King James Bible for Catholics?

I mention this only as an intriguing curiosity, and not as something I see as a good thing. In September 2020, an outfit called Walsingham Publishing in Acton, Massachusetts produced The King James Bible for Catholics in two volumes. The more complete titles are:

• The King James Bible for Catholics with the Deuterocanonical Books and The Prayer of Manasses, I Esdras and II Esdras: Volume I - Genesis to Ecclesiasticus
• The King James Bible for Catholics with the Deuterocanonical Books and The Prayer of Manasses, I Esdras and II Esdras: Volume II - Isaiah to Revelation

This Roman Catholic edition is based on the 1611 KJV text with spelling and orthographic changes from the 1769 Oxford edition, edited by Benjamin Blayney. There are a few textual modifications that bring it in line with Catholic strictures. One thorough change is replacing “Jehovah” (and JAH) with “The Lord” in the eight places where these words appear in the KJV. This subjects the KJV text to the instruction from the Roman Catholic Congregation for Divine Worship Statement on the Name of God.[i] The deuterocanonical books (called the Apocrypha and diminished in authority in the KJV) are spread out into the Old Testament canon in the way they appear in fully Catholic Bibles. This Bible has some footnotes, which probably correspond somewhat with the notes HERE.

The motivation for creating this Bible rests not in the Roman Catholic Church beginning to lean to some kind of preference toward the KJV. Instead it is related to the Ordinariate, a Roman Catholic structure for Anglicans, Episcopalians, and Methodists to reunite with the Catholic Church while preserving some elements of their liturgy.[ii] Additionally, it is a recognition that “The King James Bible has had more influence on English language and culture than any other book ever published.”

---

[i] Statement on the Name of God: “The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament has issued guidance to Bishops’ Conferences on the translation of the ‘Name of God’ in texts for use in the liturgy. The directives expand on the instruction Liturgiam Authenticam and note that the Hebrew Tetragrammaton YHWH, Yahweh or Jehovah, has in the tradition of the Church always been translated as ‘Lord’.” It is further indicated that this instruction is at least partially based not only on church tradition, but also because Jews find the pronunciation of Jehovah or Yahweh offensive.
[ii] Some Catholics have pushed back at this edition being a violation of their Canon Law 825 §1. “Books of the sacred scriptures cannot be published unless the Apostolic See or the conference of bishops has approved them. For the publication of their translations into the vernacular, it is also required that they be approved by the same authority and provided with necessary and sufficient annotations.”

Catholicity and Separation

I just read an article in which a conservative Calvinistic Southern Baptist trashed separatism and promoted catholicity. He reserved special attention for the “fundamentalist” brand of separatism. The author is not someone who moved from Fundamentalism to Liberalism, but rather someone who has moved from Fundamentalism to a Reformed position.

He makes some good points. Fundamentalism can exalt carnality, pride, and an “us four, no more” attitude. Their gospel is not broad enough or deep enough to save and sanctify anyone who does not dot their i’s and cross their t’s. Division over extremely exacting eschatological theories becomes the norm.

There is a right sort of “catholicity”[i] that chronologically sees across time and generations, knowing we belong to the same church institution as and adhere to the same gospel preached by the apostles.  It geographically reaches across continents, nations, and communities.[ii] It linguistically embraces different tongues and peoples. “…I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.”

Unfortunately, this sort of “catholicity” often embraces “Catholicism” as representative of the “true church” up until the time of the Protestant Reformation. It flies in the face of a New Testament Christianity that separated itself from infidelity, heresy, and immorality (e.g., 2 Corinthians 6:17; Titus 3:10; Ephesians 5:1-4). It distinguishes itself from and denies the poor and afflicted faithful martyrs of Jesus (e.g., Revelation 2:10, 13; 17:6). It recognizes the unorthodox majority and rejects the orthodox remnant.[iii] 

There is a right sort of “fundamentalism” that loves, seeks for, and adheres to the fundamental principles of the Bible, and the Christian religion based on it. It rejects compromise of those principles, while enthusiastically and evangelistically sowing those principles in the field of the world.

Unfortunately, strains of fundamentalism promote individuality to the detriment of the corporate nature of gathered believers (Romans 15:5-7; 1 Corinthians 12:12-27), as well as the fellowship of the churches (1 Corinthians 7:17; 14:33). It minimizes the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:5-9; Revelation 1:5-6).[iv] It elevates private interpretations as the norm to determine orthodoxy, fellowship, and separation (Mark 7:9; 2 Peter 1:20). It becomes a haven for little dictators.[v] 

Where does the middle way begin? Perhaps: The Bible as the sole rule of faith and practice. Autonomous churches that are guided by this belief about the Bible. A gospel that is to be preached to every creature. And strong doses of humility.

Both “Big F” Fundamentalism and “Big C” Catholicism miss the mark, in different directions. Let us take up our Bibles and learn the Bible way of the unity of the faith and separation unto the gospel of God.

---

[i] Recognizing that the words “catholic” and “catholicity” have a broader more generic meaning, I nevertheless generally avoid them as more likely to help rather than hurt the recognition of the Roman Catholic Church.

[ii] Human beings and local churches are limited by geography, but connect with other congregations across the globe through fellowship of the word and Spirit.
[iii] I am unable to read the Bible, see the New Testament church there, research church history, and then pretend that the only church that existed for 15 centuries was Roman Catholic! I have sadly heard too many Reformed brethren say so. Away with such.

[iv] “A keen awareness of where the church has always stood” is needed, if we also have the biblical insight to understand what the church is, biblically.
[v] On the other hand, Roman Catholicism and Greek Orthodoxy (and at least some species of Reformed churches) are havens for big dictators!

I am afraid of you

Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. Galatians 4:10-11

Over the Easter season – seeing how Baptists have added “days, and months, and times” to their once very simple “form” of worship – the above verses came to mind. During his second journey Paul, with Silas and Timothy, visited the region of Galatia (Acts 16:6; Galatians 4:13). He returned on his third journey, strengthening the disciples (Acts 18:23).[i] He preached a simple and straightforward gospel of Christ crucified (Galatians 3:1-3). This letter to the Galatians is occasioned by false brethren who perverted the gospel, adding law, works, “days, and months, and times, and years.” The Galatians had received the word by faith, moving from Gentile idolatry to Christianity. Through false teaching, they moved then toward Judaism. Now Paul was afraid; afraid they had fallen away from the grace of God to a teaching of salvation by works (Galatians 1:6-9).

Baptist friends, I am afraid of some of you. No, you probably will not admit to teaching works instead of grace. Yes, you add to the simple faith of Baptists, looking here and there to see what others have to offer – what days, months, and times they keep.[ii]

A Southern Baptist pastor recently called the week from Palm Sunday to Easter Sunday “the holiest week of the Christian calendar.” An independent Baptist pastor recently related that in his lifetime he had “celebrated” all of the following during “Passion Week.”[iii]

Palm Sunday, Daily Devotional (adult) or Coloring page (children), Maundy Thursday Communion, Foot Washing/Anointing, Tenebrae Candles, Sit alone in Darkness, Thursday Night Prayer Vigil, Seven Sayings on the Cross, Good Friday, Stations of the Cross, Jewish Pesach Supper, Fast/Pray Saturday, Sunrise Service, Easter Worship, Church breakfast, Easter Egg Hunt, Walk thru Jerusalem (Vignettes of passion story).

Oh, my! I’ve been around awhile, and still had to look up some of this stuff.[iv] Other parts of the whole “season” include Clean Monday (Greek Orthodox), Mardi Gras, Ash Wednesday, Lent, Easter Vigil, and who knows what else.

Let’s look to the Bible as our rule of faith and practice. That is what we claim to believe. If we want days, and months, and times, and years, what do we find in the Bible? Our “church calendar” is based on the Lord’s week – six days of labour and one day of rest (i.e. gathering to celebrate the Lord’s day, sing, worship, fellowship, and study the word). Every Lord’s day, by its very nature, is a celebration of the Lord’s resurrection. We do not recognize one Sunday out of 52 as more holy than the other 51 Sundays.

If we want ritual or ceremony, what do we find in the Bible? How about baptism, a picture of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Lord’s supper, a memorial of his body and blood given for us. Want more things to do? If so, check the Bible. You might find something that is not a fabricated ritual. How about washing one anothers’ feet? I have found that some of the most aggressive opponents of old-time Baptist feet washing nevertheless taken hook, line, and sinker for feet washing when included in a Maundy Thursday service. Maybe if it looks like a theatrical production, it suits!?

May the Lord help us who are true Baptists, who wish to be true Baptists, to find the Old Paths and walk therein.

“Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.”

 “Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of thy name: and deliver us, and purge away our sins, for thy name’s sake.”

“Help us, O Lord our God; for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude. O Lord, thou art our God; let not man prevail against thee.”

---

[i] Galatia is also mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:10 and 1 Peter 1:1.
[ii] Such as Lent, which I have addressed HERE, HERE, and HERE.
[iii] He wrote, “I have personally either done these or witnessed them done in Baptist Churches.”
[iv] The only observances I grew up with was a recognition of Easter Sunday, and the Easter egg hunt. In church itself, Easter usually elicited a sermon on or related to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hunting Easter eggs was not a church sponsored event, but the church people did not oppose children doing it, that I recall, and many were involved in organizing it for family or community. Incidentally, we never bought into the “Good Friday” timing of the crucifixion.

Days, and Months, and Times: Some of the Easter Week observances

A brief list that might be helpful in conjunction with the next post, I am afraid of you.

• Palm Sunday – receive palm branches or palm crosses signifying Jesus’ ‘triumphal entry’ into Jerusalem.
• Daily Devotional – 8-Day Devotional and Coloring booklet for Passion Week.
• Holy Monday – represents the day of the cleansing of the Temple.
• Holy Tuesday – represents Jesus goes to the Mount of Olives.
• Holy Wednesday – into the darkness; service of Tenebrae (where candles are gradually extinguished, creating a sense of darkness), signifying Jesus abandoned by his disciples. 
• Maundy Thursday – the Last Supper instituted, Jesus’s betrayal by Judas Iscariot, and his arrest at the Garden of Gethsemane, often including a representation of foot washing; might in some instances include a Jewish Pesach Supper.
• Good Friday – recognized as the day of crucifixion, and may include fasting, with meditation and veneration of the cross.
• Holy Saturday – burial of Jesus, a late-night Easter Vigil service represents women watching the tomb.
• Easter Sunday – commemorates the resurrection, often with sunrise services, Easter breakfast, Easter egg hunts, in addition to regular worship services. Churches averse to the word “Easter” may call it “Resurrection Sunday” instead.

Perhaps looking here (see link) will provide better understanding of some of this stuff (often, I do not really get it): Journey through Lent with Jesus.

Richard Simon, text critic from the past

Philip Schaff identifies Catholic priest Richard Simon as the first theologian to “confine inerrancy to these non-existing original autographs,” which idea A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield would later popularize among American conservatives. Simon often is dubbed the “father of Biblical criticism.”

In the footnote, second paragraph, p. 393, Schaff writes:

“The distinction between ‘inerrant autographs’ and errant copies seems to have been first made by Richard Simon (1638-1712), the father of biblical isagogic, to prove the necessity of textual criticism and to silence the attacks of Protestant and Roman Catholic champions for the inerrancy of the existing text of the Bible.[i] He also intended to show ‘que les protestants n’avait aucun principe assurè de leur religion, en rejetant la tradition de L’Eglise’ (Preface to his L’histoire critique du V.T.)” This French sentence translates roughly “that Protestants had no assured principle of their religion, in rejecting the tradition of the [Roman Catholic] Church.”[ii]

Simon rejected the principle of sola scriptura, and rejected the authority of the apographa.

“Fourthly, The great alterations which have happened, as we have shewn in the first Book of this Work, to the Copies of the Bible since the first Originals have been lost, utterly destroy the Protestants and Socinians Principle, who consult onely these same Copies of the Bible as we at present have them.”[iii]

“When we have not the Originals, upon which one may ground the truth of the Copies which are taken from them, we have still reason to doubt.”[iv]

Some Catholics thought Simon did not sufficiently support the authority of the Church Fathers. Protestant theologians opposed the work of Simon, especially since he attacked Sola Scriptura. He held other views in common with modern liberals, such as teaching that Moses did not write much of the work in the Pentateuch commonly attributed to him. Like Simon before them, many modern-day Protestants and Evangelicals are adrift on a textual sea whose wind bloweth them where it listeth.

---

[i] biblical isagogic – introductory study; study of the literary and external history of the Bible prior to exegesis; that is, prior to trying to interpret the Bible itself. Schaff uses (Biblical) Isagogic as a noun meaning the historico-critical Introduction to the Bible – “a literary history of the Bible from its origin to the present time. Theological Propædeutic; a General Introduction to the Study of Theology, Exegetical, Historical, Systematic, and Practical, including Encyclopædia, Methodology, and Bibliography; a Manual for Students, Second Edition, Philip Schaff and Samuel Macauley Jackson, New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1894, p. 149.
[ii] Ibid., Schaff and Jackson, p. 393.
[iii] A Critical History of the Old Testament, Richard Simon (1638-1712), London: Walter Davis, 1682 (Preface).
[iv] Ibid., Simon, Book II, Chapter IV, p. 32.

Let Lent Alone

• What is Lent?
• Why Not Lent?

Last summer I happened upon the article On Common Objections to the Observation of Lent by Phillip Powers. Powers is a Southern Baptist preacher and member of South Caraway Baptist Church in Jonesboro, Arkansas. In the essay he attempts to obliterate three common objections to Lent, concluding that “In the final analysis, we must conclude that the decision to observe the season of Lent, whether that observance is personal or corporate, it must remain at the level of Christian freedom. The three objections he considers most common are that Lent is too Catholic,[i] too works-oriented,[ii] and that it “is nowhere explicitly commanded in Holy Scripture.”[iii] Those, all true, might seem sufficient to most Baptists, but Pastor Powers tries to work around them.

Clearly, both its origins and purpose is based on the practice of the Roman Catholic Church. In responding to these two objections, Powers boosts a baseless historical boondoggle – that “the Roman Catholic Church was the only church for the first 1500 years of Christian history.” If the church of grace died, only to be replaced by the church of works alone, we run afoul of the promises of the head of the church. The “holy season of Lent” is theirs in a works-based religion and tainted by that association. Let those who glory in works have it.

Answering the third objection, Powers rejects the Regulative Principle for Worship. Since churches do many things “that are not directly commanded in Scripture” and “no one follows the RPW absolutely,” the writer thinks we should jettison the RPW and embrace Lent. Why not instead jettison the things we do that are not commanded in Scripture and more fully and faithfully embrace the word of God as the regulator of our faith and practice?

In Why I Encourage People Not to Observe Lent, Bart Barber answers this argument well, writing, “Movement toward Lent is movement away from the idea that the New Testament should give us the pattern for ecclesiastical celebrations or individual spiritual formation…I argue that having taken some steps in a bad direction is no good reason to continue further along the path.”

In making his argument, Pastor Powers reveals its weakness when he cannot base it on the Scriptures, but must fit it in at the level of Christian freedom. If he will settle it there, I urge him (and others like him) to apply the Christian charity of 1 Corinthians 8-10, and not let this liberty or freedom become a stumblingblock to others. Concerning Lent, Jon Shaff, a Free Will Baptist preacher from Oklahoma, said “there are many brothers and sisters like myself that have been ‘taken out of Rome’ by the Grace of God and it makes us cringe to hear the words like ‘Lent’...Show your brothers and sisters kindness and gentleness...do not entice them to go back to things from which the Lord has delivered them.”

---

[i] “One of the primary objections that is most often given against the practice of Lent, as well as any other practice that might remotely be considered liturgical, is that it comes to us from the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church.” Lent is intrinsic in the Roman church calendar and holy week observances. Lent is not a biblical observance, and the long tradition of its observance by Catholics does not make it so.
[ii] “In some traditions, Lent is presented as a way of ‘earning’ God’s forgiveness, as a meritorious act by which we might deserve God’s grace, even as a kind of penance.” Lent restricts certain matters of separation and holiness to a certain time of year. “Self-reflection, examination, confession, and repentance” should be daily rather than seasonal Christian practice (cf. Luke 9:23).
[iii] “A final objection that is often raised in this conversation is that the practice of Lent is nowhere explicitly commanded in Holy Scripture.” There is no positive command in the New Testament to observe any season of the year as holy. Bible believers should not be seeking religious traditions to borrow from others, but rather search the scriptures daily to see whether such things are so.

A poll and an opinion

A couple of articles I cannot recommend as sound, but are nevertheless interesting.

• Why some younger evangelicals are leaving the faith -- “Along with a decline in white evangelicalism, the data indicates a stabilized increase in the number of those who no longer identify as religious at all.”

The author states that the material was gathered from over 75 interviews he conducted between 2010 and 2018 with those dissatisfied with their evangelical faith. I was struck by the fact that the interviewees often complained about white evangelicals’ allegiance to politics. Yet it was often their own political views rather than theological ones that influenced their exit from evangelicalism.

• ‘I dare you to deny me Communion.’ What has happened to Catholicism in America? -- “Biden has scandalized and confused many faithful by continuing to receive Holy Communion while supporting abortion, which the church deems gravely sinful.”

I have numerous and significant disagreements with the theology and practice of the Roman Catholic (so-called) Church. Nevertheless, this opinion piece makes a valid point about their need to stand on what they believe.

Douay–Rheims Only

Just an odd but perhaps interesting notice in passing – some people claim that there is a Douay–Rheims Only Movement (DRO) that is similar to King James Onlyism. This DRO view is held both by traditionalist Catholics who are in full communion with the RCC, as well as sedevacantists.[i] Here are three related readings:

• Why Should You Read Only the Douay-Rheims Catholic Translation of the Bible? -- “The Douay-Rheims Bible is a scrupulously faithful translation into English of the Latin Vulgate Bible which St. Jerome (342-420) translated into Latin from the original languages.”
• 7 Reasons Why I Love the old Douay Rheims Bible -- “There are many passages in the Douay Rheims Bible that are NOT contained in Catholic Bible versions like the RSVCE and NAB.”
• Uncomfortable Facts about the Douay-Rheims -- “Douay-Rheims Onlyists have not gone to some of the extremes of King James Onlyists...However, they do often parallel King James Onlyists in arguing the superiority of their preferred translation due to the manuscript tradition on which it is based.”

---

[i] Sedevacantists are persons who identify as Roman Catholic, but believe that the position/office of the Bishop of Rome (or pope) is currently vacant (from the Latin phrase sede vacante, “with the chair [that is, of ‘Saint Peter’] vacant”).

Lent should not be

Lent should not be observed in biblical Baptist churches:

• Lent is an invention of popery. It is part and parcel of the Roman church calendar and holy week observances. These are not found in the Bible.
• Lent contradicts the Bible view of holy days (e.g. Colossians 2:16-17). The Lord’s day is the “holy day” to be biblically observed (cf. Acts 20:7).
• Lent disagrees with the biblical principle of worshiping according to God’s revealed will (Regulative Principle). There is no positive command in the New Testament to observe any day or season as holy.
• Lent restricts certain matters of separation and holiness to a certain time of year. Personal holiness should be a daily Christian practice (cf. Luke 9:23).

[Based on my thoughts and thoughts I have heard others present.]

No Good Friday, take a Spring Holiday

According to Indiana Public Media, “In a memo to city employees last week, [Mayor John] Hamilton [of Bloomington, Indiana] announced Good Friday will now be known as ‘Spring Holiday’ and Columbus Day will now be known as ‘Fall Holiday.’ The change will affect how the paid time-off days are described for city employees.”

“Columbus Day” has not attracted much attention; it is far away and not as notable. However, the change of “Good Friday” to “Spring Holiday” has garnered attention and created something of a stir. Good Friday is a major day for many many folks in various Christian traditions.

Personally, I see Good Friday as a Roman Catholic invention. I do not recall Good Friday ever mentioned in my growing up days in a rural East Texas Baptist Church. Neither do I think it biblically corresponds to the day Jesus was crucified. Finally, the Bible does not set aside the crucifixion or birth of Christ as “church holy days.” This is not found in scripture. On the other hand, I am not fighting Good Friday as a holiday that our society recognizes. My place of employment gives the day, and I will take it regardless of what they call it.

Now the Roman Catholic “invention” has become a Mayor John Hamilton “unvention.” Hamilton wrote in a memo, “We are terrifically proud of our diverse workforce at the City. That diversity makes us stronger and more representative of the public we proudly serve. These updated names for two days of well-merited time off is another way we can demonstrate our commitment to inclusivity.” In reality, Hamilton’s words conceal a duplicitous aim to include by excluding, to not to offend (some) people by offending (some) people. I believe the actions of those like Mayor Hamilton are hypocritical and duplicitous, as well as a demonstration of a certain type of lunacy. Just kept your eyes peeled and your ears to the ground. I suspect we will find that Bloomington’s “Spring Holiday”" will always be on Friday before Easter rather than the third Friday of April!

I sent the following note to the Mayor Hamilton, though it is likely he will never read it.

Dear Mayor Hamilton,

Yesterday I read the news that the city of Bloomington, in the name of specific inclusivity, has axed “Good Friday” for a more innocuous holiday called “Spring Holiday.”

I am a Christian, but I do not observe Good Friday. I am not a citizen of Bloomington, but rather an outside observer. I will be quite interested to follow this to find whether “Spring Holiday” will always be the third Friday in April, or whether the city will hypocritically move it around to be the Friday before Easter each year!

Thanks for reading my thoughts. Have a good day.

Sincerely,

Lent

Why I Encourage People Not to Observe Lent by Bart Barber -- "Lent is not in the Bible, nor anything resembling it. Movement toward Lent is movement away from the idea that the New Testament should give us the pattern for ecclesiastical celebrations or individual spiritual formation."

Transubstantiation: A Roman Miracle?

A pretty maid, a Protestant,

Was to a Papist wed;

To love all Bible truths and tales,

Quite early she’d been bred.

It sorely grieved her husband’s heart

That she would not comply

And join the Mother Church of Rome

And heretics deny.

So day by day he flattered her,

But still she saw no good

Would ever come from bowing down

To idols made of wood;

The mass, the host, the miracles,

Were made but to deceive;

And transubstantiation, too,

She’d never dare believe.

He went to see his clergyman

And told him his sad tale:

“My wife’s an unbeliever, sir,

You can, perhaps, prevail;

For all your Romish miracles

My wife has strong aversion,

To really work a miracle

May lead to her conversion.”

The priest went with the gentleman –

He thought to gain a prize.

He said, “I will convert her, sir,

And open both her eyes.”

So when they came into the house,

The husband loudly cried,

“The priest has come to dine with us!”

“He’s welcome,” she replied.

And when, at last, the meal was o’er,

The priest at once began

To teach his hostess all about

The sinful state of man;

The greatness of the Saviour’s love,

Which Christians can’t deny,

To give Himself a Sacrifice

And for their sins to die.

“I will return tomorrow, lass,

Prepare some bread and wine;

The sacramental miracle

Will stop your soul’s decline.”

“I'll bake the bread,” the lady said.

“You may,” he did reply,

“And when you’ve seen this miracle,

Convinced you’ll be, say I.”

The priest did come accordingly,

The bread and wine did bless.

The lady asked, “Sir, is it changed?”

The priest answered, “Yes;

It’s changed from common bread and wine

To truly flesh and blood;

I tell you, lass, this power of mine

Has changed it into God!”

So having blessed the bread and wine,

To eat they did prepare;

The lady said unto the priest,

“I warn you to take care,

For half an ounce of arsenic

Was mixed right in the batter,

But since you have its nature changed,

It cannot really matter.”

The priest anon was struck real dumb –

He looked as pale as death.

The bread and wine fell from his hands

And he did gasp for breath.

“Bring me my horse!” the priest cried,

“This is a cursed home!”

The dame replied, “Begone; ’tis you

Who shares the curse of Rome.”

The husband, too, he sat surprised,

And not a word did say.

At length he spoke, “My dear,” said he,

“The priest has run away;

To gulp such mummery and tripe,

I’m not, for sure, quite able;

I’ll go with you, and will renounce

This Roman Catholic Fable.”             

Author Unknown; The earliest incident I’ve found so far is in The United Empire Minstrel: a Selection of the Best National, Constitutional and Loyal Orange Songs and Poems, William Shannon, Toronto: Henry Lowsell, 1852, pp. 202-204

The season

Lent is not a Baptist season. Lent is not a biblical observance.

The Affair of the Sausages

In 1522 in Zürich, Switzerland, preacher Ulrich Zwingli taught on the basis of sola scriptura that "Christians are free to fast or not to fast because the Bible does not prohibit the eating of meat during Lent." "The Affair of the Sausages" soon followed. 

"[Reformer, Ulrich] Zwingli’s sermon [Concerning Choice and Liberty Respecting Food, in 1522] inspired a couple of his supporters to eat sausage at the home of Christoph Froschauer, a nearby printer at Zurich. It may seem silly to us, but this occurred during the season of Lent and breaking the Lenten fast directly challenged the authority of the Church. Froschauer was arrested. While Zwingli did not join the others in breaking the Lenten fast, he did condone their actions in light of scripture and the concept of Christian liberty. This eventually led to a public disputation or debate in January of 1523."

From The Affair of Sausages (where you can read more)

Why Not Lent?

In a recent blog post, Southern Baptist pastor Bart Barber wrote, “Lent is not in the Bible, nor anything resembling it. Movement toward Lent is movement away from the idea that the New Testament should give us the pattern for ecclesiastical celebrations or individual spiritual formation.”

It is not inherently sinful to give up something or fast for forty days, even if those days happen to precede Easter. But observing Lent can be a sin. For some it is an errant religious ritual rising from a works-based philosophy. For others it is an empty religious ritual observed because others say so and do so. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. A person might voluntarily choose any day or set of days to fast (or give up something). He or she should not make a display of it (see Jesus’s words in Matthew 6:16ff. “When you fast...”). Starting a season of sacrifice and fasting with a mark of penance certainly does that.

Observing of days (or not) should be a private matter of the individual and not a public imposition on others (see Romans 14). This calls in question church-wide observations of church-sanctioned days that are not commanded -- whether they be Lent or Independence Day or Christmas. Let all be fully persuaded in their own minds. It is ill-advised to bring an unauthorized day into the church to all members to observe. For example, we might celebrate Christmas as a family at home, yet leave it out of the church and not set it before others who are offended by it. Further, preachers should not impose a so-called “church calendar” upon the membership in his preaching. It violates the Romans 14 principle.

The reasons for observing Lent in a free church tradition often come out of left field, while some might appeal to something like the “normative principle.”

• A biblical model, “… the Lenten fast is modeled after Jesus’ 40 day fast in the wilderness, so it too has a biblical origin…” To say that Lent is based on Jesus’s fast in the wilderness is one of the “left field” arguments. It is “reverse exegesis” -- doing something and then looking in the Bible for justification.
• The “if you do this” argument: “Neither Christmas nor Easter is found in the Bible, yet these holy days are universally celebrated in Baptist churches.” Bart Barber answers this argument well, writing, “having taken some steps in a bad direction is no good reason to continue further along the path.” It is also not true that these days are universally celebrated Baptist churches. Some churches oppose them, while others leave them out of the church gathering and for each family to determine what they will do in their homes. Similarly, in Christianity Today Steven R. Harmon claims, “All Baptist congregations observe some sort of calendar in their worship.” All Baptist congregations do not observe some sort of calendar in their worship -- unless one is including that we number our days by the Gregorian calendar. Baptists have no official or “Christian” calendar. And even if we did, that is not proof that it is a good thing.
• If God did not forbid something, then it is acceptable. This is a derivative of the normative principle, but is too loose to hang our hats on. There are many things that are forbidden by the fact that God commanded something else. The practice of Lent incorporates some things that God forbids -- such as announcing our fasting and setting days for others to observe.

Lent is an extra-biblical human tradition. We should order our faith and practice on the commandments of God rather than the traditions of men. In the Bible, fasting is not taught as a means of penance. It is not a means of obtaining the God’s grace. As Bible believers we shouldn’t be looking to find which religious traditions we can borrow from others, but search the scriptures daily to see whether such things are so.

See  Part 1

What is Lent?

Today is the next Wednesday after Ash Wednesday, one week into the Lenten season. But what is Lent? Once upon a time Bible-believing Baptists would have to look it up in a dictionary (since it is not in the Bible) -- but now in ecumenical times, modern Baptists embrace the practice of Lent and encourage others to do so! This is an unusual change for folks who claim the Bible as their rule of faith and practice.*

In some/many Christian traditions -- probably most often associated with Catholic and Orthodox -- Lent is a season of forty-six days (forty days, not counting Sundays) that leads up to Easter. It begins with a day called Ash Wednesday -- a ritual of rubbing ashes on a person’s forehead in the sign of a cross. It ends with Easter Sunday (One Catholic web site says that it “officially ends on Holy Thursday”; this may vary in different traditions). During Lent, participants give up a particular food, habit, etc. and fast -- varying according to what is required by the church affiliation of the participant. Mardi Gras (Fat Tuesday) marks the last day before the Lenten season, which began with people feasting on the foods that they would give up during Lent.

The practice of Lent is not derived from a biblical command or a biblical precedent, but evolved over a period of time. Many historians trace it back initially to Christians who prepared for Easter with three days of fasting and prayer -- which later developed into a “Holy Week”. There is a connection to the Catholic practice of preparing “catechumens” to be baptized at Easter. By the fourth century, Lent had evolved into much of its current days -- including its length of forty days. Most connect the forty days with the forty days fasting of Jesus in the wilderness before His temptation. Some also connect the period of "forty” with the forty years wandering of Israel in the wilderness.

Lenten comments

• Lent and Today’s Baptists -- “Baptists tend to reject and look with suspicion on that which is not explicitly outlined in Scripture.” 
• Roman Catholic -- “Ash Wednesday marks the beginning of the Season of Lent. It takes place 46 days before Easter Sunday. It is a season of penance, reflection, and fasting...” 
• The Upper Room -- “Lent is a season of the Christian Year where Christians focus on simple living, prayer, and fasting in order to grow closer to God.” 
• United Methodist -- “Lent is a season of forty days, not counting Sundays, which begins on Ash Wednesday and ends on Holy Saturday...The forty days represents the time Jesus spent in the wilderness, enduring the temptation of Satan and preparing to begin his ministry...Lent is a time of repentance, fasting and preparation for the coming of Easter.”

* When I Googled “Baptists and Lent,” I got many more hits promoting Lent among Baptists than those rejecting it.

To be continued, Part 2

3 Purveyors of Persecution

The three churches in the previous post -- Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican -- each defends itself as the true church by citing historical continuity back to the apostles. Even if that were true, there is a simple matter that must rend them from the lineage of the church built by the carpenter's son of "not many wise, not many mighty, and not many noble," but rather the weak, base and despised. These three "universal" churches not only fought one another, but also universally persecuted and murdered any simple Christians whose faith did not align with their pronouncements.

The Inquisition, or Inquiry on Heretical Perversity, refers to any of the judicial institutions from the 1100s to the 1800s within the Roman Catholic Church which hounded "heretics".  Punishment ranged from imprisonment, banishment, and torture to death (usually a quite horrific one). Some modern historians have tried to revise this view of the Inquisition. But it's stain cannot be erased. The Fourth Council of the Lateran in 1215 declared what was already practiced, stating that secular authorities "shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled" to exterminate all heretics that the (Roman Catholic) Church pointed out to them in their jurisdiction. The oft revered "Saint" Thomas Aquinas believed that obstinate heretics should "not only to be separated from the Church, but also to be eliminated from the world by death." Persecution by the Catholic Church is no mere spectre of the dark ages. For example, the state of Croatia (named after the Roman Catholic "Croats") was formed in 1941. The Serbs in Croatia, who were Eastern Orthodox, were given three options -- convert to Roman Catholicism , be exiled, or be executed. This was no empty threat, but was at least carried out on women and children in Prebilovici. In 1965 the Roman Catholic Church issued "Dignitatis Humanae" (part of the Vatican II Council) which "declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom," repudiating centuries of Roman Catholic practice otherwise.

Orthodox Byzantine emperor Alexios I Komnenos (1081--1118) persecuted and punished Paulician and  Bogomil "heretics". One of his last acts in life was to burn at the stake Basil, a Bogomil leader condemned as a heretic by Patriarch Nicholas III. The Coptic Christians in Egypt suffered under the Byzantine Empire. The Melkite Patriarchs, whose leadership encompassed both spiritual and civil matters, massacred those they considered heretics. Another example of Orthodox persecution can be seen during Patriarch Nikon’s reforms in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 17th century. The dissenters were persecuted, either finding it necessary to flee the country, or else submit to torture and burning at the stake. Even in recent years there are reports of the Russian Orthodox Church aligning itself with Vladimir Putin  in his government-sponsored persecution of Catholics.

Anglicans were later getting in the game than the older Catholic and Orthodox churches, but they plied the trade quite well. Who does not know of the violent war of Anglican against Catholic in England? And laws such as the Uniformity Act of 1662 and the Blasphemy Act of 1650 enforced the dominance of the Church of England and chastised religious dissenters. The sad case of Edward Wightman, the last person in England burned at the stake for heresy (1612), stands as a testament to their zeal against religious "heresy".

Yes, the Reformers wielded the sword to spread their religion, and time would fail me to speak of the wild excesses of the Radicals at Munster. But these are the three that are blowing the long horn for their catholicity, continuity, consensus, existence, and succession. The continuity of these so-called churches is the continuity of the growth of an acorn into a giraffe -- a kingdom not of this world seduced by the kingdoms of this world. What simple reader cannot detest such desultory connection and see & know that a church making converts by the sword has fully departed from the "my church" of Jesus Christ of the New Testament both in theology and practice? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.