Quite a serious topic that I have called
the alignment of New Evangelicals with apostasy.
New Evangelicals have endorsed a false gospel and
I'm going to document that in this paper
and then to state what we should do
regarding New Evangelicals and their endorsement of Roman
Catholic inherent righteousness.
Evangelicals throughout history have maintained that justification by
faith alone is the way in which sinful
human beings are made right in Christ Jesus.
Before the all-holy God, it is that
justification is a judicial act of God.
It is His imputing Christ's righteousness to the
believer based solely and wholly on what Christ
Jesus has done in His perfect life and
in His absolutely sufficient death for His people.
Historically, Evangelicals have been in alignment with the
Apostle Paul in what Paul said, for example,
in Romans 4, to him that worketh not,
but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,
his faith is counted for righteousness.
That was all the historical position of Evangelicals
before the Reformation, after the Reformation and in
all the great confessions of faith we have
had throughout history, a belief in the righteousness
of Christ alone for salvation.
A person calling himself Evangelical is professing to
be committed to this gospel as proclaimed in
Scripture.
The true gospel demands separation from all who
teach another gospel, as the Apostle declared in
the Scripture in Galatians.
But though we or an angel from heaven
preach any other gospel unto you than which
we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed.
As we said before, so say I now
again, if any man preach any other gospel
unto you than which ye have believed, let
him be accursed.
Without such separation, the name Evangelical signifies nothing.
If an Evangelical will not separate for the
sake of the gospel, he is not an
Evangelical in fact.
New Evangelicalism has willingly compromised with another gospel
over the last 50 years or so, particularly
since 1960.
Since then the Evangelical world has changed beyond
recognition.
This is fully documented in Ian Murray's new
book called Evangelicalism Divided.
Where it all became center stage and very
apparent was in the UK and Britain.
The first and second National Evangelical Anglican Conferences
that met at Keele and Nottingham in the
UK in 1967 and 1977 respectively showed a
willingness to be united with ritualistic Anglicans and
those who were liberal Anglicans and who in
practice look very much like Roman Catholics and
liberals who held to a fallible Bible.
Such leading Evangelicals as J.I. Packer and
John Stott who signed the conference statements of
Keele and Nottingham in 1967 and 1977 by
that very endorsement set aside the gospel of
Christ.
The gospel of accepting, or the so-called
other gospel of accepting Anglicans as brothers and
sisters in Christ.
That was the first overt departure in our
own times.
17 years after Nottingham we had here in
the United States of America in Dallas, Texas
at the end of March 1994 a declaration
to the United States and the world was
published called Evangelicals and Catholics Together the Christian
Mission in the Third Millennium.
This document which has not been revoked but
has been continually defended by its signers has
made some devastating effects on what was called
Evangelicalism.
The two main instigators, the two main men
to perpetrate this Evangelicals and Catholics Together were
Charles Colson and Richard John Newhouse, a Lutheran
pastor turned Roman Catholic priest.
The specific task was begun in September 1992
according to themselves and they were joined in
the writing process by Larry Lewis of the
Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention,
Jesse Miranda of the Assemblies of God, John
White of Geneva College and the National Association
of Evangelicals and others including two Jesuits, the
very well-known Avery Dulles and Juan Diaz
-Vilar and two more Jesuits signed
the
document and such as Bill Bright of Campus
Crusade, Mark Knoll of Wheaton College, Pat Robinson
of the 700 Club and the Catholic signers
included the very well-known Cardinal John O
'Connor of New York who is since deceased,
Archbishop Sevilla, Archbishop Stafford and Bishop Francis George
who is presently Archbishop of Chicago.
The gospel was presented in this horrendous document.
Having said that there were differences that cannot
be resolved here, the exact words of the
document, the document goes on to explain that
they are motivated by a desire to solve
moral and cultural issues and then they go
on to proclaim that Catholics are our brothers
and sisters in Christ and that they are
truly Christian and then they go on to
proclaim what they say they have agreed on
in the gospel and this is exactly the
words from the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together.
Quotation, we affirm together that we are justified
by grace through faith because of Christ.
Living faith is active in love that is
nothing less than the love of Christ.
Now had they been biblical and were giving
a truly biblical message they would have said
that we are justified, we affirm that we
are justified by grace alone, through faith alone
and in Christ Jesus alone.
Why did they not say that?
Because if they did, the Roman Catholic Archbishops
would not have signed and the Catholic Church
could not agree to sign.
And so they take away from the gospel
the very thing that makes the gospel.
They take away the righteousness of Christ because
they leave out the word alone signifying the
righteousness of Christ Jesus.
That faith is his righteousness alone and it
is God's gift of grace based on his
righteousness alone.
The very thing that the martyrs of old
died for and that the true Evangelicals always
stood for is taken away from the so
-called gospel of ECT.
Most serious, a deficient other gospel because the
righteousness of Christ alone is taken out of
it.
And then they add to what is in
scripture by their following statement.
Living faith is active in love.
Living faith is a Catholic terminology and it
is the very thing that the Council of
Trent has said that we were to have
living faith active.
Living faith because the Catholics cannot accept a
faith that is faith alone.
It has to include their sacraments.
And so we have the declaration of Trent,
quotation, for faith unless hope and charity be
added to it, neither unites one perfectly with
Christ nor makes him a living member of
his body.
The concept therefore had to include works and
particularly the Roman Catholic sacraments.
And so these Evangelicals include then the Catholic
definition of faith as living faith to make
room for her priests and her sacraments.
The new Evangelical signers have concurred with Roman
Catholic definition of living faith active in love.
And this is exactly what the New Catechism
of the Catholic Church says.
The New Catechism of the Catholic Church declares
in paragraph 1814, quotation, the very root of
the Church's living faith is principally by means
of baptism, end of quotation.
So living faith is to make room for
her sacrament of baptism.
And this is what the Evangelicals have declared
is the Gospel.
First of all in taking out the word
alone so that the righteousness of Christ is
excluded.
And then defining faith as not faith alone
but as living faith active in love so
as the Catholic sacraments are again included.
It is not faith alone that is taught
by these Evangelicals.
We have here exactly what Trent had said.
And if these men such as Packer, Oskin,
T.M. Moore and others who have now
endorsing both Evangelicals and Catholics together, one and
two, if they were to be logical, they
would say the words of Trent.
If anyone shall say that by faith alone
the sinner is justified so as to understand
that nothing else is required to cooperate in
the attainment of the grace of justification and
that it is in no way necessary that
he be helped, be prepared and disposed by
the action of his own will, let him
be anathema, that is eternally cursed to hell.
So the Catholics stand in this document in
having the righteousness of Christ removed, in removing
the word alone and then in having their
concept of living faith and not faith alone
placed in the document signed by Jesuits and
so-called Evangelicals.
To endorse this document is to deny many
repeated texts in Scripture.
For example, the words of the Apostle, but
after the kindness and love of God our
Saviour towards man appeared, not by the works
of righteousness which we have done, but according
to his mercy he saved us.
Amen and praise his name.
Now it gets worse because that was their
so-called gospel, another gospel, but then they
go on explicitly to endorse baptismal regeneration in
the same document.
Under the general heading of we witness together
and to use the words of the document
in the context of evangelization and re-evangelization,
end of quotation, that is the gospel, the
message to the world by these new evangelical
personalities such as Packer, Coulson and Bright is,
quotation, for Catholics all who are validly baptized
are born again and are truly, however imperfectly,
in communion with Christ, end of quotation.
They might as well have said what the
Code of Canon Law says.
The Code of Canon Law says, quotation, baptism
by which men and women are freed from
their sins are reborn as children of God
and configured to Christ.
They said the same thing in different words
as does official Catholic teaching, that you are
born again by baptism.
And these are men who are called leading
evangelicals now endorsing baptismal regeneration.
In contrast to what these evangelicals have signed
and what is the official teaching of the
Roman Catholic Church, the risen Christ Jesus the
Lord says, he that is, he that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved.
He that believeth not shall be damned.
Faith is the key of saving grace and
unbelief its damning sin.
Faith is what is necessary for salvation and
baptism is simply an ordinance that follows faith
and testifies to faith.
The proof of this is found in the
omission in the second half of the verse,
it is not he who is not baptized
shall be damned but rather he that believeth
not shall be damned.
Over the years repentance has been demanded of
these men, in letters personally to them, in
emails and formally as a group of over
600 of us at the ex-Catholics for
Christ conference, exactly five years in the same
city of Dallas, where as a group of
evangelicals true to the gospel, we demanded that
these men repent of teaching a false gospel.
They have not done so and they have
continued to defend their abominable position.
Even in my own Ireland, J.I. Parker
went from north to south defending this very
document and establishing in my own homeland of
Ireland, Evangelicals and Catholics together Ireland.
A new document for the Irish to say
that the Catholics and the Evangelicals are one
in faith in Ireland.
They have done so in other nations as
well.
So not only have they defended their position,
but they are bringing it across the world
to try and see that it is implemented.
What is the implementation of it?
What is the purpose of it?
They declare it in the document itself.
The real purpose is to put a stop
to the gospel going out to Catholics across
the world.
It is a compromise so that Catholics are
not evangelized.
The impact has been seen most of all
in the southern part of the Americas, South
America, Central America and in Spain, Portugal and
the Philippines.
It has already become apparent that many missionaries
are not returning to some of these nations
for lack of support and because they are
told that these nations are for the most
part now considered as brothers and sisters in
Christ.
So we have a devastating effect on millions
of lives and in countries that need to
be evangelized.
And this is the exact purpose as stated
in the document itself.
Quotation.
We are aware that our experience reflects the
distinctive circumstances and the opportunities of Evangelicals and
Catholics living together in North America.
At the same time we believe that we
have discovered and resolved, that what we have
discovered and resolved is pertinent to the relationship
between Evangelicals and Catholics in other parts of
the world.
And they declare also, quotation, it is neither
theologically legitimate nor prudent, a prudent use of
resources for one Christian community, they mean church,
to proselytize, and they mean evangelize, among other
active adherents of another Christian community.
It is not legitimate to proselytize, to evangelize
another Christian community.
Since when is it not legitimate to give
the gospel to those who know it not?
Since when is it illegitimate to expose heresy
and error?
Since when are men and women not to
contend for the faith that this is not
legitimate?
We have here now not simply a departure
from the gospel and an addition of a
faith that is not faith in Christ alone,
but we have its purpose so that nations
and millions of souls are not evangelized.
It wasn't long after this that I got
a telephone call from a man returning from
the mission field in Spain.
He phoned me from Sacramento and he said,
Richard, I've been already hit with churches not
wanting to support me since Evangelicals and Catholics
together have been published.
Robert Colton, working in Malaga, Spain.
This is horrifically disastrous when it comes to
giving the gospel.
The gospel says we are to separate from
such men and for those who support them.
In the words of the Apostle John, 2
John 1.9-11, Whosoever transgresseth and abideth
not in the doctrine of Christ hath not
God.
He that bringeth in the doctrine of Christ,
he hath both the Father and the Son.
If there come unto you any that bring
not this doctrine, receive him not into your
house, neither bid him Godspeed.
For he that biddeth him Godspeed is a
partaker of his evil deeds.
It's clearer than that we cannot get.
We are to separate from men of evil
deeds who teach not the doctrine of Christ.
You would think that that is bad enough,
Evangelicals and Catholics together, 1994.
But what happened in 1997 was even worse.
A more compounded and erudite and subtle and
worthless presentation of what was officially called the
gift of salvation.
It was November the 12th, 1997, the document,
the gift of salvation, published by leading Evangelical
and Roman Catholic leaders.
It expressed the intention was to show a
common faith and that Evangelicals were to acknowledge
one another as, quote, brothers and sisters in
Christ.
It was published in the magazine called Christianity
Today on December the 8th, 1997.
Explicitly, the Roman Catholic signers of the document,
such as Richard John Newhouse and the Jesuit
Avery Dulles, state in the document, quotation, Catholics
who are conscientiously faithful to the teaching of
the Catholic Church.
Because the Catholic signers say that they are
conscientiously faithful to the teaching of the Church,
we would presume that the document teaches Catholic
form of justification.
And that is indeed what the document does.
It teaches inferred, conferred inner righteousness.
It endorses Rome's own teaching on justification.
And this is signed now not just by
men who signed the first document, but they
are joined now with such as Timothy George
and the PCA man T.M. Moore, former
president of Chesapeake Seminary, and John Woodbridge.
We have now a nerodite, extremely clever presentation
of Catholic conferred inner righteousness.
The document states that justification, quotation, is central
to the scriptural accounts of salvation and its
meaning has been much debated between Protestants and
Catholics.
However, it goes on to state that the
signers have reached an agreement and they give
you in words what the agreement is.
Quotation, it's two sentences, quite long, and please
listen.
Quotation, we agree that justification is not earned
by any good works or merits of our
own.
It is entirely God's gift conferred through the
Father's sheer graciousness.
Out of the love that he bears us
in his Son, who suffered on our behalf
and rose from the dead for our justification.
Jesus was put to death for our trespasses
and raised for our justification.
In justification, God, on the basis of Christ's
righteousness alone, declares us to be no longer
his rebellious enemies, but his forgiven friends.
And by virtue of his declaration, it is
so.
The subject under review is clearly said in
the first sentence.
We agree that justification is conferred through the
Father's sheer graciousness.
And by careful reading, studying the grammar of
these long sentences, we see what is the
pivotal statement that these men are trying to
make.
It, that is justification, is entirely God's gift
conferred, not imputed.
Conferred.
And by virtue of his, that's God's, declaration,
it.
Justification conferred is so.
So we have here, quite cleverly, wrapped up
the traditional Roman Catholic teaching that we have
conferred justification.
To use the word conferred instead of the
biblical word imputed is a denial of the
scriptural authority of God's scriptural authority in his
written word.
We have here a setting aside of the
importance of scripture and its terminology.
And we have an implementation of the Catholic
word that was used to defend Catholicism against
the concept of imputation.
This has been done right through from medieval
times onwards.
I spent four years studying Thomas Aquinas and
studying how it was that because justification is
conferred, it is a quality of the soul
and is in a person.
It was what I was trained in, in
my Dominican theology.
It was the very thing that Trent insisted
on, that justification is conferred, not imputed.
And it was what Trent declared as a
curse, that if anybody did not accept this
concept, they were damned forever.
Quotation from Trent, if anyone shall say that
by the said sacraments of the new law,
grace is not conferred from the work which
has been worked, ex opere operato, but that
faith alone in the divine promise suffices to
obtain grace, let him be anathema.
That is, if you do not believe that
conferred justification automatically works, that is ex opere
operato, and if you believe only in faith
alone to obtain the divine promises, you are
eternally cursed.
Such as R.C. Sproul has said correctly
that that is in writing the Church of
Rome's condemnation of the biblical gospel.
And the new catechism has endorsed the teaching
of Trent and has called it, as well
as other councils, infallible.
So we have the Catholic Church insisting on
the word conferred, as the new catechism does,
quotation from its very words, justification is conferred
in baptism, the sacrament of faith.
It conforms us to the righteousness of God
who makes us inwardly just by the power
of his mercy, end of quotation.
Because inner righteousness is located in the person
and not, as the scriptures say, in Christ,
it is possible to lose this conferred righteousness.
And so, logically, the Catholic Church needs it
to be conferred again and again and again.
In the scriptures, conferred righteousness does not exist.
Justification is a one-time declaration by God
that Christ's righteousness is held to your account.
But the Catholic Church, because of their idea
of it coming through the sacraments, has repeated
the idea of getting it again and again.
And so they say, formally and officially, in
their new catechism, they say the following, 1446,
the new catechism, quotation, the sacrament of penance
offers a new possibility to convert and rediscover
and recover, I beg your pardon, and recover
the grace of justification.
The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament
as the second plank of salvation after shipwreck,
which is the loss of grace.
So, again and again, this grace of justification
can be given to you as the priest
gives his absolution.
And so the need for the word conferred.
And the Church says that it is necessary
to have the sacraments.
Sacramental grace is the grace of the Holy
Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each
sacrament.
The utter blasphemous words that this conferring through
their physical sacraments is necessary for a man
or woman to be saved.
In the scripture we have a declaration of
the righteousness of Christ unto all them that
believe.
There is no difference.
It is, in the words of the Apostle
Paul, and to be found in him not
having my own righteousness, which is of the
law, but that which is by faith in
Christ.
It is the wonder of being found in
him having his righteousness imputed to me or
to you.
The Roman Catholic Church, by its concept of
conferred instead of imputed, is replacing her physical
sacraments for the Lord of glory and believing
on him and him alone.
In face of the biblical clarity and in
face of history of this word that was
set up to deny imputed righteousness, we now
have leading evangelicals using the precise term of
Rome.
This is a perversion of biblical truth and
it is an attempt to subsume the so
-called gospel as replacing the gospel of Christ
and bring it into conformity with Roman Catholic
teaching.
Evangelicals such as J.
I.
Packer, when he was Orthodox, wrote splendid things
about faith alone and Christ's righteousness alone.
As has done Timothy George of the Foundation
Movement, that is the Reformed within the Southern
Baptists, and Osk Innes, men famous for writing
about the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the
believer.
We are not talking about ordinary scholars, we
are talking about men of renown who know
this distinction and now put their names to
a document that holds to the Catholic terminology.
This is a betrayal of what the gospel
stands for and what Paul said, for example,
11 times even in one chapter of Romans
alone, chapter 4, logizimae in Greek, imputed, reckoned,
credited, counted.
The word logizimae, 11 times in Romans 4
alone, summed up we could say in the
very words of Romans chapter 4 verse 5,
but to him that worketh not, but that
believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his
faith is counted for righteousness.
And now we have the blasphemous, horrendous statement
endorsed by so-called evangelicals saying, and by
virtue of God's declaration, it, justification conferred, is
so.
The lie of Satan, that justification of Christ's
righteousness is in a person, it is in
Christ and in him alone.
Part of my own search in becoming a
biblical Christian was that very truth as I
kept reading Romans and I kept reading particularly
Ephesians 1 and 2.
18 times in Ephesians 1, for example, Paul
says in him, in whom, in Christ.
18 times he shows that our righteousness is
in him and in him alone in the
first chapter of Ephesians.
We have here an endorsement of the message
of Satan and what the scriptures say, have
no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness,
rather reprove them, expose them, show them for
what they are.
Now instead of repentance we have had a
consistent defense of these horrendous things.
We've had a book published right across the
world, it's called Evangelicals and Catholics Towards a
Common Mission.
And in here, some of these same men
who signed it, together with Newhouse and Colson
who put the book together, try to defend
what they have done.
To distinguish this book from the document ECT,
we call it by the words in the
subtitle, the Christian Towards a Common Mission, or
just Common Mission.
The architects have now designed this book to
defend their unbiblical gospel and their endorsement of
baptismal regeneration.
And I would like to show you just
what has been said in this book.
Packer writes in the Common Mission quotation, Neither
Evangelicals nor Roman Catholics can stipulate that things
they believe which the other side does not
believe be made foundational to partnership at this
point.
So ECT lets go of Protestant precision on
the doctrine of justification and the correlation between
conversion and new birth.
What does Packer say?
Let me read a little bit of that
again.
ECT lets go of Protestant precision on the
doctrine of justification.
He says it in his own words, that
he and others have let go of the
Protestant precision, definitiveness, on the very doctrine of
justification.
That such a compromise is heretical is seen
from what he says earlier in the same
article, and I quote his own words about
Roman Catholic teaching.
Quotation, Roman teaching obscures the gospel and indeed
distorts in a tragically anti-spiritual and un
-pastoral manner.
Roman teaching obscures the gospel, so he says.
And still he goes on to say that
this is not to be foundational to the
partnership that Evangelicals are to have with Catholics.
And then he declares, and listen to this
quotation.
Rome's official doctrine disorders particularly on justification, merit
and the mass sacrifice so obscure the gospel
that were I as a gesture of unity
invited to mass, which of course as a
Protestant I am not, nor shall be, I
would not feel free to accept the invitation.
End of quotation.
So he says that it so obscures the
doctrine of justification that were he invited to
mass he wouldn't go.
And still he's willing to say that we
should evangelize together with Catholics.
And that this is not of importance even
though they distort the very doctrine of justification.
Showing his own heresy in the one article
that he has written.
Towards the end of the same article he
shows why he is doing all of this.
He is trying to rebuild a Christian consensus,
and so he proposes quotation.
Domestic differences about salvation and the church should
not hinder us from joint action in seeking
to re-Christianize the North American milieu.
So that you are to work together to
re-Christianize the North American situation with
doctrines that distort the very gospel of Christ
Jesus as he himself has said.
In the words of Paul, but there be
some that trouble you and would pervert the
gospel of Christ.
But though we or an angel from heaven
preach any other gospel unto you than which
we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed.
Packer continues even in a more serious vein
in the same book to defend his position
and also in other articles.
And I'd like to quote from another article
that he has read, that he has written
in the J.I. Packer collection produced by
Alistair McGraw.
He says the following, Can conservative Protestants, Eastern
Orthodox and Roman Catholics of mainstream type join
together in bearing witness to all I have
spoken of?
I urge you that we can, despite our
known and continuing differences about the specifics of
the salvation process and the place of the
church in that process.
To be sure, fundamentalists within our three traditions
are unlikely to join us in this.
For it is the way of fundamentalists to
follow the path of contentious orthodoxy.
As if the mercy of God in Christ
automatically rests on persons who are notionally correct.
And is just as automatically withheld from those
who fall short of notional correctness on any
point of substance.
For this concept of, in effect, justification not
of works, but of words.
Words, that is, of notional soundness and precision
is near to being a cultic heresy in
its own right.
And need not detain us further now, however
much we may regret the fact that some
in all our traditions are bogged down in
it.
Orthodox evangelicals have never maintained that notional soundness
and precision ever saved anyone.
Doctoral theory has never been held by any
evangelical over the years who has been authentically
evangelical.
All evangelicals throughout history have been consistent upholding
Romans 10.10. For with the heart man
believes unto righteousness.
And with the mouth confession is made unto
salvation.
Belief in the righteousness of Christ alone.
Packer appears to be doing casuistry.
Trying to preempt his critics by raising a
false contrast or dichotomy between heart religion and
head religion.
This is an old liberal tactic by which
you try to insinuate that all who do
not agree with your definition or your contrast
or dichotomy are unloving and un-Christian.
This is an old tactic that men who
were liberal before have employed.
There has been none in historical evangelicals and
of our evangelical confessions of faith who have
ever declared that anyone is sound by notional
correctness.
This is an absurd caricature that Packer has
invented.
Rather evangelicals today as in the days of
Paul declare that Christ's righteousness alone is what
saves fallen and dead humanity.
The righteousness of Christ alone.
This is the precise point that Christ Jesus
proclaimed.
The precise point of the gospel.
The precise point that Paul stood against the
Judaizers on.
The precise point that the reformation was fought
on.
The righteousness of Christ and that alone.
And now the righteousness of Christ and that
alone is inferred to be a domestic issue.
And this is horrendous.
Not only in the face of what has
been declared to be evangelical and biblical faith
over the years but what men and women
have died for.
Not notional correctness but faith in Christ alone.
They went to the stake and were willing
to be burnt alive.
And so we had such as John Huss,
William Tyndale, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, John Rogers,
the wonderful 25 year old Anne Eskew, John
Bradford, John Philpott and I could go on
many others.
Who gave their lives for justification by Christ's
righteousness alone.
And now this is declared to be a
domestic issue of no importance.
We have here quite a horrendous defamation of
biblical faith.
We have biblical faith downgraded to be called
a cultic heresy.
What J.
I.
Packer has done is to deny the importance
of the gospels and the scriptures.
On the precise point of justification by faith
alone.
Sola Fide.
What Packer has done is set aside the
very confessions of faith for which men and
women have contended for throughout the centuries even
before the reformation.
And he has set aside the very blood
of the martyrs who died for this very
cause.
And the scriptures say that God's judgment is
on such.
In the words of Hebrews 10, For we
know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth to
me, I will recompense, saith the Lord.
And again the Lord shall judge his people.
It is a fearful thing to fall into
the hands of the living God.
Another defender in very erudite and clever words
in the common mission, and the one who
put the book together with Chuck Colson, Richard
John Newhouse.
He declares in his article in this book,
quotation, and it is emphasized in a book
in which we don't have emphasis much at
all, it is emphasized in italics, quotation, if
at the end of the 20th century separation
for the sake of the gospel is not
necessary, it is not justified.
Newhouse declares that the gospel is no longer
relevant to Christian unity.
And this is the intent and purpose of
ECT 1 and the gift of salvation ECT
2.
That the gospel is no longer relevant to
Christian unity.
If this is not contended for by men
and women who stand for biblical truth, then
this very declaration by Richard John Newhouse can
come upon the heads of this generation and
on the children coming after this generation.
If separation for the gospel is no longer
justified, it is no longer necessary.
That is the gauntlet laid down before the
people of God.
And it has not been answered by the
people of God.
It falls into Roman Catholic teaching.
That unity with Rome is what is necessary.
As the Vatican Council II documents declared, little
by little, as the obstacles to perfect ecclesial
communion are overcome, all Christians will be gathered
in a common celebration of the Eucharist as
the mass.
Into the unity of the one and only
church.
This unity we believe dwells in the Catholic
Church as something we can never lose.
And this is not just little by little,
this is a big step towards unity with
the Roman Catholic Church.
Taken by men calling themselves evangelical and expressed
in precise terms by Newhouse.
It is more frightening because it comes from
a Catholic.
We discussed in my previous talk about the
Inquisition, the 600 years of torture, confiscation of
property, and of burnings at the stake of
millions across Europe, and particularly in Spain.
The 600 years of the Inquisition done by
the same church that Newhouse believes in.
And so separation from the Gospel is no
longer necessary for unity.
The very intent of ECT I and II.
We saw, those who were on the internet
last week, that the sectarian rules are now
being enforced in France.
The churches who are outside the pale when
it comes to what is acceptable by the
state in France.
The type of churches that you would be
from, who hold to justification by faith alone.
What was declared and published by the Evangelical
Times in 1998 in Belgium.
Quotation, the Belgian Chamber of Representatives recently passed
a law creating a sect oversight organization that
would scrutinize 189 religious organizations listed in the
Belgian parliamentary sect A report published in 1997.
And it goes on to list some of
the churches involved.
So we have sectarian persecution of churches already
happening in Europe.
When will it happen on this side of
the Atlantic?
All the pieces are already in place.
The Gospel is at stake.
And we declare what our brother Spurgeon declared
in his own day.
Quotation, since he was cursed who rebuilt Jericho,
much more the man who labors to restore
potpourri among us.
The words of Spurgeon.
And this is the very thing of restoring
potpourri among us that ECT I and II
strives to do.
And are we to remain like dumb dogs
or sleeping shepherds?
Or are we to sound the trumpet as
men and women did in ages of the
past?
We are told by Paul in Titus 3
.10 A man that is a heretic after
the first and second admonition reject knowing that
he that is such subverted and sinneth being
condemned of himself.
We've reached a breaking point period in history.
What is at stake is the Gospel, the
power of God unto salvation.
And those who are ambassadors for Christ must
defend the Gospel of grace.
Because we are considering who our God is
and what the Gospel of Christ is.
We are considering not a temporal affair.
When we have contaminated food, we put it
aside.
Or we have infectious diseases, they are quarantined.
But this is not simply a temporal matter,
we are talking about the salvation of souls.
And the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
And men who are implementing and upholding a
false gospel.
Ought they not to be quarantined and separated
as the Bible says they should be from
the people of God.
The Bible warned about false teachers.
We had this warning right through the Scriptures
from the Lord Himself speaking about false Christ.
Paul speaking about the grievous wolves.
And Peter speaking about the false teachers.
All speaking about the many and the few
believers who would remain faithful.
And we are told, now the Spirit speaketh
expressly that in latter times some shall depart
from the faith giving heed to seducing spirits
and doctrines of devils.
The infallible word of God warning us about
false teachers.
This is not simply something of history.
It is more evident in our own day.
Only in our own day men and women
seem frightened to name names as did Paul.
And to say exactly who it is that
are now denying the very Gospel of God's
grace.
Contend for the faith once delivered for the
saints.
A commandment.
Stand fast in one spirit the Lord says
to you.
With one mind striving together for the faith
of the Gospel.
And this demands naming those who are not
doing so.
And who have denied the very Gospel and
to continue to defend their position.
Such as J.
I.
Packer.
Like a pied piper drawing thousands of evangelicals
onto himself.
And such as Charles Colson on the radio
each day and his email messages sent out
each day.
Twisting and contorting the very Gospel of Christ.
Such as Bill Bright and Campus Crusade right
across the world.
With millions of dollars behind them.
Such as Mark Knoll from Wheaton College.
Pat Robertson of the 700 Club.
The famous Os Guinness.
Now in the mire of a false teaching
and a false denial.
A denial of a false Gospel.
Richard Land.
Timothy George.
Who has defended this in Christianity today.
And such as T.
M.
Moore.
Just to name a few names.
We have here another denial of the very
Gospel of the Lord and Saviour.
We have anti-biblical terms and the doctrinal
intent of Rome stated in very clever ways.
And Catholics identified as brothers and sisters in
Christ.
This delusion to bring the damnation on souls
to whom the Gospel should be given.
In the past the greatest harvest field to
make up most Bible believing churches was from
the Catholic Church.
And if these men persist and are not
addressed in their heresy.
The purpose is to prevent the Gospel going
forth to souls who are in these systems.
Of the Roman Catholic Church and others that
were addressed in ECT 1.
Such as the Orthodox.
We have the righteousness of Christ himself in
the mud and trodden on by men.
And it is for you and for me
to defend the Gospel of grace.
And one thing that I have never asked
and that I ask of you today and
for those who are listening to this tape.
That we not only defend but we cry
out to God in prayer.
That he would vindicate his name and his
Gospel.
And that he would bring his wrath and
vengeance against these men.
And I quote from Psalm 94.
The very prayer of God in the scripture
that I pray with you now.
O Lord God to whom vengeance belongs.
O God to whom vengeance belongs.
Show thyself.
Show thyself O Lord.
Show thyself in this wicked and apostate age.
And may the God of all glory exhibit
his wrath.
May the God of all glory show his
face.
And may the God of all glory equip
you the saints of God.
For those listening on tape who may wish
to get a copy of this.
You may write to PO Box 192 Del
Valle.
Two words D-E-L-V-A-L
-L-E.
Texas 78617.
Or visit our webpage where this will be
put and posted.
For all to see at bereanbeacon.org.
B-E-R-E-A-N-B-E
-A-C-O-N.org.
Or you can email us from the email
address given on our webpage.
I ask that if anybody here wants to
get a copy.
We have some copies on the table of
this address.
And when it is on our webpage and
other webpages that you take it and email
this to others.
Of all addresses that I have given in
my 15 years as a believer.
I think this is the most serious presentation
I have ever given.
And I pray to God that as we
have prayed.
That God's wrath may be seen.
And that his believers contend for the faith
once delivered to the saints.
Amen and Amen.
Praise God.
This message is being circulated worldwide by Berean
Beacon Ministries.
Post Office Box 192.
Delval.
D-E-L.
V-A-L-L-E.
Texas 78617.
United States of America.
In the United Kingdom and the Republic of
Ireland.
It is circulated by Reformation Ireland.
15 Lakeview Avenue.
Newton Abbey.
20 Antrim.
BT36.
5ZG.
Northern Ireland.
United Kingdom.
This Reformation audio track is a production of
Stillwater's Revival Books.
SWRB makes thousands of classic Reformation resources available.
Free and for sale.
In audio, video and printed formats.
It is likely that the sermon or book
that you just listened to is also available
on cassette or video.
Or as a printed book or booklet.
Our many free resources as well as our
complete mail order catalog.
Containing thousands of classic and contemporary Puritan and
Reform books, tapes and videos at great discounts.
Is on the web at www.swrb.com.
We can also be reached by email at
swrb at swrb.com.
By phone at 780-450-3730.
By fax at 780-468-1096.
Or by mail at 4710-37A Avenue.
Edmonton, that's E-D-M-O-N-T
-O-N.
Alberta, abbreviated capital A, capital B.
Canada, T-6-L-3-T-5.
You may also request a free printed catalog.
And remember that John Calvin, in defending the
Reformation's regulative principle of worship.
Or what is sometimes called the scriptural law
of worship.
Commenting on the words of God.
Which I commanded them not, neither came into
my heart.
From his commentary on Jeremiah 731.
God here cuts off from men every occasion
for making evasions.
Since he condemns by this one phrase.
I have not commanded them, whatever the Jews
devised.
There is then no other argument needed to
condemn superstitions.
Than that they are not commanded by God.
For when men allow themselves to worship God
according to their own fancies.
And attend not to his commands, they pervert
true religion.
And if this principle was adopted by the
Papists.
All those fictitious modes of worship.
In which they absurdly exercise themselves.
Would fall to the ground.
It is indeed a horrible thing for the
Papists.
To seek to discharge their duties towards God.
By performing their own superstitions.
There is an immense number of them.
As it is well known.
And as it manifestly appears.
Were they to admit this principle.
That we cannot rightly worship God.
Except by obeying his word.
They would be delivered from their deep abyss
of error.
The prophet's words then are very important.
When he says.
That God had commanded no such thing.
And that it never came to his mind.
As though he had said.
That men assume too much wisdom.
When they devise what he never required.
Nay, what he never knew.