-my Mom riding horseback in the countryside with her Horse riding club

(and how later that might have played a factor in two girls I was attracted to and a novel "Diana" that affected me deeply in my teens)

-My brother Christopher playing "conker" with Chestnuts tied to sholeaces! (only the brits would devise a game like this!)

-My brother relating a Jaguar or some other sports car "flying" by his school at some increditble speed. The drama and awe with which he related this formed in me an early apprecation for fast cars,one which has continued to this day.

The "punts" on the Cam river and the gorgeous Colleges in Cambridge, that all seemed to be named after Jesus or Mary!

When I hear Christians acting as though the intellect isnt important now, I cringe. Cambridge was the birthplace of intellectualism and Christian thought. C.S. Lewis lived and worked there. Christianity is the most advanced culture of philosophy and Academic systems. The fact that atheism largely eradicated these roots in the 20th Century is a very sad thing indeed and something I hope my life can be part of reversing. For Centuries, being a Christian and being an intellectual, a thinker, were synonomous. While I appreciate experiential knowledge and mysticism, lets not throw out suc a glorious inheritance so easily.

."http://histclo.com/country/eng/pe/pe60johnsc.html

NOTES for more stories to come: 1. B-day in St Tropez, the large round tray of raosted nuts, possible topless female sunbathers. The back seat of the VW bug, winding through the mountains in South of France, then LifeCycling through the area as an adult working out "Spinning" Berchtesgarden, the Bus, the rock thrown down the cliff into the forest, the rock that broke something...My brother and the Jaguar going 100. Shrubbery School, the rubbish can, "conquer" nut game with chestnuts. My brothers weird hobby of using sewing kits to lower things out hotel windows, then later doing the same to recover bottle caps in San Antonio. The possibility of this project being a catalyst for restoring my relationship with my brother and even step-Dad. How God restores family. The "punts" on the river Cam, Wimpy Burges and Brits eating burgers with knife and fork. How I envisined "the states" and in my mind saw a Giant "steak. The pass-through window-a first architectural design feature. My first bike, how I copied Andrew and the bike had front wheel brakes, how we'd ride around the block. Snow, and my first snowman, snowball fights.going w my family into some woods where my Dad chopped down a Christmas tree. First Christmas's. Alconbury AFB, the hangar. I was impressed and it made my Dad look so cool. I felt bad that he had to drive 25 miles, that seemed so far. Our trips to London. FIsh & Chips. Sightseeing, the trains. The White cliffs of Dover. My favorite TV show about the creatures that lived on the banks fo the river.

Highlights of a life well and not so well, lived:

Lived in or visited: the UK, Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium, Texas, MS, NorCal, FLA, DC, Virginia, West VA, New Orleans, AZ, New Mexico, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, France. HIGHLIGHTS:

Celebrated my 4th B-day in the South of France. Crossed the English Channel age, 12 on a Hover craft

Visited (Hitler’s lair in Berchtesgarden) age 4.

Visited Monticello (Jefferson’s home) age 4

Crossed the Atlantic in a commercial Airliner several times, aged 4-14.

Skied in the Swiss Alps and Lake Tahoe, age 10-12.

Lived in a Penthouse on the Rhine river, age 11-12.

Rode the train from Wiesbaden to Stuttgart, Germany age 12.

Visited Castles on the Rhine river, age 11-13.

Flew, as 10 yr old passenger, in a small Cessna, from San Diego to Tampa.

Rode or drove from the South or Texas, to CA, several times age 10-30’s.

Crossed the Pacific (Hawaii) as an adult.Vacationed in Maui, Palm Springs, Santa Barbara, Switzerland, The Netherlands, London, Paris.

Attended several F1 “Grand Prix” races around Europe and Long Beach, CA and Autosports events, age 8-12, Around America. Won several non-pro autosports trophies, age 20-22. Won #1 Singles (Tennis) MVP Trophy in High School, age 18.

Got to State Finals on HS Tennis team age 18.

Won several 1st place ribbons in Biloxi, MS Art Shows, age 17.

Was offered Art Scholarship to Ole Miss University, age 18.

Paid $5000 to write a Greek Comedy movie script (Middle Age)

Twice paid $5000 to paint oil portraits (Middle Age)

Starred in a Prime Time major News Network Reality Show (one episode) (Middle Age)

Enjoyed hundreds of hikes in Griffith Park and other local trails. (Middle Age)

Had two jobs as live-in Private Chef in a $1.5M luxury Homes (Middle Age) in the Hills, in L.A.

Was hired by Ben Affleck, given my own trailer and worked on an Oscar winning film (ARGO, as on-camera hand double/sketch artist) Middle Age. As a visionary: saw self driving cars, in 2002, mobile hands free phones in 1995, “Gravity” script, in the 1980’s, MTV music videos, at age 12, years before MTV, the Hyperloop in 1995. Written 12 feature film “spec” scripts (Young-Middle Age) Married 11 years, divorced and re-established financial trust with my ex wife, now close friends and writing partners with her. Have experienced total melt-down/destruction of a marriage and the total rebuilding of that friendship. Have been friends with a few celebs. (actors, singers) Partied in Hollywood clubs and luxury homes, all over Los Angeles, hundreds of times. 25--Middle age Attended numerous Pop Music or Rock concerts at almost every venue all over Los Angeles. Age 12-Middle Age Interviewed on a West L.A. Sound stage, along with 5 of my paintings, for a SHOWTIME 35 mm film doc on Marilyn Monroe that Premiered at the Palm Springs Int. Film Festival, age-30’sAttended the Premiere of that Film, in Palm Springs, where I enjoyed minor, fleeting celebrity status.My art appeared once, in PEOPLE magazine.

30’sI enjoyed backstage at a MOODY BLUES concert at Universal Amphitheater.

20’sI had a Publicist for my Art -30’s.

I’ve had front-row box seats at the Hollywood Bowl. Middle AgeI

met the Great-grandson of the founder of Hollywood. Middle age

I’ve visited or worked on, every major studio lot in Los Angeles and Hollywood. Young-Middle AgeI’ve enjoyed beaches in Maui, Los Angeles, Northern California, Mississippi, Florida and The Netherlands. 4-Middle Age I attempted to surf in Malibu. 20’s Been to Art Museums all over the world, including numerous visits to the Getty in Brentwood. 4-Middle Age Helped my architect brother flip homes many times in Los Angeles. 20’sDesigned many residences as an Architecture student/aspiring architect, in High School. Designed and contracted a hip, post-modern Silver Lake Laundry to Bathroom conversion, in budget. Middle Age Enjoyed hundreds of great shoulder/full body/foot massages Young-Middle age Swam in secluded pools on Maui -Middle AgeHad amazing revelatory spiritual experiences as a Christian 20’s-Middle Age. Attended/Worshipped Jesus at almost 20 different Church locations all over Los Angeles over 1000 times since 1993. Studied every major religion in depth 20’s-Middle Age. Sold almost 200 original paintings. 20’s Middle Age Had several one-man shows at Cacao, a popular West L.A. Coffee shop, owned by the Designer of iconic BigFoot Lodge in Atwater Village. 30’sCurated several group shows at Cacao. 30’s Participated in several ground breaking group show/parties at the infamous Black Cat Gallery in Mar Vista. Middle Age Been paid as: Photographer, Designer, Contractor, Writer, Musician, Oil Portraitist, Organizer and Chef. 12-Middle Age Worked on almost 200 professional movie, TV or commercial sets in a variety of positions. Middle Age Written, Directed and Produced several low budget short films and/or videos. Middle Age Created authentic food from many international cuisines. 30’s Middle Age Enjoyed about $5000-$10,000 in the finest restaurant cuisine in L.A., New Orleans, Germany, the Netherlands and France. 4-Middle age Briefly co-owned, with my then-wife, a catering company which catered several events. Middle Age Briefly co-owned, with a friend, a failed Hollywood event company. Middle Age.

0 notes

colin777-world · 7 years

Text

The Prophesied End-Times Army of Women OCTOBER 16, 2017 BY MONICA DENNINGTON The Monday Heart-Check! (Watch today’s 8-minute message!) . The Prophesied End-Times Army of Women (Transcript)

There are many prophecies in the Bible that tell us about the end times, and that period of time right before Jesus Christ returns. Some of those prophecies, we’re very familiar with. the But the exciting thing about living in the last generation is the fact that, just as in Jesus’ generation, there are going to be some prophecies in the Bible about the end-times that we haven’t ever recognized before.

Just as in Jesus’ time, when he was fulfilling many of the prophecies that the Pharisees and the Jewish people were familiar with about the Messiah, he was also bringing into view and fulfilling prophecies about the Messiah that nobody noticed before.

Like the prophecy about the suffering servant, and the fact that by his stripes we would be healed, and by his wounds our transgressions would be forgiven.

So in addition to the prophecies that we are all excited to see fulfilled — like the appearance of the two witnesses in Revelation — there are also going to be prophecies in the Scriptures that we never noticed before. But as they come into view and jump off of the pages into real life, we’ll begin to recognize them as speaking about events and people in the end-times.

One of these passages is found in Psalms 68, verse 11, and it says:

“The Lord announced the word, and great was the company of those who proclaim it: ‘Kings and armies flee in haste; in the camps, men divide the plunder.’”

[Caption: Psalm 68:11-12 (NIV)]

At first glance, reading out of this particular translation, this may not seem to be clearly an end-times prophecy.

But as we look at this verse in some other translations, and take a closer look at the Hebrew, we’re going to find that there’s a lot more there that meets the eye.

First of all, the NET Bible says:

“The Lord announced the word, many many women spread the good news.”

[Caption: Psalm 68:11-12 (NET)]

The Amplified version (AMP) says:

“The Lord gives the word [of power]; the women who bear and publish [the news] are a great host.”

[Caption: Psalm 68:11-12 (AMP)]

And the NASB says:

“The Lord gives the command; the women who proclaim the good tidings are a great host…”.

[Caption: Psalm 68:11-12 (NASB)]

Why is there such a difference in these translations? The NET translation notes explain this. They say:

“The Hebrew is ‘the one spreading the good news [are] a large army’. The participle translated ‘the ones spreading the good news’ is a feminine plural form…”

So a person who knows Hebrew, that’s reading Hebrew, is going to immediately see that this passage is talking about a large group of women.

It is only through the translation process that this has been clouded, and its only now being revealed to us and brought to our attention in these end-times.

And understanding that this group of people is a group of women, now we are going to look at two Hebrew words in that verse that tell us more about this group of women, and what exactly they will be doing.

First, the word that is translated “many many women” or “a great host of women” is the word “tsaba”. This word means:

1. that which goes forth, army, war, warfare, host

(a) army, host

i. host (of organized army)

ii. host (of angels)

iii. of sun, moon, and stars

iv. of whole creation

(b) war, warfare, service, go out to war

~ mass pf persons…especially organized for war (an army); by implication, a campaign…(+) army, (+) battle, company, host, service, soldiers, waiting upon, war(-fare).

So understand that there is no doubt about the nature of this group of women.

We’re not talking about a group of women who get together in a stadium to have a women’s conference.

We’re talking about, literally, an army— a campaign of women who go out before the Lord, proclaiming the Word of power that the Lord has spoken.

And indeed the New Living Translations says:

“The Lord gives the word, and a great army brings the good news.”

How do we know this is an end times event that we’re talking about?

First of all, because we see that though Psalms 68 does talk about events of the past, it is also looking toward a future—when the King and His procession come into view, and he goes up onto his holy hill. As it says,

“Your procession has come into view, oh God, the procession of my God and King into the sanctuary. In front are the singers, after them the musicians; with them are the maidens playing tambourines. Praise God in the great congregation; praise the LORD in the assembly of Israel.”

[Caption: Psalm 68:24-26 (NIV)]

So this is pointing to the time when Jesus will return, and as God, he will take his place also as King in Jerusalem.

In fact, this entire passage is a portrait of the return of Christ, and how he will march forward in power, defeat his enemies, crush their heads, and march in victory in that procession up to his holy hill.

This is a future event that has not yet happened.

Second of all, we also know that throughout human history, the history of the Bible, and the history of the Church, though we have seen a few bright shining stars of strong women leaders and prophets that God has raised up in order to proclaim his Word of power, we have never in human history yet seen a formidable army of women that go forth in a campaign to publish and preach his Word.

And indeed that is exactly what our second Hebrew word is going to tell us about this verse, because the word that is translated “to proclaim” or “to pronounce” the word of the Lord is the word “basar”. It means:

1. to bear news, bear tidings, publish, preach, show forth

(a) to announce (salvation) as good news, preach

i. to announce (glad news):

~messenger, preach, publish, shew forth, (bear, bring, carry, preach, good, tell good) tidings.

So ladies and gentlemen, whether or not it fits into your doctrine, this is the Word of the Lord.

It is written. It cannot be changed.

This is a prophecy about an army of women who are going to be marching forth in power, specifically to publish and to preach the good news of Jesus Christ.

That’s right — an end-times army of women preachers, and we are coming.

So if you have been called to be part of this end-times army — to give the testimony of Christ before men, to go and proclaim that Word to the world — then the Lord is here to give you this word today:

Your place in history has been prophesied, and he is now calling you to step up to the bat.

And yes, all the armies of hell are going to come against you. That river of lies is going to be coming out of the dragon’s mouth to try to overwhelm the woman. [Caption: Revelation 12:15-16 (NET)]

Satan is going to tell you that God wants you to shut up—that you cannot speak to men. That you cannot proclaim the testimony of Jesus Christ before men because you are a woman.

But this passage tells you that there will be an army of women.

And it also tells you what the fate of all of those who try to come against that army will be.

In verse 17 it says,

“The chariots of God are tens of thousands and thousands of thousands; the Lord has come from Sinai into his sanctuary…Surely God will crush the heads of his enemies, the hairy crowns of those who go on in their sins. The Lord says, ‘I will bring them from Bashan; I will bring them from the depths of the sea, that you may plunge your feet in the blood of your foes, while the tongues of your dogs have their share.’”

[Caption: Psalm 68:17, 21-23 (NIV)]

So ladies, if God has called you to proclaim his Word, you cannot march in fear.

You must march in power; you must march according to the orders that have been given to you in this Scripture.

And if you are a person who thinks it is your job to come against these women, you will be counted as one of these enemies, and your fate will be the same.

This is a prophesied event that is happening in your hearing and in your view— right now before Jesus comes back.

If the Lord is calling you to become a part of this army, the only correct answer is, “Yes Sir!”.

And if you are not a woman called to be a part of this army, the only right action is to support them with all of your funding, with all of your words, and with everything that is in you.

Because the Word of power that they are proclaiming is not their own.

It is the Word of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is returning soon.

Let those who fear the word of the Lord praise God’s Word in the sanctuary.

And let those who have an ear, hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.

________________________________________

“As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work.”

0 notes

jacques2493-blog · 7 years

Text

www.philippekacou.org

Kacou 8: Comparison between Darby and Louis Segond 1 I want to make a comparison between Darby and Louis Segond. Since 2002, when I began to preach the revelation on the Bible, some cunning pastors and prophets, being in contact with the Message, have started to recommend Darby in their churches instead of accepting the Message. Yet, they can change bibles and doctrines, but they cannot change the most important thing which is the spirit of divination which they call holy spirit and which will send them to hell. You see? 2 And since 2003, hundreds of pages have been sent on the Internet around the world. And we see more and more pastors, prophets and evangelists with Darby Bibles. They have put down their big fetish pots Louis Segond, Scofield, Thompson and King James... 3 Also, I believe that, some demons of divination that we cast out here can go and reveal it to them in order to blur the source. Some also see that what I preach is the truth but by accepting, what will it cost them? ... Remember Matthew 8:28-34, Jesus had delivered two fathers of families who were returning to their homes. It should have been a celebration in the honour of the Lord Jesus-Christ, but when people saw that it had cost them a herd of pigs, they did not want it, they chased the Lord Jesus away... 4 Well. There are many truths but only one is the Truth, there are many gods but only one is the true God. There are many churches but only one is the true Church. There are many holy spirits but only one is the true Holy Spirit. There are many versions of the Bible but only one is the true Bible. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 5 Know that on this point of the Message, a great contradiction is thrown on earth. They will tell me: "What about those who do not have the Darby Bible in their language?" You see? Do not be afraid! I do not want to take the Bible away from you. For 1500 years, your fathers had no Bible but they lived Christianity better than you. 6 And those who publish the Darby version, instead of seeking to translate it into other languages, they seek how to revise it. All those who corrected versions in history were powerful preachers, filled with the Spirit. Not a group of scholars but only one person. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. Know that ancient Hebrew is no longer spoken and it is the most difficult language ever, with no vowel but I think that they can translate the Darby version into other languages like, one day also, this Message will be translated into other languages that I do not understand. You see? That's what they should do. Anyway, I do not believe in any revision. The evolution of languages requires explanatory notes at the foot of page, and not a revision. Languages will always evolve. 7 Thus, according to the grace that has been granted to me, I consider now that, from this ministry of Matthew 25:6 and of Revelation 12:14, owning a Bible version that the Spirit condemns is an act of rebellion. And also having the Darby version that I have recommended and staying away from what God is doing here does not change anything. There is no Salvation except in what God is doing here. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 8 Well. Let's come to the comparison. In Isaiah 35:8-9, it is the way that is holy and not the road. In Judges 17:1-5, it is question of gods, that is to say idols, and not the Almighty God. Read up to Judges 18:23-24 where Louis Segond acknowledges that it is question of "gods" that is to say idols. In Exodus 32:4, Louis Segond acknowledges that a golden calf is a god and in 1 Kings 12:28, Louis Segond writes "God" with “G” in capital letter while it is question of golden calves. 9 In Ezekiel 2:1; Ezekiel 3:1 and in Ezekiel 4:1... It is question of "son of man", that is to say Prophet not "The son of man" which refers to Jesus Christ, the Supreme Prophet as in Matthew 16:13. Also, in Ezekiel 3:12 and 14 as in Revelation 14:13, it is question of the Spirit of God and therefore capital "S" like in Ezekiel 8:3. 10 I continue. In Genesis 1:2; in 1 Samuel 16:4; in Isaiah 61:1 ... The letter "S" must be in capital letter when it is question of the Almighty God. Yet, the real reason why Louis Segond writes "the [s]pirit" of God with small "s" is that, for him, there is a good spirit of God and an evil spirit of God. I do not believe in that doctrine. And that is revealed in 1 Samuel 18:10. Louis Segond says: "... the evil spirit of God came upon Saul." while Darby says: "... an evil spirit from Jehovah was upon Saul.". Louis Segond says: “the evil spirit of God…” whereas Darby says: “an evil spirit from God…”. It is not the same thing. It is the same with 1 Samuel 19:9. 11 In Matthew 24:24, "C" of false christs must be in small letter because it is not the true Holy Spirit but spirits of divination that would act as holy spirit. So, it must be written "false christs" with small “c” and not "false Christs” with capital “C”. 12 Now in Revelation 1:4, it is question of "Spirits" with capital “S” because it is the Holy Spirit in seven dispensations but Louis Segond writes it with small “s”. 13 There is withdrawal of "firstborn son" in Matthew 1: 25 to say that Mary did not have other children after the Lord Jesus-Christ. It is on purpose that they did all these things for doctrinal reasons. 14 The small letters in christ and in the lord Jesus especially in the New Testament ... is in line with the Greek language which does not allow capital letters except when the word takes the sense of a proper noun. 15 In Matthew 4:10 ... do homage is the literal translation of the Greek word proskïneo. 16 In Revelation 1:20, it is question of seven lamps, that is to say, a candlestick and not seven candlesticks which give forty-nine lamps; the same for Revelation 11:4. 17 In John 17:11: it is "I come to Thee" and not "I go to Thee" for the Father is in Him; likewise in verse 12, it is question of "Thy name which Thou hast given Me". 18 In Daniel 5:25, Louis Segond does not mention the writing that was written on the wall, that is to say: "Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin!". Keep in mind that: Upharsin is the plural of Pérès. 19 In Daniel 9:25-27, there is a confusion in the translation on "the 70 weeks of Daniel" like Micah 1:10-15 that Louis Segond had trouble translating. Darby says in Micah 1:10:" ... at Beth-le-aphrah roll thyself in the dust." Louis Segond says: "...I roll in the dust at Beth-Leaphra." You see? It is different! One says: “… roll thyself in the dust” and this one says: “…I roll myself in the dust…”. 20 In Matthew 24: 28, it is question of "eagles" and not "vultures". It's also worth specifying that the Louis Segond versions do not have the same content ... The translator not being able to understand all the languages of the earth, a man with the Spirit of God should translate for example Darby into Portuguese and Spanish, ... for the most important [thing] is that it should be done in the language of the messenger and by the grace of God, it is done. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 21 In Revelation 1:10, it is question of “day”, that is to say Sunday and not “day” which refers to the prophetic day which is a thousand years. And yet, the Millennium alone is one thousand years. 22 In Genesis 4:15, it is the killer of Cain who will be punished seven times and not Cain who will be avenged seven times. Darby writes this: "And Jehovah said to him, Therefore, whoever slayeth Cain, he shall be punished sevenfold ..." Louis Segond says: "Jehovah said to him: If someone killed Cain, Cain would be avenged seven times ...". It is not the same thing. And in Genesis 4:23-24, the theologian Lemech interpreted it in his favor in order to shed blood like his great-grandfather Cain. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 23 Well. Matthew 11: 23: "Hades" is not necessarily "the dwelling place of the dead" because there is on the one hand the Hades which is the place of torments and on the other hand the bosom of Abraham. 24 In Hebrews 13:17, Louis Segond says: "Obey them that rule over you and submit to them, for they watch OVER your souls ...". But the true Bible says that there is only one who watches OVER our souls and also OVER the souls of our leaders and it is God! [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. So the true translation is not who watches OVER your souls but who watches FOR your souls. 25 1 Corinthians 11:15 ends with a full stop and not a question mark, to conclude that the long hair is the veil of the woman. And the committees which revised Louis Segond acknowledged that. 26 In Romans 16:1 it is not question of "deaconess" but "servant". Verse 2 shows it. This woman was in aid of the saints, that is what she did. 27 Revelation 12:18 is part of the first paragraph of chapter 13 and it is not: "It stood" but "I stood..." because it is not question of the dragon but John. 28 The same work on Louis Segond has also been done for the King James, Ostervald, David Martin versions and many others because each of these versions reigns over a place of the world. There are some countries where, even among the evangelicals, Louis Segond is unknown. Satan has done a substantive work and people do not know it. You see? 29 Similarly, Louis Segond has undergone many revisions, which has never been the case of Darby. And yet, we know that it is because the thing is not good that it is revised. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. Also, the committees of revision did not keep the paragraphs that are in the Hebrew and Greek originals. And a multitude of verses has been added for harmony. 30 I point out that the Scofield and Thompson versions are by-products, derivatives of the Louis Segond version. With regards to the King James Version, that is to say King James, when King James IV of Scotland was on the throne of England under the name of James I, he asked the fifty-four best interpreters of London, both pagan and religious, to make a translation that bears his name, a way to win the favour of Christians. It is like giving to the whole world an excellent translation of the Bible called: Fidel Castro Version or even Emperor Bokassa I version. And yet, all these things are the work of theology. 31 Take Louis Segond for example, the first element of contradiction is: "Louis Segond, doctor of Theology" on the first page of this bible. Accepting that is to accept theology because if I know that fetishism is not good, how can I read a bible translated by a fetish priest and having on its front page: "Zérédji Translation, great fetish priest" even if it is well done? At this level, at least, I praise the evangelicals and the Protestants because, condemning the Catholics, they do not use the Tob bible. The evangelicals and theologians will stand at the judgment to condemn the Branhamists. You see? The Branhamists want to show to mankind that the worthless tree of theology that William Branham condemned can produce very good fruits like the Louis Segond Bible. And they will answer for that before God. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 32 If a member of those churches does not know why these Louis Segond, King James bibles and others are of the devil, I beg you to explain it to him carefully starting with theology to get to the comparisons of verses. But if a Branhamist, a son of Belial argues against this Message, it is due to ill faith or pride, if not he is a sorcerer because he cannot say that he does not understand ... [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 33 With regards to the divisions of the Bible into chapters and verses, first, in the 9th century, the Masoretes (Jewish rabbis and scholars) inserted some figures in the margins of the scrolls of the Old Testament leaving paragraphs compact, complete and intact. Then, in the 13th century, two people: a cardinal named Hugo and an English archbishop named Langton divided the first translations into chapters. It was in 1520 that Sanctès Pagnin had placed some figures in the margin of his Latin translation like in the Hebrew scrolls after the example of the Darby Version, with no distinction of indented lines. 34 But in 1551, Robert Estienne, in his English translation of the New Testament published in Geneva, did it like Louis Segond, breaking up the text into verses and each verse into indented lines, destroying thus the paragraphs of the Hebrew and Greek scrolls. Robert Estienne did it for his publication of the Vulgate published in 1555. And this diabolical system was first adopted by the clergy of France and the major evangelical movements of the time. Therefore by Darby, we know that Revelation 12:18 is the first verse of Revelation 13. Revelation 12:18 says this: “And I stood upon the sand of the sea”; and Revelation 13:1 says: “and I saw a beast rising out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and upon its horns ten diadems, and upon its heads names of blasphemy". And in Darby, the asterisks mark the beginnings of the chapters of the Hebrew originals. Thus, Genesis 2:4 is the beginning of chapter 2 of Genesis and it is the case of the entire Bible. You see that Genesis 2:1 says: "Thus were finished ...". And you see that it is the beginning of the conclusion of chapter 1 ... 35 According to history, John Nelson Darby was born in London in 1800 to an Irish father. He is of Irish origin like William Branham and Columban. After strong studies of law at the University of Dublin in Ireland, he finishes as a lawyer before giving up the bar to follow the Lord. Like John Wesley in 1725, he was a small deacon of the Anglican church in 1825 then pastor the following year in the region of Wicklow in Ireland before resigning after several disagreements with his superiors. After the intense studies of law, the only thing that Darby studied, it is languages so much so that he spoke Hebrew and Greek like his mother tongue. 36 Studying languages is not theology! [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 37 Thereafter, his friend John Gifford Bellet, also a lawyer, joined him. From then on, leaned solely upon the Holy Spirit, Darby begins to preach in the villages and countrysides of Ireland, across Europe, Asia and America, condemning the organisation of the church, the presidency of the church by man, luxury and theology and demonstrating already that "Jesus Christ is the Jehovah of the Old Testament", calling all the churches to come back to the foundation of the Apostles and the prophets. Darby spoke English, French, Hebrew, Greek, German and Italian. He translated the New and the Old Testament around 1859 before the one that Louis Segond translated at the request of the Company of Pastors of Geneva. 38 The Darby version thus surpassed the one of King James that King James requested that they made in his name, and which was made in 1611, a version which had reigned over two centuries and which was the replication of that of William Tyndale. 39 And speaking of the King James version, King James himself had approved 47 scholars, powerful interpreters to whom must be added a certain number of Jewish rabbis who had the best manuscripts and the whole divided into three big groups. A group at Cambridge University, another group at Oxford University, and the last group at Westminster. And each group was also divided into two small groups. Six groups in all. The first group finished and passed the work to the second group which passed it to the next group ... and despite that, there were fourteen corrections before the first publication of King James in 1611. And yet, each of them mastered Hebrew more than any Jew. 40 And it was reported that one of the translators of King James was so skilled in all languages, mainly those of the East, that if he had been present at the confusion of languages at the time of the tower of Babel, he could have served as an interpreter. And the great-great-grandfather of such a man was a builder of the tower of Babel and now his great-grand-son is a builder of a new tower of Babel called "King James bible" in this Eden of Satan. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 41 But the providence of God made that Darby, only one man, rose up on behalf of God to translate the Bible. Does the Almighty God need fifty-four scholars to translate the Bible? Does God deal with the clever? ... 42 The Darby version also surpassed the one of the powerful theologian Ostervald which is from a revision of the philosopher and theologian David Martin at the request of the synod of Walloon churches on the bible of Lemaistre de Sacy. I discovered in 2005, that John Nelson Darby had gone further in the interpretation of the mysteries of the Bible, indicating already in the 19th century that the 24 elders around the throne were the whole of the 12 Apostles and the 12 Patriarchs, and that Genesis 1:27 does not apply to angels. 43 The only Bible on the earth which imposed itself and which has never been retouched or revised even by its author and which has never been a replication and which is not a translation from another version is the one of the lawyer John Nelson Darby. It is such a Bible that is needed for a Message of restitution. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 44 And I had the revelation that it is the Bible of the Bride in this end of times before having these pieces of information. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 45 John Nelson Darby died on April 29, 1882 and these are his last words:" God be blessed, I do not believe I have anything to withdraw, and very little to add. I have nothing to add except my sincere gratitude and thankful affection for Him." (Letter of March 19th, 1882). May these words also be mine at the end of this Message and may I be granted as well as you who have believed, the laurels of victory and we rest upon that! [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. I have said what I have seen and what God has commanded me to say like Moses, Paul and all the prophets before me ... I have been called in a supernatural way and I have served like them, if they enter, we will also enter [Ed: the congregation says, “Amen!”]. 46 Now, know that the Bible comes from ancient manuscripts. The three best-known manuscripts that gather the canon, the totality of the recognized books of the Old and New Testament are: the Sinaiticus discovered in the 4th century in the monastery of Saint Catherine of Mount Sinai. It contains the Old and New Testament in full; today this manuscript is preserved in the British Museum of London. Then comes the Alexandrinus discovered in the 5th century in Alexandria in Egypt, it contains the Old and the New Testament and mysteriously, the New Testament starts from Matthew 25:6. That is found in the bible encyclopaedia of Frank Reisdorf-Reece. For us, it is not a coincidence. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. Then in 3rd place, the Vaticanus, of an unknown origin, without value, this manuscript does not contain 1 and 2 Timothy, Philemon, Titus and Revelation. It is preserved in the Vatican. 47 We consider that this manuscript assigned to Africans and starting with Matthew 25: 6 is a prophetic sign. Here is a report of theologians according to the same encyclopedia, on the same page. It is written: "The first Protestant version was the one of Olivetan (1535). It was corrected by John Calvin (1550) and later by Theodore de Bèze and edited by Cornelius Bertram (Geneva 1588). Since then, it has been revised by David Martin (1707) and by Jean-Frédéric Ostervald. All these versions are replaced today by those of Louis Segond (Geneva 1874, Oxford 1880), the one called Synodal (revised in 1926), and the one that we consider the most faithful to the original text, the one of John Nelson Darby". Amen! Did you get that? I read this last sentence again: “…the one that we consider the most faithful to the original text, the one of John Nelson Darby” [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. But how then? You know that the Darby version is more faithful to the original texts and you leave it to go and use the King James versions, the Scofield, Thompson versions, and so on…? I do not understand! But me, I prefer the most faithful version even if it is hard to understand. 48 Look at the King James version for example, it was translated by a group and yet God cannot deal with a group but with only one person! And there were revisions and revisions and revisions. And a complete revision of King James took place in 1881. Before the midnight Cry, all that was not known but now that is known, do not reason! Receive that as a commandment of God. Amen! 49 God said in Matthew 25:6 and Revelation 12:14 that a short Message will come to carry the elect far from the face of the serpent: far from these Catholic, Protestant, evangelical and Branhamist churches, including all the so-called revealed or restored churches... far from the holy spirit that acts in these churches. ... Far from these Cain, Tommy Osborn, Ushe Praise, Morris Cerullo, Yonggi Cho! Far from these Joel Osteen, T.D. Jakes, Doug Batchelor, Billy Graham, Edir Macedo, Valdemiro Santiago, Silas Malafaia, Paula White, Joyce Meyer and Chris Oyakhilome! Far from these David Owuor, Emmanuel Makandiwa, Uebert Angel, T. B. Joshua, David Oyedepo, Alberto Mottesi, Claudio Freidzon, and Dante Gebel! Far from these Benny Hinn, Manasseh Jordan, Jesse Jackson, John Hagee, Pat Robertson, Joaquim Gonçalves, Donald Parnell, Alejandro Bullón and Guillermo Maldonado. Sorcerers and magicians under Joel 2:28 and 1 Corinthians 2:4-5. Far from the Next Generation Alliance. Far from Carlos Annacondia, Paul Ayoh, Benjamin Boni, Jean-Baptiste Nielbien, Bernard Agré, ... Far from these so-called Christian bookstores and media, ... Far from these unions and federations of churches, ... Far from these fetish pots that you call Louis Segond, King James, Tob, Scofield, Thompson bibles ... Far from these prophets that travel through the earth and, it is this Message which is the two wings of the great eagle of Revelation 12:14 and which must carry the elect to the desert far from the face of the serpent. Stay away from them! For there is no Salvation outside of this Message. Recognize the day and its Message! They are sorcerers and magicians under Joel 2:28 and 1 Corinthians 2:4-5. [Ed: The congregation says, “Amen!”]. 50 Let's bow our heads! You who are here for the first time, after hearing this Message, is there someone who believes entirely and who would like to accept It? ... If that is the case, let him simply raise his hand ... You must do it freely because our wish is not that God transforms crabs into fish! If He does it, it will be good, but there will be a lot of fish here, but fish with behaviours of crabs and we will have all kinds of problems... If someone says: “I will buy a Darby Bible but I will remain in my Catholic, Protestant, evangelical or Branhamist church, leave him! You see? It is a crab. But what God is looking for this morning, they are fish, they are the elect. Amen! Does anyone want to accept this Message this morning? [Ed: Someone raises his hand] Brother, may God bless you! Yes, Brother there! Sister, God also bless you there ... Keep your hands raised while I pray for you! May God bless you there! May God also bless you there... 51 Lord Jesus Christ, You my Lord and my Saviour. I pray that in this commitment, You support their faith! Their decision will be tried by the devil and we will not be there to support them but we recommend them to your divine grace! And as we finish this morning's service. I commit every brother and every sister into your hands so that, separated from body, we may always be united in the same Spirit and in the same faith, far from sin until we meet again! Lord Jesus-Christ, make us strong and give us victory over sin and over the devil and may the honour, the glory and the magnificence be to You forever and ever, Amen!

0 notes

whatisonthemoonarchive · 7 years

Text

'MANY COUPLES WERE SPLIT UP BY THE UC/FFWPU. LOYALTY HAD TO BE TO ONE PERSON, MOON

"She left me ... because her church, the Roman Catholic church, told her to." '

Loyalty to Moon or the Pope?

'The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.' Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, 'Cities Petrus Bertanous'

'The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the Pope* has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth.' Quoted in the New York Catechism. https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=258966

'The Catholic Church itself promotes mind control. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the idea of freedom of religion is wrong. Religious belief is said to be “outside the realm of free private judgment,” which means that people are not supposed to use their own personal judgment to determine their religious beliefs. According to Canon Law (the official laws governing the Roman Catholic Church), Catholics are required to submit their minds and wills to any declaration concerning faith or morals which is made by the Pope or by a church council. They are also required to avoid anything that disagrees with such declarations.

The Catholic Church teaches that only the Magisterium of the Catholic Church (the Pope and the bishops in communion with him) has the right to interpret Scripture. People are not allowed to interpret Scripture for themselves. They are supposed to rely entirely on Catholic Church authorities. Catholics are supposed to “receive with docility” any directives given to them by Catholic Church authorities. The Catholic Church also teaches that when the bishops officially teach doctrine relating to faith and morals, then God supernaturally prevents them from making any errors. This is called “infallibility.” It applies to official councils, such as the Second Vatican Council. It also applies to other teachings, as long as the bishops and the Pope are in agreement about them.

In addition to all this, the Pope is said to be infallible whenever he makes an official decree on matters of faith and morals. According to Catholic doctrine, it is impossible for the Pope to teach false doctrine. Catholics are expected to obey the Pope without question even when he is not making an “infallible” statement about doctrine. They are expected to submit their wills and minds to the Pope without question.' https://www.raptureforums.com/forums/threads/a-former-nun-speaks-candidly-about-pope-francis-deception-and-mind-control-in-the-catholic-church.112180/

'One strange prescription of Romanism which puzzles not only Protestants but Roman Catholics too, is the necessity of auricular confession to a priest in order to obtain forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation. A Roman Catholic, says his Church, must, in order to obtain peace with God, declare all his sinful actions, omissions and his most secret thoughts and desires, specifying minutely the kinds of sins committed, the number of times and all the circumstances which might alter the gravity of a sin. A murderer is obliged to declare his crimes, a young girl her most intimate thoughts and desires and a child the least little mischiefs of his innocent life. What happens when women are commanded, under penalty of eternal damnation, to confess to a man their deepest sexual thoughts and sins? A Roman Catholic wife will have to disclose to the priest the most intimate relations of her marital life. The priest will know more about the wife than the husband. There are no more family secrets because Rome has required that hearts and souls should be fully explored by priests. In this manner, Romanism controls the whole intimate lives of married couples. Roman Catholics, whether they feel that they ought to admit it or not, are forced into submission to Romanism through the process of torturing auricular confession.

The real reason behind this Roman prescription of obligatory confession of sins to a priest, is to keep all Roman Catholics under constant submission and authority of the priests of Rome. Confession, in the Church of Rome, keeps individuals under control and its leaders can exercise a most effective authority over the penitents.' I WAS A PRIEST By Jean Lucien Vinet http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/IWasaPriest.htm

Pope or Moon?

………………………..

* '494 A.D.: Gelasius, Bishop of Rome, 'There are two authorities by which the world is governed-- The PONTIFICAL AND THE ROYAL, the sacerdotal order being that which has charge of the sacraments of life, and from it must be sought salvation. Hence in Divine things it becomes kings to bow the neck to priests, especially to the head of priests, whom Christ's own voice has set over the universal Church.'

533 A.D. The Emperor Justinian decreed the Bishop of Rome, '...head of all the holy Churches and of all the holy priests of God.'

590 A.D. The ascension of Gregory the Great.

607 A.D. The Emperor Phocas declared the Roman pontiff, Boniface III, head over all the churches of Christendom, and even of Constantinople. At this time as well, the last of the ten 'Roman' kingdoms, the Anglo-Saxons and the Lombards 'gave in their formal submission to the religious supremacy of Papal Rome.' For nearly a thousand years, after this point, the 10 primary powers of Europe gave their allegiance to the Pope of Rome, as if to Christ Himself!

1073 A.D. Pope Gregory VII claimed authority and temporal power over kings, and succeeded in removing the German emperor Henry IV from the throne, replacing him with another.

1198 A.D. Innocent III brought the power of the Pope to new heights. 'He excommunicated Sweno, king of Norway; threatened the king of Hungary to alter the succession; put the kingdom of Castile under an interdict; and when Philip Augustus of France refused at his bidding to take back his repudiated wife, Innocent did not hesitate to punish the whole nation by putting France also under the same dreaded penalty, until her king humbly submitted to the Pope's behest. King John of England and Philip II of Aragon were both constrained to resign their kingdoms and receive them back as spiritual fiefs from the Roman pontiff, who claimed also the right to decide the election of the emperors of Germany by his confirmation or veto.' (Romanism and the Reformation, H.Grattan Guinness. N.J.: OFPM, 1967. p.14. -- from the Second edition, 1891.)

1294 A.D. Boniface VIII declared that the Pope represents God upon Earth. 'In the summary of things concerning the dignity, authority, and infallibility of the Pope, set forth by Boniface VIII, are these words: "The pope is of so great dignity and excellence, that he is not merely man, but as if God, and the vicar of God. The pope alone is called the most holy,... Divine monarch, and supreme emperor, and king of kings... The pope is of so great dignity and power, that he constitutes one and the same tribunal with Christ, so that whatsoever the pope does seems to proceed from the mouth of God. ...The pope is as God on earth."' (Romanism and the Reformation, H.Grattan Guinness, p. 16)

'All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.' On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17

Father A. Pereira says: 'It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII.'

These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: 'To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical.'

Writers on the Canon Law say, 'The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth.' Barclay Cap. XXVII, p. 218. Cities Petrus Bertrandus, Pius V. - Cardinal Cusa supports his statement.

Pope Nicholas I declared: 'the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man.' Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can. 7, Satis evidentur, Decret Gratian Primer Para

'We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894

'The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.' Catholic National, July 1895

1964 AD -- 'The pope's power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power.

Bishops, therefore, with their helpers, the priests and deacons, have taken up the service of the community, presiding in place of God over the flock…

...bishops by divine institution have succeeded to the place of the apostles, as shepherds of the Church, and he who hears them, hears Christ, and he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ.

...bishops in an eminent and visible way sustain the roles of Christ Himself as Teacher, Shepherd and High Priest, and that they act in His person.

In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.

And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office. And therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly styled irreformable and therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment.' from the DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH LUMEN GENTIUM SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964' ' http://historicism.com/tour/tour3.htm

0 notes

revdanno-blog · 8 years

Text

‘NEVER PERISH’ by JC RYLE

Never Perish

J. C. Ryle (1816-1900)

"They shall never perish."--John 10:28

__________________________

First published by Drummond's Tract Depot, Stirling, Scotland

There are two points in religion on which the teaching of the Bible is very plain and distinct. One of these points is the fearful danger of the ungodly; the other is the perfect safety of the righteous. One is the happiness of those who are converted; the other is the misery of those who are unconverted. One is the blessedness of being in the way to heaven; the other is the wretchedness of being in the way to hell.

I hold it to be of the utmost importance that these two points should be constantly impressed on the minds of professing Christians. I believe that the exceeding privileges of the children of God, and the deadly peril of the children of the world, should be continually set forth in the clearest colors before the Church of Christ. I believe that the difference between the man in Christ, and the man not in Christ, can never be stated too strongly and too fully. Reserve on this subject is a positive injury to the souls of men. Wherever such reserve is practiced, the careless will not be aroused, believers will not be established, and the cause of God will receive damage.

Reader, perhaps you are not aware what a vast store of comfortable truths the Bible contains for the peculiar benefit of real Christians. There is a spiritual treasure house in the Word which many may never enter, and some eyes have not so much as seen. There you will find many a golden verity besides the old first principles of repentance, faith and conversion. There you will see in glorious array the everlasting election of the saints in Christ,—the special love wherewith God loved them before the foundation of the world,—their mystical union with their risen Head in heaven, and His consequent sympathy with them,—their interest in the perpetual intercession of Jesus, their High Priest,—their liberty of daily communion with Father and the Son,—their full assurance of hope,—their perseverance to the end. These are some of the precious things laid up in Scripture for those who love God: these are truths which some neglect from ignorance. Like the Spaniards in California, they know not the rich mines beneath their feet. These are truths which some neglect from false humility. They look at them afar off with fear and trembling, but dare not touch them. But these are truths which God has given for our learning, and which you and I are bound to study. It is impossible to neglect them without inflicting injury upon ourselves.

It is to one special truth in the list of a believer's privileges that I now desire to direct your attention this day. That truth is the doctrine of perseverance, —the doctrine that true Christians shall never perish or be cast away. It is a truth which the natural heart has bitterly opposed in every age. It is a truth which for many reasons deserves particular attention at the present time. Above all, it is a truth with which the happiness of all God's children is most closely connected.

There are four things which I propose to do in considering the subjects of perseverance.

I. I will explain what the doctrine of perseverance means.

II. I will show the Scriptural grounds on which the doctrine is built.

III. I will point out some reasons why many reject the doctrine.

IV. I will mention some reasons why the doctrine is of great practical importance.

I approach the subject with diffidence, because I know it is one on which holy men do not see alike. But God is my witness, that in writing this tract, I have no desire to promote any but of Scriptural truth. In pleading for perseverance, I can say with a good conscience that I firmly believe I am pleading for an important part of the Gospel of Christ. May God the Spirit guide both writer and reader into all truth! May that blessed day soon come when all shall know the Lord perfectly, and differences and divisions pass away for ever!

I. I will first explain what I mean by the doctrine of perseverance.

It is of the utmost importance to make this point clear. It is the very foundation of the subject. It lies at the threshold of the whole argument. In all discussions of disputed points in theology, it is impossible to be too accurate in defining terms. Half the abuse which has unhappily been poured on perseverance, has arisen from a thorough misunderstanding of the doctrine in question. Its adversaries have fought with phantoms of their own creation, and spent their strength in beating the air.

When I speak of the doctrine of perseverance, I mean this. I say that the Bible teaches that true Christians shall persevere in their religion to the end of their lives. They shall never perish. They shall never be lost. They shall never be cast away. Once in Christ, they shall always be in Christ. Once made children of God by adoption and grace, they shall never cease to be His children and become children of the devil. Once endued with the grace of the Spirit, that grace shall never be taken from them. Once pardoned and forgiven, they shall never be deprived of their pardon. Once joined to Christ by living faith, their union shall never be broken off. Once called by God into the narrow way that leads to life, they shall never be allowed to fall into hell. In a word, every man, woman and child on earth that receives saving grace, shall sooner or later receive eternal glory. Every soul that is once justified and washed in Christ's blood, shall be found safe at Christ's right hand in the day of judgment.

Reader, such statements as this sound tremendously strong. I know that well. But I am not going to leave the subject here: I must dwell upon it a little longer. I desire to clear the doctrine I am defending from the cloud of misrepresentation by which many darken it. I want you to see it in its own proper dress,—not as it is portrayed by the hand of ignorance and prejudice, but as it is set forth in the Scripture of truth.

Perseverance is a doctrine with which the ungodly and worldly have nothing to do. It does not belong to that vast multitude who have neither knowledge, nor thought, nor faith, nor fear, nor anything else of Christianity except the name. It is not true of them, that they will "never perish." On the contrary, except they repent, they will come to a miserable end.

Perseverance is a doctrine with which hypocrites and false professors have nothing to do. It does not belong to those unhappy people whose religion consists in talk, and words, and a form of godliness, while their hearts are destitute of the grace of the Spirit. It is not true of them, that they will "never perish." On the contrary, except they repent, they will he lost for ever.[1]

Perseverance is the peculiar privilege of real, true, spiritual Christians. It belongs to the sheep of Christ who hear His voice and follow Him. It belongs to those who are washed, and justified, and sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God. It belongs to those who repent, and believe in Christ, and live holy lives. It belongs to those who have been born again, and converted, and made new creatures by the Holy Ghost. It belongs to those who are of a broken and contrite heart, and mind the things of the Spirit, and bring forth the fruits of the Spirit. It belongs to the elect of God, who cry to Him night and day. It belongs to those who know the Lord Jesus by experience, and have faith, and hope, and charity. It belongs to those who are fruit-bearing branches of the vine,— the wise virgins,—the light of the world,—the salt of the earth,—the heirs of the kingdom,—the followers of the Lamb. These are they whom the Bible calls the saints. And it is the saints and the saints alone of whom it is written, that they shall "never perish."[2]

Does any one suppose that what I am saying applies to none but eminent saints? Does any one think that people like apostles and prophets, and martyrs may perhaps persevere to the end, but that it cannot be said of the common sort of believers? Let him know that he is entirely mistaken. Let him know this privilege of perseverance belongs to the whole family of God,—to the youngest as well as the oldest,—to the weakest as well as the strongest,—to the babes in grace as well as to the old pillars of the Church. The least faith shall as certainly continue indestructible as the greatest. The least spark of grace shall prove as unquenchable as the most burning and shining light. Your faith may be very feeble, your grace may be very weak, our strength may be very small, you may feel that in spiritual things you are but a child. Yet fear not, neither be afraid. It is not on the quantity of a man's grace, but on the truth and genuineness of it that the promise turns. A farthing is as truly a current coin of the realm as a golden sovereign, though it is not so valuable. Wherever sin is truly repented of, and Christ is truly trusted, and holiness is truly followed, there is a work that shall never be overthrown. It shall stand when the earth and all the works thereof shall be burned up.

Reader, there are yet some things to be said about perseverance, to which I must request your special attention. Without them the account of the doctrine would be imperfect and incomplete. The mention of them may clear up some of the difficulties which surround the subject, and throw light on some points of Christian experience, which God's children find hard to understand.

Remember, then, that when I tell you believers shall persevere to the end, I do not for a moment say that they shall never fall into sin. They may fall sadly, foully, and shamefully, to the scandal of true religion, to the injury of their own deep and bitter sorrow. Noah once fell into drunkenness. Abraham twice said falsely that Sarah was only his sister. Jacob deceived his father Isaac. Moses spoke unadvisedly with his lips. David committed horrible adultery. Solomon lost his first love, and was led away by his many wives. Hezekiah forgot God, and boasted of his riches. Peter denied his Lord three times with an oath. The apostles all forsook Christ in the garden. All these are cases in point. They are all melancholy proofs that Christians may fall. But believers shall never fall totally, finally, and completely. They shall always rise again from their falls by repentance, and renew their walk with God. Though sorely humbled and cast down, they never entirely lose grace. The comfort of it they may lose, but not the being. Like the moon under an eclipse, their light is for a season turned into darkness; but they are not rejected and cast away. Like the trees in winter, they may show neither leaves nor fruit for a time; but the life is still in their roots. But they never perish.

Remember for another thing, that when I say believers shall persevere to the end, I do not mean that they shall have no doubts and fears about their own safety. So far from this being the case, the holiest men of God are sometimes sorely troubled by anxieties about their own spiritual condition. They see so much weakness in their own hearts, and find their practice come so short of their desires, that they are strongly tempted to doubt the reality of their own grace, and to fancy they are but hypocrites, and shall never reach Heaven at all. To be safe is one thing: to feel sure that we are safe is quite another. There are many true believers who never enjoy the full assurance of hope all their days. Their faith is so weak and their sense of sin so strong, that they never feel confident of their own interest in Christ. Many a time they could say with David, "I shall one day perish" (1 Sam. xxvii. 1); and with Job, "Where is my hope?" (Job xvii. 15.) The joy and peace in believing, which some feel, and the witness of the Spirit, which some experience, are things which some believers, whose faith is impossible to deny, never appear to attain. Called as they evidently are by the grace of God, they never seem to taste the full comfort of the calling. But they are perfectly safe, though they themselves refuse to know it.

" More happy, but not more secure,

The glorified spirits in heaven."

The full assurance of hope is not necessary to salvation. The absence of it is no argument against a man's perseverance to the end. That mighty master of theology, John Bunyan, knew well what he wrote when he told us that Despondency and Much-afraid got safe to the celestial city at last, as well as Mr. Valiant-for-the-truth. It is as true of the most doubting child of God, as it is of the strongest, that he shall "never perish." He may never feel it. But it is true?[3]

Remember, in the last place, that the certain perseverance of believers does not free them from the necessity of watching, praying, and using means, or make it needless to ply them with practical exhortations. So far from this being the case, it is just by the use of means that God enables them to continue in the faith. He draws them with the cords of a man. He uses warnings and conditional promises as part of the machinery by which He insures their final safety. The very fact that they despised the helps and ordinances which God has appointed, would be a plain proof that they had no grace at all and were on the road to destruction. St. Paul before his shipwreck had a special revelation from God, that he and all the ship's company should get safe to land. But it is a striking fact that he said to the soldiers, "Except the seamen abide in the ship ye cannot be saved." (Acts xxvii.31.) He knew that the end was insured, but believed also that it was an end to be reached by the use of certain means. The cautions, and conditional promises, and admonitions to believers, with which Scripture abounds, are all part of the Divine agency by which their perseverance is effected. An old writer says, "they do not imply that the saints can fall away: but they are preservatives to keep them from falling away." The man that thinks he can do without such cautions and despises them as legal, may well be suspected as an impostor, whose heart has never yet been renewed. The man who has been really taught by the Spirit will generally have a humble sense of his own weakness, and be thankful for anything which can quicken his conscience and keep him on his guard. They that persevere to the end are not dependent on any means, but still they are not independent of them. Their final salvation does not hang on their obedience to practical exhortations, but it is just in taking heed to such exhortations that they will always continue to the end. It is the diligent, the watchful, the prayerful and the humble to whom belongs the promise: "They shall never perish."

Reader, I have now given you an account of what I mean when I speak of the doctrine of perseverance. This, and this only, is the doctrine that I am prepared to defend in this tract. I ask you to weigh well what I have said, and to examine the statement I have made on every side. I believe it will stand inspection.

It will not do to tell us that this doctrine of perseverance has any tendency to encourage careless and ungodly living. Such a charge is utterly destitute of truth. It cannot justly be brought forward. I have not a word to say on behalf of any one who lives in wilful sin, however high his profession may be. He is deceiving himself. He has a lie in his hand. He has none of the marks of God's elect. The perseverance I plead for is not that of sinners, but of saints. It is not a perseverance in carnal and ungodly ways, but a perseverance in the way of faith and grace. Show me a man that deliberately lives an unholy life, and yet boasts that he is converted and shall never perish, and I say plainly, that I see nothing hopeful about him. He may know all mysteries, and speak with the tongue of angels, but so long as his life is unaltered he appears to me in the high road to hell.[4]

It will not do to tell us that this doctrine of perseverance, is merely a piece of Calvinism. Nothing is easier than to get up a prejudice against a truth, by giving it a bad name. Men deal with doctrines they do not like, much as Nero did when he persecuted the early Christians. They dress them up in a hideous garment and then hold them up to scorn and run them down. The perseverance of the saints is often treated in this manner. People stave it off by some sneering remark about Calvinism, or by some apocryphal old wives' fable about Oliver Cromwell's death-bed, and think they have settled the question.[5] Surely it would be more becoming to inquire whether perseverance was not taught in the Bible 1400 years before Calvin was born. The question to be decided is not whether the doctrine is Calvinistic, but whether it is scriptural. The words of Bishop Horsely deserve to be widely known. "Take especial care," he says, "before you aim your shafts at Calvinism, that you know what is Calvinism and what is not,—that in the mass of doctrine which it is of late become the fashion to abuse under the name of Calvinism, you can distinguish with certainty between that part of which is nothing better than Calvinism, and that which belongs to our common Christianity and the general faith of the reformed Churches,—lest, when you mean only to fall foul of Calvinism you should unwarily attack something more sacred and of a higher origin."

Last, but not least, it will not do to tell us that perseverance is not the doctrine of the Church of England. Whatever men please to say against it, this is an assertion at any rate, which they will find it hard to prove. Perseverance is taught in the seventeenth Article of the Church of England, clearly, plainly, unmistakably. It was the doctrine of the first Archbishops of Canterbury, Parker, Grindal, Whitgift, Bancroft, and Abbott. It was the doctrine preached by the judicious Hooker, as any one may see by reading his sermons.[6] It was the doctrine which all the leading divines of the Church of England maintained till the reign of Charles the First. The denial of the doctrine up to this time was hardly tolerated. More than one minister who called it in question was compelled to read a public recantation before the University of Cambridge. In short, till the time when Archbishop Laud came into power, perseverance was regarded in the Church of England as an acknowledged truth of the Gospel. Together with the popish leaven which Laud brought with him, there came the unhappy doctrine that true believers may fall away and perish. This is a simple matter of history. The perseverance of the saints is the old doctrine of the Church of England. The denial of it is the new.[7]

Reader, I feel that it is time to leave this branch of the subject and pass on. I want no clearer and no more distinct statement of perseverance than that contained in the seventeenth Article of my own Church, to which I have already referred. The article says of God's elect —"They which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by His Spirit working in due season: they through grace obey His calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of His only begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and, at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity." These are precisely the views which I maintain. This is the doctrine which I long ago subscribed. This is the truth which I believe it is my duty as a clergyman, to defend. This is the truth, which I now want you to receive and believe.[8]

II. I now proceed to show the Scriptural grounds on which the doctrine of perseverance is built.

I need hardly say that the Bible is the only test by which the truth of every religious doctrine can be tried. The words of the sixth Article of the Church of England deserve to be written in letters of gold: "Whatsoever is not read in the Holy Scripture, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an article of the faith." By that rule I am content to abide. I ask no man to believe the final perseverance of the saints, unless the doctrine can be proved of the Word of God. One plain verse of Scripture, to my mind, outweighs the most logical conclusions to which human reason can attain.

Reader, in bringing forward those texts of Scripture on which this tract is founded, I purposely abstain from quoting from the Old Testament. I do so, lest any should say that the Old Testament promises belong exclusively to the Jewish people as a nation, and are not available in a disputed question affecting individual believers. I do not admit the soundness of this argument, but I will not give any one the chance of using it. I find proofs in abundance in the New Testament, and to them I shall confine myself.

I shall write down the texts which appear to me to prove final perseverance, without note or comment. I will only ask you to observe as you read them, how deep and broad is the foundation on which the doctrine rests. Observe that it is not for any strength or goodness of their own that the saints shall continue to the end and never fall away. They are in themselves weak, and frail, and liable to fall like others. Their safety is based on the promise of God, which was never yet broken,—on the election of God, which cannot be in vain,—on the power of the great Mediator Christ Jesus, which is Almighty,—on the inward work of the Holy Ghost, which cannot be overthrown. I ask you to read the following texts carefully, and see whether it is not so.

"I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

"My Father, which gave them Me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." (John x. 28, 29.)

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

"As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

"Nay in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.

"For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

"Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom. viii. 35-39.)

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 John ii. 19.)

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." (John v. 24.)

"I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever." (John vi. 51.)

"Because I live, ye shall live also." (John xiv. 19.)

"Whosoever liveth and believeth in Me, shall never die." (John xi. 26.)

"By one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." (Heb. x. 14.)

"He that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." (1 John ii. 17.)

"Sin shall not have dominion over you." (Rom. vi. 14.)

"The very hairs of your head are all numbered." (Rom. vi. 14.)

"A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench." (Matt. xii.20.)

"Who shall also confirm you to the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. i. 8.)

"Kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time." (1 Peter i. 5.)

"Preserved in Jesus Christ, and called." (Jude 1.)

"The Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto His heavenly kingdom ." (2 Tim. iv. 18.)

"I pray God your whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

"Faithful is He that calleth you, who also will do it." (1 Thess. v. 23,24.)

"The Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep you from evil." (2 Thess. iii.3.)

"God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." (1 Cor.x. 13.)

"God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath;

"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us." (Heb.vi.17,18.)

"Fear not little flock; for it is your father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom." (Luke xii. 32.)

"This is the Father's will which hath sent Me, that of all which He hath given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day." (John vi. 39.)

"The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord Knoweth them that are His." (2 Tim. ii. 19)

"Whom He did predestinate, them that He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified." (Rom. viii. 30.)

"God hath not appointed us unto wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Thess.v. 9.)

"God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth." (2 Thess. ii. 13.)

"The vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory." (Rom. ix. 23.)

"The gifts and calling of God are without repentance." (Rom. 11. 29.)

"If it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Matt. xxiv. 24.)

"He is able to save to the uttermost all them that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever liveth to make intercession for them." (Heb. vii. 25.)

"Able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy." (Jude 24.)

"I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day." (2 Tim. i.12.)

"I have prayed for thee, That thy faith fail not." (Luke xxii. 32.)

"Holy Father, keep through Thine own name those whom Thou hast given Me." (John xvii. 11.)

"I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil." (John xvii. 15.)

"I will that day they also whom thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am." (John xvii. 24.)

"If, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life." (Rom. v.10.)

"The Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him; but ye know Him, for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." (John xiv. 17.)

"Being confident of this very thing, that He which begun a good work in you, will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." (Phil. i. 6.)

"The anointing which ye have received of Him abideth in you; and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in Him." (John ii. 27.)

"The Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption." (Ephes. iv. 30.)

"Ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession." (Ephes. i. 13, 14.)

"Born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible." (1 Peter i. 23.)

"He hath said, I will never leave thee nor forsake thee." (Heb. xiii. 5.)

Reader, I lay before you these forty-four texts of Scripture, and ask your serious attention to them. I repeat that I will make no comment on them. I had rather leave them to the honest common sense of all who read the Bible. Some of these texts, no doubt, bring out the doctrine of final perseverance more clearly than others. About the interpretation of some of them, men's judgments may differ widely. But there are not a few of the forty-four which appear to my mind so plain, that were I to invent words to conform my views, I should despair of inventing any that would convey my meaning so unmistakably.

I am far from saying that these texts are all the Scriptural evidence that might be brought forward. I am satisfied that the doctrine maintained in this tract might be confirmed by other arguments of great might and power.

I might point to the attributes of God's character revealed in the Bible, and show how His wisdom, unchangeableness, and power, and love, and glory are all involved in the perseverance of the saints. If the elect may finally perish, what becomes of God's counsel about them in eternity, and His doings for them in time?[9]

I might point to all the offices which the Lord Jesus fills, and show what discredit is thrown on His discharge of them, if any of His believing people can finally be lost.

What kind of Head would He be, if any of the members of His mystical body could be torn from Him? What kind of Shepherd would He be, if a single sheep of His flock was left behind in the wilderness? what kind of Physician would He be, if any patient under His hand were at length incurable? What kind of High Priest would He be, if any name once written on His heart were found wanting when He makes up His jewels? What kind of Husband would He be, if He and any soul once united to Him by faith were ever put asunder? [10]

Finally, I might point to the great fact that there is not a single example in all Scripture of any one of God's elect ever finally making shipwreck and going to hell. We read false prophets and hypocrites. We read of fruitless branches, stony ground, and thorny ground hearers, virgins without oil in their vessels, servants who bury their talents. We read of Balaam, and Lot's wife, and Saul, and Judas Iscariot, and Ananias and Sapphira, and Demas. We see their hollow characters. We are told of their end. They have no root. They are rotten at the heart. They endure for a while. They go at last to their own place. But there is not a single instance in the whole Bible of any one falling away who ever showed unquestionable evidences of grace. Men like Abraham, and Moses, and David, and Peter, and Paul always hold on their way. They may slip. They may fall for a season. But they never entirely depart from God. They never perish. Surely if the saints of God can be cast away, it is a curious and striking fact that the Bible should not have given us one single plain example of it.

But time and space would fail me if I were to enter into the field which I have just pointed out. I think it better to rest my case on the text which I have already given. The mind to which these texts carry no conviction, is not likely to be influenced by other arguments. To myself they appear, when taken altogether, to contain such an immense mass of evidence, that I dare not, as a Christian man, deny to be true. I dare not, because I feel at this rate I might dispute the truth of any doctrine in the Gospel. I feel that if I could explain away such plain texts as some of those I have quoted, I could explain away almost all the leading truths of Christianity.

Reader, I am quite aware that there are some texts and passages of Scripture which appear at first sight to teach a contrary doctrine to that which I maintain in this tract. I know that many attach great weight to these texts, and consider them to prove that the saints of God may perish and fall away. I can also say that I have examined these texts with attention, but have found in them no reason to alter my opinion on the subject of perseverance.[11] Their number is small. Their meaning is unquestionably more open to dispute than that of many of the forty-four I have quoted. They all of them admit of being interpreted so as not to contradict the doctrine of perseverance. I hold it to be an infallible rule in the exposition of Scripture, that when two texts seem to contradict one another, the less plain must give way to the more plain, and the weak must give way to the strong. That doctrine which reconciles most texts of Scripture is most likely to be right. That doctrine which makes most texts quarrel with one another is most likely to be wrong.

I ask you, if not convinced by all I have said hitherto, to put down the texts I have quoted on behalf of perseverance, and the texts commonly quoted against it, in two separate lists. Weigh them one against another. Judge them with fair and honest judgment. Which list contains the greatest number of positive, unmistakable assertions? Which list contains the greatest number of sentences which cannot be explained away? Which list is the strongest? Which list is the weakest? Which list is the most flexible? Which list is the most unbending? If it were possible in a world like this to have this question fairly tried by an unprejudiced, intelligent jury, I have not the least doubt which way the verdict would go. It is my own firm belief and conviction that the final perseverance of the saints is so deeply founded on Scriptural grounds, that so long as the Bible is the Judge, it cannot be overthrown.

III. The third thing I propose to do, is to point out the reasons why many reject the doctrine of perseverance.

It is impossible to deny that multitudes of professing Christians entirely disagree with the views expressed in this. I am quite aware that many regard them with abhorrence, as dangerous, enthusiastic, and fanatical, and lose no opportunity of warning people against them I am also aware that among those who hold that the saints of God may fall away and perish, are to be found many holy, self-denying, spiritually-minded persons, —persons at whose feet I would sit in Heaven, though I cannot approve of all their teaching upon earth.

This being the case, it becomes a matter of deep interest to find out, if we can, the reasons why the doctrine of perseverance is so often refused. How is it that the doctrine for which so much Scripture can be alleged, should be stoutly opposed? How is it that a doctrine which for the first hundred years of the Reformed Church of England it was hardly allowable to call in question, should now be so frequently rejected? What new views can have risen up in the last two centuries which make it necessary to discharge this good old servant of Christ? I am confident that such inquiries are of deep importance in the present day. There is far more in this question than appears at first sight. I am satisfied that I am not wasting time in endeavouring to throw a little light on the whole subject.

I desire to clear the way by conceding that many good persons refuse the doctrine of perseverance for no reason whatever excepting that it is too strong for them. There are vast numbers of true-hearted Christians just now who never seem able to bear anything strong. Their religious constitution appears so feeble, and their spiritual digestion so weak, that they must always be "fed with milk and not with meat." Talk to them strongly about grace, and they put you down as an Antinomian! Talk strongly about holiness, and you are thought legal! Speak strongly of election, and you are considered a narrow-minded Calvinist! Speak strongly about responsibility and free agency, and you are regarded as a low Arminian! In short, they can bear nothing strong of any kind or in any direction. Of course they cannot receive the doctrine of perseverance.

I leave these people alone. I am sorry for them. There are sadly too many of them in the Churches of Christ just now. I can only wish them better spiritual health, and less narrowness of views, and a quicker growth in spiritual knowledge. The persons I have in my mind's eye in this part of my tract are of a different class, and to them I now address myself.

(1) I believe one reason why many do not hold perseverance is their general ignorance of the whole system of Christianity. They have no clear idea of the nature, place, and proportion of the various doctrines which compose the Gospel. Its several truths have no definite position in their minds. Its general outline is not mapped out in their understandings. They have a vague notion that it is a right thing to belong to the Church of Christ, and to believe all the Articles of the Christian faith. They have a floating, misty idea that Christ has done certain things for them, and that they ought to do certain things for Him, and that if they do them it will be all right at last. But beyond this they really know nothing. Of the great systematic statements in the Epistles to the Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews, they are profoundly ignorant. As to a clear account of Justification, you might as well ask them to square the circle or write a letter in Sanskrit. It is a subject they have not even touched with the tips of their fingers. This is a sore disease, and only too common in England. Unhappily it is the disease of thousands who pass muster as excellent Churchmen. It is absurd to expect such people to hold perseverance. When a man does not know what it is to be justified he cannot of course understand what it is to persevere to the end.

(2) I believe another reason why many do not hold perseverance, is their dislike to any system of religion which draws distinctions between man and man.There are not a few who entirely disapprove of any Christian teaching which divides the congregation into different classes, and speaks of one class of people as being in a better and more favourable state before God than another. Such people cry out, "that all teaching of this kind is uncharitable; that we ought to hope well of every body, and suppose everybody will go to heaven." They think it downright wrong to say that one man has faith and another not, one a child of God, and another a child of the world, one a saint and another a sinner. "What right have we to think anything about it?" they say. "We cannot possibly know. Those whom we call good, are very likely no better than others, —hypocrites, impostors, and the like. Those of whom we think badly are very probably quite as much in the way to heaven as the rest of mankind, and have got good hearts at bottom." As to any one feeling sure of heaven, or confident of his own salvation, they consider it quite abominable. "No man can be sure. We ought to hope well of all." There are only too many people of this sort in the present day. Of course the doctrine of perseverance is perfectly intolerable to them. When a man refuses to allow that any one is elect, or has grace, or enjoys any special mark of God's favour more than his neighbours, it stands to reason that he will deny that any one can have the grace of perseverance.

(3) I believe another common reason why many do not hold perseverance is an incorrect view of the nature of saving faith. They regard faith as nothing better than a feeling or impression. As soon as they see a man somewhat impressed with the preaching of the Gospel and manifesting some pleasure in hearing about Christ, they set him down at once as a believer. By and by the man's impressions wear away, and his interest about Christ and salvation ceases altogether. Where is the faith he seemed to have? It is gone. How can his friends, who have pronounced him a believer, account for it? They can only account for it by saying, that "a man may fall away from faith," and that "there is no such thing as perseverance." And in short, this becomes an established principle in their religion. Now this is a mischievous error, and I am afraid sadly common in many quarters. It manifestly may be traced to ignorance of the true nature of religious affections. People forget that there may be many religious emotions in the human mind with which grace has nothing to do. The stony ground hearers received the word with joy, but had no root in them. The history of all revivals proves that there may often be a great quantity of seemingly religious impression without any true work of the Spirit. Saving faith is something far deeper and mightier than a little sudden feeling. It is an act not of the feelings only but of the whole conscience, will, understanding, and inward man. It is the result of clear knowledge. It springs from a conscience not grazed merely, but thoroughly stirred. It shows itself in a deliberate, willing, humble dependence on Christ. Such faith is the gift of God, and is never overthrown. Make faith a mere matter of feeling, and it is of course impossible to maintain perseverance.

(4) I believe another reason why many do not hold perseverance is near akin to the one last mentioned. It is an incorrect view of the nature of conversion.Not a few are ready to pronounce any change for the better in a man's character a conversion. They forget that there may be many blossoms on a tree in spring, and yet no fruit in autumn, and that a new coat of paint does not make an old door new. Some, if they see any one weeping under the influence of a sermon, will set it down at once as a case of conversion. Others, if a neighbour suddenly gives up drinking or swearing, and becomes a communicant and a great professor, at once rush to the conclusion that he is converted. The natural consequence in numerous instances is disappointment. Their supposed case of conversion often turns out nothing more than a case of outward reform, in which the heart was never changed. Their converted neighbour sometimes returns to old habits, as the sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire. But then unhappily the pride of the natural heart, which never likes to allow itself mistaken, induces people to form a wrong conclusion about the case. Instead of telling us that the man never was converted at all, they say that "he was converted, but afterwards lost his grace and fell away." The true remedy for this is a right understanding of conversion. It is no such cheap and easy and common thing as many seem to fancy. It is a mighty work on heart, which none but He who made the world can effect, and a work which will abide and stand the fire. But once take a low and superficial view of conversion, and you will find it impossible to maintain final perseverance.

(5) I believe another most common reason why many do not hold perseverance is an incorrect view of the effect of baptism. They lay it down, as a cardinal point in their divinity, that all who are baptized are born again in baptism, and all receive the grace of the Holy Ghost. Without a single plain text in the Bible to support their opinions, and in the face of the 17th Article, which many of them as Churchmen have subscribed, they still tell us that all baptized persons are necessarily regenerate. Of course such a view of baptism is utterly destructive of the doctrine that true grace can never be overthrown. It is plain as daylight that multitudes of baptized persons never show a spark of grace all their lives, and never give the slightest evidence of having been born of God. They live careless and worldly, and careless and worldly they die, and to all appearance miserably perish. According to the view to which I am now referring, "they have all fallen away from grace! They have all had it! They were all made God's children! But they all lost their grace! They have all become children of the devil!" I will not trust myself to make a single remark on such doctrine. I leave those who can to reconcile it with the Bible. All I say is, that if baptismal regeneration be true, there is an end of the final perseverance.

(6) I believe another reason why many do not hold perseverance, is an incorrect view of the nature of the Church. They make no distinction between the visible Church which contains "evil as well as good," and the invisible Church which is composed of none but God's elect and true believers. They apply to the one the privileges, and blessings, and promises which belong to the other. They call the visible Church, with its crowds of ungodly members, and baptized infidels, "the mystical body of Christ, the Bride, the Lamb's wife, the Holy Catholic Church," and the like. They will not see what Hooker long ago pointed out, and his admirers would do well to remember,—that all these glorious titles do not properly belong to any visible Church, but to the mystical company of God's elect. The consequence of all this confusion is certain and plain. Upon this man-made system they are obliged to allow that thousands of members of Christ's body have no life, no grace, and no sympathy with their Head, and end at last by being ruined forever, and becoming lost members of Christ in hell! Of course at this rate they cannot maintain the doctrine of perseverance. Once embrace the unscriptural notion that all members of the visible Church are, by virtue of their churchmanship, members of Christ, and the doctrine of this tract must be thrown aside. Oh, what a wise remark it is of Hooker's! "For want of diligently observing the difference between the Church of God mystical and visible, the oversights are neither few nor light that have been committed."

Reader, I commend the things I have just been saying to your sincere and prayerful attention. I have gone through them at the risk of seeming wearisome, from a deep conviction of their great importance. I am sure if any of this tract deserves consideration, it is this.

I entreat you to observe how important it is for Christians to be sound in the faith, and to be armed with clear Scriptural knowledge of the whole system of the Gospel. I fear the increasing tendency to regard all doctrinal questions as matters of opinion, and to look on all earnest-minded men as right, whatever doctrines they maintain. I warn you that the sure result of giving way to this tendency will be a vague, low, misty theology,—a theology containing no positive hope, no positive motive, and no positive consolation,—a theology which will fail most, just when it is most wanted, in the day of affliction, the hour of sickness, and on the bed of death.

I know well that it is a thankless office to offer such warnings as these. I know well that those who give them must expect to be called bigoted, narrow-minded, and exclusive. But I cannot review the many errors which prevail on the subject of perseverance, without seeing more than ever the immense need there is for urging on all to be careful about doctrine. Oh, learn to know what you mean when you talk of believing the doctrines of Christianity! Be able to give a reason of your hope. Be able to say what you think is true, and what you think false in religion. And never, never forget that the only foundation of soundness in the faith, is a thorough textual knowledge of the Bible.

I entreat you, in the last place, to observe how one error in religion leads on to another. There is a close connection between false doctrines. It is almost impossible to take up one alone. Once let a man get wrong about the Church and the sacraments, and there is no saying how far he may go and where he may land at last. It is a mistake at the fountain-head and influences the whole course of his religion. The mistake about baptism is a striking illustration of what I mean. It throws a colour over the whole of a man's divinity; it insensibly affects his views of justification, sanctification, election, and perseverance; it fills his mind with a tangled maze of confusion as to all the leading articles of the faith. He starts with a theory for which no single plain text of Scripture can be alleged, and before this theory tramples plain passages of the Bible by the score! They interfere forsooth, with his favourite theory, and therefore cannot mean what common sense tells us they do! Oh, reader, be as jealous about a little false doctrine, as you would be about a little sin! Remember the words of St. Paul: "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump."

IV. I now proceed, in the last place, to mention some reasons why the doctrine of final perseverance is of great importance.

When I speak of the importance of perseverance, I do not for a moment mean that it is necessary to salvation to receive it. I freely grant that thousands and tens of thousands have gone to heaven, who believe all their lives that saints might fall away. But all this does not prove the doctrine maintained in this tract to be a matter of indifference. He that does not believe it and yet is saved, no doubt does well; but I am persuaded that he that believes it and is saved does far better. I hold it to be one of the chief privileges of the children of God, and I consider that no privilege contained in the Gospel can be lost sight of without injury to the soul.

(1) Perseverance is a doctrine of great importance, because of the strong colour which it throws on the whole statement of the Gospel.

The grand characteristic of the Gospel is, that it is glad tidings. It is a message of peace to a rebellious world. It is good news from a far country, alike unexpected and undeserved. It is glad tidings that there is a hope for us, lost, ruined, and bankrupt as we are by nature,—a hope of pardon, a hope of reconciliation with God, a hope of glory. It is the glad tidings that the foundation of this hope is mighty, deep, and broad,—that it is built on the atoning death and gracious mediation of a Saviour. It is the glad tidings that this Saviour is an actual living person, Jesus the Son of God; able to save to the uttermost all who come to God by Him, and no less merciful, compassionate, and ready to save than able. It is the glad tidings that the way to pardon and peace by this Saviour is the simplest possible. It is not a thing high in Heaven that we cannot reach, or deep in the depths that we cannot fathom. It is simply to believe, to trust, and to cast ourselves wholly on Jesus for salvation, and salvation is all our own. It is the glad tidings that all who believe are at once justified and forgiven all things; their sins, however many, are washed away; their souls however unworthy are counted righteous before God. They believe on Jesus, and therefore they are saved. This is the good news. This is the glad tidings. This is the truth which is the grand peculiarity of the Gospel. Happy indeed is he that knows and believes it!

But think, reader, for a moment, what a mighty difference it would make in the sound of the Gospel, if I went on to tell you, that after receiving all those mercies you might by-and-by lose them entirely. What would your feelings be if I told you that you were in daily peril of forfeiting all these privileges, and having your pardon sealed in Christ's blood taken back again? What would you think if I told you that your safety was yet an uncertain thing, and that you might yet perish and never reach Heaven at all? Oh, what a falling off this would seem! Oh, how much of the grace and beauty of the glorious Gospel would disappear and fade away! Yet this is literally and exactly the conclusion to which a denial of perseverance must bring us.

Once admit that the saints of God may perish, and you seem to me to tear from the Gospel crown its brightest jewel. We are hanging on the edge of precipice. We are kept in awful suspense until we are dead. To tell us that there are plenty of gracious promises to encourage us, if we will only persevere, is but mockery. It is like telling the sick man that if he will only get well he will be strong. The poor patient feels no confidence that he will get well, and the poor weak believer feels nothing in him like power to persevere. Today he may be in Canaan, and tomorrow he may be in Egypt again, and in bondage. This week he may be in the narrow way; but for anything he knows, next week he may be back in the broad road. This month he may be a justified, pardoned, and forgiven man; but next month his pardon may be all revoked, and he himself in a state of condemnation. This year he may have faith, and be a child of God; next year he may be a child of the devil, and have no part or lot in Christ. Where is the good news in all this? What becomes of the glad tidings? Verily such doctrine seems to me to me to cut up the joy of the Gospel by the roots. Yet this is the doctrine we must hold, if we reject the final perseverance of the saints.[12]

I bless God that I am able to see another kind of Gospel than this in the word of God. To my eyes the Bible seems to teach that he who once begins the life of faith in Christ, shall without doubt be preserved from apostasy, and come to a glorious end. Once made alive by the grace of God, he shall live for ever. Once raised from the grave of sin and made a new man, he shall never go back to the grave and become once more the old man dead in trespasses and sins. He shall be kept by the power of God. He shall be more than conqueror through Him that loved Him. The eternal God is his refuge; underneath Him are Everlasting Arms. The love in which he is interested is eternal. The righteousness in which he is clothed is eternal. The redemption which he enjoys is eternal. The sense and comfort of it he may lose by his own carelessness. But the thing itself, after once believing, is his for evermore.

Reader look at the two ways in which the weary and heavy_laden sinner may be addressed, and judge for yourself which is most like the gospel of the grace of God. On the side stands the doctrine, which says, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. Once believing thou shalt never perish. Thy faith shall never be allowed entirely to fail. Thou shalt be sealed by the Holy Spirit unto the day of redemption." On the other side stands the doctrine, which says, " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. But after thou hast believed take care. Thy faith may fail. Thou mayest fall away. Thou mayest drive the Spirit from thee. Thou mayest at length perish everlastingly." Which doctrine of these two contain most good news? Which is most like glad tidings? Is it all the same which way the sinner is addressed? Is it matter of indifference whether we tell him that believing he is saved, unless he falls away, or whether we tell him that believing he is saved for ever? I cannot think it. I regard the difference between the two doctrines as very great indeed. It is the difference between January and June. It is the difference between twilight and noonday.

I speak for myself. I cannot answer for the experience of others. To give me solid peace, I must know something about my future prospects as well as about my present position. It is pleasant to see my pardon today: but I cannot help thinking of tomorrow. Tell me that He who leads me to Christ, and gives me repentance and faith in Him, will never leave me nor forsake me, and I feel solid comfort. My feet are on a rock. My soul is in safe hands. I shall get safe home. Tell me, on the other hand, that after being led to Christ I am left to my own vigilance, and that it depends on my watching, and praying, and care, whether the Spirit leaves me or no, and my heart melts within me. I stand on quicksand. I lean on a broken reed. I shall never get to heaven. It is vain to tell me of the promises; they are only mine if I walk worthy of them. It is vain to talk to me of Christ's mercy; I may lose all my interest in it by indolence and self-will. Reader, the absence of the doctrine of perseverance appears to me to give a different colour to the whole Gospel. You cannot wonder if I regard it as of great importance.

(2) But the doctrine of perseverance is also of importance, because of the special influence it is calculated to have on all who halt between two opinions in religion.

There are many persons of this description in the Church of Christ. There are hundreds to be found in every congregation to which the Gospel of Christ is preached, who know well what is right, and yet have not courage to act up to their knowledge. Their consciences are awakened. Their minds are comparatively enlightened. Their feelings are partially aroused to a sense of the value of their souls. They see the path they ought to take. They hope one day to be able to take it. But at present they sit still and wait. They will not take up the cross and confess Christ.

And what keeps them back? In a vast proportion of cases they are afraid to begin, lest they should by-and-by fail and fall away. They see innumerable difficulties before them if they serve Christ. They are quite right. It is vain to deny that there are difficulties, both many and great. They stand shivering on the brink of the vast sea on which we would have them embark, and as they mark the rolling, tumbling waves, their hearts faint. They mark many a little boat on the waters of that sea, tossed to and fro, and struggling hard to make its way across, and looking as if it would be engulfed in the angry billows, and never get safe to harbour. "It is of no use," they feel: "it is of no use. We shall certainly fall away. We cannot serve Christ yet. The thing cannot be done."

Now, what is most likely to give courage to these halting souls? What is most likely to hearten them for the voyage? What is most likely to cheer their spirits, nerve their minds, and bring them to the point of boldly launching away? — I answer, without hesitation, The doctrine of final perseverance.

I would fain tell them that however great the difficulties of Christ's service, there is grace and strength in store to carry them triumphantly through all. I would tell them that these poor, praying, broken-spirited voyagers whom they watch and expect to see cast away, are all safe as if they were already in harbour. They have each a pilot on board, who will carry them safe through every storm. They are each joined to the everlasting God by a tie that can never be broken, and shall all appear at length safe at the right hand of their Lord. Yes: and I would fain tell them that they too shall all make a glorious end if they will only begin. I would have them know that, if they will only commit themselves to Christ, they shall never be cast away. They shall not be plucked away by Satan. They shall never be left to sink and come to shame. Trials they may have, but none that the Spirit will not give them power to endure. Temptations they may have, but none that the Spirit shall not enable them to resist. Only let them begin, and they shall be conquerors. But the great matter is to begin.

Reader, I believe firmly that one reason why so many wavering Christians hang back from making a decided profession, is the want of encouragement which the doctrine of perseverance is intended to afford.

(3) The doctrine of perseverance is of importance because of the special influence it is calculated to have on the minds of true believers.

The number of true believers is at all times very small. They are a little flock. But even out of that flock there are a few who can be called strong in faith, few who know much of uninterrupted joy and peace in believing, few who are not often cast down by their doubts, anxieties, and fears.

It is useless to deny that the way to Heaven is narrow. There are many things to try the faith of believers. They have trials the world cannot understand. They have within a heart weak, deceitful, and not to be trusted,—cold when they would fain be warm,—backward when they would fain to be forward,—more ready to sleep than watch. They have without a world that does not love Christ's truth, and Christ's people, —a world full of slander, ridicule, and persecution,—a world with which their own dearest relations often join. They have ever near them a busy devil, an enemy who has been reading men's hearts for 6,000 years, and knows exactly how to suit and time his temptations,—an enemy who never ceases to lay snares in their way,—who never slumbers and never sleeps. They have the cares of life to attend to, like other people,—the cares of children,—the cares of business,—the cares of servants,—the cares of money,—the cares of earthly plans and arrangements,—the cares of a poor, weak body, each daily thrusting itself upon their souls. Who can wonder that believers are sometimes cast down? Who ought not rather to marvel that any believers are saved? Truly I often think that the salvation of each saved person is a greater miracle than the passage of Israel through the Red Sea.[13]

But what is the best antidote against the believer's fears and anxieties? What is most likely to cheer him as he looks forward to the untried future and remembers the weary past? I answer without hesitation, the doctrine of the final perseverance of God's elect. Let him know that God having begun a good work in him will never allow it to be overthrown. Let him know that the footsteps of Christ's little flock are all in one direction. They have erred. They have been vexed. They have been tempted. But not one of them has been lost. Let him know that those whom Jesus loves, He loves unto the end. Let him know that He will not suffer the weakest lamb in His flock to perish in the wilderness, or the tenderest flower in His garden to wither and die. Let him know that Daniel in the den of lions, the three children in a fiery furnace, Paul in the shipwreck, Noah in the ark, were none of them more cared for and more secure than the believer in Christ. Let him know that he is fenced, walled, protected, guarded by the Almighty power of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and cannot perish. Let him know that it is not in the power of the things in the present or things to come,—of men or of devils,—of cares within or troubles without, to separate one single child of God from the love that is in Christ Jesus.

This is strong consolation. These are the things which God has laid up in the Gospel for the establishment and confirmation of His people. Well would it be for His people if these things were more brought forward than they are in the Church of Christ. Verily I believe that one reason of the saints' weakness is their ignorance of the truths which God has revealed in order to make them strong.

Reader, I leave the subject of the importance of perseverance here. I trust I have said enough to show you that I have not called your attention to it in this tract without good cause. I feel strongly that the hardness of man's heart is such that nothing should be omitted in religious teaching which is likely to do it good. I dare not omit a single grain of truth, however strong and liable to abuse it may seem to be. Nothing appears to me of small importance which adds to the beauty of the Gospel, or gives encouragement to the halting, or confirms and builds up God's people. I desire to teach that the Gospel not only offers present pardon and peace, but eternal safety and certain continuance to the end. This I believe be the mind of the Spirit. And what the Spirit reveals I desire to proclaim.

And now, reader, I have brought before you, to the best of my ability, the whole subject of perseverance. I have told you as plainly as I can, what I believe to be the truth as it is in Jesus. If I have offended you by anything I have said, I am sorry. I have no desire to pain anyone, and least of all the children of God. If I have failed to convince you I am sorry, but I am satisfied the defect is not in the doctrine I defend, but in my manner of stating it. It only remains to conclude this tract by a few words of practical application.

(1) For one thing, let me entreat you to consider well, whether you have any part at all in the salvation of Christ Jesus.

It matters nothing what you believe about perseverance, if after all you have no faith in Christ. It matters little whether you hold the doctrine or not, so long as you have no saving faith, and your sins are not forgiven, and your heart not renewed by the Holy Ghost. The clearest head-knowledge will save no man. The most correct and orthodox views will not prevent a man perishing by the side of the most ignorant heathen if he is not born again. Oh, search and see what is the state of your own soul!

You cannot live forever. You must one day die. You cannot avoid the judgment after death. You must stand before the bar of Christ. The summons of the Archangel cannot be disobeyed. The last great assembly must be attended. The state of your own soul must one day undergo a thorough investigation. It will be found out one day what you are in God's sight. Your spiritual condition will at length be brought to light before the whole world. Oh, find out what it is now! While you have time, while you have health, find out the state of your soul.

Your danger, if you are not converted, is far greater than I can describe. Just in proportion to the thorough safety of the believer is the deadly peril of the unbeliever. There is but a step between the unbeliever and the worm that never dies, and the fire that is not quenched . He is literally hanging over the brink of the bottomless pit. Sudden death to the saint is sudden glory; but sudden death to the unconverted sinner, is sudden hell. Oh, search and see what is the state of your soul!

Remember that you may find out whether you have an interest in the invitations of the Gospel. It is a thing that may be known. It is nonsense to pretend that no man can tell. I never will believe that an honest man, with a Bible in his hand, will fail to discern his spiritual condition by diligent self-examination. Oh be a honest man! Search the Scriptures. Look within. Rest not till you find out the state of your soul. To live on and leave the soul's state uncertain, is not to play the part of a wise man but a fool.

(2) In the next place, if you know nothing of the privileges of the Gospel, I entreat you this day to repent and be converted, to hear Christ's voice, and follow Him.

I know no reason, human or divine, why you should not accept this invitation today and be saved, if you are really willing. It is not the quantity of your sins that need prevent you. All manner of sin may be forgiven. The blood of Jesus cleanseth away all sin.—It is not the hardness of your heart that need prevent you. A new heart God will give you, and a new spirit will He put in you.—It is not the decrees of God that need prevent you. He willeth not the death of sinners. He is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.—It is not any want of willingness in Christ:—He has long cried to the sons of men, "Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." "Him that cometh unto Me I will in no wise cast out." Oh, reader, why should not you be saved?

A day must come, if you are ever to be God's child, when will you cease to trifle with your soul's interests. An hour must come when at last you will bend your knee in real earnestness, and pour out of your heart before God in real prayer. A time must come when the burden of your sins will at last feel intolerable, and when you will feel you must have rest in Christ or perish. All this must be if you are ever to become a child of God and be saved. And why not today? Why not this very night? Why not without delay seek Christ and live? Oh, reader, answer me, if you can!

(3) In the next place, let me entreat every reader who holds final perseverance, so to use this precious doctrine as not to abuse it.

There is an awful readiness in all men to abuse God's mercies. Even the children of God are not as free from the sad infection. There is a busy devil near the best of saints, who would fain persuade them to make their privileges a plea for the careless living, and to turn their soul's meat into poison. I cannot look around the church and the end to which many high professors come without feeling that there is need for caution. "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall."

Would we know what it is to abuse the doctrine of perseverance? It is abused when believers make their safety an excuse for inconsistencies in practice. It is abused when they make their security from final ruin an apology for a low standard of sanctification, and a distant walk with God. Against both those abuses I entreat believers to be on their guard.

Would we know what it is to use the doctrine of perseverance aright? Let us watch jealously over the daily workings of our own hearts. Let us mortify and nip in the bud the least inclination to spiritual indolence. Let us settle down in our minds as a ruling principle of our lives, that the mercies of God are only turned to a good account when they have a sanctifying effect on our hearts. Let us root it finally in our inward man, that the love of Christ is never so really valued as when it constrains us to increased spiritual-mindedness. Let us set before our minds, that the more safe we feel the more holy we ought to be. The more we realise that God has done much for us, the more we ought to do for God. The greater our debt, the greater should be our gratitude. The more we see the riches of grace, the more rich should we be in good works.

Oh, for a heart like that of the Apostle Paul! To realize like he did, our perfect safety in Christ,—to labour as he did for God's glory, as if we could never do too much,—this is the mark,—this is the standard at which we ought to aim.

Reader, let us so use the doctrine of perseverance that our good may never be evil spoken of. Let us so adorn the doctrine by our lives that we may make it beautiful to others, and constrain men to say, "It is a good and holy thing to be persuaded that the saints will never perish."

(4) In the last place, I entreat all believers who have hitherto been afraid of falling away, to lay firm hold on the doctrine of perseverance, and to realize their own safety in Christ.

I want you to know the length and breadth of your portion in Christ. I want you to understand the full amount of treasure to which faith in Jesus entitles you. You have found out that you are a great sinner. Thank God for that. You have fled to Christ for pardon and peace with God. Thank God for that. You have committed yourself to Jesus for time and eternity: you have no hope but in Christ's blood, Christ's righteousness, Christ's mediation, Christ's daily all-persevering intercession. Thank God for that. Your heart's desire and prayer is to be holy in all manner of conversation. Thank God for that. But oh, lay hold upon the glorious truth,—that believing on Jesus you shall never perish, you shall never be cast away, you shall never fall away! It is written for you as well as the apostles, "My sheep shall never perish." Yes! reader, Jesus has spoken it, and Jesus meant it to be believed. Jesus has spoken it, who never broke His promises. Jesus has spoken it, who cannot lie. Jesus has spoken it, who has power in heaven and earth to keep His word. Jesus has spoken it for the least and lowest believers: "My sheep shall never perish."

Wouldest thou have perfect peace in life? Then lay hold on this doctrine of perseverance. Thy trials may be many and great. Thy cross may be very heavy. But the business of thy soul is all conducted according to an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure. All things are working together for thy good. Thy sorrows are only purifying thy soul for glory; thy bereavements are only fashioning thee as a polished stone for the temple above, made without hands. From whatever quarter the storms blow, they only drive thee nearer to heaven: whatever weather thou mayest go through it is only ripening thee for the garner of God. Thy best things are quite safe. Come what will, thou shalt "never perish."

Wouldest thou have strong consolation in sickness? Then lay hold on this doctrine of perseverance. Think, as thou feelest the pins of this earthly tabernacle loosening one by one, "nothing can break my union with Christ." Thy body may become useless; thy members may refuse to perform their office; thou mayest feel like an old useless log,—a weariness to others, and a burden to thyself. But thy soul is safe. Jesus is never tired of caring for thy soul. Thou shalt "never perish."

Wouldest thou have full assurance of hope in death? Then lay hold on this doctrine of perseverance. Doctors may have given over their labours; friends may be unable to minister to thy wants; sight may depart; hearing may depart; memory may be almost gone: but the loving kindness of God shall not depart. Once in Christ thou shalt never be forsaken. Jesus shall stand by thee. Death shall not separate thee from the everlasting love of God in Christ. Thou shalt "never perish."[14]

Reader, may this be your portion in life and death! And may it be mine!

Added to Bible Bulletin Board's "J. C. Ryle Collection" by:

Tony Capoccia Bible Bulletin Board Box 119 Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022 Our websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com Email: [email protected] Online since 1986

___________________

FOOTNOTES

[1] "We do not hold that all whom the most discerning minister or Christian considers true Christians, will be 'kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.' God alone can search the heart, and He may see that to be a dead and temporary faith which we in the judgement of charity think living and permanent."—Scott's reply to Tomline, page 675.

[2] "It is grossly contrary to the truth of the Scriptures to imagine that they who are thus renewed, can be unborn again."—Archbishop Leighton, 1680.

[3] "Every believer doth not know that he is a believer, and therefore, he cannot know all the privileges that elong to believers."—Traill, 1690.

"Let none encourage themselves to a freedom in sin, and presume upon God's preservation of them without the use of means. No! The electing counsel upon which this victory is founded, chose us to the end. He that makes such a consequence, I doubt whether he ever was a Christian. I may safely say that any person that hath settled, resolved, and wilful remissness, never yet was in the covenant of Grace."—Charnock on Weak Grace. 1684.

[5] I allude you to the common story that Cromwell on his deathbed asked Dr. Thomas Goodwin whether a believer could fall from grace. Goodwin replied he could not. Cromwell is reported to have said, that "if so he was safe, for he was sure that he had been in a state of grace."

The truth of this story is exceedingly questionable. It is a remarkable fact that Cromwell's faithful servant, who published a collection of all the remarkable sayings and doings of his master in his last sickness, does not mention this conversation. It is more probable that it is one of those false and malicious inventions with which the great Protector's enemies laboured so hard to blacken his memory after his death.

[6] "As Christ being raised from the dead, dieth no more, death hath no more power over him; so the justified man being allied to God in Christ Jesus our Lord, doth as necessarily from that time forward always live, as Christ by whom he hath life liveth always." (Rom. vi. 10; John xiv. 19.) "As long as that abideth in us which animateth, quickeneth, and giveth life, so long as we live; and we know that the cause of our faith abideth in us for ever. If Christ the fountain of life may flit, and leave the habitations where once He dwelleth, what shall become of His promise, 'I am with you to the world's end'? If the seed of God which containeth Christ may be first conceived and then cast out, how doth St. Peter term it immortal? (1 Pet. i.23.) How doth St. John affirm that it abideth (1 John. iii.9.)"—Hooker's Discourse of Justification. 1590

[7] There are few subjects about which English people are so ignorant as they are about the real doctrines of the Church of England. Many persons know nothing of the theological opinions of the English Reformers, and of all leading English divines for nearly a century after the Protestant Reformation. They call opinions old which in reality are new, and they call opinions new which in reality are old.

It would be a waste of time to inquire into the causes of this ignorance. Certain it is that it exists. Few people seem to be aware that those doctrines which now are commonly called evangelical, were the universally received divinity of English Churchmen throughout the reigns of Queen Elizabeth and James 1st. They are not, as many ignorantly suppose, new-fangled views of modern invention. They are simply the old paths in which the Reformers and their immediate successors walked. Tractarianism, High Churchism, and Broad Churchism are new systems. Evangelical teaching is neither more nor less than the old school.

The proof of this assertion is to be found in the Church history of the reigns of Elizabeth and James 1st, and in the writings of the divines of that period. Far be it from me to defend all the sayings and doings of theologians of that date. The student will find in their writings abundant traces of intolerance, illiberality, and bigotry, which I would be the last to defend. But that the vast majority of all Churchmen in that day held doctrines which are now called Calvinistic and Evangelical, is to my mind as clear as noon-day: and upon no point does the evidence appear to me so clear as upon the doctrine of perseverance.

(1) Is it not a historical fact, that in Queen Elizabeth's reign, in the year 1595, the University of Cambridge compelled Mr. Barret, of Caius college, to read a public recantation and apology in St. Mary's Church, for having denied the doctrines of final perseverance and election? —The Church of England's old Antithesis to new Arminianism by William Prynne, page 56.

(2) Is it not a historical fact, that the Articles drawn up by the Vice-Chancellor and heads of the University of Cambridge, against the above-mentioned Barret, conclude with the following words? "This doctrine, being not about inferior points of matters indifferent, but of the substantial ground, and chief comfort and anchor ground of our salvation, hath been to our knowledge continually and generally received, taught, and defended in this University, in lectures, disputations, and sermons, and in other places in sermons, since the beginning of her Majesty's reign, and is so still holden: and we take it agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England—Edwards Veritas Redux, page 534

(3) Is it not a historical fact, that in the same Queen Elizabeth's reign, in the same year, 1595, the Lambeth Articles were drawn up and approved by Archbishop Whitgift and Bishop Bancroft (afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury); and that they contain the following proposition: "A true living and justifying faith, and the Spirit of God who justifies, is not extinguished, falleth not away, vanisheth not in the elect, either finally or totally." These articles were not added to our confession of faith; but Fuller's words nevertheless are perfectly true: "The testimony of these learned divines is an infallible evidence what were the general and received doctrines of England in that age."—Fuller's Church History. Tegg's edition. Third volume, page 150.

(4) Is it not a historical fact, that in the year 1604, in James the First's reign, this doctrine of perseverance was considered at the Hampton Court Conference. The Puritan party wished the Lambeth Articles to be added to the thirty-nine Articles. Their request was not granted: but on what grounds? Not because the doctrine of perseverance was objected to, but because King James thought it better "not to stuff the book of Articles with all conclusions theological."While even Overall, Dean of St. Paul's, whose soundness on this point was most suspected, used these remarkable words: "Those who are justified according to the purpose of God's election, though they might fall into grievous sin, and thereby into the present estate of damnation, yet never totally nor finally fall from justification, but are in time renewed by God's Spirit unto lively faith and repentance —Fuller's Church History, third volume, page 181.

(5) Is it not a historical fact, that the first exposition of the thirty-nine Articles, published after the Reformation, contains a full and distinct assertion of the doctrine of perseverance, in the part which treats of the seventeenth Article? I allude to the work of Thomas Rogers, Chaplain to Archbishop Bancroft, to whom the book was dedicated, 1607.—Rogers on the thirty-nine Articles. Parker Society Edition.

(6) Is it not a historical fact, that in the year 1612, King James the 1st published a declaration written by himself, against one Vorstius, an Arminian divine, in which he calls the doctrine, that the saints may fall away, "A wicked doctrine, a blasphemous heresy, directly contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England." Prynne. Church of England Antithesis, etc., page 206.

(7) Is it not a historical fact, that the same King James the 1st, in the same year 1612, wrote a letter to the States of Holland, in consequence of a Dutch divine, named Bertius, having written a book on the Apostasy of the Saints, and sent it to the Archbishop of Canterbury. In this letter, the King speaks of Bertius as "a pestilent heretic," and called his doctrine "an abominable heresy," and in one place says, "he is not ashamed to lie so grossly as to avow that the heresies contained in the said book are agreeable with the religion and profession of the Church of England."—Prynne. Church of England's Antithesis to Arminianism, page 206.

(8) Is it not a historical fact, that the same King James the First, in the year 1616, visited with severe displeasure a clergyman named Sympson, a fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, for preaching before him, at Royston, that true believers may totally fall away?—Fuller's History of Cambridge, page 160.

(9) Is it not a historical fact, that in the Synod of Dort, in the year 1619, the doctrine of final perseverance was strongly asserted? Now several English Divines were formally deputed to attend this Synod and take part in its proceedings, and amongst others, Bishop Davenant, and Bishop Carleton. And is it not notorious that however much they differed from the conclusions of the Synod in the matters of discipline, they "approved all the points of the doctrine?"—Fuller's Church History, vol. 3, page 279.

(10) Last, but not least, is it not a historical fact, that all the leading Archbishops and Bishops in the reigns of Elizabeth and James the First, were thorough Calvinists in matters of doctrine? And is not a notorious fact that the final perseverance of the saints is one of the leading principles of the system that is called Calvinistic? Heylin himself is obliged to confess this. He says, "It was safer for any man in those times to have been looked upon as a heathen or publican than an anti-Calvinist." —Heylin's Life of Laud, page 52.

I lay these ten facts before the reader, and ask his serious attention to them. I am unable to understand how any one can avoid the conclusion which may be drawn from them. To me it appears an established point in history, that the doctrine of the final perseverance of the saints is the old doctrine of the Church of England, and the denial of this doctrine is new.

I could easily add long quotations to strengthen the evidence which I have brought forward. I could turn to marginal notes of the "Bishop's Bible", published under the special superintendence and approval of Archbishop Parker. I could quote passage upon passage from the writings of Archbishops Cranmer, Grindal, Sandys, Abbot, Usher,—of Bishops Ridley, Latimer, Jewell, Pilkington, Babington, Hall, Davenant, Carleton, Prideaux, and Reynolds. In short, the difficulty is to find theological writers in the reigns of Elizabeth and James the First, who ever thought of disputing final perseverance. William Prynne gives the names of no less than 130 writers who held that the saints could never perish, and gives the references to their works. But at that time he wrote (1629) he could only find four writers who had denied the perseverance of the saints and taught the possibility of their apostasy. I could supply many quotations from the writers he names. But I spare the reader. He has probably heard enough.

I have made this note longer than I intended, but the importance of the facts which it contains must be my apology. The whole subject in the present day is one of the deepest moment.

The evangelical members of the Church of England are constantly taunted by their adversaries with holding new views. They are told that their opinions are not "Church opinions," and that they ought to leave the Church of England and become dissenters without delay. I entreat all readers of these pages never to be moved by such taunts and insinuations. I tell them that those who make them are only exposing their own thorough ignorance of the first principles of their own communion. I tell them not to be ashamed of their own views, for they have no cause. I tell them that the evangelical members of the Church of England are the true representatives of the views of the Reformers and their immediate successors, and that those who oppose them know not what they are saying.

If I were in a position to offer counsel to my evangelical brethren at this crisis, I would earnestly advise them to hold fast the doctrine of final perseverance, and never let it go. There is no doctrine which so entirely overturns the modern view of baptismal regeneration. There is no doctrine in consequence which Tractarians dislike so much and labour so hard to overthrow. It is a barrier in their path. It is a thorn in their side. It is an argument which they cannot answer. The seventeenth Article of the Church of England is one of the keys of our position. He that gives up the doctrine of perseverance may rest assured that he has sold the past to his enemy. Once allow that saving grace may be totally lost, and in the day of controversy you will never hold your ground.

Last, but not least, I would counsel all clergymen who are persecuted for holding evangelical opinions to arm themselves with a thorough knowledge of old Church of England divinity, and to take comfort in the thought that they have the truth on their side. They, at all events, are explaining the thirty-nine Articles according to the intention of those who composed them. Their opponents are either neglecting the Articles, or attaching to them a new meaning.

How far is it reasonable and fair to persecute godly men for preferring the views of the Reformers to those of Laud, I leave it to the others to decide. But those who are persecuted may take comfort in the reflection that if they err, they err in good company. And if they ever suffer loss of character and position for holding final perseverance and denying the inseparable connection of baptism and regeneration, they may boldly tell the world that they suffer because they agree with Latimer, and Hooper, and Jewell, and Whitgift, and Carleton, and Davenant, and Usher, and Leighton, and Hooker, and Hall. He that suffers in company with these good men has no cause to be ashamed.

[8] I would entreat any man that hath his eyes set right in his head to read and consider the words of the seventeenth Article, the order and soundness of them; and then let him judge whether perseverance unto the end be not soundly and roundly set down and averred in this Article."—George Carleton, Bishop of Chichester, 1692. An Examination, p.63.

[9]"Now if Thou shalt kill this people as one man, then the nations, which have heard the fame of Thee, will speak, saying, "Because the Lord was not able to bring this people into the land which He sware unto them, therefore He hath slain them in the wilderness."—Numbers xiv. 15, 16. "What wilt Thou do to Thy great name ?"—Joshua vii. 9. "If any of the elect perish, God is overcome by man's perverseness; but none of them perish, because God, who is omnipotent, can by no means be overcome."—Augustine. De Corruptione et Gratia, cap. VII

[10] "How well do they consult for Christ's honour that say His sheep may die in a ditch of final apostasy?

"Christ and His members make one Christ. Now, is it possible a piece of Christ can be found at last burning in hell? Can Christ be a crippled Christ? Can this member drop off and that? How can Christ part with His mystical members and not with His glory?"—Gurnall. 1665.

[11] The following texts, on which the opponents of perseverance principally rely, appear to call for a brief notice.

Ezek. iii. 20 and Ezek. xviii. 24. I can see no proof in either of these cases that "the righteous" here spoken of, is anything more than one, whose outward conduct is righteous. There is nothing to show that he is one justified by faith and accounted righteous before God.

1 Cor. ix. 27. I see nothing in this but the godly fear of falling into sin, which is one of the marks of a believer, and distinguishes him from the unconverted, and a simple declaration of the means which Paul used to preserve himself from being a castaway. It is like 1 John v. 18: "He that is begotten of God keepeth himself."

John xv. 2. This does not prove that the true believers shall be taken away from Christ. A branch that "does not bear fruit" is not a believer. "A lively faith," says the 12th Article, "may be as evidently known by good works, as a tree is known by the fruit."

1 Thess. v. 19. If "the Spirit" here means the Spirit in ourselves, it means no more than grieving the Spirit," in Eph. iv. 30. But many think it is the Spirit's gifts in others, and ought to be taken in connection with verse 20.

Gal. v. 4. The tenor of the whole Epistle seems to show that this "falling" is not from inward grace of the Spirit, but from the doctrine of grace. The same remark applies to 2 Cor. vi. 1.

Heb. vi. 4-6. The person here described as "falling away" has no characteristics which may not be discovered in unconverted men, while it is not said that he possesses saving faith, and charity, and is elect.

John viii. 31; Coloss. i. 23. The conditional "if" in both these verses, and several others like them that might be quoted, does not imply uncertainty as to the salvation of those described. It simply means that the evidence of real grace is "continuance." False grace perishes. True grace lasts. "It is frequent in Scripture," says Charnock, "to put into promises these conditions which in other places are promised to be wrought in us."—Charnock on Real Grace. 1684.

I readily grant that these are not all the texts that the adversaries of final perseverance generally bring forward; but I believe they are the principal ones. The weak point in their case is this: they have no text to prove that saints may fall away, which will at all compare with such an expression as, "My sheep shall never perish;" and they have no account to give of such a mighty saying as this promised of our Lord, which is at all satisfactory or even rational. John Goodwin, the famous Arminian, offers the following explanation of this text: "The promise of eternal safety made by Christ to His sheep, doth not relate to their estate in the present world, but to that of the world to come!" A man must be sorely put to straits when he can argue in such a way.

[12] "They weaken Christians' comfort that make believers walk with Christ like dancers upon a rope, every moment in fear of breaking their necks."—Manton on Jude. 1658

[13] "There are as many miracles wrought as a saint is preserved minutes."—Jenkyn on Jude. 1680.

[14] The deathbed of Bruce, the famous Scotch divine, is a striking illustration of this part of my subject. Old Fleming describes it in the following words. "His sight failed him, whereupon he called for his Bible; but finding his sight gone he said, 'Cast up to me the eighth chapter of the Romans and set my finger to these words,—I am persuaded that neither death nor life, etc., shall be able to separate me from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Now,' said he, 'is my finger is upon them?' when they told him it was, he said, 'Now God be with you my children: I have breakfasted with you, and shall sup with my Lord Jesus Christ this night,' and so gave up the Ghost."—Fleming's Fulfilment of Prophecy, 1680.

0 notes

pamphletstoinspire · 7 years

Photo

THE CATHOLIC EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES, THE APOSTLE - From The Latin Vulgate Bible

Chapter 5

ON THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES

PREFACE.

The seven following Epistles have been called Catholic or general, not being addressed to any particular Church or person, if we except the Second and Third of St. John. They are called also Canonical, having been received by the Church as part of the canon of the New Testament, and as writings of divine authority... The first of the seven epistles was written by St. James, surnamed the lesser, and James of Alpheus, (Matthew x. 3.) one of the twelve apostles, called the brother of our Lord, (Galatians i. 19.) who was made bishop of Jerusalem. His mother is thought to have been Mary, sister to the blessed Virgin Mary, and to have been married first to Alpheus, and afterwards to Cleophas; to have had four sons, James, Joseph, Simon, (or Simeon) and Jude, the author of the last of these epistles. All these four being cousins-german, are called brothers of our Lord, Matthew xiii. 55... This epistle was written about the year 62.[A.D. 62.] The chief contents are: 1. To shew that faith without good works will not save a man, as St. Augustine observed, lib. de fid. et oper. chap. iv.; 2. He exhorts them to patience, to beg true wisdom, and the divine grace; 3. He condemns the vices of the tongue; 4. He gives admonitions against pride, vanity, ambition, &c.; 5. To resist their disorderly lusts and desires, which are the occasions and causes of sin, and not Almighty God; 6. He publisheth the sacrament of anointing the sick with oil; 7. He recommends prayer, &c. St. Jerome, in a letter to Paulinus, (t. iv. part 2, p. 574.) recommends all these seven epistles in these words: James, Peter, John, and Jude, published seven epistles....both short and long, short in words, long as to the content; Jacobus, Petrus, Joannes, Judas, septem epistolas ediderunt....breves pariter et longas, breves in verbis, longas in sententiis. (Witham)

Chapter 5

A woe to the rich that oppress the poor. Exhortations to patience, and to avoid swearing. Of the anointing the sick, confession of sins, and fervour in prayer.

1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries, that shall come upon you.

2 Your riches are corrupted and your garments are moth-eaten.

3 Your gold and silver is rusted: and the rust of them shall be for a testimony against you, and shall eat your flesh as fire. You have stored up to yourselves wrath against the last days.

4 Behold the hire of the labourers, who have reaped your fields, of which you have defrauded them, crieth out: and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth.

5 You have feasted upon earth, and in luxuries you have nourished your hearts in the day of slaughter.

6 You have condemned and put to death the just one, and he resisted you not.

Notes & Commentary:

Ver. 1-6. Go now rich men, &c. In the first six verses, he gives admonitions to those among the Christians who were rich, not to rely on riches, nor value themselves on this account. You must look upon your riches and treasures as if they were already putrefied and corrupted, your gold and silver eaten and consumed with rust: and their rust shall rise in testimony and judgment against you, for not making better use of them. As your coin is eaten with rust, so shall your bodies be hereafter as it were eaten and consumed by fire. You heap up to yourselves a treasure in the day of wrath, while through covetousness, and hard heartedness, you defraud labourers of their hire, living at the same time in feasting and luxury, as in the day of slaughter. That is, feasting as men are accustomed to do, on the days when victims are slaughtered, offered, and eaten with great rejoicing. Others expound it, as if you were feeding, and making yourselves fit sacrifices and victims for God's anger and indignation. (Witham) --- You have feasted, &c. The Greek is, "you have lived in delicacies and debaucheries, and have feasted upon your hearts as for the day of sacrifice:" Etruphesate, kai espatalesate ethrepsate tas kardias umon os en emera sphages. That is, you have fattened yourselves with good cheer and sensual pleasures, like victims prepared for a solemn sacrifice. (Calmet) --- Others among you have unjustly oppressed, accused, and brought to condemnation the just one, by which seems to be understood just and innocent men, who are divers times deprived of their fortunes, and even of their lives, by the unjust contrivances of powerful wicked men. (Witham)

7 Be patient, therefore, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, patiently bearing till he receive the early and the latter rain.

8 Be you, therefore, also patient, and strengthen your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth near.

9 Murmur not, brethren, one against another, that you may not be judged. Behold the judge standeth before the door.

10 Take, brethren, for an example of suffering evil, of labour and patience, the prophets, who spoke in the name of the Lord.

11 Behold we account them blessed, who have endured. You have heard of the patience of Job, and you have seen the end of the Lord, that the Lord is merciful and compassionate.

Ver. 7-11. Be patient, &c. He now in these five following verses turns his discourse from the rich to the poor, exhorting them to patience till the coming of the Lord to judgment, which draweth near; his coming to judge every one is at his death. Imitate the patience of the husbandman, waiting for fruit after that the earth hath received the timely and early[1] rain soon after the corn is sown, and again more rain, that comes later to fill the grain before it comes to be ripe. This seems to be the sense by the Greek: others expound it, till he receive the early and latter fruits. (Witham) --- Behold the judge standeth before the door. This expression is synonymous with that in the foregoing verse. "The coming of the Lord is at hand." This way of speaking is not uncommon in Scripture. Thus God said to Cain: "If thou hast done evil, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door?" St. James is here speaking of the approaching ruin of Jerusalem, the destruction of the temple, and the dispersion of the Jews by the Romans. (Calmet) --- Call to mind for your encouragement the trials and constancy[2] of the prophets: the patience of Job, after which God rewarded him with great blessings and property, and you have seen the end of the Lord; that is, what end the Lord was pleased to give to Job's sufferings. But St. Augustine, Ven. Bede, &c. would have these words, the end of the Lord, to be understood of the death of our Lord Jesus Christ, on the cross, for which God exalted him, &c. (Witham)

Note 1:

Ver. 7. Temporaneum et Serotinum. In most Greek manuscripts ueton proimon kai opsimon, pluviam priorem et posteriorem.

Note 2:

Ver. 10. Exemplum accipite, exitus mali, et laboris, et patientiæ, kakopatheias kai makrothumias. There is nothing in the Greek for laboris, which the Latin interpreter may have added to express the full sense.

12 But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath. But let your speech be; yea, yea: no, no; that you fall not under judgment.

Ver. 12. But above all things....swear not, &c. This earnest admonition is against all kind of oaths in common conversation, (not against oaths made on just and necessary occasions) and in the very same words, as our blessed Saviour warned all people against this sin of swearing. (Matthew, chap. v.) How unaccountably is this commandment of God contemned? And what a dreadful account will some day be exacted for so many oaths, curses, and blasphemies, which are now so common, that we may rather wonder at the patience of God and that already exemplary punishments have not fallen upon whole cities and kingdoms for this continued profanation of the holy name of God? (Witham) --- St. James here repeats the injunctions of our Saviour, not to swear al all. (Matthew v. 34.) See the annotations in that place.

13 Is any of you sad? Let him pray. Is he cheerful in mind? Let him sing.

Ver. 13. No explanation given.

14 Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil, in the name of the Lord:

15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.

Ver. 14-15. Is any man sick among you?[3] or in danger of death by sickness, let him call, or bring in the priests of the Church, &c. The apostle here enjoins the constant use of the sacrament, called extreme unction, or the last anointing with oil, instituted, (as were all the sacraments of the Church) by our Saviour Christ, and which is here fully and clearly delivered in plain words, expressing, 1. the persons to whom this sacrament is to be administered; 2. the minister; 3. the form; 4. the matter; 5. the effects. As to the first, is any man sick among you? This sacrament then is to be given to every believing Christian, who is in danger of death by sickness. 2. Bring in the priests, one or more, they are the ministers of this sacrament. The Protestant translation has the elders; yet in their book of common prayer, he who is called in to assist and pray with the sick, is called either the minister, the curate, or the priest, never the elder. Dr. Wells has not changed the word elders in his translation; but in his paraphrase he expounds it of those ministers of the church who are above deacons. 3. And let them pray over him. Besides other prayers, the form of this sacrament is by way of prayer, let the Lord forgive thee, &c. 4. Anointing him with oil. The oil with which he is anointed by the priest, is the outward visible sign, and the matter of this sacrament, as water is the matter of baptism. 5. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man, &c. All the sacraments of the new law have their virtue from the merits of our Saviour, Christ, and therefore must be ministered and received with faith in our Redeemer. (Witham) --- Is any man sick? &c. The Greek expression in this place is equivalent to, "Is any one dangerously ill amongst you?" Asthenei tis en umin. The primary intention of this sacrament of extreme unction, is to confer a special grace upon the dying Christian, to strengthen him in his last and dreadful conflict, when the prince of darkness will exert his utmost to ruin his poor soul. But besides this, it was also intended to free man from venial sin, and likewise from mortal, if guilty of any, provided he were contrite and not able to have recourse to the sacrament of penance. But the sacrament of penance being the only regular means of obtaining pardon for mortal sin committed after baptism, a person must first have recourse to this sacrament, if he be able, as a necessary preparation for the sacrament of extreme unction. Other effects of this sacrament are, that it lessens the temporal punishment due to sin, and restores health to the worthy receiver, if it be expedient for the good of his soul. (St. Augustine, serm. 215. C. Theol. Petav. Habert. Bailly, &c. de Extrem. Unct.) --- How great then is the folly of such persons as are afraid to receive this sacrament, imagining it to be the irrevocable sentence of impending dissolution? whereas one of the very effects of this sacrament is to restore health, if it be expedient for the soul; and who would wish for health upon any other conditions? (Haydock) --- The anathemas pronounced by the council of Trent against those who deny the existence of this sacrament, are sufficient to establish the belief of it in the minds of Catholics. See session 14, canon 1, 2 and 3, of the council of Trent. It may be proper, however, to observe, in confirmation of our belief of this sacrament, that whenever the ancient Fathers have had occasion to speak of extreme unction, they have always attributed to it all the qualities of a sacrament, as St. Chrysostom who proves from this text of St. James the power which the priest has to forgive sins; (lib. 3. de Sacerdotio.; St. Augustine, ser. 215) not to mention Origen, who wrote at the beginning of the third century, (hom. ii. in Levit.) enumerating the different ways by which sins are forgiven in the new law, says, "That they are remitted when the priests anoint the sick with oil, as is mentioned in St. James." When Decentius, bishop of Eugenium in Italy, in 416[A.D. 416], wrote to Innocent I upon this sacrament, he makes no question whether it was a sacrament, but only consults him concerning the manner of administering; whether a bishop could give it, or whether priests were the only administerers of this sacrament, as St. James says, "Let them call in the priests of the Church;" and whether it could be given to penitents before they had been reconciled by absolution. To the former question, the pope replied there could be no doubt, as St. James could never mean that bishops were excluded as being higher than priests; but that he supposed them to be taken up with other things. We might add to this, the word presbyter was then used indiscriminately for both bishops and priests. (Haydock) --- As to the next question, whether penitents could receive this sacrament before absolution, he answered in the negative. "For," says he, "can it be thought that this one sacrament can be given to those who are declared unworthy of receiving the rest?" (Innocent I in epist. ad Decent. chap. viii.; Habert. de Extre. Unct.) --- If it be objected that mention is not more frequently made of this sacrament in the writings of the ancients, we will answer with Bellarmine, that the most evident things were not always written, but only as occasion offered, that many of the mysteries were kept secret, to preserve them from the ridicule of the infidels. That in the times of persecution it was more difficult to administer this sacrament and less necessary, as the greatest part of Christians died not by sickness but by martyrdom. (Theol. Petav. de Extre. Unc.) --- Ven. Bede in Luke ix. speaketh thus: "It is clear that this custom was delivered to the holy Church by the apostles themselves, that the sick should be anointed with oil consecrated by the bishop's blessing." --- Let him bring in, &c. See here a plain warrant of Scripture for the sacrament of extreme unction, that any controversy against its institution would be against the express words of the sacred text in the plainest terms. (Challoner) --- And the Lord, by virtue of this sacrament, or if you will, sacramental prayer, shall raise him up, shall give him spiritual strength and vigour to resist the temptations which at that hour are most dangerous. He shall also raise him up, by restoring him his corporal health, when God sees it more expedient for the sick man. --- And if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him, not merely by prayer, but by this sacrament. (Witham)

Note 3:

Ver. 14-15. Infirmatur, asthenei tis; infirmum, kamnonta, laborantem; alleviabit, egerei, suscitabit.

16 Confess, therefore, your sins one to another; and pray one for another, that you may be saved: for the continual prayer of a just man availeth much.

Ver. 16. Confess, therefore, your sins, &c. Divers interpreters expound this of sacramental confession, though, as the authors of the annotations on the Rheims Testament observe, this is not certain. The words one to another, may signify that it is not enough to confess to God, but that we must also confess to men, and not to every man, but to those whom God appointed, and to whom he hath given the power of remitting sins in his name. I cannot but observe that no mention at all is made, "in the visitation and communion of the sick," in the Protestant common prayer book, of this comfortable passage out of St. James, of calling in the priests of the Church, of their anointing him with oil....and that his sins shall be forgiven him. Perhaps having laid aside that sacrament, it seemed to them better to say nothing of those words. But such a confession as is practised by all Catholics, is at least there advised. "The sick person," saith the book of common prayer, "here shall be moved to make a special confession of his sins....After which confession, the priest shall absolve him after this sort. Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners, who truly repent, forgive thee....and by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, " &c. Here is a special confession, or a confession of particular sins; here is a power of forgiving sins in God's name, acknowledged to be given to the Church, and to priests; here are the very same words used by every Catholic priest in the sacrament of penance. This is clearly ordained in their liturgy: how far it is complied with, I know not. (Witham) --- One to another. That is, to the priests of the Church, whom (ver. 14.) he had ordered to be called for, and brought in to the sick: moreover, to confess to persons who had no power to forgive sins, would be useless. Hence the precept here means that we must confess to men whom God hath appointed, and who, by their ordination and jurisdiction, have received the power of remitting sins in his name. (Challoner) --- Pray for one another. Here is recommended prayer in general, as a most necessary Christian duty. He encourages them to it by the example of Elias[Elijah]. (Witham)

17 Elias was a man passible like unto us: and with prayer he prayed that it might not rain upon the earth, and it rained not for three years and six months.

Ver. 17. No explanation given.

18 And he prayed again: and the heaven gave rain, and the earth yielded her fruit.

Ver. 18. No explanation given.

19 My brethren, if any of you err from the truth, and any one convert him.

Ver. 19. No explanation given.

20 He must know, that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and shall cover a multitude of sins.

Ver. 20. He who causeth a sinner to be converted, &c. St. James concludes his epistle with a work of charity, one of the most acceptable to Almighty God, and most beneficial to our neighbour, when any one becomes instrumental in converting others from their errors, or from a wicked life; for it is only God that can convert the heart. But he who with a true and charitable zeal, animated with the love of God and of his neighbour, makes this the chief business of his life, has this comfort here given him, that this will cover in the sight of God a multitude of sins, which he may have contracted through human frailty. The Church of England, when they modelled the articles of their reformation, received this epistle of James as canonical. They profess to follow the holy Scriptures as the only rule of their belief: they find in the 14th and 15th verses of this chapter these words: "Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil....and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him." In these words they find all that they themselves require, to be a sacrament of the new law; to wit, a precept or injunction, clear and unlimited as to time, a visible sign, with a promise of invisible grace, in remitting of sins, the minister of it, and the persons specified who are to receive it. They also found this practised at the time of the reformation by the Universal Church, by all Catholics, both in the east and west, both by the Latin and by the Greek Churches; and that all Christian Churches received it as a sacrament; and yet they thought fit to lay it quite aside, as if it was neither a sacrament nor a holy ceremony, nor a pious custom fit to be retained. They must have judged that they had convincing proofs both to contradict in other things the judgment and belief of the Catholic Church, and also in this particular; as to which latter case, I shall examine the reasons which they bring. I presume it may be needless to insist upon the groundless imagination of Wycliff, and some heretics about that time, who denied this to be a sacrament, fancying it was prescribed by St. James, because the oil of Palestine was a sovereign remedy to cure diseases. If so, any physician, any old woman or nurse to the sick, might have applied oil full as well, if not better than the priests. Calvin, and the reformation writers, give us the following reasons or conjectures, that this anointing, as well as that, (Mark vi. 13.) was only to be used for a time, by those who had the gift of curing diseases miraculously; so that like other miraculous gifts, (as the speaking of tongues, prophesying, &c.) it was but to last during the first planting of the Christian faith. Dr. Fulk, against the Rheims Testament, and Mr. Baxter, &c. affirm boldly, that Christ "appointed his apostles to anoint those with oil whom they cured." And Dr. Hammond says, "that the anointing with oil, was a ceremony used by Christ and his apostles in their miraculous cures." They assert this, as if it was taught by Scripture itself. They are no less positive that this anointing soon ceased, and was laid aside with the gift of miraculous cures, given sometimes to the first Christians at their baptism, or when they received the Holy Ghost in the sacrament of confirmation. Dr. Fulk, besides this, is positive that "the Greek Church, never to this day received this anointing and praying over the sick as a sacrament." These are their arbitrary, groundless, and false expositions, which they bring against a clear text of the holy Scriptures. It might be sufficient to oppose the judgment and authority of the Church to their private judgment. But to answer in short each particular: we find by the evangelists, (Matthew x. 8.; Mark vi. 13.; Luke x. 9.) that Christ gave to his twelve apostles, and afterwards to his seventy-two disciples, in their first mission before his death, (which was only into the cities of Israel) a power of casting out devils, of raising the dead, or curing diseases in his name. And St. Mark tells us, that they cast out many devils, and anointed many sick with oil, and cured them. But when Dr. Fulk and others add, that our Saviour appointed, ordered, or commanded them to anoint with oil those whom they cured, no such thing is said, nor insinuated, neither by St. Mark nor by any of the evangelists, nor any where in the holy Scriptures. And how Dr. Hammond could tell us that this "anointing with oil was a ceremony used by Christ himself," I cannot imagine. As for the apostles and disciples, they might cure many, making use of oil, and many without it by laying hands upon them, by a prayer, or by calling upon the name of Jesus, as the seventy-two disciples returned to him with joy, (Luke x. 17.) saying, Lord, even the devils are subject to us in thy name. Neither is it judge probable by the interpreters that the apostles, in their miraculous cures, were tied up or confined to the use of oil: especially since we find that after Christ's resurrection, in their second mission to all nations, Christ foretells (Matthew xvi. 18.) that they who believe in him, shall have this miraculous gift of healing the sick, but mentions only the laying of hands upon them: they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall be well. Besides had Christ appointed or given orders to his disciples to make use of oil in such miraculous cures, it would scarce have happened but we should have some examples of it in the Acts of the Apostles, where so many miraculous cures are related to have been done by St. Peter, by St. Paul, and others, but no mention of this ceremony of oil. We agree with our adversaries that this gift of miraculous cures, of which St. Paul speaks, (1 Corinthians xii.) was common only for a short time, like the other gifts of the Holy Ghost, which were only necessary, as St. Augustine takes notice, at the first planting of the Christian faith; and so that anointing with oil, merely as it was made use of in miraculous cures of the body, soon ceased, perhaps even before our Saviour's death; but we believe as our Saviour appointed water to be the matter of the sacrament of baptism, so he would have oil to be the matter of the sacrament of the sacrament of extreme unction, which he instituted to strengthen the souls of the sick, against the dangers and temptations at the approach of death, and of which St. James here speaks near upon thirty years after Christ's ascension. And the anointing in St. Mark, used in corporal diseases, may be looked upon as a figure of the sacrament of extreme unction in St. James, as the frequent washings or baptisms, as they are called, of the Jews, and especially the baptism of St. John the Baptist, was a figure of the baptism of Christ. The miraculous gift of healing, as well as other gifts of the Holy Ghost, was often given with the sacraments, which were to be always continued, and not to cease, with those gifts. We may also take notice, that neither they who had this gift of healing, had any command or advice to make use of it to all that were sick, nor were all that were sick ordered to seek for a cure of those who had this gift; whereas here St. James orders every one to send for the priests of the Church to anoint him, and pray over him for spiritual relief. St. Timothy had frequent infirmities, as we read in 1 Timothy v. 23., nor yet did St. Paul, who had that gift, cure him. The same St. Paul left Trophimus sick at Miletum. (2 Timothy iv. 20.) Epaphroditus, St. Paul's companion in his labours, was sick, when he had St. Paul with him, even unto death; that is, so as to be at the point of death (Philippians ii. 27.); nor yet did St. Paul, but God, restore him to his health. And if St. James had spoken of a miraculous restoring of corporal health by that anointing, he should rather have said: bring in those who have the gift of healing; for we may reasonably suppose that many had this gift who were not priests, and we have no reason to suppose that all priests had this gift. Our adversaries tell us with great assurance, that this anointing mentioned by St. James was soon laid aside; which, say they, we may gather from the silence of the writers in the three following ages[centuries]. To this merely negative argument the Catholics answer: 1. That it is enough we have the tradition and practise of the Church, witnessed by the writers in the ages[centuries] immediately succeeding. 2. That the greatest part of the writings in those ages[centuries] are not extant. 3. The writers of those times seldom mentioned those things which were sufficiently known among the Christians by daily use, especially what related to the sacraments and mysteries of the Christian religion, which (as it appears by the writings that they were able to preserve) they made it their particular endeavour to conceal from the heathens, who turned them to derision and contempt. In the mean time, had not this anointing been always retained and continued, the ages[centuries] immediately following would not have conspired every where to practise it, and to look upon it as a sacrament. Not to insist on the authority of Origen,[4] in the beginning of the third age[century], (hom. ii. in Levit.) who numbering up the different ways by which sins are forgiven in the new law, says, that they were remitted when priests anoint the sick with oil, as in the epistle of St. James; St. Chrysostom[5] in the end of the fourth age[century], (in his third book de Sacerdotio, tom. i. p. 384. Nov. Ed. Ben., written before the end of the fourth age, about the year 375) says, that priests (and his word expresseth sacrificing priests, not elders) have now a power to remit sins, which he proves from those words in St. James, Is any man sick among you? &c. This shews, as do also Origen's words, that this custom was then continued in the East, in the Greek Church, and that it was believed a sacrament, of which the priests only were the ministers. Innocent I[6] in his answers to Decentius, bishop of Eugenium, in Italy, at the beginning of the fifth age[century], in the year 416, calls this anointing and prayer over the sick, set down in St. James' epistle, a sacrament in the same sense as other sacraments in the new law. See Labbe's Councils, tom. ii, p. 1248. And as to what Innocent I and Ven. Bede relate of a custom by which lay persons, when a priest could not be had, anointed and prayed over a person in danger, it was only to testify their desire of having the sacrament: as it was likewise a pious custom in some places for sinners to make a confession to a layman, not that they them looked upon it as a sacrament, but only that they hoped God would accept of their private devotions and humiliation, when they could not have a priest to administer the sacraments to them. It is needless to mention authors in the following ages[centuries]. St. Gregory (Sacramentarium. fer. 5. in Cœna Dni.) describes the ceremony of blessing oil to be used in the anointing of the sick. Theodore, made archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 668, among other decrees, ordains that sick persons receive the holy unction, set down by St. James. The Capitularia of Charles the great, say that no one, when about to depart out of this world, ought to want the anointing of the sacrament of oil. The same is ordained in a council of Chalons, the year 813, canon 48; by a council at Aix la Chapelle, the year 830, canon 5; by the council of Mayence, in the year 847, canon 26, &c. Now since we find this anointing made use of as a sacrament at least from the fourth age[century], let our adversaries tell us when this anointing prescribed by St. James was left off, and when and how it came to be taken up again. They have no manner of proofs for either; and yet we have a right, as the authors of the annotations on the Rheims Testament observe, to demand clear and convincing proofs in this case, when the Scripture seems so clear for us and against them. Dr. Fulk affirms boldly, that this anointing was never to this day received in the Greek Church as a sacrament. This only shews how little credit is to be given to him. He might have found great reason to doubt of his bold assertion, since neither Photius, in the ninth age[century], nor Michael Cerularius, in the eleventh, ever objected this difference betwixt their Greek and the Latin Church, at a time when they reckoned up even the most minute differences either in doctrine or discipline, so as to find fault with the Latins for shaving their beards. He might have found it by what happened at the time of the council of Lyons, in the thirteenth age[century], when the pope, in his letter to the emperor of Constantinople, wrote that the Latin Church, and all in communion with him, acknowledged seven sacraments, which the Greeks never blamed. He might have observed the same when the Greeks and Armenians came to an union in the council of Florence, in the fifteenth age[century]. The same Dr. Fulk, who wrote about the year 1600, could scarce be ignorant of the ill success the Augsbourg confession met with among the Greeks, to whom, when the Lutherans had sent copies of their faith and of their reformation, Jeremy, the patriarch of Constantinople, with a synod of the Greeks, condemned their articles, and among other points, declared that they held "in the orthodox Catholic Church seven divine sacraments," the same as in the Latin Church, baptism....and the holy oil. Had Dr. Fulk lived a little longer, he must have been more and more ashamed to find other Greek synods condemning him and all the said reformers. For when Cyrillus Lucaris, advanced to the see of Constantinople by the interest of the French Calvinists, began to favour and support the doctrine of the Calvinists, the Greeks in several synods under their patriarchs, (in the years 1639, 1642, 1671, and 1672) condemned Cyril and the new doctrine of the said reformers, and expressly declared that they held seven sacraments. See M. Arnauld, tom. iii. Perpetuitè de la Foy; and the dissertations of M. Le Brun, tom. iii. p. 34, and 572, disert. 12, where he shews that all the churches of the East, and all the Christian churches of the world, though separated from the communion and subordination to the Pope, agree with the Latin Church, as to the sacrifice of the Mass, as to the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and as to the seven sacraments. (Witham) --- If, with holy Scripture, we must allow that charitable persons on earth may prove instrumental, under God, to their neighbour's salvation, why are we to deny this to the saints in heaven, whose charity for man is much greater?

Note 4:

Ver. 20. Origen, in hom. ii, in Levit. (p. 68. Ed. Par. in the year 1574) where he numbers the different ways by which sins are remitted in the new law, and speaking of penance, says, In quo impletur et illud quod Apostolus dicit, Si quis autem infirmatur, vocet presbyteros ecclesiæ.

Note 5:

Ver. 20. St. Chrysostom, iereis....echousin exousian, habent potestatem.

Note 6:

Ver. 20. Innocent I. Pœnitentibus istud infundi non potest, quia genus est Sacramenti, nam quibus reliqua Sacramenta negantur, quomodo unum genus putatur concedi? By charisma, Innocent I understands, oleum ad ungendum.

#catholic epistle of st. james

0 notes