Back when Jason Stellman was beginning his unwinnable fight with “the Church”, reflecting upon Reformed ecclesiology as presented by Michael Horton in People and Place, Jason asked this question:Now the question could arise about how, given the fractured nature of Protestantism, a particular church’s binding and loosing can be taken seriously. I mean, with no visible church but only visible churches, who’s to say whose earthly binding and loosing is in fact reflective of the heavenly reality?
What stops Joe PCA, upon being disciplined, from running down the street to the OPC or even the PCUSA? What good is discipline in that case? He further asks:
Some questions to further discussion: (1) Does Rome’s magisterial view of ecclesiastical authority betray an overrealized and romanticized eschatology? (2) Can Protestantism’s insistence that there is no necessary coincidence between earthly and heavenly binding and loosing bear the weight of the Scriptural evidence, e.g. Matt. 16:19? and (3) By their respective self-authenticating definitions of the church as either the assembly that gathers around the bishop (Catholicism) or the assembly that gathers around the Word and sacraments (Protestantism), has either side effectively rigged the game?
Rome, apparently, “rigs the game” by ignoring their own rules.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJohn,
ReplyDeleteJason has sadly misplaced his hope, which means he had a sham faith all along. What is most striking to me is that he seems to have suppressed what is now a very faint knowledge of the possibility that on the last day the institution of the popes might be shown to have been apostate. Jason has fallen prey to his own irrational arguments, arrogance and, frankly, what what appears to me dangerous, even gripping conceit. It seems to me that he's been turned over to the evil one, at least for a season. May our prayers continue for him, his family and his small sphere of influence.
Finally, and quite aside from Jason though it does apply to him, listen to the spiritual insights of any Romanist. They show themselves to have no spiritual understanding whatsoever. They have nothing to say that pertains to Christian life because they are without understanding, the mind of Christ. In a word, they are not regenerate. (I speak of Romanists mind you, not all within Rome.) They are also fools in the truest sense of the word. (I am not engaging in name calling or anything so silly as that.)
As Tozer put it, it's one thing to hear a sweet lute played sweetly and quite another thing to hear about it. It's apparent that Jason has not heard the voice of the Good Shepherd.
Hi Ron, I appreciate your thoughts here. I agree with you that Jason is a fool in the truest sense of the word, and it does seem possible to me that he never did have anything but a sham faith. On the other hand, I've seen folks whom I'd call a downright apostate return to the Reformed faith after many years away.
DeleteIt does not seem to me that his sphere of influence is small. We live in an era where "celebrity=influence", and Jason is a minor celebrity within the conservative Roman Catholic world.
John,
ReplyDeleteGo around your neighborhood and ask the Roman Catholics if they ever heard of Jason? :) It's all relative I suppose. In the big scheme of things, we're all small potatoes.
Regarding the sham faith, I'm simply treating him according to his profession and acts in accordance with 1 John 2:19. On the other hand, if he returns I will then consider him an erring brother that repented. It's one of those apparent contradictions. :)
Thanks Ron -- I've responded privately.
DeleteThat photo must surely be photo-shopped.
ReplyDeleteActually, Jason is trying to be as much like Bryan Cross as he possibly can be. He is of the opinion that it is the hat that makes Bryan smart. That's why he got one for himself.
Delete