Since Paul-the-papistical-syncretistic-mariolatrous-schismatic-Owen (hereafter Paul P.S.M.S. Owen for short) never misses a chance to scatter seeds of infidelity, it comes as no great surprise that he’s a religious pluralist in the liberal tradition of Karl Rahner.
***QUOTE***
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states in paragraph 847 (quoting Lumen gentium): “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience–these too may achieve eternal salvation.”
To give two examples, the Catechism states regarding the Jews: “The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant” (par. 839). Regarding the Muslims we are told: “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day” (par. 841).
To be honest, though I consider myself to be a moderate exclusivist, I find it difficult to see what the problem is with these statements.
Consider the following facts:
1. Job was plainly a true worshipper of God, though he was not a member of the family of Abraham.
2. Jethro, the priest of Midian, was also a true worshipper of God, though he did not join the visible Church at that time (Exod. 18:27).
3. The Ninevites experienced God’s saving grace in response to the preaching of Jonah, though there is no indication that they received circumcision and converted to the Jewish faith: “Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them” (Jon. 3:10). Jonah in fact cites Exodus 34:6-7 and applies it to the experience of the Ninevites (Jon. 4:2). It is because of what Moses had spoken of the gracious character of God (to all men), that Jonah was reluctant to preach to the people of Nineveh.
4. Does anyone doubt that King Lemuel was a sincere worshipper of God (Prov. 31)?
5. Acts 17:27 plainly indicates that God is present to be found by anyone who will “grope” for him. The word “grope” (pselaphao) is especially significant, because it speaks of those who are searching for God while still in the darkness, prior to the light of full revelation.
6. Peter declared to Cornelius in Acts 10:35: “But in every nation whoever fears him and works righteousness is accepted by him.” And note that these words were spoken BEFORE Cornelius and his family were converted through the outpouring of the Spirit.
Please notice that the Catholic Catechism is careful to avoid all forms of Pelagianism, for it insists that it is only possible for the heathen to seek God if they are “moved by grace.” Regarding the specific statements with respect to Jews and Muslims, can anyone doubt that the Jewish faith is a response to God’s revelation of himself under the Old Covenant? Paul insists that the covenant privileges still belong to the Jewish people (Rom. 9:4-5). Paul is hopeful of the salvation of his Jewish brethren, because he recognizes that, unlike ungodly heathen, they truly “have a zeal for God” (Rom. 10:2). With respect to the Muslims, can anyone doubt that they truly adore the one God who revealed himself to Abraham? Could we not say of them, as Jesus said of the Samaritans, that they worship the God they do not know (John 4:22)? Paul said the same of the religious Athenians of his day (Acts 17:23). How much more could it be said of the Muslims?
The Westminster Confession of Faith is very careful when handling these issues. It makes three important points: 1) There is simply no “ordinary” possibility of salvation outside of the visible church (25.2). But that does not mean there is no possibility at all, in the mystery of God’s providence. 2) Those “who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word,” are “regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth” (10.3). That plainly is stated in such a way as not to limit God’s saving operation to the outward preaching of the gospel. 3) It is only by the saving operation of Christ, working in the hearts of the elect by his Spirit, that men can be saved. Those who do not profess the Christian religion cannot “be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they ever so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess” (10.4). There is no saving efficacy in the teachings and rituals of any other religion.
But what of verses such as the following?:
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Answer: Anyone who comes to God, comes on the basis of Christ’s atonement, effectually applied by means of the secret agency of his Spirit, and not through the means of other religions. Neither Judaism nor Islam can be accepted as genuine paths to life, though God in his sovereign mercy may choose to give elect Jews and Muslims to the Son (Rom. 9:18). Revelation 20:15 says that anyone whose name is found written in the Book of Life will be spared from the fires of Hell. It does not limit those whose names are found in the Book of Life to the visible Church.
“Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). Answer: Christ is the only Savior of the world. Any person who finds salvation, finds it through the grace of Christ, operating openly through the preaching of the word and sacraments, or secretly by means of the operation of the Spirit in the hearts of men. There is no other figure under heaven who can take credit for the eternal salvation of any human being.
“How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? . . . So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:14, 17). Answer: Paul does not limit the preaching of the word to human preachers. In Romans 10:18, Paul quotes Psalm 19:4 to the effect that the creation itself preaches the word of God.
http://www.communiosanctorum.com/?p=133
***END-QUOTE***
As usual, his latest essay is riddled with fallacies:
1.Unlike Paul P.S.M.S. Owen, I find it difficult not to see what the problem is with these statements. To begin with, the CCC facilely equates OT Israelites and OT piety with modern-day Jewry and modern-day Judaism. This is grossly anachronistic, and disregards their very considerable historical and theological discontinuities.
Are all modern-day Jews ethnic Jews? Do they all trace their ancestry back to Abraham? Is modern-day Judaism the same as OT or Second Temple Judaism?
Modern-day Judaism is self-consciously anti-Christian to one degree or another. It ranges along a continuum from Ultra-Orthodox to Orthodox to Conservative to Reform to Reconstructionist to Marxist, with many other variations.
Is the Mosaic Covenant still a saving covenant? Is that the view of the author of Hebrews?
Paul P.S.M.S. Owen disregards the principle of progressive revelation. What may have constituted the saving knowledge of God in epochs past is inadequate at a later stage of redemptive history—much less the terminal consummation in Christ.
Is there no soteric distinction between Messianic Jews and non-Messianic Jews?
2.However, the spiritual situation of the Muslims is infinitely worse. At least the Jews have a genuine revelation from God—a revelation which is foundational to the Christian canon.
But Islam is a classic Christian heresy, and Muhammad is a false prophet. The Koran is a pastiche of Muhammad’s garbled, hearsay knowledge of the Bible, further littered with local legends and heresies, as well as his own imaginative effusions and opportunistic adaptations.
There is no historical or Scriptural evidence that Muslims are lineal descendents of Abraham. That’s nothing more than Muslim propaganda.
Then we are treated to this statement, posed as a rhetorical question: “With respect to the Muslims, can anyone doubt that they truly adore the one God who revealed himself to Abraham?”
I, for one, don’t doubt it. Rather, I deny it. Allah isn’t Yahweh. Allah is an idol of Muhammad’s vain imagination.
The only difference between Muslims and pagans is that Muslims adore one false god whereas the heathen adore many false gods.
The depth of Paul P.S.M.S. Owen’s spiritual darkness is nothing short of amazing. It’s as if he thumbed through the entire Bible blindfolded. From Genesis to Revelation, idolatry is the archetypal sin of Scripture. Yet Paul P.S.M.S. Owen has not the foggiest idea of what idolatry really is.
Islam is not the adoration of the true God by another name. Islam is the suppression of the true God by a surrogate god. That’s the whole point of idolatry: to substitute the false for the true.
Paul P.S.M.S. Owen is no more evangelical than John Hick or Joseph Campbell. All Paul P.S.M.S. Owen has done is to rename the Mormon pantheon.
3.Then you have his last-ditch appeal to Job, Jethro, Lemuel, and Cornelius. No, none of these men were Israelites. But they came into contact with the covenant community, as neighbors and in-laws, through trade, marriage, and military occupation. Assuming that they were saved, they were saved because they have a saving knowledge of the true God thanks to their providential associations with the chosen people of God.
4.The Book of Jonah never says the Ninevites were recipients of God’s saving grace. Rather, they were spared temporal punishment. Paul P.S.M.S. Owen is a past master of Scripture-twisting.
5.Then there’s his willful abuse Acts 10:35, where he defiantly lifts the verse out of its explicitly evangelistic context in which the offer of the gospel is extended to all people-groups. He further disregards the fact that Cornelius was already a God-fearer (v2).
6.His appeal to Acts 17:28 flouts the distinction between seeking and knowing. The verbal image alludes to a blind man or sighted man groping in darkness due to the absence of light, where the implicit metaphors represent spiritual ignorance and knowledge respectively. The imagery is pessimistic.
7.Far from supporting his case, Jn 4:22 undercuts it. For the Samaritans shared the same religious roots as the Jews, but by separating from the faith of Israel, they cut themselves off from the saving stream of redemptive revelation.
8. Paul P.S.M.S. Owen’s appeal to Rom 10:18 fails to perceive that Paul’s allusive astronomical hyperbole is being reused as a metaphor for the kerygmatic outreach of the missionary church.
9.Why an Anglo-Catholic bothers to cite the Westminster Confession is unclear. In any event, given the contextual parallel with infant salvation, it is more natural to see those “who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word,” as having reference, not to the heathen, but to other mental incompetents.
10. Paul P.S.M.S. Owen resorts to the old face-saving device of saying that whoever is saved is saved through Christ. But what is missing is faith in Christ, as if that were merely a bonus point or hood ornament.
No comments:
Post a Comment