Are evangelicals closer to what the New
Testament church believed than Roman Catholicism?
Actually, though evangelicals are
not to a church denomination but a faith group that makes up a
religious movement (which arose in response to liberal declension
from Scripture), this group overall actually has the most in common
with Scriptural Christian teachings.
However,
like as the term “Christian” became watered-down and
corrupted over time, giving rise to the term “born-again”
and “evangelical” (which pollsters often treat as
synonymous, wrongly so), then likewise “evangelical”
which used to be synonymous with fundamentalist, has increasingly
become a mixture of traditionalists anfd that of a watered-down
superficial idea of faith and with arrested development (though
overall it has attested
to being the most unified major Christian group overall in core
conservative, Scripture beliefs). There is also classic evangelicals,
inclusion such holy men as Matthew Henry, and the 20th century
evangelical movement.
Principal
differences btwn evangelicalism today and Roman Catholicism is,
Rather
than imagining that act itself of proper baptism makes one good
enough to enter Heaven (via cleaning of a sin infants are not guilty
of, and infusing them with charity) at that point, and thus
henceforth treating them as children of God, evangelicals overall
instead stress the importance personal conversion of repentant faith
in the Lord Jesus. And which faith is then to be expressed in
baptism and following the Lord in obedience.
However,
like as most Catholics are nominal (though she treats such as
members) and partly trust their own merits and that of the church to
save them, too many evangelicals make Christ a means to an end,
believing in Him to save them by faith - sometimes regardless of how
they live - almost in abstract from all Christ is, versus believing
in the Lord Jesus as a person and thus seeking to obey what they know
He taught, which is what believing entails.
Rather
than teaching that one usually must to endure postmortem purifying
punishments in RC Purgatory (since the sinful nature remains
after baptism, and RCs are taught they must usually atone for sins
after death, and actually become good enough in character to be with
God), evangelicals instead teach that;
While
nothing unclean shall enter God's Holy City, (Rv.
21:27) believers are already washed, sanctified and justified
(1Co.
6:11) by effectual faith in the risen Lord Jesus to save them by
His sinless shed blood, (Rem. 3;25 — 5:1; Eph.
2:8,9;
Titus
3:5) and are already accepted in the Beloved on His account, and
made to spiritually sit with Christ in Heaven, (Eph.
1:6; 2:6)
and by Him have direct access to God in the holy of holies in prayer.
(Heb.
10:19) And who, if they die in faith will go to be with the Lord
at death. (Phil
1:23; 2Cor.
5:8 [“we”]; Heb, 12:22,23; 1Cor.
15:51ff'; 1Thess.
4:17)
And
with the only suffering after this life being that of the loss of
rewards (and the Lord's revelation and disapproval) at the judgment
seat of Christ, which one is saved despite the loss of, and which
does not occur until the Lord's return and believers resurrection.
(1Cor.
3:8ff; 4:5;
2Tim.
4:1,8;
Rev.11:18;
Mt.
25:31-46; 1Pt.
1:7; 5:4)
And which resurrection being the only transformative the believer
looks forward to after this life (Rm.
8:23; 2Co.
5:1-4; Phil
3:20,21;
1Jn.
3:2) — not purgatory, which suffering commences at death in
order to enable souls to enter Heaven.
However,
most evangelicals are wrongly taught that once one has believed on
Christ for saslvation, they cannot fall away and be lost, for since
one who fundamentally lives contrary to this, such as not providing
from his own family as he could, then it is declared that "he
has denied the faith." (1 Tim. 5:8) And thus we also have
warnings against having an evil hard of unbelief, in departing from
the living God." to "draw back into perdition,"
(Hebrews 3:12; 10:38,39) and "entangled again with the yoke of
bondage," thereby making Christ "to become of no effect,"
"to profit you nothing," being "fallen from grace."
(Galatians 5:2,4) For while we can take no credit for faith, and the
obedience of faith which God enables and motivates us to do,"
(Phil. 2:12,13) we can choose to no only sin but harden our hearts at
God's correction, which He works so that we will not be "condemned
with the rest of the world." (1 Cor. 11:32) Thanks be to God.
However,
there is some retaining by evangelicals of the Catholic failure to
see that discerning
the body of Christ (1 Co. 11:17–34) means showing the Lords
death by effectually treating the other members as those who were
bought by His sinless shed blood, signified by sharing a meal with
them, but extending far beyond that (in which I come too short),
versus focusing on the elements (Catholics) or the death of Christ
somewhat in abstract from how the Lord’s supper is to show His
death till He comes.
Rather
than making what the NT refers to as episkopos (overseer) and
presbuteros (senior) into being two pastoral offices, and making
pastors into a separate class of (normatively celibate) sacerdotal
“hiereus’ “(priests” in English) and even
translating that Greek word that is distinctively used for a
distinctive sacerdotal class as referring to her own priests, and
with their primary unique function being that of offering the
Catholic Eucharist as sacrifice for sins, and as being spiritual
food for the flock;
Instead,
evangelicals overall recognize that episkopos and presbuteros
(senior) refer to one office (Titus
1:5-7; Acts
14:23; 20:17) of (normatively married: 1 Tim. 3:1–7) holy
believers, and that the Holy Spirit never uses hiereus for NT pastors
aside from being part of the whole body of believers. For all
believers are called to sacrifice (Rm.
12:1; 15:16;
Phil.
2:17; 4:18;
Heb.
13:15,16;
cf. 9:9)
and all constitute the only priesthood (hieráteuma) in the NT
church, that of all believers, (1Pt.
2:5,9;
Re
1:6; 5:10;
20:6).
And
that the primary function (besides prayer) of NT
episkopos/presbuteros is that of preaching/teaching the inspired word
of God. By which word (Scriptures) man is to live by, (Mt.
4:4) as Christ lived by the Father, (Jn.
6:57) with doing His will being His “meat.” (Jn.
4:34) by the believing of which one receives spiritual lie, being
regenerated, (Acts
10:43-47; 15:7-9;
Eph.
1:13) and thus desiring the milk of the word, (1Pt.
2:2) and then handling the “strong meat” (Heb.
5:12-14) of the word of God, which word believers are “nourished”
(1Tim.
4:6) and built up, and are to let it dwell in them richly. (Col.
3:16)
However,
while required (with rare exceptions) clerical celibacy is not
Scriptural, ordaining
women pastors is also unscriptural, and yet it is often seen in
modern evangelicalism, in contrast to its past.
Rather
than making Peter into a person that the NT church looked to as the
rock upon with the church is built, and the first of a line of
(conditionally) infallible popes reigning from Rome, evangelicals
see Peter as the street level leader among brethren, not as lord
exalted above all, or with his office possessing perpetual ensured
infallibility.
For in
contrast to Peter, that the LORD Jesus is the Rock (“petra”)
or "stone" (“lithos,” and which denotes a large
rock in Mk.
16:4) upon which the church is built is one of the most
abundantly confirmed doctrines in the Bible (petra: Rm.
9:33; 1Cor.
10:4; 1Pet.
2:8; cf. Lk.
6:48; 1Cor.
3:11; lithos: Mat.
21:42; Mk.12:10-11;
Lk.
20:17-18; Act. 4:11; Rm.
9:33; Eph.
2:20; cf. Dt.
32:4, Is.
28:16) including by Peter himself. (1Pt.
2:4-8) Rome's current catechism attempts to have Peter himself as
the rock as well, but also affirms: “On the rock of this faith
confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,” (pt. 1, sec.
2, cp. 2, para. 424) which understanding some
of the so-called “church
fathers” concur with.)
Rather
than effectively making a church itself an object of faith, and with
her claimed infallibility being essential ot know what is of God,
and with dissent from her official teachings necessarily meaning
rebellion from God, evangelicals implicitly recognize that the NT
church began with common souls correctly discerning what was of God,
and in dissent from the historically valid magisterium.
However,
while dissent from authority can be Scriptural, and separation from
the impenitent recalcitrant aberrant and heretical persons and
churches is warranted, separation in the face of differences has too
often been the default recourse for evangelicals, while a central
magisterium of holy anointed men of faith should be a goal as it is
actually Scriptural, though that of Rome and Orthodox priests or
cults is not.
There is more that can be said of evangelicalism falling short of the prima NT church, but the more severe contrasting teachings of groups can be seen described in this section, by the grace of God.
But
there is still room at the cross for all who will come to God in
repentance and faith, and trust in the Divine Son of God sent by the
Father, the risen Lord Jesus, to save them on His account, by His
sinless shed blood, and thus be baptized and live for Him. Acts
10:36-47
The
redeemed have come to God as souls as sinners knowing their desperate
need of salvation, and not as souls saved by their works or church
affiliation, but as destitute of any means or merit whereby they may
escape their just judgment and gain eternal life with God.
And
with contrite heart have cast their whole-hearted repentant faith
upon the mercy of God in Christ, trusting the risen Divine Lord Jesus
to save them on His account, by His sinless shed blood. (Rm. 3:9 -
5:1) and declare this in baptism. And whose faith is thus counted as
righteousness, but it is a faith that will characteristically follow
Him, and repent when convicted in their heart that they failed to do
so.
Did
the NT church believe what the Roman Catholic church teaches on the Eucharist?
No,
and note that language must be precise here for not even Catholicism
teaches that the elements of bread and wine turn into the manifestly
literal incarnated physical body and blood of Christ as it was
present on the cross, even though Catholics claim to take “eat:
this is my body, which is broken for you” (1 Corinthians 11:24)
plainly literal.
The RCC (and basically EOs) profess,
that
at the moment of the Consecration which is when the priest says,
"This is my body," "This is the cup of my blood"
the bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Jesus
Christ who is then really present as God and as Man sacrificing
himself for us on the altar as he sacrificed himself on the cross
(The Mass Explained - Catholic Education Resource Center)
At
“consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of
the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of
Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the
substance of his blood,” thus becoming the “true Body of Christ
and his true Blood,” (CCC 1376; 1381) having been “substantially
changed into the true and proper and lifegiving flesh and blood of
Jesus Christ our Lord,” being corporeally present whole and entire
in His physical "reality.” (Mysterium Fidei, Encyclical of
Pope Paul VI, 1965)
Notice
the words “present” and “reality/real,” for unlike how Christ
was manifestly present and real in His incarnation described in
Scripture, and which manifest physicality is emphasized ( 1 John 1:1;
cf. 1 John 5:8) in contrast to a Christ whose appearance did not
correspond to what He was as regards incarnation (as within really
Docetism and or Gnosticism), in Catholicism the Eucharistic Christ is
not what He appears, feels, tastes and would scientifically test to
be, for what He appears to be is mere bread and wine. But which
itself does not exist, being replace by Christ, until this
non-existent bread and wine begins to manifest decay, and then He no
longer exist/is present under that appearance either.
The
presence of Christ's true body and blood in this sacrament cannot be
detected by sense, nor understanding, but by faith alone..."
(Summa Theologica; Summa Theologica - Christian Classics Ethereal
Library)
"If
you took the consecrated host to a laboratory it would be chemically
shown to be bread, not human flesh." (Dwight Longenecker,
"Explaining Transubstantiation")
"Christ's
presence in the Eucharist challenges human understanding, logic, and
ultimately reason. His presence cannot be known by the senses, but
only through faith." (Norms for the Distribution and Reception
of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United
States of America)
"the
Most Holy Eucharist not only looks like something it isn’t (that
is, bread and wine), but also tastes, smells, feels, and in all ways
appears to be what it isn’t." (The Holy Eucharist BY Bernard
Mulcahy, O.P., p. 22)
"the
substance of the bread cannot remain after the consecration: "
(Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiæ Article 2) "On the altar are
the body and blood of Christ; the bread and wine no longer exist but
have been totally changed into the body and blood of the Saviour... - https://www.ewtn.com/library/Doc
"The
Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the
consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist;"
(CCC 1377) "...that is, until the Eucharist is digested,
physically destroyed, or decays by some natural process." ibid,
Mulcahy, p. 32)
In
contrast, the only Christ of Scripture has a manifestly physical
body, even after being glorified:
“That
which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen
with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled,
of the Word of life:” 1 John 1:1; cf. 1 John 5:8)
“This
is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water
only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth
witness, because the Spirit is truth.” (1 John 5:6)
“Why
are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my
hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a
spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” (Luke
24:38-39)
A
purely literal reading of the “this is my body/blood” that is
broken/shed for us said at the last supper would mean that the
apostles were consuming the same literally manifest human flesh and
blood of Christ which attested to His incarnation, in contrast to a
Docetist-type Christ, whose appearance did not correspond to what He
physically was, meaning a metaphysical meaning.
Note
that support for the Catholic miscontruance of the Lord’s supper
largely relies upon reading the gospels in isolation from the rest of
the NT, as well as so-called “church Fathers.” However, the
uninspired (versus wholly God-inspired Scripture) words of men whose
teaching came after the apostles had died, and which to varying
degrees testifies to a progressive accretion of traditions
not seen in the only inspired record of what the NT church believed,
cannot be determinitive of what that NT church believed.
As
pertains to the Lord’s supper, in Catholicism it is presented as
"the heart and summit of the Christian life” (CCC 1407) “a
kind of consummation of the spiritual life, and in a sense the goal
of all the sacraments," (Mysterium Fidei, Encyclical of Pope
Paul VI, 1965) through which “the work of our redemption is carried
out,” (CCC 1364) providing “the medicine of immortality, the
antidote for death, and the food that makes us live for ever in Jesus
Christ” (CCC #1405) and only conducted by Catholics priests who
offer it “in reparation for the sins of the living and the dead,”
(CCC 1414) “cleansing us from past sins and preserving us from
future sins.” (CCC 1393) ;
But
rather than the NT church understanding the Lord’s supper as being
the life-giving central hub and focus of the Christian life, what we
see in the the only inspired and substantive record of how the NT
church understood it is that it only being actually only taught in
one epistle (aside from the mere mention of breaking of bread in Acts
and the “fest of charity” in Jude 1:12, which is in 1
Corinthians. In which the Lord’s supper is that of remembering His
death by sharing a meal with others who were bought by His sinless
shed blood, thus showing union with Christ and each other as being
"one bread," analogous to how pagans have fellowship in
their dedicatory feasts, (metaphorical
or metaphysical? 1Cor. 10)
Therefore
in the next chapter the Corinthians are rebuked as not actually
coming together to eat the Lord’s supper, for while they did come
together for that purpose, yet they were not actually having the
Lord’s supper due to how they treated the body of Christ, the
church.
When
ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat
the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before other
his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have
ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of
God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I
praise you in this? I praise you not. (1 Corinthians 11:20-22)
The
apostle Paul thus reiterates what the Lord said at the institution of
the Lord’s supper, an adding the interpretive conclusion, “For as
often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s
death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and
drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the
body and blood of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 11:26-27)
Catholics
actually invoke this section in support of the Catholic
interpretation, but the nature of the elements is not the contextual
focus, though in v. 26 the bread is still called bread and the cup
represents its content, while the purpose of the Lord’s supper is
stated, and with the focus continuing to be that of the corporate
body of the church (and which focus continues into the next chapter)
.
Which
is to do “show the Lord’s death till He comes,” which was by
sharing a meal with others who were bought by His sinless shed blood,
thus showing affirmation of them and themselves in union with Christ,
with the church being as "one bread."
Therefore,
by selfishly eating independent of other blood-bought faithful
believers, ignoring and shaming them, thenthen they were not actually having
the Lord’s supper, but were acting contrary to the very act that
they were supposed to be remembering and showing. And thus in essence they were guilty of being contrary to the atoning blood of Christ, by
which He purchased the church, (Acts 20:28) and were being chastened
for it, some even unto death. For as Paul was very conscious of, to
mistreat the church was to mistreat Christ Himself. (Acts 9:4)
This
being the offense, not effectually considering/recognizing/discerning
the body of Christ by mistreating its members by selfishly eating
independent of other blood-bought faithful believers, ignoring and
shaming them, then the solution is not some defining of the nature of
the bread and wine, but even contrary to requiring fasting before the
Lord’s supper, the apostle enjoins:
Wherefore,
my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And
if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together
unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come. (1
Corinthians 11:33-34)
In
addition, no where is the Lord’s supper presented as a sacrifice
for sins and a means of obtaining spiritual life, nor is the
conducting of it a uniquely pastoral function, or their primary
unique function, much less that of pseudo RC
priests.
Instead
the primary work of NT pastors (besides prayer) is preaching. (Act
6:3,4; 2
Tim.4:2) with believing the gospel being the means of obtaining
life in oneself, by which one is regenerated, (Acts
10:43-47; 15:7-9;
Eph. 1:13;
cf. Psalms
19:7) thus desiring the sincere milk (1Pt.
2:2; cf. (1Co.
3:22) and then the “strong meat” (Heb.
5:12-14) of the word of God, and by the preaching of which
pastors “feed the flock” (Acts
20:28; 1Pt.
5:2) ) by which they are "nourished." (1
Timothy 4:6 ) Glory be to God.
A
more extensive examination of the Catholic verses Scripture
understanding of the nature of the elements consumed is here,
by the grace of God.
Now
what we (and I) a believers need to do is better act in accordance
with effectually remembering and thus showing the Lord’s death and
resurrection till He comes.
Supplementary:
Actual Bible teaching:
Proposals:
Possible Catholic version:
1
Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you. (Romans 16:16)
If
Catholics (especially Roman) wrote or altered the Bible, then rather
than holy Peter being the street-level leader among brethren, and its
initial evangelists, and serving a general pastoral role, but who never
taught or presumed perpetual infallibility of office or had apostolic
successors;
then
in order to support the Roman Catholic premise that he was the first of
a line of conditionally infallible popes reigning from Rome, then it
would not have been hard to insert at least, on command, exhortation or
example teaching:
Peter confirmed as being the rock upon which the church was built.
Having
Peter calling a ecumenical council in Rome and replacing James with
Peter in providing the conclusive judgment on what the churches should
do.
A successor being named or intimated for the martyred James.
Salute one another with an holy kiss. The Catholic churches of Christ salute the church of Rome, along withPeter, ourapostolic head. (Romans 16:16)
2
Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls... (Hebrews 13:17a)
Obey them that have the rule over you, chiefly Peter, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls...
3
Now
therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens
with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the
foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the
chief corner stone; (Ephesians 2:19-20)
Now
therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens
with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the
foundation of the prophets and apostles, upon Peter the Rock, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; (Ephesians 2:19-20)
4
And certain men which came down from Judæa taught the brethren, and said,
Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and
disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and
certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and
elders about this question. (Acts 15:1-2)
And certain men which came down from Judæa taught the brethren, and said,
Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and
disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and
certain other of them, should go to Romeunto Peter and the other apostles and elders about this question. (Acts 15:1-2)
5
And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and
brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath declared how God at the first
did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. (Acts 15:13-14) Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: (Acts 15:19)
Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send
chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: (Acts 15:22)
And after they had held their peace, Peter
answered, saying, Men, brethren, hearken unto me: I declared how God at
the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his
name. (Acts 15:13-14) Wherefore my decree is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: (Acts 15:19) Then pleased it Peter and the other apostles and elders, with the whole church underPeter, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: (Acts 15:22)
6
Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. (Acts 12:1-2)
Now
about that time Herod the king stretched forth hands to vex certain of
the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword (to be succeed by Linus). (Acts 12:1-2)
7
Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. (Hebrews 4:16)
Pray for us: for we trust we have a good conscience, in all things willing to live honestly. (Hebrews 13:18)
And as regards other distinction Catholic teachings, include:
Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need,with prayer toMary and saints in glory also being made. (Hebrews 4:16)
Pray for us to God and to angels and saints in glory,for we trust we have a good conscience, in all things willing to live honestly. (Hebrews 13:18)
I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; (1 Timothy 2:1)
I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men,especially those in Purgatory. (1 Timothy 2:1)
I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:. (Romans 16:1)
Include Mary being at least named after Acts chapter 1, and as being a recourse for intercession — even a chief one.
I commend unto you Mary our Mother, and to Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: (Romans 16:1)
And
there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun,
and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:[images taken from Gn 37:9–10]And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. (Revelation 12:1-2)
And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; Mary clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And Mary being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. (Revelation 12:1-2)
And
to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly
into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time,
and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
Include a prophecy of Mary being bodily taken to Heaven and enthroned, and nourishing the church. See here.
And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly unto Heaven, into her throne, wherebyshe nourished the church on earthfor a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
This is
a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a
good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,
vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; (1 Timothy 3:1-2)
Somewhere
between Acts thru Revelation (which are interpretive of the gospels),
describe conducting the Lord’s supper as being the primary unique
function of (normatively celibate) pastors.
And
as providing spiritual life, and offering it as a sacrifice for sins,
versus showing remembrance of the Lord’s death by demonstrating the
union with the Lord and each other who were bought with His sinless shed
blood, by taking part in a communal meal which commemorates that; like
as pagan idolaters have fellowship with devils in their commemorative
feasts.
Thus
to treat faithful members of that body as if they were otherwise is to
fail to recognize that body, and thus not effectually remembering the
Lord’s death, by which believers have union with Christ, being bought
with His sinless shed blood, to the glory of God.
This is
a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a
good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,
vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; (1 Timothy 3:1-2)
8
The
cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of
Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body
of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. (1 Corinthians 10:16-17)
But I say,
that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils,
and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with
devils. (1 Corinthians 10:20)
The
cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of
Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body
of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all consuming the one body of Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:16-17)
But I say,
that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils,
and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with
devils by eating their flesh. (1 Corinthians 10:20)
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before other
his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have
ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God,
and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise
you in this? I praise you not. (1 Corinthians 11:20-22)
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. (1 Corinthians 11:29)
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before other
his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have
ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God,
and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise
you in this? I praise you not. (1 Corinthians 11:20-22)
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. (1 Corinthians 11:29)
Take
heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which
the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which
he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)
Take
heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which
the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God with the Eucharist, which he hath provided, even his own body and blood. (Acts 20:28)
If
thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a
good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of
good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. (1 Timothy 4:6)
If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up by the Eucharistaccording to the d
1. Nowhere are NT pastors distinctively called by the distinctive word for a distinctive separate sacerdotal class of believers , ("hiereus" in Greek, and "priests" in English due to a etymological corruption of the Greek presbuteros), to whom souls regularly came to obtain forgiveness.
2. While in principal confession of sin to leadership has its place, yet nowhere are NT believers shown regularly confessing sins to their pastors in particular, or ever being commanded to do so in the NT. Instead, the only exhortation or command to confess sins is to each other in general (but which would include leadership and sometimes it may be confidential to them for their judgment),
Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. (James 5:16)
Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit. Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins. (James 5:17-20)
Here we see an example of spiritual binding and loosing, in which the heavens were bound from providing rain, and then loosed to do so, whereby believers of like fervent holy faith are encouraged as able to obtain such binding and loosing in prayer.
However, in the case of an infirm man the intercession of NT pastors (presbuteros) can obtain deliverance of chastisement, as indicated byJames 5:14,15, as can the intercession of believers of fervent holy faith, but pastors as particularly expected to be so. And as having disciplinary authority in union with the church, (1 Corinthians 5:4,5;2 Corinthians 2:9–11: you forgive, I forgive/heal) without any record or mention of required confession.
Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. (James 5:13-15)
Yet nowhere is the infirm man required to confess his sin, and which in this case is likewise one he is ignorant of, but chastened for. (cf.Mark 2:1-11) Nor isJames 5:14,15an example of the Catholic "Last Rites," as healing is what is promised here, while the Catholic Last Rites is normatively a precursor of death.
One can be chastised for unconfessed sins he is not aware of, and mercy can even be requested for those who sinned in ignorance, (Lk. 23:34;Acts 7:60) and we see healing and forgiveness being treated as one thing, for the latter obtained the former. And which was in response to the intercession of the man's friends, and is corespondent to James 5.
And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?
And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion. (Mark 2:3-12)
In both cases it seems that the afflicted were not aware of the sins that there were under chastisement for, and in neither case was confession of such required, and in both cases intercession obtained deliverance without the separate Catholic sacerdotal class of clergy ("hiereus") being required.
3. Nowhere does any NT pastor teach believers in general need to be regularly confessing their sins to them in particular (not that this is wrong, as honesty and accountability should be a norm, yet serious public sins against the body are to be publicly confessed - Joshua 7:19–21) in order to obtain forgiveness.
Scripture states that,
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9)
And when Peter charged Simon Magnus with sin, he told him to pray to God himself if perhaps he might be forgiven. However, this does not mean that intercession for mercy are not to be asked of pastors or believers in general, as was also the case here.
Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me. (Acts 8:22-24)
Yet God will withhold forgiveness if we are not repentant, and can chastise us for not making things right with those we hurt. Also, elders who are accused (by 2 or 3 witnesses) and found guilty of sins against the body are to be publicly rebuked. (1 Timothy 5:19,20)
4. See extended comments of this at end of article) As seen inJames 5:16-18, the power of binding and loosing are is not restricted to clergy, but there are formal judicial actions of binding and loosing, which magisterial judicial power flowed from the OT supreme magisterium, (Deuteronomy 17:8-13) which, as with civil courts, could declare a person guilty of innocent, and even physical bind or loose a person. Likewise a father could bind or loose his daughter who is under his care from her vows, or her husband could could once married. (Numbers 30)
However, premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome is novel and unScriptural, and there is no and for binding and loosing judgments to also stand in Heaven (Matthew 18:18) requires them to be in accordance with the known (Scriptural) character and will of God, just as the promise that whatever we pray for will be done must.
Note also that magisterial judicial actions executed under leadership are not autocratic, but in union with all the church.
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:16-18)
The formal corporate judicial binding and loosing is seen in action in1 Corinthians 5:3-5:
For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Likewise is the corporate nature of forgiveness by the body that was harmed by public sin:
To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. (2 Corinthians 2:10-11)
Yet while judicial actions are carried out by the whole church under leadership, that the spiritual power to bind and loose is not restricted to clergy is also evident by what followsMatthew 18:16-18, as it applies to two or three are gathered together in the Lord's name, in union with Him and each other in sound faith.
Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:18-20)
Leadership can act in the person of Christ in such judicial and disciplinary cases together with the church, as Spirit-filled holy men such as the apostles could declare one to be bound in sin, as seen before inActs 8:20-23, and inActs 5:1-10(cf.Acts 13:6-12;1Co. 4:21) and be instruments of Divine judgment.
And this judicial spiritual power is not an endowment of office as if anyone in that office can effectual spiritually execute such, but is to be by the power of Spirit-filled holy men who are to occupy that office, although the spiritual power of binding and loosing in general is provided for all Spirit-filled holy believers.
5. Outside of the above cases, nowhere is clerical intercession or that of anyone required for forgiveness, but the promise that "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9) means that forgiveness does not require regular confession to clergy, let alone Catholic priests.
Supplementary to the issue of binding and loosing:
The below is from my response to a Catholic who cited inMatthew 18:15in support of his church uniquely being the one true church:
Which, extended to v. 20 states:
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:15-20)
Matthew 18:15-18, without the text that follows, is a standard text invoked by Catholics who mistakenly believe it supports only their own magisterial office, and as one that possesses ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, which is a novel and unScriptural premise.
For this is one of many teachings that support the establishment of authority to bind and loose, both religious and civil, formal and informal, and flows from the Old Testament, in which the "supreme court" of Israel could bind a man in his guilt or loose him, and in which dissent was a capital offense. (Deuteronomy 17:8-13)
Likewise disobedience to civil authority is warned as being potentially deadly inRomans 13:1-7. And in the teaching of sola scriptura (such as the Westminster Confession) there is affirmation the authority of councils to Scripturally settle disputes.
However, ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome is nowhere promised or seen or essential for authority and preservation of faith, and is presumptuous, while the judgment ofMatthew 18:15-17requires the overall corporate consensus of the people. (cf.2 Corinthians 2:10) And as with required obedience to civil "powers that be," then in principle valid authority does not apply to just one formal church or government or family (see below), but to all, requiring conditional (as long as not in conflict with the word of God) obedience to those under it.
And in addition, the judgment of a father on the vows of his daughter, or a husband over those of his wife were binding or loosing, (Numbers 30) and the power to bind and loose inMatthew 18:15-20extends to "two or three are gathered together in my name."
And likewise, the only NT place confession of sins is exhorted is inJames 5:16:
Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. And which is that of each other, not simply leadership, and in context this prayer of faith refers to binding and loosing, and which here is also applied to loosing one from their sins:
Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain [binding]: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain [loosing], and the earth brought forth her fruit. Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins. (James 5:17-20)
ThereforeMatthew 18:15, with the text that follows, does not support the Catholic teaching on the unique power of their church to bind and to loose, but in one sense applies in principle to all governments, and in the spiritual realm it judicially applies to Spirit-filled leadership in union with the congregation, while spiritual power such as in intercession and deliverance and certain binding is also provided to all holy believers of effectual fervent prayer and faith (which I do not claim to be much of), though this should especially characterize the clergy. And with the magisterial office being the supreme judge in settling matters of controversy, based on evidential warrant of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power. Yet not as dictators, but as street-level servant-authorities in union with church leadership overall. To the glory of God.