Crucifixus in Centro Sacrarii aut Cohors Musica

Amici, Americani et Compatriotae,

What is in the middle - the center - the sanctuary of your church as you enter it? Do you see a crucifix above the Tabernacle where the Consecrated Host - Jesus' Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity - resides?

St Matthew South
Waxhaw, NC

Or do you see a music band with no crucifix, no cross - just the glorification of people instead of the glorification of Jesus Christ?

Christlife Church
Charlotte, NC

Even some Pentecostal churches have common sense enough to actually put a Cross front and center, albeit above a music band on a stage (oh for the old time altar where one kneels to receive Jesus' Body and Blood at the Holy Eucharist!)

Christian Assembly Church
Pittsfield, MA

I would like to know whom these Protestant churches actually worship? Fine sounding music? The music band? The people singing and playing guitar who are but creatures created by God? Or the Living God Himself? Even before one goes into a Catholic or Orthodox Church, one knows immediately Who is being worshiped, and it isn't the music band or the preacher boy in black polo shirt, tan shorts, and sneakers pontificating from an iPad.

Orthodox Church
Russia

But in self-gratifying la-la land, there is nothing of the holiness and awe of Heaven to see.

Christlife Church New Place
Charlotte, NC

Translatio Institutionis Generalis Missalis Romani CCXCIX (GIRM 299)

Amici, Americani, et Compatriotae,

It has recently come to my attention that the English (as well, I am told, the Spanish and Italian) translations of paragraph 299 in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) is a mistranslation intended to indicate that the priest facing the congregation (versus populum) is the favored position at Mass instead the priest leading the congregation in worship of God (ad orientem) . As it turns out, a correct translation indicates that "versus populum" is not necessarily preferred but only permitted.

GIRM 299 in English translation from USCCB is provided below:

The altar should be built separate from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. Moreover, the altar should occupy a place where it is truly the center toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns. The altar should usually be fixed and dedicated.

GIRM 299 in the original Latin is provided below:

Altare maius exstruatur a pariete seiunctum, ut facile circumiri et in eo celebratio versus populum peragi possit, quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit. Altare eum autem occupet locum, ut revera centrum sit ad quod totius congregationis fidelium attentio sponte convertatur. De more sit fixum et dedicatum.

GIRM 299 literally translated into English is provided below:

The larger altar may be built separated from the wall, to easily walk around and in it the celebration is able to be finished toward the people, which is expedient wherever it may be possible. However, the altar may occupy this place, that it may actually be the center to which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful may be turned voluntarily. From this custom it may be fixed and dedicated.

ANALYSIS

The relative pronoun “quod" in the phrase “quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit” is neuter singular like the noun to which it refers, “altare,” in the phrase “altare maius exstruatur” whereas the noun “celebratio” in the phrase “celebratio versus populum” is feminine singular. Therefore, the phrase “which is expedient wherever it may be possible” refers to “the larger altar may be built separated from the wall” and NOT the phrase, “the celebration is able to be finished toward the people.” Otherwise, instead of the relative pronoun "quod" (neuter singular) being used, the relative pronoun "quae" (feminine singular) would have been used. A better way to explain this is the following tutorial which the translators at the Vatican would do well to avail themselves of:

KNOW LATIN – Scite lingam Latinam

LIVE LATIN – Vivete linguam Latinam

LOVE LATIN – Amate linguam Latinam

Eschatologia Falsa Raptus

THE FALSE ESCHATOLOGY OF THE RAPTURE

During the sermon on the evening of July 10, 2016 at Christlife Church, another anecdotal reference was made to a theological viewpoint not held by any of the early Fathers of the Church in the first four centuries after Christ. This reference was to the eschatology of the Rapture which purports (based on a misreading of selected verses of Sacred Scripture taken out of context) that:

(1) Christ will physically return to planet Earth to rescue all true Christians

(2) The majority of humanity will be left behind to be persecuted under the reign of antichrist for seven years

(3) Then Jesus Christ will come for a third time to establish a reign of 1000 years of peace and prosperity (called the Millennial Reign of Christ)

(4) After this Satan will be released upon the world for one last rebellion after which he is thrown into hell and the Final Judgment comes.

This essay will refute the false eschatology of a dispensationalist rapture using first Sacred Scripture and second historical evidence.

SACRED SCRIPTURE

When the Pentecostal fundamentalist eschatology is explained in the simple and straightforward way described above, it seems like the ludicrous theology that it actually is. But let us examine this deeper. The idea of the rapture evolves out of a misinterpretation of Matthew 24:40-44 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

Matthew 24:40-44 states:

40 Then two men will be in the field; one is taken and one is left.  41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left.  42 Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.  43 But know this, that if the householder had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have watched and would not have let his house be broken into.  44 Therefore you also must be ready; for the Son of man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

Fundamentalist dispensationalists like Pentecostals take this to mean that when Christ returns at the Parousia, the person who is truly and authentically Christian will be lifted into the sky to meet Jesus in the air and go to Heaven while the sinful person will be left behind to suffer torture and torment on this Earth. Unfortunately, the parallel passage of this part of St. Matthew’s Gospel in Luke 17:34-37 is ignored:

34 I tell you, in that night there will be two men in one bed; one will be taken and the other left.  35 There will be two women grinding together; one will be taken and the other left.”  37 And they said to him, “Where, Lord?” He said to them, “Where the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”

St. Luke’s account gives a detail that St. Matthew’s account omits (the two Saints simply reported the same thing differently). The disciples ask the Lord where this abduction of people will happen, and the Lord says where the eagles are gathered together. Now we must remember that these things were said in Judea in the early 1^st century AD when the Roman Empire had conquered the entire Mediterranean world. The symbol used by the Roman legions above their military banner inscribed with the initials SPQR (Senatus Populusque Romae) was the golden eagle. 

Jesus was telling his disciples that where they would see that banner with its eagle would be the place of abduction, and those being abducted would not be going to Heaven in some sort of mysterious rapture by Him, but into Roman prison and possibly subsequent crucifixion. That is why Jesus says, “Where the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together,” for at the dead bodies of crucifixions would be the SPQR banners atop of which were the Roman eagle.

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 is the other passage of Sacred Scripture used to promote this false eschatology of a rapture:

13 But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.  14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.  15 For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep.  16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; 17 then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.  18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

St John Chrysostom, one of the 36 Doctors (or recognized Teachers) of the Church who lived from AD 347 to AD 407, explains in part what this passage of Sacred Scripture means in his eighth homily on St. Paul’s First Letter to the Church at Thessalonika: 

Let us then see what he now also says. “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the Lord, shall in nowise precede them that are fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel, and with the last trump.” For then, he says, “The powers of the heavens shall be shaken.” [Matthew 24:29] But wherefore with the trumpet? For we see this on Mount Sinai too, and Angels there also. But what means the voice of the Archangel? As he said in the parable of the Virgins, Arise! “The Bridegroom comes.” From [Matthew 25:6] Either it means this, or that as in the case of a king, so also shall it then be, Angels ministering at the Resurrection. For He says, let the dead rise, and the work is done, the Angels not having power to do this, but His word. As if upon a king's commanding and saying it, those who were shut up should go forth, and the servants should lead them out, yet they do this not from their own power, but from that Voice. This also Christ says in another place: “He shall send forth his Angels with a great trumpet, and they shall gather together his Elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” [Matthew 24:31] And everywhere you see the Angels running to and fro. The Archangel therefore I think is he, who is set over those who are sent forth, and who shouts thus: “Make all men ready, for the Judge is at hand.” And what is “at the last trumpet”?  Here he implies that there are many trumpets, and that at the last the Judge descends. “And the dead,” he says, “in Christ shall rise first. Then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”

It is apparent from this that St. Chrysostom regards St. Paul’s account as an event happening at the end of the Earth prior to the Last Judgment, hence his words above:

The Archangel therefore I think is he, who is set over those who are sent forth, and who shouts thus: “Make all men ready, for the Judge is at hand.” And what is “at the last trumpet”?  Here he implies that there are many trumpets, and that at the last the Judge descends.

To regard this in any other way than the prelude to Final Judgment is to require not two comings of Christ (one at His birth 2000 years ago and another at the end of time), but three (one at His birth 2000 years ago, a second at the rapture and another when Jesus comes to defeat antichrist and start His millennial reign), or possibly even four (the last being at the end of His millennial reign when He at last casts Satan into hell). Obviously such eschatology is ludicrous.

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

Before the 19^th century the idea and the term rapture never appeared in any Christian writings, including Protestant, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox. The writings of the men who were taught by the Apostles in the late 1^st century and early 2^nd century are completely devoid of any eschatology where Christ raptures true believes, a seven year tribulation occurs, and then a millennial reign happens. Rather, this idea came from a man by the name of John Nelson Darby who lived from 1800 to 1882, and whose ideas another man by the name of CI Scofield popularized in a Protestant Study Bible in the early 20^th century.

John Nelson Darby started out as an Anglo-Irish priest. But when he learned that to continue in the Irish-Anglo Church he had to swear allegiance to England’s George IV as the rightful king of Ireland, he resigned to join an interdenominational group of believers who did not want to be answerable to any ecclesial authority.  Eventually through the twists and turns of human self-will run riot he became the head of what was informally known as the Darbyite Brethren. He maintained the false Calvinist notion of predestination (the heresy of once saved, always saved contrary to 2^nd Peter 2:20-22) and created a man-made system of dispensationalism and futurism which included this idea of a rapture. Interestingly, fellow Calvinist and contemporary Charles Haddon Spurgeon published various criticism of John Darby’s theology (there is no unity within the various factions of Protestantism).

In a first edition of 1909 and then in a revised edition of 1917, a certain Cyrus I (CI) Scofield, having come upon John Darby’s ideas, popularized them in his dispensational study notes in a Scofield Reference Bible. CI Scofield's notes on the Book of Revelation are a major source for the various timetables, judgments, and plagues elaborated on by popular religious writers in the late 20^th and early 21^st centuries such as Hal Lindsey, Edgar C. Whisenant, and Tim LaHaye; and in part because of the success of the Scofield Reference Bible, 20^th century American fundamentalists placed greater stress on eschatological speculation. This, needless to say, has contributed to great financial success in the publication of books and the production of movies. Yet NONE of these ideas which have profited self-made, self-appointed Protestant clergymen so much were ever taught by the Apostles or heard of by their spiritual descendants, the ones whom they taught, the early Church Fathers. Indeed, St. Victorinus (a bishop of Pettau in what is now Austria and an ecclesiastical writer of AD 270 who suffered martyrdom probably in AD 303 under Emperor Diocletian) wrote a Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John. None of the ideas of a rapture and dispensationalist futurism purported by John Darby and CI Scofield appear in this late 3^rd and early 4^th century exposition on the Book of Revelation (or Apocalypse as it is called in Greek).

CONCLUSION

A true reading of Sacred Scripture is inconsistent with the man-made eschatology of a rapture. And none of the dispensationalist ideas of John Darby and CI Scofield appear in history until a Protestant “priest” got upset over having to swear allegiance to the King of England who himself was Protestant. So I ask the reader this: will you believe what the early Church Fathers (Sts John Chrysostom, Victorinus et alias) learned from the Apostles themselves, or will you default to the feel-good and exciting theology of dispensationalism that has contributed so mightily to the profit of self-appointed clergymen who write books and produce movies for the titillation of the emotions without the edification of the spirit? We would do well to remember what is said in the 2^nd Papal Encyclical (other known as St peter’s 2^nd Epistle):

20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. [2 Peter 1:20-21]

Interpretation of Sacred Scripture belongs to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church Who Herself at the Councils of Carthage and Rome in the 4^th century AD determined what would be in the Sacred Canon and what would not be. It does NOT belong to self-made, self-appointed men like John Darby and CI Scofield, nor with their descendants who use a false eschatology to earn monetary profit for themselves.

Origo Bibliorum Sanctorum

ORIGO BIBLIORUM SANCTORUM

Amici,

Protestors say that they believe the Bible is inerrant and that the Bible is the only authority for spiritual truth. The first part of what they say is true and correct: the Bible is without error. Yet these same protestors reject the very Church which determined what books would be in the Bible and what books would not be. The second part of what they say is false: the Bible is the only authority for spiritual truth. In point of fact, both Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church are authoritative, especially since it was on the basis of these that the Church determined what would be in the Bible and what would not be. Therefore, if someone says that he accepts the authority of the Bible, then by definition he must accept the authority of Sacred Tradition and the authority of the Church. If he rejects either of the last two, then when he says he accepts only the authority of the Bible, he is a hypocrite and a heretic.

THE CHURCH: THE PILLAR AND BULWARK OF TRUTH

St. Paul writes in 1st Timothy 3:15 the following:

“…if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.”

It is the Church, NOT Sacred Scripture, which is the pillar and bulwark of the truth. Sacred Scripture records that truth but it is NOT that truth. There is a difference between a record and that which is recorded. Therefore, if it is accepted that Sacred Scripture records the truth, and if the Church according to that Scripture is the pillar and bulwark of that truth, then everyone – Protestants, Orthodox and Catholic – is obligated to give assent to the Church.

TRADITION: BOTH VERBAL AND WRITTEN ARE AUTHORITATIVE

St. Paul writes in 2nd Thessalonians 2:15 the following:

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.”

Tradition then is authoritative and must be obeyed, whether verbal or written. To reject the authority of the Sacred Tradition of the Church is to reject Sacred Scripture which admonishes us to adhere to Tradition. Therefore, if it is accepted that Sacred Scripture records the truth, then everyone – Protestants, Orthodox and Catholic – is obligated to accept as authoritative the past 2000 years of the Church’s Sacred Tradition.

SCRIPTURE: CONTENT AT THE TIME OF CHRIST

At the time of Christ, the Scriptures held to be sacred and divine were those recorded in the Septuagint, a translation into Koine Greek of the books in the Old Testament completed by 70 scholars in Alexandria, Egypt in 132 BC. It was this translation which the writers of the New Testament quoted throughout the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles and Revelation. Therefore, it is stipulated that the books in this translated were regarded by Jesus, His disciples and St. Paul as canonical. These included the standard 66 books recognized by the protestors of the 16th century as well as 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Baruch, Wisdom and Sirach. Yet in spite of the fact that Jesus Himself and his disciples accepted these books, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and the other protestors rejected them on their own cognizance. They defied the Church and the Holy Spirit Who inspired the Church on what to accept and what to reject as canonical.

SCRIPTURE: DETERMINED BY THE CHURCH

The content of the New Testament was written by the Apostles in the 1st century AD, but there was a lot of controversy over what was canonical and what was not canonical in the first 400 years of the Church. Some noteworthy and salutary books like the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, and the letters of Clement, were highly regarded and read as Scripture in some of the local Churches. Others, like the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Judas, were Gnostic and clearly heretical; these were rejected outright. And still others such as the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of St. Jude and the Book of Revelation, while regarded as canonical today, were not always accepted by every local Church in the first few centuries after Christ. So how and when did the Church Universal (i.e., Catholic) – the undivided Church of East (Orthodox) and West (Roman) – decide on which books would be accepted as canonical and which would not be? The Church did in the late 4th century AD what She had done to decide the problem of Judaizers in 1st century AD as recorded in Acts 15:6-29. She held a Council of the Bishops and Presbyters (i.e., Priests). Actually, she held two councils: one at Rome in AD 382 and another at Carthage in AD 397. The relevant text of the proceedings of these Councils is reproduced below. The reader must bear in mind, however, that the names given to the books of the Old Testament in this text are their Greek versions given in the Septuagint vice their original Hebrew or Aramaic versions to which the Protestants default in their publications. That is because Jesus and His Apostles, and hence the early Church used the Septuagint.

STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF ROME IN AD 382 ON SACRED SCRIPTURE

It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun.

The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book [Joshua]; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [1st & 2nd Samuel and 1st & 2nd Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books [1st & 2nd Chronicles]; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book; Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee [Hosea], one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias [Zephaniah], one book; Aggeus [Haggai], one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book. Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John.

The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.

Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book.

Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle.

Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.

Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE IN AD 397

It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings [1st & 2nd Samuel, and 1st and 2nd Kings], two books of Paraleipomena [1st & 2nd Chronicles], Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras [Ezra and Nehemiah], two books of the Maccabees. Of the New Testament: four books of the Gospels, one book of the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, one epistle of the same [writer] to the Hebrews, two Epistles of the Apostle Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude, one book of the Apocalypse of John. Let this be made known also to our brother and fellow-priest Boniface, or to other bishops of those parts, for the purpose of confirming that Canon, because we have received from our fathers that those books must be read in the Church. Let it also be allowed that the Passions of Martyrs be read when their festivals are kept.

Extra Ecclessiam Nulla Salus

EXTRA ECCLESIAM NULLA SALUS

Amici,

The following historical account from the early New Testament Church is presented in refutation of the false assumption and idea that the Church started either with the rebellion of Martin Luther, John Calvin and Henry VIII in the 16th century, or worse, with someone’s own man-made denomination in the 20th century or some mega-church in the 21st. The Church started in 33 AD when Jesus Christ said to Simon in Matthew 16:18, “Thou art Rock and upon this Rock I shall build my Church, and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail.”

St. Ignatius of Antioch was a disciple of St. John, the writer of the Book of Revelation, having sat and learned at his feet. St. Ignatius went on to write letters to some of the same Churches in Asia Minor to which St. John had addressed the Book of Revelation (which is really a circular Epistle). One of the Churches to which St. Ignatius wrote an Epistle was the one in Smyrna which St. John addresses in Revelation 2:8-11. Another Church to which St. Ignatius wrote an Epistle is the one in Philadelphia which St. John addresses in Revelation 3:7-13. St. Ignatius essentially carried on the work which St. John had started in Asia Minor. He stated in his epistles that the Church is Catholic ( Katholika Ekklesia ] and that outside of the Church there is no salvation [ extra Ecclesiam nulla salus ]. These things, which are contrary to the Protestant paradigm which began in the 1500 years after the foundation of the Church, were written about 110 AD (a mere 17 or so years after the death of the last Apostle) by a student of that Apostle. The text below cites the relevant sections in the applicable letters.

In chapter 8 of his letter to the Smyrnaeans, St. Ignatius wrote in part the following:

“See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.”

In chapters 2, 3 and 4 of his letter to the Philadelphians, St. Ignatius wrote in part the following:

“Wherefore, as children of light and truth, flee from division and wicked doctrines; but where the shepherd is, there follow as sheep. For there are many wolves that appear worthy of credit, who, by means of a pernicious pleasure, carry captive [ 2nd Timothy 3:6 ] those that are running towards God; but in your unity they shall have no place.”

“Keep yourselves from those evil plants which Jesus Christ does not tend, because they are not the planting of the Father. Not that I have found any division among you, but exceeding purity. For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of repentance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren. If any man follows him that makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If anyone walks according to a strange opinion, he agrees not with the passion [ of Christ ].”

“Take heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to [ show forth ] the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever you do, you may do it according to [ the will of ] God.”

Therefore, outside of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church there is NO salvation. We are baptized into the Church, the Body of Christ, founded in AD 33 on Peter the Rock in Matthew 16:18, and born of the Holy Spirit at the Feast of Pentecost in Acts 2:1-4. A personal relationship with Christ entails a personal relationship with the Church His Body, and that relationship is one of submission, for Christ did not establish His Church as a Democracy where every person gets a vote but as a Monarchy with Him as absolute Ruler. 

Thus we say:

Christus vincit
Christus regnat
Christus imperat

Epistula Aperta ad Ecclessiam Christi Vitae

Open Letter to Christlife Church

Dear Sirs,

Last night my wife and I visited your Christlife Church and listen to a sermon on the Revolutionary Church. We were invited by our neighbors who are parishioners at your Church. My wife is quite taken up with her new lady friend. That she is finally going to a Church – any authentic Christian Church – is welcome news and I find this encouraging. But I am a devout and staunch Catholic Christian. I know the Faith once delivered unto the Saints very well, and that includes the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well as the Bible which the Catholic Church gave to the world. I can read both Latin and Koine or New Testament Greek. I have studied the writings of the early Church Fathers (Sts Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, John Chyrsostom, etc.). And I know history, ancient and modern. So I cannot be fooled by fine sounding words that tickle the ears and appeal to popular prejudices with feel-good theology.

That all said, there was much good said in the sermon last night, and many points were quite valid. I commend you heartily. However, a few things require closer examination. One of these was a statement which almost anecdotally claimed that the Church took a left turn in AD 300. Another was a continued denigration of religion in favor of spirituality. And a third was a disdain for rules and tradition. I shall deal with each of these in the following discussion. Truth is very important to me – truth in history, truth in religion, truth in politics, and truth in science. I am both a nuclear engineer by profession and a Latinist by avocation. So when I hear history or religion being misrepresented, then I shall respond not to criticize the person making the incorrect claim but to correct in charity (Latin – in caritate). I apologize that this letter is rather long-winded, but truth cannot be distilled into sound bites. It requires thorough and exact explanation along with dispassionate, rational thinking. God gave us brains and He expects us to use them.

ANNO DOMINI 300

The oblique reference that the Church made a left turn in AD 300 was without substantiation or explanation. Typically when I hear Protestants of any denomination (not just Assemblies of God) make such an assertion, they are usually referring to the legalization of Christianity under Emperor Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus Augustus (or in Greek Κωνσταντῖνος ὁ Μέγας) via the Edict of Milan in AD 313. Protestants typically assert that Constantine erred by making Christianity a State Religion, and that this gave rise to the Catholic Church Whom they abhor based on popular prejudices disseminated by heretics in the 1500s. Little do they realize that it was St Ignatius of Antioch, a student of St John who wrote the Book of Revelation, who first used the phrase Ecclessia Catholica (literally universal assembly) in his letter to the Church of Smyrna in AD 110 (one of the seven Churches in Asia Minor to which St John had written Revelation), some 213 years BEFORE Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity. One indeed wonders what Protestants would have preferred instead of Christianity as a State Religion: perhaps Mithraism or Greco-Roman paganism or the Arian heresy which was rampant throughout the Christian Mediterranean world at that time? I write that with irony for of course they would not prefer those.

But suffice it to say that in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge against Maxentius God gave Constantine a vision of a trophy of the cross arising from the light of the sun in the heavens, carrying the message, “In Hoc Signo Vinces “or "with this sign, you will conquer.” That sign was Chi (Χ) traversed by Rho (Ρ):☧, a symbol representing the first two letters of the Greek spelling of the word Christos or Christ. With that sign provided by God Himself Constantine prevailed, and both paganism and Arianism throughout the Roman Empire were defeated. Mithraism never prevailed in the east and died out in Persia. And Constantine convened the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325 to stop the spread of the Arian heresy which denied the divinity of Christ (it is essentially the same heresy which today is resurrected as the Jehovah Witness sect). What Constantine did by making Christianity a State Religion was threefold:

He provided the Church in the West – the Latin Church – with the means to preserve Greco-Roman civilization when the German and Slavic barbarians invaded in the 400s so that in the 1400s when Europe was ready the Renaissance would take place.

He provided a bulwark in the East against Islam which rose in AD 632 and by AD 732 had invaded the West all the way to Tours, France. That bulwark lasted from AD 313 until the fall of Constantinople in AD 1453, more than 1000 years later.

He enabled the spread of Christianity into Ukraine and Russia and the conversion of millions of souls to the Gospel. It was this spread that turn the tide of the Mongol Invasion when the last of the Khan tyrants died.

So the statement that the Church made a left turn in AD 300 is demonstrably incorrect. Rather, the Church made a wrong turn in AD 1054 when the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Bishop of Rome excommunicated each other (fortunately Patriarch Athenogoras and Pope Paul VI lifted this mutual excommunication in 1965). And the Church made a wrong turn again in AD 1521 when Martin Luther rebelled, followed by John Calvin and then by the notorious Henry VIII who for the sake adultery broke with Rome. Yes, Pope Alexander VI in the late 1400s was a horrid man of sin and depravity who did much harm to cause the so-called Reformation, and yes, the Catholic Church needed a purgation which it got at the Council of Trent in 1571.

But let us note that the Assemblies of God (of which your Christlife Church is a part) was established in AD 1914 (not the AD 33 for the Catholic Church). And this denomination is in part derived from the Pentecostal revival of the late 1800s and early 1900s within primarily the Methodist Church. And that Church in turn derived in the 1700s from the Anglican Church which was started in the 1500s by the adultery of King Henry VIII. Therefore, if someone wants to talk about wrong turns, then behold that unbroken succession of wrong turns that began when Henry VIII demanded to dissolve his sacramental marriage to Catherine of Aragon for Anne Bolyne, and Pope Clement VII said, “NO! Jesus declared that what God has joined together, let no man cast asunder.” Imagine that! The Pope defending Sacred Scripture (Matthew 19:1-12) against a Protestant! But I digress.

RELIGION

I frequently hear the phrase, “I am not religious; I am spiritual.” To which I respond, “So are the Wiccans and pagan witches. That doesn’t make them holy.” Now there are two objections to this sentiment of being spiritual and not religious, the first Biblical and linguistic, and the second political.

First, James 1:27 states, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.” The Greek word that is used here is θρησκεία which means religious worship, especially external – that which consists of ceremonies, religious discipline, religion. The Latin Vulgate of course translates θρησκεία as religio and states:

“Religio munda et inmaculata apud Deum et Patrem haec est visitare pupillos et viduas in tribulatione eorum inmaculatum se custodire ab hoc saeculo.”

Religio means obligation, bond, reverence and derives from the verb religare which means “to bind together.” This word – θρησκεία for the Greeks and religio for the Romans – was used extensively by all the early Church Fathers who succeeded the Apostles. It denotes the binding together of the Assembly or Church which you throughout your sermon actually advocated with great eloquence. Yet you object to the word religion in spite of its Biblical and historical basis. You’re spiritual but you want your congregants to be bonded – religati – together. Really? I think that what you think is meant by religion is really not the Christian religion.

Second, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

If yours is not a religion, then you are not entitled to any protection under the First Amendment. So in this day and age of post-modern, neo-pagan liberal progressivism which seeks to shove atheism and hedonism down the throats of every authentic orthodox Christian who upholds the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman and the sanctity of life from conception onwards, I would be very careful if I were you in making statements that say yours is not a religion. Again, what you think is meant by the word religion and what it really means are two different things.

TRADITION AND RULES

Repeatedly throughout the sermon last night disparaging references were made about rules and tradition. Yet St Paul was clear about the traditions handed down from the Apostles. In 1^st Corinthians 11:2, he states:

“I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.”

And in 2^nd Thessalonians 2:15 he also states:

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.”

Indeed, all the Church had for the first 400 years of Her existence was Apostolic tradition, whether written or verbal, to go on. It was not until the Councils of Carthage and Rome in the late 300s that the Church – the Bishops and Patriarchs in communion with the Bishop of Rome and the Patriarch of Constantinople – made a decision regarding what books would be in the Canon of Sacred Scripture and what would not be. There was no formal collection of books called a Bible before that time. There were simply individual manuscripts laboriously copied over the years from one person to another by that tradition which Protestants hold in contempt. It was these that were read during the Liturgy of the Word at Mass on Sundays. Some books which had been routinely read at Mass like the Shepherd of Hermas and the Letters of Clement were rejected by these two Church Councils but others they accepted. Interestingly the undivided Church of that time accepted the seven Deuterocanonical Books (which you Protestants call the Apocrypha) that Martin Luther and John Calvin in their rejection of Sacred Tradition threw out of the Bible. These include Judith, Tobit, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1^st and 2^nd Maccabees. But again I digress.

Tradition is the steady beam of passing on what we have inherited from the past. The Church did not end in AD 300, else Jesus lied when He told St Peter in Matthew 16:18:

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

Rather, throughout history people have rejected that Sacred Tradition and started their own Church based on their own emotional fancies and their disdain for following rules and regulations. Their cry is the same as Satan’s, “Non serviam,” which means, “I will not serve.” (No, I am NOT saying that is you. Rather, that is the rebellion of Luther, Calvin and Henry VIII.)

As for rules and regulations, what does Jesus Himself say? Matthew 5:17-20 tells us:

“Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”

Now how did the early Church worship? Is that not what you should want to do? Follow in the footsteps of what the New Testament Church actually did? St. Justin Martyr describes this in AD 155 and it is the Catholic Mass (some 145 years before that “left turn” you talked about last night). Here is what he says in his First Apology.

“      No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.

We do not consume the eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilates for its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of his own words contained in the prayer of thanksgiving.

The apostles, in their recollections, which are called gospels, handed down to us what Jesus commanded them to do. They tell us that he took bread, gave thanks and said: Do this in memory of me. This is my body. In the same way he took the cup, he gave thanks and said: This is my blood. The Lord gave this command to them alone. Ever since then we have constantly reminded one another of these things. The rich among us help the poor and we are always united. For all that we receive we praise the Creator of the universe through his Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit.

On Sunday we have a common assembly of all our members, whether they live in the city or the outlying districts. The recollections of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as there is time. When the reader has finished, the president of the assembly speaks to us; he urges everyone to imitate the examples of virtue we have heard in the readings. Then we all stand up together and pray.

On the conclusion of our prayer, bread and wine and water are brought forward. The president offers prayers and gives thanks to the best of his ability, and the people give assent by saying, “Amen”. The eucharist is distributed, everyone present communicates, and the deacons take it to those who are absent.

The wealthy, if they wish, may make a contribution, and they themselves decide the amount. The collection is placed in the custody of the president, who uses it to help the orphans and widows and all who for any reason are in distress, whether because they are sick, in prison, or away from home. In a word, he takes care of all who are in need. 

We hold our common assembly on Sunday because it is the first day of the week, the day on which God put darkness and chaos to flight and created the world, and because on that same day our savior Jesus Christ rose from the dead. For he was crucified on Friday and on Sunday he appeared to his apostles and disciples and taught them the things that we have passed on for your consideration.“

By the way, the English word Eucharist is derived from the Greek ευχαριστία which means thanksgiving. It is used repeatedly by the Apostle Paul in his epistles, but few Bible translations properly translate this word. And yes, the real Presence of Jesus – Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity – is the Eucharist exactly as Jesus’ Bread of Life Discourse in John chapter 6 has it. That’s Biblical and as you can see from the text above substantiated by the unchanging Tradition of the Church. A validly consecrated ἐπίσκοπος or ordained πρεσβύτερος prays the ἐπίκλησις over the bread and wine, and by the power of the Holy Spirit they become the very Body and Blood of our Blessed Lord and Savior. Sadly the rebellion of the Protestants undid all of that in the 1500s.

CONCLUSION

I will support my wife in whatever she endeavors. I love her with all my heart. But I will combat disinformation with all the knowledge at my disposal. I applaud the moral values which your religious denomination teaches, and the fellowship and friendship which it extends. But Jesus founded One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church in Matthew 16:18, and the Holy Spirit breathed life into Her at the Feast of Pentecost in Acts 2:1-4. The divisions that exist today are created by man’s self-will run riot – “I’m spiritual but not religious.” Imagine your Church as a Protestant one doesn’t even commune with the Protestant Christian School right next to you because each of you is “spiritual but not religious” – nothing binds you together – there’s that word religio again! And now you have to move out into another building! Christians do not even support Christians because “…each one of you says, ‘I belong to Paul’ or ‘I belong to Apollos,’ or ‘I belong to Cephas,’ or ‘I belong to Christ’” (1^st Corinthians 1:12). How Christ must weep that His prayer in John 17:20-21 is negated by human rejection of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Church Whom He founded on Peter the Rock, “I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.”

Cordialibus cum Salutationibus,

Paulus