Modern Pharaisaism - Calvinist Division

Alistair Begg - a pastor and broadcaster of "Truth for Life" - explains why he can't sign the Manhattan Declaration, notwithstanding his attendance at the conference that gave rise to the declaration:

Why then have I chosen not to append my name as one of the initial signers? Because of my convictions about the nature of the Gospel, and the importance of Christian co-belligerency being grounded in it. The activity of the Christian as a citizen engaging in co-belligerency over civic and moral issues is not the same as the declaration of Christians mutually recognizing the reality of each other’s faith. This is what I wrote to Chuck Colson:

“Thank you for sending me the amended document. I care deeply about these issues, but I cannot in conscience sign on with those with whom I have fundamental disagreements on the nature of the Gospel. (I just re-read Calvin in the Institutes, Book IV, section 18.)”

This particular section of Calvin’s Institutes provides us with his response to the Roman Catholic doctrine of the mass.

It was maintained at the meeting in New York that this document was not to be viewed as a product of ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together). However, in light of the evangelical leadership behind the declaration, it is hard not to take into consideration the most recent ECT paper on “The Blessed Virgin Mary in Christian Life and Faith”. In examining the place of Mary, the writers “acknowledge the primary authority of Holy Scripture.” This at least gives the impression of a concession to Roman Catholicism. Protestant theology affirms the sole authority of Scripture. Sadly contemporary evangelicalism seems little concerned with the solas of The Reformation and is therefore susceptible to initiatives, which make something other than the Gospel, the basis of unity and the focus of our declarations.

I am reminded in this connection of the declaration of Jude.

“Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.”

It is quite common for people to view The Reformation as simply a disagreement between two groups of men. The protestant martyrs and their monuments testify to the fact that they died, not on account of ecclesial differences, but because the issue was the way of salvation. (Interestingly, exactly the same was true of the Roman Catholic martyrs!)

Are we wise to lay aside crucial historical differences of eternal significance so as to secure temporal advantages? George Smeaton, in his classic work on the atonement observes, “To convert one sinner from his way is an event of greater importance than the deliverance of a whole kingdom from temporal evil.”

I do not believe it is possible to embrace the premises of ecumenical strategy and still draw the conclusions of evangelical orthodoxy.

In accord with others who have chosen not to sign, my reservation is not with the issues themselves, or in standing with others who share the same concerns, but it is in signing a declaration along with a group of leading churchmen, when I happen to believe that the teaching of some of their churches is in effect a denial of the biblical gospel. I wonder whether it might not have been more advantageous for evangelicals to unite on this matter, rather than seeking cooperation with segments from Rome, Eastern Orthodoxy and the Latter Day Saints. The necessary co-belligerence, as far as I’m concerned, can never be rooted in a Gospel other than that which has been given to us.

Here are some comments on his blog:

Alistair, I agree with you that the Roman Catholic Church isn't of Christ. However, I believe that all Christians should band together against this legislative onslaught! All churches, pulpits & preachers are under attack. If you don't believe that listen to some of your own preaching about the empty churches of Europe! Europe has become a mission field! The United States is next. Even Calvin fled to Switzerland rather than take up the struggle. Is this what we're supposed to do?

And:

While the patriotic side of me, which mourns the passing of our great nation's Judeo/Christian heritage, yearns to take action with those who share my political leanings, I must regroup and remember that God has already told us who we are to partner with, or not. We are not to be yoked together with unbelievers, which most certainly would include the Roman Catholic Church, who, by her own admission, has condemned Protestants as 'anathema'. What communion has light with darkness? None, no matter what that darkness is called. By signing that document, however politically beneficial it may seem, it would still be partnering with the aspostate Roman Catholic Church. The gospel must come first, before our political desires, and the true Church must never yoke herself to any other but Christ Himself.

This provides an interesting insight into a mindset that still exists.

This kind of Christian sectarian in-fighting has a long history.  In fact, this kind of thing led to the martyrdoms of St. Peter and St. Paul.  We can see this alluded to in the First Epistle of Clement:

But not to dwell upon ancient examples, let us come to the most recent spiritual heroes. Let us take the noble examples furnished in our own generation. Through envy and jealousy the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours; and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him. Owing to envy, Paul also obtained the reward of patient endurance, after being seven times thrown into captivity, compelled to flee, and stoned. After preaching both in the east and west, he gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and come to the extreme limit of the west, and suffered martyrdom under the prefects. Thus was he removed from the world, and went into the holy place, having proved himself a striking example of patience.

Some scholars argue that this is a reference to the possibility that Peter and Paul were betrayed by Christian sects that were hostile to the church headed by Peter and Paul.

Christians clearly still have a lot of work to do in order to advance the message and reality of Christ's love, which involves the ideal of Christian unity.