Showing posts with label Matters ecclesiastical. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Matters ecclesiastical. Show all posts

Monday, 18 March 2013

A Presbyterian Republic?


I came across this interesting paper this morning, a paper that emanated from the Scottish Covenanters and proposed the setting up of a republic in these islands and get rid of the monarchy.

I would be very pleased to hear your views on the contents of this historic paper.

 The Queensferry Paper.

 The Queensferry Paper was so called  because it was discovered in the pocket of a Covenanter, Henry Hall of Haughshead, when he was seized at South Queensferry on 4 June 1680. Hall was in the company of Donald Cargill when they were discovered and an attempt made to arrest them. Cargill made good his escape but Hall subsequently died from his wounds. The document is thought to have been a manifesto intended to be taken by Hall to Holland where dissident Scots  could consider a new Presbyterian system for Scotland.

 Smellie in Men of the Covenant calls the paper “the most advanced of all the Covenanting manifestos “. It was a bond strong in its affirmations and denials; made a solemn confession of faith and frankly disavowed sinful rulers. It further made a declaration in favour of a republic. The document was the first formal statement of the dissident group that became known known as the Cameronians, MacMillanites and Reformed Presbyterians. A document of some 6,000 words it is much longer and definitive than the Declaration at Sanquhar which was made shortly after on 22 June 1680.

 The substance of the document given in Hewisons The Covenanters, ( the lengthy full text is in Johnson`s Treasury)  was :

 1. To covenant with and swear acknowledgement of the Trinity and to own the Old and New Testaments to be the rule of faith.

2. To advance God`s kingdom, free the church from Prelacy and Erastianism, and remove those who had forfeited authority.

3. To uphold the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, with her standards, polity, and worship, as an independent government.

4. To overthrow the kingdom of darkness, ie Popery, Prelacy and Erastianism.

5. To discard the royal family and set up a republic.

6. To decline hearing the indulged clergy.

7. To refuse the ministerial function unless duly called and ordained.

8. To defend their worship and liberties, to view assailants as declarers of war, to destroy those assaulting, and not to injure any `but those that have injured us`.[i]

 The fifth article recites the reasons for rejecting rule by a single person (the monarchy) and declares:

We do declare that we shall set up over ourselves, and over what the Lord shall give us power of, government and governors according to the Word of God, and especially that Word, Exodus xviii.21:`Moreover, though shalt  provide out of all the people, able men, such as fear God , men of truth, hating covetousness, and place such over them; to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundred, rulers of fifties , and rulers of tens.`  That we shall no more commit the government of  ourselves, and the making of laws for us, to any one single person, or lineal successor, we not being by God, as the Jews were, bound to one single family; and this kind of government by a single person being most liable to inconveniences, and aptest to degenerate into tyranny, as sad and long experience hath taught us.

Tuesday, 4 December 2012

PURITANS’ PROGRESS - Dr Alan Clifford


A 350th Anniversary Commemoration of the Norwich & Norfolk Ministers Ejected from their Churches by the Act of Uniformity, 1662. 

Dr Alan C. Clifford
Norwich Reformed Church

Remember those ... who have spoken the Word of God to you, 
whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct - 
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and for ever.
(Hebrews 13: 7-8)

We now attempt to understand why around 2000 Puritans—including all our local heroes—refused to submit to the Act of Uniformity in 1662. Since he was part of the later history of British Nonconformity, we allow Alexander Drysdale to summarize the issues for us.

[for Drysdale's scanned summary, see the attachment]


A 1662 AFTERTHOUGHT: BISHOPS, THE BIBLE & ANGLICAN TEXTUAL TAMPERING

Dr Edmund Calamy (1671-1732)—the ‘Nonconformist Champion’—commented on the deception resulting from defective translation as it relates to Acts 20: 28. Had the AV men used ‘bishop’ rather than ‘overseer’, the whole ‘PC’ Episcopalian case would been blown out of the water, since the Ephesian ‘elders’ (= ‘presbyters’) are therefore ‘bishops’. This is why Presbyterians always opposed Anglican-style bishops. Calamy further demonstrates that, to avoid the irrefutable Presbyterian case, the readings from Acts 20 and 1 Timothy 3 used in the ordination of Priests in the 1552 BCP (also in the 1549 and Queen Elizabeth’s 1559), were confined by the Restoration Anglican churchmen to the ordination of Bishops and Archbishops in the anti-Puritan 1662 Prayer Book.  

Regarding Acts 20:28, the NKJV wrongly follows the AV, which likewise agrees with Tyndale. Even the Geneva Bible is defective at this point. In this respect, the NIV is consistently accurate in using ‘overseer’ for ‘episkopos’. 

‘I cannot find that in Scripture the word Bishop ever signifies one that is superior to other ministers in power or jurisdiction, or any way above them, unless when it is applied to our Lord Jesus Christ, the Great Bishop of Souls...For which reason, I have often thought it could not be without design that our translators have in my text used the word Overseers rather than Bishops. For had they rendered it as they should have done in this manner: ‘Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops’, these words spoken to Elders or Presbyters, might have filled them with thoughts not very favourable to the Hierarchy...In the sense of Scripture, I can find no difference between Bishops and Presbyters. Our blessed Lord Jesus appears not to have made any difference between them;...nor does St Paul seem to have known any differences between Bishops and Presbyters’ (Edmund Calamy, Sermon Preached at the Ordination of Mr John Munckley, 1717, pp. 18-19, emphasis mine).

One is inclined to ask if all this matters any more. Lee Gatiss, the Director of Church Society states that ‘the old seventeenth century debates over church government or ceremonial may not divide as they once did’, having said in the beginning of the sentence that ‘the established church persists in refusing to recognise non-episcopal ordination and confirmation’ (The Tragedy of 1662, London: The Latimer Trust, 2007, pp. 55-6). This surely means these issues are still alive and highly divisive if Nonconformist ministers are not regarded as true pastors, as surely as the Roman Catholic Church does not recognise Anglican orders! However, if Dr Calamy’s case is as solid as it appears to be, that the Bible sets the standard for valid ministry, then neither Roman nor Anglican priests are valid in the sight of our Lord Jesus Christ. This, in fact, is the high theological ground demanded by the Truth of God.

Iain Murray tends to minimise the importance of all we’ve considered when he concludes:

We should greatly underestimate the seriousness of 1662 if we imagined that the cleavage which then took place was only over phrases in the Book of Common Prayer and forms of Church order. These things were involved, but the Puritans regarded them as only a part of a much wider issue, namely, what is the nature of true Christianity? The Nonconformists believed that in acting as they did they were acting for the Gospel’ (Sermons of the Great Ejection (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1962, pp. 7-8).

It seems more correct to say that the Puritans objected to more than ‘phrases’ in the BCP.  They took issue with dominant features of the book precisely because they viewed them as a denial of ‘true Christianity’. At best, because of most (but not all) of the Thirty-nine Articles and many good features of the Prayer Book, it was an unholy mixture. Baxter and his brethren could not therefore give ‘unfeigned consent to all and everything’ in it, as agreeable to the Word of God. This is serious. It can only mean that if the Puritans ‘acted for the Gospel’, then the conforming Anglicans and their Episcopal lords were acting against the Gospel. One cannot imagine a more serious charge, when today’s Nonconformists—especially those involved in the former-BEC AFFINITY umbrella body—seem to have grown weary of their distinctives just when a highly lax and compromised evangelicalism seems more firmly ensconced than ever within the present confused and corrupt Church of England.

Monday, 23 April 2012

LEADERLESS CHURCHES


What is the most effective way to ensure the church follows your personal agenda?  Easy.  Do not allow any discussion about those things that matter.  Bring down the guillotine fast.  Cut off those who want to oppose your plans.  Refuse any input from those who see things differently.  Those who support the minister’s materialistic plans as providing ‘good leadership’ have missed something inportant somewhere.

But, really, who is calling the shots in such churches?  Unless I am totally mistaken, it is the young people in the churches who are setting the entire church agenda.  They have to be catered for at all costs.  Their changing needs must be accommodated and met at all costs. 

And that brings me to another point.  When young people, people who may or may not be Christians, even though they are church members, write the agenda for the entire congregation, that church is in very serious trouble.  First, they do not have the spiritual knowledge or maturity, not just to take but to be given that role.  Their experience is still being formed (which is true for all of us, though older Christian people have loads of life experience as well as Christian experience).  They are still being educated, will go off to university, some will not return to their home area again, and when they start earning, they will link themselves to their local church and contribute to that.  The home church that they helped to plunge into enormous debt will receive nothing of their financial contributions. 

People in Northern Ireland are crying out for what they call ‘common sense politics.’  In the church scene, some mature church people are asking for the same but are not finding it.  Hair-brain ideas are proposed and no one knows where the money will come from to fund such projects.  True, I believe that God Himself will provide the resources for His work; but there’s a condition, as Hudson Taylor once famously said: “God’s work done in God’s way will not lack the resources.”  The question has to be asked of many enterprises: is what is proposed doing God’s work in the way He approves?

How easy it is for ambitious ministers who (secretly) want the new build to be named after them, to let their imaginations and their desire to be named in stone run away with them.  And for what?  Worldly fame.

Can anyone honestly say that when personal ambition enters a project, that work is being done in God’s way?  When people want to make a name for themselves, like they did at Babel (Gen.11), they merely succeed in drawing down God’s displeasure upon all involved.

But some are prepared to do just that!

Thursday, 22 December 2011

John Calvin 500 Now Available.

I am so pleased to inform you that the book "John Calvin 500 - a reformation affirmation" has now come off the presses, and is available for you to read and study.  Published by Charenton Reformed Publishing, the book deals with Calvin and Christ, Calvin and Calvinism, Calvin and Church, Calvin and Covenant, Calvin and Comfort, and Calvin and Courage. £12.50 (postage extra).  The six lecturers provide us with a lot to think about and assess.  The author of this blog is privileged to be amongst them.

Get your copy NOW through this blogsite.  £12.50 plus p&p.

Wednesday, 30 November 2011

Robbers of Christ's Glory!

It is very clear that, from a biblical viewpoint, Romanism is a massive error and deception.  One only has to look at the way in which she imposes herself and her devilish doctrines and practices between the souls of their people and the Lord Jesus Christ.  To get to Him, they must comes through the Mass, where they actually eat the Body of Christ!!!, the saints with their superabundance of merit that they can then share with those less meritorious, the priesthood (as they understand it - they seem to ignore the fact that all true believer in Christ are themselves priests, and the only Priest they go to is the Great High Priest, Christ Himself); they must go through confession - to another equally, or as recent h times have shown more sinful individual; the papacy; and even His very mother, the blessed Virgin Mary.

These are all set up as obstacles to be negotiated on the way to heaven.  But they are unScriptural additions, or road blocks, for the saints of God.  They were invented by Rome to keep a tight hold on their adherents, as all totalitarian systems do.  And Rome is a totalitarian system!  It holds its people with a tight grip!  In this regard, it is no different from other religious denominations; and one way in which you can tell if a person is more devoted to the church than to Christ is to suggest to him about leaving his denomination and joining another.  If he finds that impossible, then that man has a serious problem.  His devotion is to the church, and not to Christ or the Gospel.

What a subtle way of keeping sinners from becoming Christians! And many throughout the world have fallen for this subterfuge.  The devil has employed his "wiles," his schemes and subtle plans to divert sinners away from the Saviour of the world because he wants them with him in hell forever.  So crafty is he that he has deceived many church leaders and church members, and even many Christians.  They live only for today, and do not see further down the road, or where the devil's crafty schemes are leading them.  Rome has done this most successfully, there being almost 1.1bn Catholics in the world.  That amounts to approximately one sixth of the world's population!  What massive world-wide deception!  It would be very wrong to say that there are no true Christians among them, but such a massive population of deceived people is utterly astounding.  Any Christians within that institution are so despite the church's teaching and practice, not because of it - a statement that is also true of many Protestant churches.

The truly amazing thing is that so many have been taken in by this clever religious organisation.  They imagine Rome is exactly how she portrays herself.  They have been sucked in by her honeyed words and sentiments, and blinded by her authority and size.

But not all Christians have gone down that road to perdition.  Thank God for those with spiritual insight and discernment.

Sunday, 20 November 2011

The Plastic Church!

This is a cheap and artificial imitation of the real thing, a description that suits many churches today.  They are artificial, their membership is artificial, their worship and service are artificial, the preaching is artificial, etc.

They offer an artificial remedy for a real spiritual problem.  The love and care they show are artificial.  Their involvement in the world as the Voice of God is artificial - they tend more to be the official chaplains of political parties and governments than prophetic voices bringing the Word of God to a needy society. 

It is surely time for a new reformation and spiritual revolution within the churches.  No longer can ministers hold on to their reformed heritage; they must go and make that reformed heritage real in today's church; otherwise it will remain a plastic church!

Do you really want that?

Monday, 14 November 2011

Thomas Cranmer - English Reformer


Thomas Cranmer, DD, was one of the most significant English reformers who was not only influenced by the religious movements of his day, but came to see that the only way for the church to be the church is for her to submit her life to the authority of the Holy Scriptures.

Sir Marcus Loane inform us that after Cranmer refused Cardinal Wolsey's offer of a canonry at Oxford in 1524, 'His mind had now begun to yield to the teaching of the Scriptures, and as early as 1525, he had begun to pray daily for the abolition of the Papal power in England.'  As an examiner in divinity, Cranmer began to require students for the ministry to demonstrate that they had a first hand.knowledge of the Scriptures.  Given the spiritual condition of the church of that day, making such a demand on divinity students was tantamount to signing one's own death warrant.  The church then was not interested in ordering her life according to the Scriptures but preferred rather to hold on to her ecclesiastical power and privilege, something that provided safety to those who had it, but tyranny for those who did not.

What if our colleges and seminaries were to require that their students for the ministry were to furnish a like proof? What if today's church authorities were to insist that all preaching was to be faithful to the text of Scripture, and to seek the power of God the Holy Spirit in the preaching?  What if the church's leaders today to conduct an audit of what exactly was going on within the churches under their jurisdiction, would they find 'faith' in them? Would Christ alone be worshipped and honoured?  Would His Word be heard clearly and unmistakably?

What if church rules were to conform to the teaching of the Bible in spirit if not in letter? What if ministers were chained to the Bible in the way that in the past the Bibles had to chained to the pulpits? In today's backslidden church, to even speak in this way would be laughed at and ridiculed to the highest.  It would also mark the end of much that passes for the service of God in those churches.

Saturday, 29 October 2011

SEPARATION


It is often assumed that DMLJ was a “separatist” and that his intention was to break up the churches in the UK.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  What he was concerned to do was to bring Christians together, all those whose loyalty was to the Gospel.  He wanted to see evangelicals brought together, to work together, to worship together, to witness together.  He longed and worked for true evangelical unity.  He did not want to see evangelicals scattered all over the place in church denominations that either themselves did not hold to historic Christianity, or tolerated ministers who did not only not hold to historic Christianity, but who went out of their way to undermine and distort and eventually destroy biblical Christianity.  He longed to bring them all together.

But what happened instead.  Many men decided that denominational loyalty was much more important than the gospel.  Their emotional attachments to their denomination were so strong that they preferred to stay where the Gospel was no longer welcome, than come together with other evangelicals who loved that Gospel.

That being so, it was not those who came out of their denominations who were the schismatics, but those who stayed in, and who refused to come together in evangelical unity.  It was not those who came together into a Christian and evangelical grouping who were the separatists, but those who refused to come together with them.  Such evangelicals were being fundamentally inconsistent.  They were the separatists, because it was they who preferred the company of Gospel deniers than the fellowship of Gospel believers.

Friday, 28 October 2011

Reformation Day Remembered

31st October is the day on which reformed Christians remember the incident that heralded the great reformation of the church in Germany with the nailing of the Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences Commonly Known as The 95 Theses by Dr. Martin Luther on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenburg in 1517.  Luther (1483-1546) was appalled at the trafficking (nothing new in that!) that was going on in his day in indulgences (nothing new in that, either!) which were papal pardon for sins committed by the faithful.  In Luther's day, this was a great fund-raiser for the church.  If a Catholic wanted one of the Pope's indulgences, it was very simple: on the payment of money into the coffers of the Catholic church the indulgence was given.  

The reason for making this a public issue was that Luther's conscience was giving him a great deal of trouble and he was extremely keen to find peace with God.  He came, by the grace of God, to the wonderful discovery that this can only be had in the GospelHe wanted this issue discussed publicly, and by nailing his theses on the Castle Church door, he was announcing that this debate was to be held.

Not even Luther was to envisage the ramifications of this action.  He set the entire church alight with talk about indulgences, and forgiveness, and peace with God.  The Gospel became a very hot potato that was to be the means of debate and discussion and argument in the church for many years.  This debate was really around, "How does a sinner get right with God?"  It was about the Gospel and the Gospel way of salvation.

That's why Christians of the reformed persuasion remember this event that rocketed the church into being re-formed.  It is clear that Luther did not want to form a new church, but rather that the church might be formed again, or re-formed, or reformed, according to God's Word.

The following articles explain this in greater detail, and I am grateful to Dr Alan C. Clifford for permission to publish these articles on my blogsite.


LUTHER—Before and After

Introduction Martin Luther is known as ‘the monk who shook the world’! Indeed, after thirteen centuries of spiritual corruption, the German reformer heralded a return to the pure Gospel of Christ and his Apostles.
LUTHER’S LIFE Born at Eisleben, Saxony on 10 November 1483, of pious parents, he was educated at Magdeburg and Eisenach. After acquiring BA and MA degrees at the University of Erfurt (1501-5), a thunderstorm terrified him into becoming a monk in July 1505. Forsaking a law career (much to the annoyance of his parents), Luther entered the Augustinian cloister soon after. Ordained as a priest, he conducted his first mass in May 1507. His feeling of unworthiness created a further sense of terror in the presence of God. In vain did his father confessor John von Staupitz try to bring comfort to Luther’s soul. A pilgrimage to Rome in 1510 failed to bring relief. Indeed, it left him utterly disillusioned by the hypocritical spirituality of ‘the holy city’. Returning to Erfurt, he transferred to the new University of Wittenberg in 1511. The following year Luther became Doctor of Theology.

When Luther began a series of lectures on the Psalms and Paul’s Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians (1513-16), he was a pious though deeply disturbed Catholic. Troubled by Paul’s expression the ‘justice of God’ (Romans 1: 17), he gradually understood that what God demands of us by His law, He grants us in Christ through His grace. This new understanding transformed him. Let us hear Luther recount his evangelical conversion in his own words:


Night and day I pondered until I saw the connection between the justice of God and the statement that ‘the just shall live by his faith’. Then I grasped that the justice of God is that righteousness by which through grace and sheer mercy God justifies us through faith. Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise. The whole of Scripture took on a new meaning, and whereas before the ‘justice of God’ had filled me with hate, now it became to me inexpressibly sweet in greater love. This passage of Paul became to me a gate to heaven… If you have a true faith that Christ is your Saviour, then at once you have a gracious God, for faith leads you in and opens up God’s heart and will, that you should see pure grace and overflowing love.
Thus Luther now saw God in Christ not as an angry Judge but as a loving Father. His revolutionary understanding of ‘Justification by Faith alone in Christ’ and a powerful experience of the Gospel led to a radical reassessment of all he had known. The Pope’s religion was one of fear and uncertainty. It majored on ritual and superstitious ceremonies. The way to heaven demanded the gaining of merit by ‘works righteousness’. Purgatory was the destiny of the pious whose arrival at heaven was only a remote possibility. The glorious Gospel of Grace and pardon through Christ had been shrouded in merit-mongering legalism. All this falsehood was exploded by Luther’s conversion.


What was an intensely personal event soon became public by the Pope’s declaration of Indulgences. Based on the worship of relics, the pious could shorten their time in purgatory by contributions to the Church, by which Pope Leo X wished to rebuild St Peter’s in Rome. They could even reduce purgatorial time for their dead relations! In short, the way to get to heaven was to pay up!

The Dominican John Tetzel was appointed to direct this papal racket in Germany. Luther became horrified by such corruption. As Tetzel and his retinue made their way around Germany, the cash flowed in to a shameful jingle:
As soon as the money clinks in the chest,
A soul flies up to heavenly rest!

Luther’s revulsion was driven by his evangelical grasp of the Gospel. While churchmen (cardinals, bishops, parish clergy and monks, etc) were enslaving the faithful in expensive piety, they completely failed to see that ‘God had opened the gate of heaven through Christ, and the way to enter was by faith in the sacrifice of Jesus’ (Dr R. Tudur Jones). Indeed, the way to receive salvation was not by penance and ritual observance but by repentance and faith in the finished work of Christ. So Luther preached the true Gospel, urging the faithful: “My beloved, you cannot buy God’s mercy!”

Frederick the Wise, the Elector of Saxony, had arranged to offer his indulgences and display a large quantity of relics at the Castle Church, Wittenberg on All saints Day, 1 November 1517. As Dr Tudur Jones states, Luther saw that this was the time ‘to strike’ a blow against the infamous racketeering. So, on 31 October, he nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the Castle Church. This document was little more than a list of statements intended for debate. However, the explosive nature of their ideas was to shatter Rome’s religious monopoly ‘right down to the foundation’ (Dr Tudur Jones). This was the beginning of the Protestant Reformation!

Luther’s protest spread like wildfire throughout Germany and beyond. With their financial burden suddenly lifted, he became a national hero for the Gospel-liberated faithful. The Pope became furious with rage on hearing the news. When Luther was summoned to Rome, he appealed to Frederick for support who refused to banish him. In 1519, academic pressure was applied to Luther by Dr John Eck in a debate at Leipzig. However, with his knowledge of Scripture and the early church fathers, Christ’s new spokesman ran rings round the papal champion.

Eventually, Leo X issued a bull condemning Luther and his books. Refusing to be intimidated, Luther burned it in public on 10 December 1520. In the spring of the following year, a special Diet [assembly] was held at Worms, in the presence of the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V. After two hearings, despite every device to silence Luther and make him recant, he refused to yield.


“If I have spoken error, bear witness against me.. Recant? I cannot deny the work of many years. My conscience is captive to the Word of God. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.”
To briefly summarise Luther’s impact, he was threatened with death but was provided sanctuary in the Wartburg castle from May 1521 to March 1522. During this time, he translated the New Testament into German. It was published in September. Thus the light of Christ’s true Gospel brought increasing liberty from Rome’s errors and tyranny in every area of life. The obligatory celibacy of the Lutheran clergy was ended, Luther himself being married to former nun Katharine von Bora on 13 June 1525.


Later that year, Luther published his critique of Erasmus’ treatise on free will in De servo arbitrio [On the Enslaved Will]. Concerned to recover the Augustinian view of Paul’s Gospel of God’s sovereign grace, Luther defended the doctrine of predestination against Erasmus’ Pelagian doctrine of self-saving human power. Yet, as John Calvin was to argue later, Luther equally affirmed the ‘free offer’ of the Gospel:


It is certain that you are a part of the world. Do not let your heart deceive you by saying: "The Lord died for Peter and Paul; He rendered satisfaction for them, not for me." Therefore let every one who has sin be summoned here, for He has made the expiation for the sins of the whole world and bore the sins of the whole world (Comment on 1 John 2: 2).
Luther also revolutionised worship by composing chorales or hymns. The most famous is ‘Ein’ feste burg ist unser Gott’ [A safe stronghold our God is still], composed in 1527. Often afflicted by depression, Luther’s list of remedies are interesting, both spiritual and human:

Faith in Christ
The love of a good woman
Music
Manual labour
Getting downright angry.
After sad disagreement with the Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli at Marburg in 1529, the German Reformation was established in the issuing of the Augsburg Confession in 1530. The complete German Bible was published in 1534. Not before he produced an unhappy tract Against the Jews in 1543 (sadly later appealed to by the Nazis), Luther died at his birthplace, Eisleben on 18 February 1546.

Rev. Dr Alan C. Clifford

THE CHURCH BEFORE LUTHER

As is evident from the letters of the New Testament (apart from those written to the seven churches in Rev. 2-3), churches of Christian believers were settled in several cities in the Roman Empire—Colosse, Corinth, Ephesus, Jerusalem, Philippi, Rome and Thessalonica (in alphabetical order). If anything, Jerusalem may be regarded historically as the ‘mother church’ of Christianity (see Acts 15), although, strictly speaking, this title is reserved by Paul for the ‘heavenly Jerusalem’ (see Gal. 4: 26). However, there is no biblical evidence that any one church claimed priority over the others. With the passage of time, the Church of Rome gradually assumed a sense of priority since the Apostles Peter and Paul were martyred there. However, neither claimed to be ‘bishop’ of Rome. On the contrary, the early church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (d. 339) states that after Peter and Paul, ‘Linus was first bishop of Rome’ (Ecclesiastical History, III. 4. 8-9). This ‘Linus’ is mentioned by Paul (see 2 Tim. 4: 21).

The situation significantly changed after the Emperor Constantine (274-337)—following his conversion—bestowed honours and privileges on hitherto persecuted Christians. Rome actually declined in political importance after Constantine made Constantinople his ‘new Rome’. In the decades following the Emperor’s death, the Empire went into decline. Barbarian tribes made incursions into Italy and Alaric the Goth sacked Rome in 410. Out of the ruins of imperial Rome, the Church of Rome began to emerge as ecclesiastical ‘top dog’. This was a fulfilment of Paul’s prophecy regarding the ‘man of sin’ or antichrist (see 2 Thess. 2: 1-12). The developments of this period are aptly summed up by the 17th century English philosopher, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) who described ecclesiastical Rome as ‘the ghost of the old Roman Empire sitting crowned upon the grave thereof’ (Leviathan). The Papacy was slow in developing. Even ‘Pope’ Gregory the Great (590-604) disclaimed the title of ‘universal bishop’, an honour his successor Boniface III (in 607) adopted. Significantly, the title ‘pontifex maximus’ (or ‘supreme bridge builder’) once given to emperors became attributed to popes. Gregory had bestowed the ‘pallium’—an honour given to victorious generals by emperors—on the Roman missionaries to England and Germany respectively, Augustine (who came to England in 597) and Boniface.

The religion of Rome had departed significantly from the purity of the teaching it received from the Apostle Paul’s Letter to the Romans. Prayers for the dead, the worship of relics and lighting of candles started around 300-375. The church father Jerome (c. 340-420)—translator of the Latin Vulgate Bible—approved of these novelties. He was opposed by Vigilantius of Leon, the first of many champions of the true Gospel to inhabit the Valleys of Piedmont (NW Italy) in the centuries before the Reformation. In addition to the growth of superstitious ritual, the heresy known as Pelagianism (salvation by ‘free will’ rather than ‘free grace’)—spread by the British monk Pelagius—began to infect the theology of salvation taught by Paul. Martin Luther rightly remarked on Paul’s warnings in Romans 16: 17-20: ‘It is as though he had foreseen that out of Rome and through the Romans would come the seductive and offensive canons and decretals and the whole squirming mass of human laws and commandments, which have now drowned the whole world and wiped out this Epistle and all the Holy Scriptures, along with the Spirit and with faith, so that nothing has remained there except the idol, Belly, whose servants St Paul here rebukes. God release us from them. Amen’ (Introduction to Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans).

Deviant Roman dogmas developed progressively. Marian devotion grew as the term ‘Mother of God’ was applied to Mary after the Council of Ephesus (431). Purgatory was established by Pope Gregory I in 593. The College of Cardinals was established in 927. The obligatory celibacy of the priesthood was decreed by Pope Gregory VII in 1079. Transubstantiation became a central feature of the Mass through the decree of Pope Innocent III in 1215. The seven sacraments were affirmed in 1439. Tradition was declared of equal authority to the Bible by the Council of Trent in 1545. After the Reformation era, Mary’s immaculate conception (though objected to by Bernard of Clairvaux and Thomas Aquinas in the middle ages) was made official in 1854. Papal infallibility was declared in 1870, and the bodily assumption (into heaven) of the Virgin Mary was proclaimed by Pope Pius XII in 1950.

Rev. Dr Alan C. Clifford

Thursday, 20 October 2011

My Debt To The Doctor


MY DEBT TO THE DOCTOR: An 110th Anniversary Tribute to Dr D Martyn Lloyd-Jones




MY DEBT TO THE DOCTOR
An 110th Anniversary Tribute to DR D. MARTYN LLOYD-JONES
Alan C. Clifford
Pastor, Norwich Reformed Church
52 pages pbk �3.50
ISBN 978-0-9555165-2-8
CHARENTON REFORMED PUBLISHING

Order your copy at http://www.christiancharenton.co.uk/?tid.hl.dtd

Approaching the end of my seventh decade, I wish to express my debt to a famous Welsh preacher who, under God, was instrumental in my spiritual development. He was the first of three major Welsh influences in my life. The second was my university education, the third being my beloved wife Marian whom I met at university in North Wales. This tribute is not so much an autobiography as a token of gratitude to God for the life and ministry of the greatest Christian preacher of the 20th century, expressed through the medium of eighteen letters I received from him during the last fifteen years of his life.

As a young Christian reared in Methodism, converted in Anglicanism and in the process of discovering Puritanism, I became aware of this London-based minister known as 'the Doctor'. Called thus by his affectionate admirers, the late Dr D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) had been the minister of Westminster Chapel for approaching twenty years when I first heard of him. (from the Introduction).

The photograph of the Doctor with a youthful Rev Alan C Clifford at the Gateshead Church in the north of England where Rev. Alan Clifford was installed as minister.

To order your copy of this intensely personal book, click here, and remember to quote the order code TID.HL.DTD.  Thank you.



Monday, 17 October 2011

STALIN’S ‘USEFUL IDIOTS’ STILL AT LARGE



Strange as it may seem but there are signs of Stalin’s ‘useful idiots’ at large in the world today, and not least in Northern Ireland.  They are also deeply embedded within the church.  They are being controlled by the ‘higher powers’ to do their bidding.  The term was used by Stalin to describe Soviet sympathisers in the Western countries.  Joseph Stalin had, as one of his most ‘useful idiots,’ a man called Walter Duranty. 

Duranty was a correspondent, the Moscow bureau chief of the New York Times, Pulitzer Prize winner, and a Stalin apologist, who lived in America.  He was the means of spreading dangerous propaganda in the West with a view to popularising communistic ideals.  His sympathy for Stalinism was well known, as was his being ‘economical with the truth.’  Resorting to outright deception in order to pursue their goals caused him no pangs of conscience.

But what characterises ‘useful idiots’ today?  Several things. 

First, they are being used by the ‘higher powers’ for the promotion of sinister agendas.  These may well be satanic. 

Second, while some know they are being used by others and willingly fall into line, very often others are totally unaware that this is happening, and would deny any such thing.  ‘Gullible’ seems to be an apt description of such people. 

Third, they imagine, wrongly, that they are pursuing what is good and right, when all the while they are falling into the trap set for them by their masters, and pursuing a destructive course.  They are tunnel-visioned individuals who are unable to ‘see the wood for the trees’; they cannot see the damage they are doing, and even when the potential damage is pointed out to them, they don’t care; and with such an attitude, they are giving their enemies a field day.  Think how Gospel haters oppose the preacher, and believe that they are working in the best interests of the church/congregation. 

Fourth, they not only place themselves in jeopardy, but by their intrigue, cause others to follow them into ruin.  How often ‘sheep’ will follow one who sets him/herself up as a leader!  Soon the lead ‘sheep’ has drawn all the other sheep that are foolish enough to go after them out of the fold.

Fifth, they imagine that they are liked and supported by their masters while in reality they are utterly despised by them.  These foolish blind leaders and followers of the blind believe they are popular, but time will tell just how foolish they really are.

Sixth, when their masters have secured their evil purposes, they drop them like hot potatoes.  How often this has happened in the past!  If their masters think that their association with their pawns will cost them in one way or other, they will drop them immediately.

Seventh, before they finish their work for their masters, they have succeeded in dismantling everything good that they touch, leaving the beneficiaries of that good utterly dejected.  We have yet to see the results of this.

Sadly, ‘useful idiots’ are as evident today as they were in Stalin’s day.  They are found in every community, class, creed, grouping, organisation, lodge, church, whatever.  They are there!  Such people usually are not suspected by their close friends of being ‘agents’ of some higher malignant power.  Double agents are adept at hiding their true identity.

So how do you recognise them?  It’s quite simply, really.  “You will know them by their fruits,” (Mt.7:15, 16, 20).  The Scriptures make it very plain what to look for.  Look at the results of their work, their activities, and you will see clearly what these people are.  Their fruits identify them very clearly.  Watch and see what is happening before your eyes, recognise what they are doing, and then you will be able to identify these ‘double agents.’ 

Are they involved in scheming against a servant of Christ?  Do they plan against the work of the Gospel?  Are there clandestine meetings to dislodge a Gospel minister?  “You will know them by their fruits,” says Jesus.

They might try to hide whose bidding it is they are doing, but they cannot hide their role in it; and they are almost certain to deny any such involvement with these ‘shadowy characters.’  They will even try to convince the gullible (and will succeed with many) that their line of action is for the wider good, but the discerning will not be taken in by their subterfuge.  And those who protect them will also see them for what they are, while they themselves will be seen for the fools they are!  Remember, satans’ working is always from the shadows, from the dark places, where there is an absence of light.  These are tricky people to handle; they are devious, calculating and conniving.  They manipulate their ‘prey,’ and leave them open to allegations.

So, keep you eyes wide open and observe what is happening around you; try to discern the trends and trace the similarities in the ‘odd’ things that are happening; and then tell me that I’ve got it all wrong!

Friday, 14 October 2011

Church Minister in Same-Sex Partnership

THE female minister of a rural Scottish church has shocked her congregation by 'marrying' another woman.

The Rev Eleanor Muir told parishioners on Sunday morning that she had entered into a civil partnership.

But while admitting that same sex-relationships in the Kirk are 'topical' - the issue of gay clergy threatens to cause a schism in the Church of Scotland - she will not talk about her relationship.  'It is a private matter and I don't have anything to say at this stage,' she said. 'The congregation have " been enormously supportive.'

Miss Muir is minister of St Bean's church at Fowlis Wester, Perthshire, which dates back seven centuries, and previously worked on the Isle of Barra.

She came to Fowlis Wester, six miles west of Crieff, just over two years ago. It was widely known that she lived in the manse with another woman, though some locals said they assumed the couple were friends.

Perth and Kinross Conservative councillor Ann Cowan, who lives across the "road from the kirk in Fowlis Wester and was recently married by Miss Muir, said: 'I am personally very understanding of her situation. It is causing debate, but I am not going to condemn her.'
SOURCE:  Scottish Daily Mail, 13th Oct 2011.
COMMENT
The moral decline within the established church in Scotland, being presbyterian in government and the sister church of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI), is progressing at breath-taking speed.  This moral decline can be linked to the theological and spiritual decline within that denomination for many decades. 
For the church of Scotland, or indeed any church, to accept as normal what Scripture clearly condemns, ought to come as no surprise to any biblically knowledgeable Christian.  Paul teaches in Rom.1:18 that godlessness is the source of all unrighteousness, and where unrighteousness is not only tolerated but accepted as biblical, the only conclusion is that godlessness has pervaded the church.  The Church of Ireland (Anglican, or Hibernian)  has already accepted a civil partnership amongst its clergy, and the Presbyterian church in Ireland may not be too far away from a similar policy/practice.

The point is that where theological liberalism is the doorway through which most, if not all, perversions enter the church, and reformed evangelicals within those churches that are accepting of theological liberalism, need not pretend surprise at recent developments.  One  senior PCI minister told me that his church will not accept same-sex marriages within the clergy, but I'm not so sure about that, and for this reason.  Where theological liberalism is accepted as a valid expression of biblical religion, and given the spinelessness of reformed evangelicals within that church to do the right thing (they are adept at turning against their fellow evangelicals when the situation arises), it does not have the moral, spiritual or theological conviction to expose, oppose and remove such aberrations from the church's life.  

Further, the press report states that "the issue of gay clergy threatens to cause a schism in the Church of Scotland," a most unlikely outcome.  Senior reformed evangelicals within that church hold the view that even if the C of S were to join with the Roman catholic church, they would not leave 'the Kirk.'  So we are right back to the old situation where the denomination takes priority over the Gospel.  This church, and all churches that accept the validity of theological liberalism, are in exactly the same boat. They are like the frog that is placed in a saucepan filled with cold water which is then put on to boil, and the poor old frog becomes increasingly accustomed to the rise in temperature that it stays there until it is boiled to death.  In no way would it jump into a pot of boiling water.

Similarly, ministers and members alike who are comfortable within unfaithful churches, are prepared to stay in them, regardless of how those churches deny the truth of the Gospel.  They profess that the supreme standard of the church is the Holy Scriptures but in reality, the supreme standard is their church's code, or law book.  There is a tremendous departure from the truth of the Gospel in all these churches, and there are also vested and personal interests that exercise a vice-grip hold over men in the ministry.   

Commentators on the Church of Ireland's challenges over same-sex marriages is another case in point, and talk of a schism is also around.  But this will not happen either, because the denomination has such a hold over these men's consciences that they would see it as schismatic to leave 'mother church.'

Church authorities maintain their silence on such matters, thus demonstrating their indifference to the denial of the Gospel. 

But it is not being schismatic to leave what has proved itself to be a church in apostacy, and to join with what is a truer manifestation of the church on earth.  Of course, the big question is, Which one?

Monday, 3 October 2011

Church Elder Bullies Church Members

Bullying within organisations is not a new phenomenon; nor is bullying within the Christian Church.  And the bullying of minsters by elders and members is not the only form this bullying takes, nor is it the only target group that gets 'the treatment.'

In my work with the victims of bullying which goes over the past 14 years, I have had one case where a female church worker was bullied by her female minister boss. In addition, I have only had one case where a church member was bullied by an elder.

So, bullying in the church and by the church is still a problem; but the sad thing is that the churches are utterly incompetent to deal with this anti-social behaviour within its own ranks.  They may have experience of being bullies, but they do not have experience of being bullied.  At least, not those who are detailled with responsibility of sorting out church bullying issues. 

The Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI) has a somewhat chequered history so far as bullying is concerned. This is not the only church denomination that is involved in this evil behaviour, as a cursory visit to the Internet will reveal.  But PCI is one case in question.  It formed a Reconciliation Service which purportedly has responsibility for dealing with such conflict issues within congregations.  The really bizarre thing is that, as is often the case in industry and business, the people responsibility for dealing with these matters are themselves the bullies; and if they are not the direct bullies, they are too closely aligned with those who are.

How do church bodies deal with bullying issues?  It's very simple.  They simply close one door after another so that the victims of church bullying are left even more devastated than was hitherto the case.  They close ranks against "the troubler of Israel," and offer protection to the system, and also to the system's 'blue-eyed boys.'  You could write the script!

Further, the more inexperienced the ministers are, and the less capable they are of dealing with elders who step grossly out of line, the more obvious becomes their ineptitude in this situation. This is shown by the old time resort to pious platitudes.  "It's always darkest before the dawn."  "God has a plan in this that you cannot see."  Or, the most recent one that I heard, "'Let's agree to disagree' and ... we will 'find out in heaven who is right'.  The niggling thing about platitudes is that they do in fact contain some truth.  The exasperating thing about them is that they are not at all helpful when addressed by an incompetent person as he disguises his own pastoral incompetence.

You would expect ministers, of all people, to have a bit of compassion for the poor victim, but alas, they are amongst the biggest offenders in this regard.  They are way out of their depth here, and it does not take the long to show it. 

And what of the victims of bullying?  Well, they are left licking their wounds, with no one within a shout to give any comfort or help.

For anyone wanting not only research-based information on bullying, but a genuine pastoral approach to dealing with this matter, then please visit this website.  If you fear your children might be affected by your bullying, then please click this link and discover what might be happening to them, and how you might be able to help them. 

Saturday, 1 October 2011

The Latimer Syndrome Spreads

David Latimer seems to be enjoying his celebrity status as Martin McGuinness' 'presbyterian chaplain' but he is doing it, and gaining these 'honours', by dancing on the graves of the people that McGuinness & Co sent to their deaths, including my youngest brother, Kenneth. 

His denomination, at both national and local levels, has been deafeningly silent about Dr Latimer's activities, in contradistinction to the way Rev Mervyn Gibson was brought before church authorities for walking down the Newtownards Road to the music of a hymn.  Is it a case that the Presbyterian Church in Ireland supports provo-lovers, but despises members of the orange order?  This seems to be the case, in the light of his church's recent activities.  It is very distressing for members of PCI to see their denomination applauding, by its silence, the very public support given by one of its ministers to a notorious terrorist leader, yet is prepared to take action against another minister who seeks to stand for Gospel principles. 

Indeed, the Moderator of that church is strangely quiet at present - does he also support what McGuinness has done to his own fellow members?  If not, then let him come out and say so.

Innocent victims of the IRA's terrorist campaign are especially hurt by Latimer's bare-faced support for a terrorist leader, and for a man whose organisation sent many Presbyterians et al to their untimely graves.  Whilst quite clearly there are Presbyterians who will support their church at all costs, and will go on supporting it regardless, others are much more discerning, and will now be re-assessing their position within that religious denomination.  But in all likelihood, such re-assessment will issue in no change, whatever hold a church has on its members.

But David Latimer ought to be thoroughly ashamed of himself, as ought his church.  But there again, "shame demands grace," and where there is "no grace" there will be "no shame." 

I am also wondering what Dr Lesley Carroll thinks of this - my suspicion is that she thinks that all such activity is excellent, and to pot with the innocent victims of the IRA.  She also demonstrates by her actions that every action that can be taken against Gospel ministers within PCI, ought to be done without undue delay. The very presence of these ministers is an annoyance that they could do well without.

PCI's deafening silence about this matter demonstrates that, as a church, it does not know much about true reconciliation, even at the horizontal level!

Sunday, 25 September 2011

Why Do Evangelicals in Liberal Denominations Make No Difference?


What a question?  The very thought that evangelicals make no difference to the life of the church is preposterous.  That they are described as ‘salt’ and ‘light’ by our Lord is a fact.  But that they are not working as ‘salt’ and ‘light’ is also a fact.  The ‘salt’ has lost is savour, and has become useless; and the ‘light’ has been put ‘under a bushel’ therefore does not give light to anyone (Mt.5).  Saltless salt is not only useless, it is positively dangerous, because it prevents growth.  And if the light that is in you id darkness, how great is that darkness?
In today’s insipid church, there is abundant evidence around that this is exactly what has happened.  The preachers have no message – Bible studies, Bible explanations, Bible teaching, but no message.  If I were to ask you what the message was from the preacher you listened to today, could you give the main points of it?  Did it stir you to response?  Did it challenge you?  Did it hit you very deeply?  Has it changed the way you think about God, Christ, the Gospel, the Church, or has it left you ‘just as you are’?
I think it can be demonstrated that the church today is not proclaiming a ‘word from the Lord’ to its needy environment, the world.  Look at the state of the world in which she lives.  Every man does that which is right in his own eyes.  God is not speaking into today’s world, or even into His church.  There is no message!  There is no revelation.  There is no communication from God.  And the people are left not knowing how they ought to live and behave themselves.   Anything goes!  Do what you like!  Do what everyone else is doing!  Live for pleasure and enjoyment, and forget the consequences. 
Where there is no revelation, no word from God, what happens, what is the inevitable result?  The people cast off restraint.  They do whatever takes their fancy.  They are left rudderless in the storms of life.   They do not know where the spiritual ‘true north’ is to be found.
Even within the life of the modern church, the same may be discerned.  Anything goes within the church today.  There is precious little difference between the world and the church today.  Drop into any so-called evangelical church in the west today, and you will find it imitating the world in which it lives.  Look at the lifestyles of any evangelical, and you see that their Christian faith is just an add-on to an already busy life.  Even in the matter of dress, we see the same thing.  Listen to them pray, if they even do, and you will find that God is no, longer their fiend, but their pal!  And God is not anyone’s pal!  These people have degraded Him to the level of the guy you chum around with! 
No, evangelicals are not having any effect within their churches today, because the teaching of Matt.5 is being displayed for all to see.  There is no ‘salt’ or ‘light’ in the ministry.  Christians are not being ‘salt’ and ‘light’ in society, in the home, or at work.  That explains why they can hold down their jobs for decades – they are no threat to the world, not preserving what is good and disinfecting what is bad.  They are not shining the light of God’s truth and law into situations of corruption, not challenging bad language or filthy talk, not being Christ-like where He has placed them.
That’s part of the reason why evangelicals in today’s churches are having no impact for the Gospel or for good.  They need to examine, in the light of Judgement Day, what it is they are really doing. 

Thursday, 15 September 2011

True Religion Expounded!


Dr D Martyn Lloyd-Jones explains that true religion is the very opposite of false religion.  It is, first, based entirely and exclusively on God’s revelation and teaching.  God has spoken, and the church must “Listen to Him!”  Woe betide her if she refuses to listen obediently to Him who speaks.  But she is promised the fullness of divine blessing if she submits herself to His self-revelation and teaching.  This is the very essence of Christianity.  This is true religion.  This is what Christianity is all about – joyful submission to the will of the Sovereign God.  They conduct their religious affairs and their church worship, not on the basis of our ideas, but on what God has made known.  

Secondly, there is honesty and sincerity.  True religion is most careful about this.  A man does not do as David did when he murdered Uriah the Hittite and committed adultery with his wife, Bathsheba, but went on worshipping God as usual.  You do not stop presenting yourself at worship even when you know you have done wrong.  You keep up the practice so that no one will realise just what you have been at!  It is all a balancing act – between wrong-doing and right-doing.  You pretend that all is well and hope that you will end up with a zero balance, or better still, something on the ‘plus’ side.  True religion is about ensuring that what goes on in the life and heart are synchronised – that the hands on the face of the clock are reflecting what is going on inside.  It is a united life.  This does not mean that we cannot and do not make mistakes - we do; and we sin.  But it means that we recognise our sins, repent of them before God with a broken heart, and seek His gracious forgiveness.  It is about congruence.

Third, true religion is “of the heart, not of the letter.”  It is intensely spiritual because “God is spirit” (Jn.4:24).  It is deeply inward, an inward change showing itself in outward expression.  God never had a house – he dwelt in a tent in the wilderness.  He is a spirit and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth. 

Fourth, the most vital aspect of true religion is truth itself.  The Christian faith is nothing if it is not the religion of the Book.http://thebible-online.com  Truth directs us how we must worship and serve Him, glorify and enjoy Him forever.  He is the God of truth, and His Son, Jesus Christ, described Himself as the Truth (Jn.14:6).  Do you know Him?  Have you out your trust in Him?  Are you a real Christian, or a sham Christian? Be sure, and come to Christ and trust Him NOW!

The Characteristics of False Religion


This is not a comfortable issue for many church people because much of what they do falls into this category.  Dr D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones analyses this aberration with his usual astuteness and precision.
The first characteristic, he says, of false religion, is its hypocrisy.  It majors on saying one thing, and doing something quite different.  But this is not always the case with hypocrisy.  Like the Jews in Stephen’s day in the first century, and the Sanhedrin in particular, they were involved in a cynical game of pretence – they, outwardly, claimed to do their religion for God, but in fact were doing it for themselves.  This is true of all false religion.  It supposes to be worshipping and serving God, but is rather an exercise in self-worship and self-aggrandizement.  There are honest and consistent enough to actually do what they say they are doing – good works, church attendance, supporting charitable causes, being a good neighbour, as well as having all the right language for the right occasion.  But because this is all supposed to be directed to the living and true God, it turns into indisputable hypocrisy.  

The second feature of false religion is that it is very keen on what we must call institutionalism.  What is meant here is the actual worship of the church, just as the Jews worshipped the Temple.  Hypocrites put the worship of the church up against the Christian faith.  The church is their idol (which is always a mark of false religion), idol worship; they would do anything for the church; nothing would be too much trouble for the church.  But would they do anything for Christ?  That’s a different question, for to do anything for Christ would make you a bit too extreme in religion.  And what if the church departs from Christ?  What do you do then?  Who do you follow?  The hypocrite will always opt to follow the church, and walk away from Christ and His Gospel.   Like the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which teaches that, left to itself, mater tends to deteriorate and decompose, etc; so likewise the church, when left to itself after having been given up by God,  always tends to institutionalise, and therefore become utterly ineffective, because maintaining the institution takes precedence over everything else.  What is central to every form of false religion is the building.  This becomes the number one interest – a nice building, nice decor, soft comfortable seats, and the right temperature.  But the building soon takes the place of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel.  Everything is controlled by the building.  But, as Rev. Dick Lucas so famously remarked, “the building is only for sheltering us from the rain” 

The third characteristic of false religion is the emphasis on tradition - the tradition of men.  How easily we become unthinking copy-cats of what went before, good or bad. To follow good tradition, that is, Gospel tradition, is good and acceptable and mandatory for the Christian Church; but to follow the traditions of men, of the church in the past, of past or present church leaders, is the height of folly.  Today, the trend is to follow the practice of the modern-day gurus who are experts in worship.  Churches, their ministers and elders, ape the world with the best imitation they can muster.  The worship in many evangelical churches today is nothing but sheer unadulterated worldliness dressed up to look like contemporary worship, when it is nothing of the kind.  As Paul tells us in Rom.1, we, like him, must be “separated unto the Gospel of God,” unto Christ, and away from the world in all its forms and expressions.

The last mark of false religion is self-righteousness.  Hypocrites, like the Pharisees of old, “trusted in themselves that they were righteous” (Lk.18:9).  There is this pride in what they have achieved or accomplished, and in what they are and where they belong. There is pride in their particular tradition, glad that they belong to a church where every preacher is a good one, where there is no theological pluralism within its bounds, where every elder is a devoted servant of Christ (or the church!), and where every member is a true Christian.  Self-righteousness – repugnant, insulting, nauseating.  But, as Jesus taught his disciples, “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Scribes and the Pharisees, you will, by no means, enter the Kingdom of heaven” (Mt.6).   He also said that “That which is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.” 

So false religion is essentially hypocritical, and hypocritical religion is essentially false.  So beware!