|
"Take
Heed" Ministries
|
|
Cecil Andrews, PO BOX 13, Ballynahinch, BT24 8AL, Northern Ireland. Telephone/Fax 028 9756 5511. E-MAIL - takeheed@aol.com WEBSITE - http://www.takeheed.net |
|
NEWS
FROM THE FRONT
|
MARCH 2003
"Be not afraid or dismayed by reason of this great multitude for the battle is not yours but God's" (2nd Chronicles 20v15)
Dear
praying friends,
In recent years TV programmes looking at ‘natural disasters’
have become very popular and graphic footage of damage caused by tornadoes,
avalanches, volcanic eruptions etc have vividly brought home to us the havoc
that can be wreaked upon humanity by such happenings. One particular programme
I saw speculated upon the potential for disaster should a large portion of
one of the
I believe the professing Christian Church faces an
almighty ‘Tsunami’ of unprecedented apostasy. Large portions of biblical
truth are, thanks to the departure from Biblical truth and separation-standards
by so-called ‘evangelicals’, slipping into the ocean of ecumenical compromise
and a swelling tidal wave of polluted so-called ‘unity’ is threatening to
engulf and extinguish the light of The Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
However, there is a barrier and defence against this swelling tide and it
is called ‘truth’ and no ‘Tsunami’ orchestrated by Satan himself
will succeed in burying and destroying “the light
of the glorious gospel of Christ” [2 Corinthians 4:4]. Let us all ‘take
heed’ and ‘take heart’ from the words of Christ who said
“I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it” [Matthew
Your servant for Christ
The first ‘Article of Faith’
of the Mormon Church states – ‘We believe in God, the eternal Father, and
in His Son Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost’. However, as I showed in
my last newsletter [New Year 2003] the ‘God the Son, Jesus Christ’ of
Mormonism is a totally different ‘Christ’ to the ‘Christ’ revealed
in The Bible. I showed, through the Mormon quotes in my article,
how the Mormon ‘Christ’ received his earthly body as a result of a
literal, intimate, sexual union between the Mormon ‘God the Father’
and a then-virgin called Mary. For such a union to have happened obviously
the Mormon ‘God the Father’ would himself
need to be a ‘God-Man’ of flesh and bones and this is precisely what
Mormonism teaches.
In Section 130:22 of the
Mormon book ‘Doctrine and Covenants’ it teaches ‘The Father has
a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s’. This
book, ‘Doctrine and Covenants’ is regarded as part of the Mormon ‘Scriptures’.
In the Mormon manual, ‘Gospel Principles’ in chapter 10 on page
49 the question is posed ‘What Scriptures do we have today?’ and the
answer is given ‘The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints accepts
four books as scripture: the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and
Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price’.
God’s only inscripturated
Word, The Bible, rejects any notion of ‘God, The Father’ possessing a body of ‘flesh and bones’
as the following incident ably illustrates. In the book, *‘Fast Facts
On False Teachings’, in the chapter dealing with Mormonism, we read
the following on pages 172-173 ‘Several years before he died, one of
the very elderly apostles of the Mormon Church, Le Grand Richards, was presenting
an apologetic trying to prove that God was a man in heaven with a body of
flesh and bone. (This was during the Mormon
semi-annual conference being broadcast from
The first verse he read
was Matthew 16:13, but as he kept reading over national television his voice
gradually tapered off to silence when he became aware that he should not be
reading verse 17 after what he had just finished trying to prove (that God
was a man in heaven with a body of flesh and bone).
In verse 13 Jesus asked
His disciples “Whom do men say that I the Son of
Man am?” Simon Peter answered (verse 16) “Thou art the Christ,
the Son of the living God”. Jesus answered (verse 17) and said to him
“Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, for flesh and
blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven”
Jesus clearly taught that
the LDS [Mormon] doctrine of God having a body of flesh and
blood is false. Jesus said that God is spirit (John
Mormonism is a polytheistic religion
and their ‘gods’ bear no resemblance to the Triune God of the Bible.
In his helpful book *‘Mormon Claims Answered’ former Mormon, Marvin
Cowan wrote on page 25 ‘Joseph Smith taught that God the Father, Jesus
Christ and the Holy Ghost are ‘three distinct personages and three Gods”
[Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith p 370].
In God’s only inspired written
revelation, The Bible, it is clear that there is only one, unique
‘God-Man’. He is certainly not ‘God, The Father’, but
rather ‘God, The Son’, Jesus Christ, the second person of the Triune
Godhead revealed to us in The Bible in verses such as John
1:1&14; John 20:28.
* Both
books thus marked * in this article are available from
us priced £7.50 & £3.50 which
includes [
‘Catholic but not Christian’
A response to Patrick McCafferty.
In the December 2002 issue of ‘Faith
for Life’ Roman Catholic priest, Patrick McCafferty
wrote an article entitled ‘Catholic
and Christian’? The prologue to the article stated that ‘The purpose of this feature is not to explore doctrine or to arrive at
any conclusions but simply to shed light on the Catholic Church’s attitude
to the way it is perceived by some groupings and to hear its response’.
Whilst the aim of the feature was
‘not to explore doctrine’, in the course of the article, Patrick
McCafferty used ‘doctrinal
terminology’. Those that are not well grounded in the great doctrinal
truths of the scriptures might easily be deceived into thinking that the beliefs
of Patrick McCafferty and the Church of Rome do
actually accord with orthodox biblical Christianity. The purpose of this article
is to demonstrate that this is most certainly not the case. The answer to
the question posed by the title of Patrick McCafferty’s
feature ‘Catholic and Christian’? is a resounding ‘No’! To
understand why, we need go no further than to simply examine Patrick’s answer
when he was asked if he understood the reasons for opposition to the Catholic
Church - Patrick answered –
“A lot of it is they don’t understand the Catholic faith. When
people begin to talk there’s a realization that the differences are not
as deep as they thought. Our own approach
is that we have been saved by Jesus’ death on the Cross, we are being saved
by living the Christian life and we will be saved in the future”’.
It’s
interesting to note that in the 2nd ‘Evangelicals & Catholics
Together’ document called ‘The Gift of Salvation’ that was endorsed
by so-called ‘evangelicals’ like Charles Colson &
J
I Packer, part of their declaration reads “Thus it is
that as justified sinners we have been saved, we are being saved, and we
will be saved” – the question is – Are ‘Evangelicals’
and ‘Roman Catholics’ really agreed in their understanding of this terminology?
When
Patrick refers to Roman Catholics claiming ‘we have been saved by Jesus’ death on the
cross’ Patrick has in mind what Rome teaches to be the effects of
their sacrament of baptism. In the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church we
read the following in paragraph 1213 ‘Through baptism we are freed
from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated
into the Church and made sharers in her mission’. Later in paragraph
1992 we read the following ‘Justification has been merited for us by the
Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross…Justification
is conferred in baptism, the sacrament of faith’. So, when Patrick speaks of Roman Catholics ‘having
been saved’ he is referring to their baptism when they were for the
first time ‘justified’.
‘If anyone
saith that man is truly absolved from his sins
and justified because that he assuredly believes himself absolved and justified,
or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified:
and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected,
let him be anathema’ [Council of Trent; Session 6 - Justification; Canon
XIV].
In a more recent Roman Catholic publication,
Roman Catholic professor of theology, Alan Schreck [Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio]
in his book ‘Catholic and Christian’ wrote on page 33
–
‘The Catholic
Church has always taught that no one can know with absolute certainty in
this life whether he or she will be saved…It [The Catholic
Church] maintains that we should not presume to know ahead of
time that we will persevere in faith until the end’.
So, when Patrick states that Roman Catholics
‘have been saved by Jesus’ death on the cross’ Patrick
has in mind their initial baptismal ‘justification’. Then when Patrick says of Roman Catholics - ‘we
are being saved by living the Christian life’ - what he has in
mind is this idea of being ‘justified’ over and over again – the series of ‘justifications’ that I referred to earlier. This is achieved through adherence to the Roman
sacramental system. ‘Justification’
is a fragile condition that, according to
‘Christ
instituted the sacrament of penance for all sinful members of his Church,
above all for those who, since baptism, have fallen into grave sin, and
have thus lost their baptismal grace and wounded ecclesial communion. It
is to them that the sacrament of penance offers a new possibility to convert
and to recover the grace of justification’.
Roman Catholics who recover their ‘justification’ can, according to
‘If anyone
saith that the justice received is not preserved
and also increased before God through good works, but that the said works
are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not a cause
of the increase thereof, let him be anathema’ [Council of Trent; Session
6 - Justification; Canon XXIV].
So, when Patrick speaks of Roman Catholics ‘being
saved by living the Christian life’ what he
has in mind is their co-operation with God through adherence to the Roman
Catholic sacramental system [the perseverance ‘in faith’ referred to by Alan
Schreck that I quoted earlier] coupled with what Rome
refers to as ‘good
works’.
Finally, what has Patrick in mind when he writes of
Roman Catholics who believe ‘we will be saved in the future’?
‘If anyone
saith that, after the grace of justification has
been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted and the debt
of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not
any debt of temporal punishment* to be discharged either in this world or
in the next in Purgatory, before entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be
opened [to him], let him be anathema’. [Council of
*
‘Temporal Punishment’
is
defined by
The meaning is clear. Although someone is ‘forgiven as to guilt’ there remains ‘temporal punishment’ which must be discharged either here
on earth or after death in Purgatory. ‘TEMPORAL PUNISHMENT’ which has not been dealt with is sufficient
to prevent someone from going directly to heaven!
Listen to
‘The
truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments.
God’s holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must be expiated. This may
be done on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and trials of this life,
and above all through death. Otherwise the expiation must be made in the
next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments’ [ie in purgatory].
For Roman Catholics,
“I have been saved” means I have been
baptised. For Roman Catholics, ‘‘I
am being saved’ means I
am adhering to the sacramental system taught by
In the course of his
feature Patrick McCafferty also made reference to
Mary.
In their quest for ‘for the attainment of eternal life’ [paragraph 2010 Catholic Catechism] Roman Catholics are taught that
they can under certain conditions avail themselves [via ‘indulgences’] of
the ‘merits’
of not only Mary but also of ‘the saints’ that we are told ‘have
already reached their heavenly home’. The reality is that the teachings
of Rome, as skilfully articulated by Patrick McCafferty,
do not accord with orthodox biblical Christianity and the truth is that ‘the
gospel’ of Patrick McCafferty and of Rome
constitute what Paul described as “another gospel” [Galatians 1:6] and
such a ‘gospel’ is truly subject to the anathema of Almighty God [Galatians
1:8-9].
When
a Christian speaks of ‘having been saved’ he is referring to the great doctrine of JUSTIFICATION, which is full acquittal from all penalty
due to sin. When an ungodly sinner is truly ‘born again’ and becomes a Christian, part of God’s gracious and
great gift of salvation is a perfect
and permanent JUSTIFICATION. The Christian no longer stands condemned because
of sin. God “hath delivered us [him] from the power
of darkness and hath translated us [him] into the kingdom of
his dear Son” [Colossians
What
then does a Christian have in mind when he goes on to say that he ‘is being saved’? He is referring to the doctrine of PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION. Having
‘justified’ an ungodly sinner,
delivering him from the PENALTY of sin, God, by the work and influence
of His gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit, begins to deliver the Christian
from the POWER of sin. This
is well summed up by this line from Charles Wesley’s great hymn ‘O for a thousand tongues’: Wesley wrote - ‘He [God] breaks the power of cancelled sin’. Paul, in his letter to the Christians at Thessalonica, told
them “For this is the will of God, even your sanctification! [1 Thessalonians
4:3]. Christians who sin are
robbed of “the joy” of their salvation but they do not lose their ‘justification’.
When David sinned grievously he implored God to “Restore unto
me the joy of thy salvation” [Psalm 51:12] – David
did not plead for a restoration of his salvation [his ‘justification’].
For
Christians ‘I have been saved’
means having been PERMANENTLY JUSTIFIED
from the PENALTY of sin and ‘I
am being saved’ means being PROGRESSIVELY
SANCTIFIED from the POWER of sin. Finally, what then do Christians
mean when they say ‘I will be saved’?
Here they have in view the sure prospect of ‘GLORIFICATION’ when they will be saved from the PRESENCE of
sin. This looks to the eternal age to come when Christians, the redeemed of
the Lord, will receive their resurrection bodies [“it is raised
in glory” 1 Corinthians
‘I have been saved’ - PERMANENTLY JUSTIFIED
from the PENALTY of sin. ‘I
am being saved’ - PROGRESSIVELY SANCTIFIED from the POWER
of sin and ‘I will be saved’
– ETERNALLY GLORIFIED and kept
from the PRESENCE of sin. The progression of Christians from JUSTIFIED to GLORIFIED is assured by the work of Christ on the cross for Paul wrote
in Romans
Now,
are these the great Christian, biblical, doctrinal truths that Patrick McCafferty had in mind when he wrote “Our
own approach is that we have been saved by Jesus’ death on the Cross, we are
being saved by living the Christian life and we will be saved in the future”? Well, the clear answer is ‘No’! Roman Catholicism is
not Christianity. All those who are ‘in Christ’
know this to be the case. I say this
with both love and conviction. For
though Christians are nothing without love, nevertheless, love rejoices only
with the truth [“Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth” 1Corinthians 13:6;]. Christian love without
Christian truth is no better than truth without love. God gives both to His own people. Anything else is quite simply a false ‘gospel’.
_______________________________________________________________
As a rather ironic ‘PS’ to this article let me quote
an item that appeared in the Roman Catholic Zenit
News Agency report for events of 13 January 2003
The Diocese of St-Jérôme
says the baptisms of 295 children at a parish in Pointe-Calumet have been
declared invalid because they weren't done properly, the Globe and Mail
reported. For several years now, the diocese has been quietly contacting
the families of the children, offering to rebaptize them.
Starting in 1991, the layperson who officiated mistakenly let the parents
pour holy water on their children's forehead while she pronounced blessings,
the newspaper said. The same person has to perform both acts. No one noticed
the problem until 1996, when a sharp-eyed, knowledgeable grandmother spotted
the anomaly.
ZE03011321
According to Roman Catholic understanding the parents of these 295 children
thought their children ‘had been saved’ by undergoing the Sacrament
of Baptism [as we explained on pages 2&5] but in reality, according to
Roman Catholic teaching and practice, these children ‘had not been saved’
because the man-made rules of the Roman Catholic sacramental system had not
been properly observed. What has been or would be, according to Roman Catholicism,
the fate of any of these children who have already or may possibly yet die
before any ‘rebaptism’ takes place? – have they or will they end up in ‘limbo’
where according to the Pocket Catholic Dictionary [page 229]
by John A Hardon S.J. “Regarding the limbo of infants it is
an article of the Catholic faith that those who die without baptism, and for
whom the want of baptism has not been supplied in some other way, cannot enter
heaven. This is the teaching of the ecumenical councils of
This ridiculous situation serves only to validate our
claims [outlined on pages 15&16 of our June 2002 NEWS FROM
THE FRONT] that the Roman Catholic ‘Trinity’ is not the
Tri-une God revealed in the Holy Scriptures. This Montreal affair illustrates
vividly Roman Catholic man’s [or in this case - ‘woman’s’] sovereignty in
controlling exactly when God, The Holy Spirit does or does not regenerate
someone [Rome’s law of ‘ex opere operato’].
What is even more outrageous is that these Montreal baptisms have been declared
‘invalid’ on a ‘technicality’ but I haven’t heard any talk of the worldwide
baptisms performed by thousands of priests, who have recently been shown
to be guilty of the most wicked of evils perpetrated against young children,
being declared ‘invalid’!
CATHOLIC CATECHISM CORNER
In the December 2002 NEWS FROM THE FRONT I wrote on page 6
-
‘By way of education I plan on a regular basis to include an
item in my newsletter that will focus on a particular teaching from the Catechism
of the Roman Catholic Church’
– herewith is our next study in this series –
NON-CHRISTIAN TEACHING OF
THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM [2]
For this our second look at a non-Christian teaching in the
Catholic Catechism
I want to look at Paragraph 1129 that states –
‘The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments
of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation’
The
reason I decided to look at this teaching is that it is linked to the teachings
of Patrick McCafferty that we have just considered
[pages 4-10]. In dealing with this false teaching I want to refer to and quote
from former Roman Catholic, Jim McCarthy’s excellent book *‘The Gospel
According to Rome’ – Jim was the producer of the excellent video released
some years ago called *‘Catholicism – Crisis of Faith’. On pages
56-57 Jim outlined the ‘Seven Sacraments’ of the Roman Catholic system
- ‘Baptism: Penance; Eucharist; Confirmation; Matrimony; Holy Orders; Anointing
of the Sick’.
Jim
then writes ‘The sacraments are said to ‘contain’ grace…To receive grace
from a sacrament, a Catholic must be properly prepared. Except for Baptism
and Penance the Catholic must…have sanctifying grace in his soul…Baptism or
at least the desire of it is necessary for initial justification. Penance
is necessary for restoration to the life of grace should a Catholic forfeit
grace through serious sin. Confirmation, anointing of the sick and especially
Holy Eucharist provide grace needed to avoid sin and do good…The co-operative
work of the individual under the influence of grace results in the performance
of good works…According to Roman Catholic theology the performance of good
works earns a reward from God. The earned right to a reward is called MERIT.
Jim then quotes on page 59, Paragraph 2010 of the Catholic Catechism
–
‘Moved by
the Holy Spirit and by charity we can then merit for our selves and for
others the graces need for our sanctification, for the increase of grace
and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life’
This attempt by
“Even so
then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election
of grace. And if by grace then is it no more of works; otherwise grace is
no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it
no more grace; otherwise work is no
more work”
[Romans 11:5-6].
Stuart Olyott
in his book ‘The Gospel as it really is” when commenting on this passage wrote
‘God’s
choice is an entirely gracious choice, and [is] in no way conditioned by the
works of the persons involved’.
Jim continues [p 63] ‘In moving
away from explicit biblical language and definitions the Church distorted
biblical grace beyond recognition …Grace became the medium of exchange in
the Church’s merit system…[p 64] All the while the Roman Catholic Church
maintained that merited grace was still a gift from God {“if it be of works
then is it no more grace” Romans 11:6} …Biblical grace cannot be dispensed
like a product from a machine…[p 65] The belief that sacraments and
thereby the Roman Catholic Church itself are necessary for salvation has no
biblical support…Biblical justification is perfect and complete. It is a divine
act [Romans 8:33]…Roman Catholic justification is imperfect and incomplete…[p
69] For the Roman Catholic, eternal salvation involves a lifetime of doing,
working and striving…Roman Catholicism knows nothing of resting in Christ’
and earlier Jim wrote Biblical salvation, on the other hand, is characterised
by rest. Christ has already finished the work of salvation on the cross. Justification
[full and permanent acquittal – see Hebrews
In conclusion
let me quote the words of the Lord Himself in Matthew 11:38 – “Come unto me [not unto
a Church and its sacraments] all ye that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest” – the ‘rest’ of God’s
so great and free [unmerited – see Romans 3:24] salvation!
*The book and video by Jim McCarthy marked *
are available from us priced £10.50 & £11.00
These prices include
BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION
One of the
most interesting references to Satan is when he is described by Paul as “the
prince of the power of the air” [Ephesians 2:2]. In the light of what
is put out regularly over the airwaves by the BBC this expression used by Paul certainly
finds much modern-day application. On BBC1 television on
‘The programme
on MARY represented an imbalanced, highly speculative, blasphemous and diabolical
attack upon the Word of God and the Son of God. It was a sustained and unforgivable
assault upon Christians and the Christ of Christians who is no less a person
than God Almighty. To the BBC and the motley crew of scripture-denying theologians
I have a simple message – “Prepare for God’s wrath”. An inquiry into how
this programme ever came to see the light of day should be launched immediately.
Does the BBC have any plans for a similar assault upon the Koran and Mohammed
or is it only Christians who are considered fair game?’
On BBC
radio 2 on
‘Good morning Terry, I’m not looking for sympathy but
I’m a bit below par this morning. As it’s the week of prayer for Christian
Unity, I was out preaching in Rochester last night and so by the time I
was back home and, like yourself, up by the light of the moon there wasn’t
much chance of sleep. But the great thing is that Christians from all the
different churches are friends today, not like even the recent past – I
can remember when I was a student in Dublin in the 60’s being told I had
a protestant face – so I replied “no” I have an English accent. Healing
of rifts among Christians is only the first step. I believe a great contribution
to peace in the world will be peace between the great religions. I was taught
by my mother that there is only one God but many ways. The trouble is that
some people think they have a monopoly on truth about God and then we all
lose the sense of the real word about God which is love and we end up hitting
each other on the head with what has become my God. I think it takes adversity
to bring us all to the loving truth. I remember a poignant World Aids day
service in
Having received
the transcript from the BBC I asked the
following question –
Can I ask why Christians who hold to what the Bible
teaches in the area
that was addressed by Mr McGreal are not afforded
an opportunity to
publicly air their
valid convictions on 'Pause for Thought'?
I received
the following response from Julie Downing of the BBC
Thank you for your email which I have passed on to my
Producer, Rosemary Foxcroft, for reply.
This may
come as a big surprise to my readers but believe it or not I
am still awaiting a reply from the producer, Rosemary Foxcroft. In contrast to the ‘wisdom’ of ‘Father’ McGreal’s mum who taught ‘one God but many ways’ the Lord
Jesus said “narrow is the gate…which leadeth
unto life” [Matthew 7:14] and ruling out all ‘great religions’ that refuse
to acknowledge Him as the ONLY Saviour of men He said “No man cometh
unto the Father but by me” [John 14:6].
The BBC
and its handpicked contributors would do well to take to heart these words
spoken by Jesus Christ in Matthew 12:36
“But I say
unto you that every idle word that men shall speak,
they shall give an account
of it in the day of judgment”
BIBLE SOCIETIES and
On page 6 of the September
2002 issue of NEWS FROM THE FRONT I commended the work of the Trinitarian
Bible Society. The editorial article in their January- March 2003
Quarterly Record makes very sad reading as they chart the increasing
influence of
‘Even in
FOR CONTEMPLATION
In my last newsletter [pages 14-15]
I drew attention to the current rise in the popularity of ‘Contemplative
Prayer’, which is nothing less than an occultic
tool posing as ‘Christian’ worship. A few days after I issued my newsletter
an advert for ‘Contemplative Worship’ appeared in the Belfast
Telegraph for the morning service in Fisherwick
Presbyterian Church [
‘IN THE PIPELINE’
1.
I hope to continue my look
at the writings of C S Lewis in my next newsletter [DV]
2.
Plans are now well advanced
for me to host a visit to
3.
‘OPERATION MOBILISATION’
[
THE ‘ALL
On pages 14-15 of my ‘New
Year 2003’ newsletter I drew attention to the questionable ‘Christian’ books
distributed by STL who claimed that the views of authors like ‘Mother’
Teresa, ‘Father’ Henri Nouwen and ‘Cardinal’
Basil Hume [all now deceased] were ‘in full agreement with the OPERATION
MOBILISATION statement of faith’. I recently received a copy of an
‘appeal leaflet’ issued by