For Matt Black

[Brother Adam]

What doctrines of the Church do you disagree with?

[Matt Black]

This may take a bit of thought to compose a comprehensive reply, but I'll try a bit for starters; these are perhaps more 'objections' rather than hefty disagreements in some cases.

1. Sacramental soteriology vs salvation by faith. This is I suppose my main problem with the CC; I underwent a definite conversion experience at age 16. Now, I know we mustn't let the existential tail wag the theological dog, so I'm in no way basing my soteriology on my testimony; on the contrary, it seems to me from a plain reading of Scripture eg: Acts 2:38 that salvation is based rather simply on a faith response to the Good News of Jesus Christ and nothing else is necessary. To me, therefore, it's not that I dislike the concept of sacrament - I actually quite like it as a way of encountering God - but that it seems an unnecessary bolt-on to the issue of salvation. There is another point here: at present, I am quite sure of my salvation - not because of what I do but because of what Jesus has done for me and my faith in that and Him. I've not yet met a Catholic who seems to have that kind of 'blessed assurance', and that assurance would be something I would be loathe to lose...

2. Veneration of the BVM and other saints. I don't want to get into a Scripture vs everything else argument about this but suffice it to say that I find it on a personal level slightly distasteful - I can't quite articulate why and forgive me if I offend with that - again, though, personal preference is nothing on which to hang theology, but I find the idea a bit of a distraction to communicating directly with Jesus through prayer.

3. Visible priesthood - seems a bit Old Testament to me. Not sure why necessary

4. Contraception - not sure why this onerous teaching is necessary in the light of Scripture or indeed Tradition. Seems very medieval ie: lthe life in the man's seed etc

That's all I can think of for the mo - there may be more!

Yours in Christ

Matt

[Brother Adam]

Hey cool. You've thought this through some. Should make for great conversation. You're list is actually quite a bit shorter than mine when I first came here from the baptistboard as some of the old timers can attest too. I disagreed with the Church on those and merely every other point you can think of. About all I agreed with is that we both on some level believed in Jesus.

I'd love to talk about all these seperately and more in depth, but not all at once, that would be way too overwhelming.

Contraception was actually the very first doctrine that I ended up 'switching' sides on. A number of reasons -

You can't trace the acceptance of contraception any further back than 1930. Not even in Protentant circles. Martin Luther, John Calvin, Wesley, all of the Protestant fathers openly condemned the idea. The Didache, a first century instruction for those entering the Christian faith taught that contraceoption was wrong. When the Anglican conference became the first to openly accept contraception in limited form even the secular media at first saw the idiocy of doing so and how it would lead to the open acceptance of abortion.

2) It's often misunderstood that Catholics reject contraception because the "pope wants more babies". This couldn't be further from the truth. If the Pope wanted more babies he wouldn't allow for NFP which is more accurate than condoms.

I believe there is a strong biblical precedance for rejecting artifical contraception because of the santity of marriage and the dignity of the human person. Some book suggestions: "The Bible and Birth Control" (Protestant), "Theology of the Body" by John Paul II, "Life Giving Love" by Kimberly Hahn, "The Good News about Sex and Marriage" by Christopher West, Humanea Vitea, encyclical by John Paul II.

Much more to come I'm sure, but I dont' want to make these posts unreadibly long.

[Matt Black]

Thanks for that. I chose the sacramental soteriology point as an example of the wider issue of 'faith-alone' vs 'faith+works' disagreement. Now I'm no Calvinist and don't believe in Once Saved Always Saved (TM!) but I find the Catholic approach too far the other way in terms of works, to the point of it seems negating grace. Now, I know that the CC does teach salvation by grace, but I've yet to find anyone who can marry those two apparent opposites and hold them in tension without performing theological gymnastics

Yours in Christ

Matt

[Brother Adam]

Alright. Yeah, that was a big concern of mine, Faith alone vs. Faith was on the flip side the last doctrine I switched on. I was not letting go of faith alone unless there was no possible way to reconcile it with the Bible. I ended up scripture studing myself right into the Church. How is that for irony?

There is a whole slew of awesome books to read on the subject, but if you are interested in reading more, please email me and I can send some stuff your way, free of charge, no point in just listing books here.

Catholics certianly do not accept faith+works. That is heresy. But faith alone is heresy too. No where do Jesus or any of the Apostles teach faith alone. Just that it is not by faith alone that we are saved (I know you know what verse I refer to).

Catholics believe we are saved by faith in Christ, but we believe in the rest of the Bible too. lol. Faith brings about obedience. It really isn't optional. Romans opens and closes with St. Paul telling us that faith is obedient. All of the Gospels have stern warnings about holding fast to the faith through obedience and through doing good works (the goats in Jesus' discourse on the judgement are shocked to learn that while they cried "Lord, Lord!" while on earth, because they did not bear fruit they are lost).

In the sacraments we receive first adoption as sons of God. This filial adoption is absolutely christocentric and essential to our salvation. In as much as Catholics are sacramental we are covenantal. In as much as the cross of calvary is the absolute turning point of human history, it is so because of covenant theology. This is something that is neglected way too much by Protestants, especially the Baptist "Jesus is my buddy" theology.

Baptism is not a work that we do, but an abandonment to faith in God that he will do as he says he will do. Confession likewise is not a work but an absolute trust that God will forgive our sins because of our faith in Christ, and not through any work we should do, lest we boast (Eph 2). Marriage is a sacrament as Christ raised it to one. Two people become one flesh (is anyone going to tell me this is not a miracle?). Holy Orders, anointing of the sick, confirmation, they are all totally works of God, seperate from any human work.

Man, I'm getting long winded again, I'll stop there and give you room to offer up any questions or objections.

ps- oh and yes, we believe in grace alone as well. In fact, I'd say we have an absolute assurance of the full confidence of hope of our salvation, as the Bible puts it.

Edited February 14, 2005 by Brother Adam

[Matt Black]

I'm going to have to go away and digest what you've written thus far, but by way of further unpacking where I'm at currently (sorry that this is such an unorthodox way to introduce a new poster!), let me quote from a post I made on www.ship-of-geniuses.com a few weeks ago (I post there as Matt Black too):-

"The more perceptive of my shipmates will have noticed that I am in the process of undergoing yet another seismic shift on my theology. There are several reasons for this, which I'd better set out as this will assist in shipmates evaluating where I'm coming from and - just possibly - where I should be heading. Until recently, I've been a fairly comfortable, sola Scriptura-believing, inerrantist-but-not-literalist, fairly-conservative-but-with-a-touch-of-post-occasionally evangelical who is a member of his 'local' (a local church for local people) Baptist Church; I've even preached there a couple of times in the last year. So what's the problem, what are my reasons for being dissatisfied with this set-up? Read on, dear shipmates (in no particular order of priority or importance)!

1. When Mrs Black and I joined the church we're in, it drew its membership from a wide variety of traditions - eg: Anglican, Catholic, URC, Pentecostal, Brethren - as well as Baptist and accordingly, whilst it was part of BUGB, it had a rich denominational background and flavour to it; it also reflected to an extent Mrs Black's and my denominational backgrounds...which was nice. It has however in recent months become much more narrow in its Baptist ecclesiology and theology. It is not so much that those people from other traditions have left, rather they have been somewhat stifled, and Baptist ways have been imposed from on high, largely (so Mrs Black thinks - and I'm inclined to agree with her) as a result of the new minister making his mark on the place.

2. The death of my grandmother in November. A devout Catholic, her death has caused me to re-assess my attitude to the Catholic Church in which I was raised and from which I departed sometime between the ages of 12 and 16. There's a lot of baggage associated with my Catholic upbringing which will probably prevent me from returning to 'Mother Church' wholesale; nevertheless, I am rediscovering (or perhaps discovering for the first time) good theological, ecclesiological and devotional aspects of Catholicism.

3. The birth of my son in December - not so much his birth but, rather, 'what to do with him' now he's here vis a vis church/ religion etc. Normal practice at our church is to at some point in the near future to have a dedication. I have two problems with that however: (a) dedications at our church tend to be sandwiched or shoehorned into the main Sunday morning service as a bolted-on sideshow between the previous hymn and the next chorus; they last about five minutes, the minister (not the parents) says a few words and the the congregation stand to 'pledge their support' - some of these guys I don't know at all, some of them will leave in the next few years and most of them will have nothing to do with the Blacket's upbringing or supporting us, so it all seems a bit of a non-event to me; add to that the fact that Mrs Black's parents won't come because they're a variety of Exclusive Brethren and believe in infant baptism etc, and I think that whatever we do for him should be primarily a family thing, as they will be around to support us and him, unlike the local church, and you can see why I have my reservations; and (b) the fact that Mrs Black and I were baptised as infants (although both of us then went on to undergo 'believer's baptism' later), and my exploration of Catholic sacramentalism in #2 above, give me a strong desire to have the Little Lad (as Blunkett would put it) baptised at home in some way ; sorry to sound vague but that could mean Mrs Black's dad baptising him or possibly one of my two priestly uncles - although I suspect they would have to do it 'the Catholic way' to which Mrs Black's parents might object; OTOH if Mrs Black's dad does it then my uncles might feel aggrieved... I should add that Mrs Black is much more firm a believer in believer's baptism, although she too is unhappy with the idea of dedicating Junior in the way described above, for the same reasons, and would like some kind of 'family' ceremony at home

4. Spending too much time with fundamentalists on boards like BaptistBoard, which has demonstrated to me in all its fulness the weaknesses of sola Scriptura amongst other things and led me to tentatively conclude that there is a need for some kind of communitarian teaching authority to interpret Scripture (although whether that equates to some kind of Magisterium is another matter); we are of course discussing that issue on other threads in Purg, the current one being 'The Bibliolatry Dilemma'

5. I'm attracted in particular by Renovare , as they have the sort of balanced approach to the Christian life which I crave, but I think the chances of my current church adopting elements of this given the recent shift in emphasis referred to in #1 are slim (we're just about to embark on a Lenten study of The Purpose Driven Life)

So, any advice that shipmates can give me on these points? Can I still be said to be an evangelical (never mind the 'post-' bit), given the above? Should I look to a 'Higher' Church tradition (Catholic? Orthodox? Anglican?) - and bear in mind it would have to be a family thing which means Mrs Black would need persuading? Or should I just quit whining and church-hopping, which seems to have characterised my Christian life to date, and knuckle down and accept that if I go to a Baptist church, then I sign up to the whole Baptist franchise, and get on with it? Should I talk to the minister, particularly about what to do with The Boy - and what if he brands me a heretic for thinking these things?

Apologies for being rambly, but I hope I've made some kind of sense; if not, don't be afraid to ask for clarification!

Matt"

Yours in Christ

Matt

[Brother Adam]

Hi Matt,

I've read through your 'introduction'. I won't give you my story unless you really want it, as it is 33 pages long and takes about an hour and a half to read. On the short side of things, I was baptized Catholic, raised Lutheran from 6-17. Became Baptist, and subsequently have come home, longing the whole way to find an answer to 'denominationalism' since I was 12 or 13, never thinking that the Catholic Church would be the answer.

As far as what to do with baby Black, the natural and expected answer you would get from any Catholic here is to have the child baptized by a Catholic priest in good standing. As I said though, natural bias towards covanental theology.

I don't particularly think you should worry if your minister calls you a heretic at any given time, who is he, after all, to have a monopoly on truth. Christ left the Church, the Pillar and Bulwark of truth, to interpret the Holy Scirptures, and as such, the Magisterium is the subject and servant to the Holy Scriptures.

Feel free to take your time, don't worry about having to get back to me or anyone here faster than you feel you are able. God, family, work, and other duties take precedence to 'Phatmassing' as we have come to term it.

Blessings in your continued search,
Adam