Skip to main content

When it comes to the Reformation, whose side are Evangelicals on, anyway?

October 31 will mark the 500th anniversary of the day Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenburg, Germany, touching off the Protestant Reformation. A great many people will be celebrating the anniversary who have no business doing so.

The fact is that justification by grace alone, through faith alone- the central tenet of the Reformation, and the teaching Luther regarded as "the doctrine whereby the Church stands or falls-" is by no means held, as a practical matter, by all "Protestants." John Wesley chose to unbiblically define "sin" as an "intentional" violation of God's law despite the fact that the Bible abides no such qualification, even providing in the Mosaic Law for sacrifices to atone for unintentional sins! By lowering the bar on the law, Wesley set the stage for his bizarre doctrine of "Christian perfection," a teaching which he spent the rest of his life backing off from but which he never renounced. The torture that teaching has afflicted on earnest Christians in the Wesleyan and Holiness traditions down through the years has been enormous. Even more tragic is the degree to which it has taken the eyes of believers off of Jesus and His substitutionary life and death on their behalf and fixed it instead on their own ethical performance, raising doubts in people's minds about their own salvation when they predictably failed to live up to the promises of moral transformation their churches made to them without any biblical justification whatsoever.

Dr. Rod Rosenbladt (see the video below) has written and spoken quite eloquently about the tendency in "Evangelical" churches of all stripes, once people have been converted to faith in Christ through the preaching of the Gospel,  to never say another word about the forgiveness of sins, but instead to feed people a constant diet of exhortation to holy living. The effect is the same. People begin to doubt that they will be saved because they can see such little progress in their moral lives. Their eyes are taken off of Jesus and directed- permanently and repeatedly, Sunday after Sunday- to themselves and their own performance.

Roman Catholics are fond of claiming- erroneously- that the Bible never says that we are saved by faith alone.  While it's true that he never actually uses the word "alone," Paul asserts over and over that we are saved "apart from works" (Romans 8:28), "not by works" (Ephesians 2:9), "not according to our works" (2 Timothy 1:9), "not on the basis of deeds we have done in righteousness" (Titus 3:4-5)-- in other words, by faith alone. I have limited myself here to the passages in which Paul specifically excludes works from any role in justification, and does so emphatically enough to make the proposition that it is not faith alone which justifies wholly untenable. There are, of course, many other verses in which Paul ascribes justification to faith rather than works, but without specifically excluding works from any role in justification as he does in these passages.

But that doesn't stop all too many "Protestants" from buying into the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification. In fact, it would probably be accurate to say that if questioned about how they understand the ordo salutus- asked to explain in their own words how we are saved- most "Evangelicals" would give an answer closer to the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification than to Paul's and Luther's! Certainly, as Dr. Rosenbladt points out in the video below, when Lutherans of all flavors were questioned in a massive survey called "A Study of Generations" back in the 'Sixties even Lutherans gave essentially Roman Catholic answers to the question of how we are saved!

A Wesleyan or Arminian understanding of human nature as not totally corrupted by sin and still retaining enough power after the Fall to accept Christ on its own initiative- in other words, to paraphrase Ephesians 2:1, sort of a little under the weather in trespasses and sins- inevitably means that salvation is not entirely by grace, but also to some degree by one's own volition. Even faith becomes a "decision-" an act of one's own will whereby one becomes a believer. As a practical matter, of course, the emphasis on holiness of living after conversion which characterizes "Evangelical" preaching, creating further doubt as to whether faith even conceived of as one's own decision is really adequate to guarantee admission to heaven, makes it very difficult for a person subsisting on such a homiletical diet to trust in Christ alone for his or her salvation, apart from one's own performance.

And it gets worse. John Piper, an allegedly Calvinist Baptist preacher, has fallen off the Reformation wagon completely, making a false and wholly unbiblical distinction between "justification" and "salvation" and effectively buying totally into the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification/salvation by faith and works. Pastor Piper's possible fall from grace (and Galatians 5:4 would seem to put it precisely in those terms) only underscores the degree to which contemporary American "evangelicalism" finds itself at odds not only with Paul but specifically with the Reformation it will be celebrating in a few weeks.

These are serious matters. If justification is indeed "the article by which the Church stands or falls," and if Galatians 5:4 is telling the truth, they could hardly be more serious. In fact, that there could be substantial doubt about whether the Gospel itself is believed by a large segment of American Christians constitutes nothing less than an emergency of the first magnitude.

Dr. Rosenbladt's presentation below is intended to address the plight of the countless Christians who have been driven out of the Church by the making of promises the Bible doesn't make concerning the transformation of Christian's personal lives in this world and the habit of teaching them to focus, whether by preaching discipleship without preaching forgiveness and grace just as strongly and just as often to people who are already believers or by rank heresy such as Wesley's or Piper's, on themselves and on their own performance rather than on Jesus. It's a problem which urgently demands our attention and merits it especially as we draw closer to the anniversary of a movement concerning whose central issue more "Evangelicals" and other alleged "Protestants" than realize it actually side with Rome rather than with Wittenberg.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Antinomianism, "soft" and "hard"

The playwright Henrik Ibsen once wrote of a Norwegian Lutheran newsboy whose take on the Christian faith was refreshingly honest. A lot of us see the Faith the same way. "I like to commit sins," Ibsen quoted the young man as saying, "and God likes to forgive them. Really, the world is admirably arranged!" As transparently superficial and even hypocritical as that way of looking at things is, it nevertheless has a following. In my days as a seminarian and pastor in The ALC and ELCA, I found myself among theologians and seminarians and pastors who spoke about the Law with contempt, convinced that it had no role to play in the Christian life. That this was based on a superficial and distorted reading of Paul,  who wrote of Christ as the end of the Law for righteousness but openly championed its ongoing significance in the life of the Christian, somehow escaped them. So did the fact that Luther, who admittedly never spelled out a "Third Use of the Law" (...

Baptizatus sum

I have a political blog.  It can probably be found with a little effort, but I am NOT going to link to it on this one. That's because as a Christian, I'm conflicted by what's in it. Not that I'm ashamed of it as such. But it's complicated. Like all believers, I try to allow my faith to influence every aspect of my life. Like all sinners, I manage to screw things all up no matter what aspect of my life I'm trying to let it influence. That's basic biblical theology, of course; everything a sinner does is contaminated by his sinfulness to one degree or another. But politics is a particularly tricky area in which to try to restrain one's fallen nature, especially in an age as acrimonious and polarized as ours. When I call that other blog a "political blog," I do not mean to say that it is only that. I've written there about my interest in history, in astronomy, and in my Cubs, Bears, and Blackhawks, along with dozens of other things. I...

"Do not be afraid!:" A sermon for Easter

And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. -Mark 16:8 ESV What a strange text we have this morning! Here the Marys and Salome had gone to the tomb, mourning for a dead Lord, and expecting to complete the sad task of embalming Him. Instead, they found the stone at the tomb’s entrance rolled away, and an angel sitting next to it- with the incredible news that the One they mourned was alive! “Go!” the angel said. “Tell His disciples. Tell Peter. He is not here. He is risen!” So did they go and do as they had been told? No! They didn't tell anybody! It's not that they were overcome with joy that Jesus wasn’t dead anymore. Our text tells us that they didn't do what the angel told them to do because they were afraid.  Now, it's a very human thing to be afraid. We live in a universe over which we have far less control than we tell ourselves we have. Have you ever l...