Love Has Its Wounds

"Perhaps my preaching last Sunday was somewhat unpleasant because I visited many of you harshly with the severity of the teaching authority and took up not what would flatter a number of you but what would make you sad. Truly, this is of no concern to me, for I rejoice in the knowledge that the disciple's sadness is the master's joy. For the hearer profits when the preacher proclaims what is harsh, and salvation is begotten for a person when the sadness of correction is pressed upon him. As the blessed Apostle says: 'What is sadness according to God brings about a lasting salvation.' [2 Corinthians 7:10] Justifiably, therefore, do I rejoice, since I bring about salvation when I reprove. Although my son is grieved on account of the roughness of my speech, nonetheless I am made happy because I know that he profits by the grief. The holy Apostle says: 'But who is the son whom his father does not beat?' [Hebrews 12:7] For a father does not always kiss his son but also sometimes chastises him. When one who is loved is chastised, therefore, a pious act is exercised in his regard, for love has its wounds as well, which are all the sweeter for the harshness of their infliction. For a religious chastisement is sweeter than easy forgiveness, which is why the prophet says: 'Sweeter are the wounds of a friend than the freely offered kisses of an enemy.' [Proverbs 27:6]" (Maximus of Turin, Sermon 80:1, Boniface Ramsey, trans., The Sermons Of St. Maximus Of Turin [Mahwah, New Jersey: Newman Press, 1989], 192)

Problems With Attributing Too Much To Demons

Since Christians so often suggest that something or other is demonic, and much of the time they seem to do it with a lot of carelessness, it's worth considering the problems with falsely attributing things to demons. My focus here will be on attributing paranormal activity to demons, but the principles I'll be discussing also have a broader application. I'm not trying to be exhaustive. I'm just providing some examples:

Is baptismal regeneration a significant problem only if baptism is a work?

Baptism is a work, for reasons I've discussed elsewhere, like here. But even if it weren't a work, there would still be many reasons to consider baptismal regeneration problematic and in more than a minor way. See here for an overview of a double-digit number of problems with viewing baptism as a means of justification. Here and here are a couple of posts in which I discuss some of the bad fruit of baptismal regeneration, bad fruit that I think is significant and doesn't require viewing baptism as a work.

People often frame things in terms of whether including baptism with faith as a means of justification constitutes a false gospel. (It does, but that's not what I'm addressing here.) They'll often cite Galatians 1:8-9 in particular. But this isn't an all-or-nothing situation. Baptismal regeneration wouldn't have to be maximally bad in order to be bad or to be bad to more than a small extent. We recognize that in other contexts. If a church leader has some moral problems in his life, we don't dismiss those problems as insignificant just because they aren't maximally bad. It's remarkable how many people will acknowledge that baptismal regeneration is false, yet will act as though it should be of little concern if it doesn't rise to the level of Galatians 1. There's a large gray area between something being of little concern and something rising to the level of the anathema of Galatians.