Why go Roman catholic and why now?

[jwithnell]

It's one thing to have false teaching around that lures people into its consideration. It is quite another to have the adversary actively working through a system of thought, and that appears to be what's happening right now with the Roman catholic perspective. Faith plus ... faith plus works ... faith plus the sacraments. What is the appeal? Some 500 years after the reformation, what's drawing people back into the darkness?

 

[ooguyx]

Well, it's honestly easier to rely on a set of rules and regulations than to rely on Christ. To "work our your salvation with fear and trembling" in the true faith is a truely terrifying task because you can only do so by looking to Christ and trusting him to sanctify you. Meanwhile in Rome, you have a list of items (however confusing and conflicting) to look to and measure yourself against. I think that is a big reason that some are drawn to Rome.

But we shouldn't forget that those who aren't of us will go out from us, and that is a good thing.

 

[py3ak]

I’ve encountered various reasons, whether in conversion stories like those collected by Patrick Madrid, or from knowing people who have gone that route.

Aesthetics - people like the ritual.
Stability - people think that Christians of all stripes need to band together to survive secularism, Islam, etc., and that Rome is the best place to do that.
Legitimacy - on certain social and political issues Rome takes up a stand that is right, or nearly so: and they have the clout to be heard. Being RC means you don't belong to a fringe group.

Obviously these factors can only be influential if actual doctrine is considered relatively unimportant. But sadly there is an enormous mountain of this kind of fluffy thinking: we look at someone's character (or persona), and feel we know that they are a Christian: forgetting on a practical level that heresy is sin, that failure to confess the truth is indicative of a critical moral fault – unbelief. Such thinking also influences why people change from one Protestant church to another. And while I'm grateful that many people who stay in Protestantism for similar reasons will at least continue to hear a clear gospel, it does make me uneasy when I think of what flimsy supports such ideas are to the confession of the truth.

And then I’ve known people to be persuaded of some particular doctrinal point with regard to the keys, or the primacy of Peter, or other points. Those are people who grasp that doctrine does matter, and come to think that in points of sufficient significance to dictate where they should belong the Roman teaching is correct, or more nearly correct, than the Protestant. That's heartbreaking in something of a different way.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

Why go Roman catholic and why now?
It's one thing to have false teaching around that lures people into its consideration. It is quite another to have the adversary actively working through a system of thought, and that appears to be what's happening right now with the Roman catholic perspective. Faith plus ... faith plus works ... faith plus the sacraments. What is the appeal? Some 500 years after the reformation, what's drawing people back into the darkness?

Good question, J. I know that you know enough to know that we can't give a definitive answer to that, especially the "why" part. But here are some thoughts/observations.

I think that the rootlessness of postmodernism has caught up with us and something that makes the "unbroken succession" appeal, as does Rome (as fatuous as it is historically and, even if it were true, real succession affirms the Apostles' doctrine rather than reading it through tradition), is attractive to many. As a part of that, I think many see where Western Society has gone and some say "it's the Reformation's fault," seeking to identify the decline with the split of the Western Church (of course the split with the Eastern Church was formalized in 1054).

The loss of Christendom is seen by some to be the loss of proper Christian influence in society and that's Protestantism's fault. This can be, and has been, teased out rather significantly, particularly lately. One book in this regard, and the subtitle tells it all: Brad S. Gregory, The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularized Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012). This book, and others by recent converts, like the sociologist Christian Smith, argue that the mess that we find ourselves in as a society is due to the Reformation. Ross Douthat's book (Bad Religion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics) does not explicitly argue that but certainly implies it if you know what he's saying.

Bottom line: the economic collapse and societal downturn of the last five years makes Rome, this apparently massive stable institution, attractive to many. I anticipate more defections, frankly--not because that system is true but, in unstable times, it has an allure (just as the immoral woman described in the beginning of Proverbs).

Peace,
Alan

 

[Bill The Baptist]

Perhaps this explains it. Dumb and Dumber- Soup Du Jour - YouTube

 

[hammondjones]

Considering the extreme low-churchness of much of American evangelicalism and lone-ranger Christianity, it's no wonder people are left longing for something more solid, something with more of a community (be it EO or RC). Plus, rituals sure make you feel good, as was mentioned.

Ross Douthat's book (Bad Religion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics) does not explicitly argue that but certainly implies it if you know what he's saying.

Is it not true, though, that at the end of Douthat's book, one of his suggestions for improving American Christianity is to have a more confessional expression of the faith. Though Catholic himself, he praises Keller as an example of one who, though he can engage in dialogue across the aisle, as it were, nevertheless holds to a particular confession [this is his view of Keller, I'm not making a judgment either way]. I read his book to be more a condemnation of accommodationists in both Protestant and Catholic camps, though certainly there is a thread running throughout that without a "center" in Rome, the protestants were pulled far, far away.

 

[toddpedlar]

I suspect also for many - not in the Reformed branches of the church, but the American Evangelical church in general - the namby-pamby moralistic-therapeutic deism that passes for Christianity drives people to want something that is different than what Dr. Phil and Oprah have to offer. Ultimately the Evangelical church with its search for "relevance" and seeker-sensitivity stands to lose many because, really, what is offered (stupid man-centered songs, feel-good urgings to 'do more' from the pulpit, and 'welcoming' services) falls flat on the significance scale. When people who have been poorly instructed lose heart because of the cheap games and tricks that are offered in the Evangelical church, and seek something deeper and more weighty, I can understand the drive toward smells and bells, and an authoriative word... of course Rome doesn't truly offer this, but it can attract those who are disillusioned with the pap that is offered as a whole in evangelicalism.

 

[Rufus]

The aesthetics appeal wouldn't make me convert to Roman Catholicism, the Lutheran Liturgy is the exact same thing minus the prayers to the saints and other Roman Catholic trappings (and still has the Gospel).


We have to remember that while some people in Protestantism are looking that way, there are those in Roman Catholicism looking this way. A lot of the arguments used against Protestants today are the same arguments used by Eck, etc. against Luther, instead of reinventing the wheel we should look back at responses given 500 years ago.

 

[py3ak]

Indeed, Todd. Something so mild it offends no one will not suffice to retain those with a desire for depth. Strong doctrine is a little like strong cheese - it can be off-putting, but if you like it, you love it.

 

[a mere housewife]

I couldn't (saying this just as a little fly on the wall) help being struck with Mr. Stellman's seemingly pivotal dislike of being mistaken in his 'spiritual identity' for Saddleback. Our generation likes to see itself as so self aware, and self image has so much to do with our approach to faith, as to the clothes we wear, the foods we eat -- everything. I think there is some of that involved in the Young, Restless, and Reformed movement. The preaching of the cross has never been popular in terms of this sort of appeal. It is foolishness to the wise. It lacks power to those who are dazzled with a worldly show of authority and strength. Even the 'aesthetic' of worship in the cross is that of our natural sense of beauty crucified to the will of God (as I believe Rev. Buchanan pointed out very tellingly on a different thread recently). Roman Catholicism on the other hand, can offer itself in appealing self image terms of strength and sophistication. Personally -- and beyond the fact that it is easier to accommodate to some form of our innate belief that God accepts the righteous rather than justifying the guilty (I struggle with this daily, even in seeking forgiveness for sins: as I if I could repent enough to somewhat 'deserve' a pardon) -- I think this has something to do with things. It seems that would tie into, as above, the popularly 'self aware' assessment of the problems the modern world is facing. Just some thoughts from my own small realm of observation.

edit, I should perhaps add that this was one reason I was so glad (for my own sake) for Rich's reminder on a previous thread, not to think of ourselves when we oppose error as those who have found the right doctrine by some superior feat of reasoning; but as those who have had our heavy burdens taken away by Christ, who long to see others under such an 'easy yoke'. For I think (and have witnessed it in myself and others) that any appeal in what we believe to our own pride can be so easily used against us; and it is not allowed to us by the cross we cling to. I think we will have to accept as Paul did that holding to Christ alone is at some point at least, and perhaps at many points, going to make us look ignorant, uncultured, backwards, un-nuanced, fragmented and weak, beating a long dead horse with a single stick and with all the mistaken zeal of the religiously un-urbane. I think unless we're willing to look like that sort of fool, we probably will wind up being ashamed of our Lord.

 

[yeutter]

I have had several friends and kinsmen, even near kinsmen go over to Eastern Orthodoxy or to Rome. Most left the mainline Presbyterian Church and stopped of in evangelicalism along the way. What passes for worship in much of evangelicalism drove some to seek something deeper. One near kinsman told me about the lack of sacramentalism in evangelicalism as being what drove him to Rome. The aesthetics of the Popish Mass were also a factor.

 

[Rufus]

One near kinsman told me about the lack of sacramentalism in evangelicalism as being what drove him to Rome. The aesthetics of the Popish Mass were also a factor.

Sacramentalism and the aesthetics = Lutheranism. I really don't understand why people aren't going there where the Gospel is still preached.

 

[py3ak]

Because hearing a clear gospel isn't that important to them, Sean (no doubt with other reasons like location, familiarity, and so forth). If it were, it would trump aesthetics every time.

 

[JennyG]

I think we will have to accept as Paul did that holding to Christ alone is...going to make us look ignorant, uncultured, backwards, un-nuanced, fragmented and weak, beating a long dead horse with a single stick and with all the mistaken zeal of the religiously un-urbane.

I love your way of putting it, Heidi
What an honour to look ignorant, uncultured etc in the best company in the world!

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I should perhaps add that this was one reason I was so glad (for my own sake) for Rich's reminder on a previous thread, not to think of ourselves when we oppose error as those who have found the right doctrine by some superior feat of reasoning; but as those who have had our heavy burdens taken away by Christ, who long to see others under such an 'easy yoke'. For I think (and have witnessed it in myself and others) that any appeal in what we believe to our own pride can be so easily used against us; and it is not allowed to us by the cross we cling to. I think we will have to accept as Paul did that holding to Christ alone is at some point at least, and perhaps at many points, going to make us look ignorant, uncultured, backwards, un-nuanced, fragmented and weak, beating a long dead horse with a single stick and with all the mistaken zeal of the religiously un-urbane. I think unless we're willing to look like that sort of fool, we probably will wind up being ashamed of our Lord.

I'm happy it encouraged you. It's all I can hold on to. There are certain "scenes" in Biblical history that are stark for me and one of them is at the end of John 6 where Christ is left with only a handful of disciples and asks them if they're going to leave as well. Peter's response is a refrain for me:

John 6:68–69 (ESV) — 68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”

Boiled down, Christ is a reproach to the world and it's only His grip that keeps us. We might otherwise wriggle out but Little-faith lays hold of the same powerful Savior as Mr. Great Heart.

 

[J. Dean]

A good number of people whom I know switch churches (Catholic or otherwise) do so for reasons other than doctrinal, in part because they themselves have such a weak understanding of doctrine, or because the girl/boy they like happens to be in the other denomination (this has been the story of several people I know), or because of aesthetics/tradition (this has been the reason by some in more contemporary movements going to Rome, because you don't have a rock concert worship service that's "led by the Spirit").

A woman I know (a former Presbyterian from an EPC church) became Catholic because her pastor (according to her) taught her that Rome does not believe in grace. When she talked to Catholics, she learned that this is not true (Yes, Rome has a skewed understanding of grace, but to say they do not at all believe in grace as was alleged is simply incorrect).

Also, there is the continuity of Rome. It's been around since the sixth century, and its established historicity is appealing to many (Of course don't start asking them about why they needed Vatican II).

And it doesn't help when a significant portion of the doctrinally-illiterate evangelical community looks at Catholics and says "Hey! They're just like us with some cosmetic differences!" which makes it easier for parishoners to swim the Tiber back to Rome.

 

[ZackF]

I've said this on other threads and I'll say it again here, there is not a huge wave of people going towards Roman Catholicism. It is an illusion. Things are not going that way save some "conversions" for marriage. A few dozen seminarians and a handful of Reformed minsters going to Rome over a period of decades is sad but not the whole story. There is nothing equivalent in Roman Catholicism to the "Young Restless and Reformed" movement with respect to the huge nominal base that Rome has. The numbers just are not there despite the tragedy of individual losses to the RC. Some dioceses cannot for the life of them, or lack thereof, staff parishes with a priest. Right of center dioceses have more vocations per Catholic but even those dioceses have only a fraction of the ordinations they had a couple of generations ago. As Dr. Horton said on a recent WHI, "except for that one thing Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?" If people don't consider how to get right before a holy God first and foremost...then they are probably lost or will be lost until something changes. As long as the argument centers around sizes of institutions, cultural influence by numbers, grotesque authority structures, witty authors of the past, historical romanticism about "Christendom" and the beauty of Latin rituals yada, yada.....who cares? If a person wants a discussion about how to get right with God and abide in him....now we can talk?

 

[Scott1]

There are many, many more going the other way via the charismatic movement, ecumenism, para church ministry, etc. with all the faults and limitations of them.

Humans are bound to sin before regeneration and have a remnant of the Fall in their persons after regeneration that manifests itself in:

1) wanting to be God (works based salvation)
2) downplaying the holiness of God
3) downplaying the effects of sin (and compartmentalizing it through religious "acts")

It's that simple,
until our Lord returns.

 

[J. Dean]

There are many, many more going the other way via the charismatic movement, ecumenism, para church ministry, etc. with all the faults and limitations of them.

+10

Just as there is an attraction to Rome because of aesthetics, there is also an attraction to the charismatic-influenced churches because of their "charisma" and "living worship" (read: emotionalism).

 

[Galatians220]

What is the appeal? Some 500 years after the reformation, what's drawing people back into the darkness?

If I may be so bold as to venture an opinion (one that I'll probably give a shelf life to of, oh, under a day or so), people don't perceive the Catholic Church as darkness. Only those to whom He has given grace can see the evil monstrosity that is the doctrine of the transubstantiation, along with the few other, remaining elements of what used to be a Catholicism that Protestant ministers felt like preaching against. Gone are novenas, scapulars, monstrances, rosaries, "Mary" and "Joseph" altars in churches, incense, the Nine First Fridays, the Ten First Saturdays, St. Blaise Day (Feb. 2), nuns in habits wearing 15-decade rosaries, May crownings, formal observations of St. Patrick's Day, litanies, Acts of Contrition and Penance, etc., the Easter Duty, the Latin mass except for a few Tridentine parishes scattered throughout most large archdioceses, the Feast of the Chair of St. Peter at Rome (Jan. 18), warnings about "not fraternizing with Protestants," the concepts of "mortal" and "venial" sins, the necessity of the "sacrament" of penance and so much more. What's not to like about Catholicism these days? Isn't it just another form of Christianity? Aren't these also our brothers and sisters in Christ - just in another communion of which we must not speak badly? No one even *really* believes in papal infallibility anymore, and thus Catholicism becomes just another "Joe Cool" religion.

Reformed ministers haven't helped the situation. Several years ago, in an ethnic Reformed church, an elderly couple asked me what had brought me to join them. I replied that the Lord had saved me out of Catholicism; He had saved me and made me a new creation in Christ. They turned on their heels and walked away from me, never to speak to me again. Why? The minister told me later that their son had married a Catholic and was now going through the RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults, or what the converts class is now called in the Catholic Church) program. He also advised me not to bring up the subject of being grateful for being saved and being out of Catholicism again.

On a personal level, I've never been as lonely as I have been the past few years in my "real" life, trying to fit into Reformed churches. There's a part of me that longs for the camaraderie and the bonhomie, the friendship of others that I believe I had in the Catholic Church. I'll never really fit into the Reformed scene and I've started accepting that. I won't return to Rome, either - but it sure is desolate out here.

 

[py3ak]

...people don't perceive the Catholic Church as darkness.

Now that is what I was trying to say above, and on another thread, only properly succinct and clear. American Catholicism has been to a large degree Americanized and Evangellyfishized; but down past the surface you find the same problems. Cosmetic changes without repentance will never take away the reason for the Reformation: and as long as those reasons remain, distinctly Reformed churches must also.

Margaret, if you've never listened to the testimony of Tim Williams you might enjoy it. He is quite happy to express his gratitude for having been saved out of the Roman Catholic church, and I am happy that my church gave him a platform to do just that, publicly, twice.

 

[py3ak]

...people don't perceive the Catholic Church as darkness.

Now that is what I was trying to say above, and on another thread, only properly succinct and clear. American Catholicism has been to a large degree Americanized and Evangellyfishized; but down past the surface you find the same problems. Cosmetic changes without repentance will never take away the reason for the Reformation: and as long as those reasons remain, distinctly Reformed churches must also.

Margaret, if you've never listened to the testimony of Tim Williams you might enjoy it. He is quite happy to express his gratitude for having been saved out of the Roman Catholic church, and I am happy that my church gave him a platform to do just that, publicly, twice.

 

[jwithnell]

I think I see two strands going here: the first is the shallowness of so much of the modern protestant church and the desire for a more "meaningful" worship. This popped out at me about five years ago. In our area, we meet many young adults who have been home schooled -- very bright, very dedicated people who for a while, were very enamored with eastern orthodoxy and "higher" church.

Intellectual sophistication might best describe the second strand, as several have mentioned. (And likely the same force driving efforts like BioLogos which is another can of worms.) We may not have a "wave" of seminarians and pastors going over to RC, but it seems that the reformed community in particular is under attack by this form of thinking. I am particularly distressed by the outright denial of the imputation of Jesus' righteousness to us. Also, the elevation of the sacraments into a meritorious realm strips them of the wondrous grace demonstrated to us at each baptism and gathering at the Lord's table.

All this definitely is a call to prayer. It is a reminder to me of our moment-to-moment reliance on the Holy Spirit to illuminate God's truth to us. I have tended to think of God's mercy on a macro level, without seeing that thought-by-thought and moment-by-moment mercy he shows in sustaining us in the orthodox faith.

I know that you know enough to know that we can't give a definitive answer to that, especially the "why" part.

Thank you, Pastor Strange, for being gracious!

 

[Philip]

Sacramentalism and the aesthetics = Lutheranism. I really don't understand why people aren't going there where the Gospel is still preached.

Part of it, Sean, is the lack of presence. Most people in Evangelicalism are unaware of Lutheranism, or for that matter, Anglicanism (two traditions for which I have a deep respect) whereas most of us know a Catholic. It also doesn't help that Lutherans and Anglicans are fracturing.

in part because they themselves have such a weak understanding of doctrine, or because the girl/boy they like happens to be in the other denomination (this has been the story of several people I know)

A theology prof once told me that 9 out of ten times that he had someone come to him considering a journey across the Tiber, there was a love interest involved.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

Margaret:

I am delighted to hear your testimony! Thanks be to God for it! And, yes, it's an Americanized Catholicism.

Given what you just wrote, I remind everyone of Westminster Confession of Faith 24.3: "And therefore such as profess the true reformed religion should not marry with infidels, papists, or other idolaters."

Peace,
Alan

 

[yeutter]

One near kinsman told me about the lack of sacramentalism in evangelicalism as being what drove him to Rome. The aesthetics of the Popish Mass were also a factor.

Sacramentalism and the aesthetics = Lutheranism. I really don't understand why people aren't going there where the Gospel is still preached.

I agree. Lutheranism and Anglicanism provide the weekly administration of the sacraments and do so in a dignified aesthetically pleasing way. Most on this board are committed to the regulative principle and would be troubled by some aspects of Lutheran and Anglican worship. For someone who left the mainstream Presbyterian Church for its liberalism and is fed up with the namby-pamby moralistic mess that much of evangelical preaching and worship has become: historic Lutheran or Anglican liturgy would seem to provide an answer.

 

[yeutter]

Sacramentalism and the aesthetics = Lutheranism. I really don't understand why people aren't going there where the Gospel is still preached.

Part of it, Sean, is the lack of presence. Most people in Evangelicalism are unaware of Lutheranism, or for that matter, Anglicanism (two traditions for which I have a deep respect) whereas most of us know a Catholic. It also doesn't help that Lutherans and Anglicans are fracturing.

in part because they themselves have such a weak understanding of doctrine, or because the girl/boy they like happens to be in the other denomination (this has been the story of several people I know)

A theology prof once told me that 9 out of ten times that he had someone come to him considering a journey across the Tiber, there was a love interest involved.

In New England and the South it may be true that Lutheranism and Lutherans are relatively unknown. In Pennsylvania and the Great Lakes, and Great Plains regions everyone knows Lutherans. They just aren't pushy.
Love interests may have been a factor in a couple of the people I know crossing the Tiber.

Some friends have broke with evangelicalism, attended an Anglican Church that was Anglo-Romish and decided they might as well go over to Rome completely and get the real deal.

 

[JennyG]

I'll never really fit into the Reformed scene and I've started accepting that. I won't return to Rome, either - but it sure is desolate out here.

wish you were here!! Cultural ties can be very strong, and some things will always just be a more comfortable fit than others. Praising God for your clear grasp of what's at stake, and that you're in no danger of relapsing

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I was working out this morning and on my back doing some painful thing when I began to meditate on this conversation.

First of all, I agree with Zack that the tales of large influxes into the Catholic Church are greatly exaggerated. Social media has a way of making a movement seem much larger than it is. I was just listening to a Church planter who is very savvy with technology talk about how people came to his Church shocked at how small it was because his website made his tiny Church seem so big. I don't mean to downplay the significance of those who do swim the Tiber but it's so common to hear the testimony of those who have left the RCC to come to an Evangelical faith that it's noteworthy when it goes the other way. If we actually had a blog dedicated to those who leave the RCC (for whatever reason) and every story was told, the site would be massive but mostly uninteresting because its bleeding people every day.

Now, let me get to what I was thinking about this morning.

I grew up Roman Catholic. I loved the Church. I was an altar boy. As soon as I could play guitar well enough I played in the Church folk group. I was even part of a Church that had a priest come out of the Jesus Movement. We sang with our hands raised. We clapped. We even believed there wasn't really much that separated us from Evangelicals. We were excited about Jesus and every symbol of the Mass meant something to us. I was also convinced that the Church always was. I am a descendant of a strong Irish Catholic tradition and when my Nana's husband's ex-wife died (he was 93 at the time) she made sure to get married by an RCC priest as soon as possible so she could take communion in her Church (something she couldn't do for over 50 years because she married a divorced man).

I distinctly remember the fear of Hell I had as a kid and young man (especially as a young man). There was even a sense of relief (temporarily) when I went to Confession because I thought I wouldn't go to Hell anymore. I don't know why I didn't take advantage of it more but I knew that my zeal to not sin wasn't cutting it.

Now, because of a weak sense of what the distinctions were between the RCC and Protestant Churches I didn't really think there was much difference and that the Protestant Reformation came about because Luther was excited about Jesus and the RCC was a bunch of traditionalists. You may laugh but that was my view for a long time into my adulthood. I had attended a Charismatic Catholic Church and so my experience of being born again was the same as what I heard other Evangelicals talking about. Good music, good feelings, being in tune with the Spirit, etc....

I ended up not going to Church for about 4 years after joining the USMC in 1990. I had pretty much given up on finding another RCC that wasn't boring as saw dust and even tried out a few other Churches while at Camp Lejeune but they didn't do anything for me. I ended up returning to Church in 1994 after being challenged by a woman I was dating for a short time (she couldn't stand my views and asked me why I wasn't going to Church if I believed what I said). I found a phonebook and closed my eyes and put my finger on the Church where I met my wife. It had what I wanted: experience. Still didn't understand much more than that. I knew I had to try hard and I still couldn't get it done but now I didn't have the Sacrament of Penance but at least I had the Revivalist sacrament of Rededication which I only took advantage of once because I figured if I went to the front of the Church every week it might start raising eyebrows. Actually, I was at the front of the Church already because I was the worship leader so that would make it more awkward.

Man, this is getting long but I'm going somewhere with this.

Sonya and I moved to Quantico in 1996 and found a Charismatic Church in Manassas, VA that we liked. Had all the right experiential elements.

But, man! I would go into Church every week trying to "let go". I was trying to get to that point where I could abandon self and let the Spirit fill me in such a way that I would stop struggling with sin. I was newly married and, in retrospect, a really bad husband. I would walk out of Church every Sunday and the moment I walked into the sun I was depressed because I felt helpless dealing with my sin. Now I had nothing to deal with the guilt I had. I even attended a Promise Keepers at the time. After hearing how it would just change your life I thought that the motivational speakers would push me over the edge to Super Saint. I went to the prayer event on the DC Mall. Same expectation. Fail! I attended a marriage conference with the promise that it would revitalize my marriage. It wasn't bad but surely this would make me a better husband. Fail!

Then, one day while driving to work I heard some guy at the tail end of his show talking about the Lord's Supper. I was intrigued by the topic and wrote down the number 1 (800) 435- 4343. I ordered the tape series on Roman Catholicism and the book Faith Alone.

Then, on a flight to Okinawa, I was reading Faith Alone and it was like: "Why hasn't anyone told me about this before? Of course!"

I have to tell you that when I understood the Gospel for the first time that no experience, no event, no "letting go" could replace the Scripture's testimony of the Gospel. EVER AGAIN.

I'm still on a narrow path stumbling along the way and different aspects of that Gospel come into sharper focus. Understanding indwelling sin and definitive sanctification came years later.

What's the point of all of this?

I understand why many Evangelicals want more than the excrement they are fed. There's no life to it. There's a gloss to the idea that Christ died for you, etc, etc but then everything gets to what you need to do and you leave Church and your left with the wickedness of your heart. Then there's all the absolute garbage that fills the Christian air waves about the victorious life or, even if they're not peddling that, they're peddling conferences or books or having testmony from people that talk about how they were just completely changed.

And everyone listening is thinking: others are getting there, what's wrong with me?

They buy into this lie because EVERYONE listening is thinking the SAME thing. What's wrong with me? I'm not victorious throughout the week. I bought the last book or went to the last seminar that promised to change my life but it didn't do anything for me but I'm not telling anybody else because it seems to have worked for them.

It didn't work for any of them. They're still sinning and they know it but most Churches put them back on the treadmill and convince them that if they pray more, submit more, do something more then they'll be where they ought to be.

The problem is that most "Evangelical" churches are nearly or fully Pelagian today and the Roman Catholic Church looks gracious by comparison!

There is real relief when someone tells you that your sin is forgiven. Who cares whether its true. At least if I'm going to be put on a treadmill I can never get further on I have a Priest to go to at the end of the week to tell me I'm forgiven.

You can have your Church history debates and philosophical debates over these fine points. I can hang but I didn't stop for a moment to think about the history of the doctrine of justification when I encountered the Gospel on a 14 hour flight from the US to Japan in 1997. All I knew was that it was as if I had walked into a whole new world of the Scriptures I never knew existed. The Son in my universe reveals darkness for what it is. I know about all the difficulties of Church history, higher and textual criticism, etc but the Son makes all things new. That's my prayer for all men whether they're in the darkness of an "Evangelical" Church or a Roman Catholic Church or still in darkness sitting in the seats next to me. The Gospel is the power of salvation.

So, "why now"? Because men are dead in their sins and trespasses but even dead men like the "light healing" that the Roman Catholic Church gives. Jeremiah condemned the false prophets for healing the wounds of God's people lightly. False men have always had a large audience because people who are in darkness want some healing and Te Absolvo feels really good.

But those who have been place into the hands of the Great Physician?

Glory! It's impossible for someone to go back to false teachers once they've felt His touch!

 

[jwithnell]

Thank you Rich, for telling us about how Christ has worked in your life. We'll spend eternity marveling at how Christ has worked with us both as part of his church and as individuals.

My concern is for those who at some level know what you are talking about. I was a member at Providence Reformed PCA in St. Louis in its infancy under its original pastor. Now that congregation accepts Jeff Myers and his teaching -- and Jeff was closely mentored by that first pastor. I have to wonder: was there already something amiss when I was there? Did I miss something? Had I remained there, would a gradual shift in theology have carried me along too?