I have often remarked on this site on how the state of evangelicalism today comes down to the fact that the gospel has lost all specificity. No where is this more true than in the eccumenical movements to unite Protestants and Catholics such as the Evangelicals and Catholics Together document of 1994. As long as America's church has a vague, ambiguous understanding of the gospel, she will be prone to all kinds of counterfeit gospels. To most evangelicals today, someone is preaching the gospel if he names the name of Jesus. But all of the cults cloak their erroneous teachings in such psuedo-Christian language. What the church needs today more than anything is education. Evangelicals need to understand that the gospel is more than just, "God loves you and has a purpose for your life." The gospel contains two crucial doctrines: the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of justification by faith alone. The denial of either of these doctrines results in a false gospel and the denial of the former directly leads to a denial of the latter (and this is to be expected if one does not believe in a Christ who is fully God). While Rome officially embraces the doctrine of the Trinity (we can only attribute this to the grace of God, that Rome is not totally abandoned to rank apostasy), she dogmatically denies the doctrine of justification by faith alone. If we are to truly bear the title "evangelical", we must not hesitate in decrying Rome's teachings as a false gospel. While most evangelicals would have no problem in identifying Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses as presenting a false gospel (after all, they're "cults"), those same people cannot detect equally flagrant misunderstandings of the gospel by the Roman church. However, if we really have a clear grasp of the gospel and its content, then we should have no difficulty in recognizing when people are deviating from its truth. If we do not want to wear the title "evangelical" hypocritically, then we must begin, foremost, by being Protestants. After all, the meaning of the term "evangelical" is one who heralds the gospel.
But lest anyone in our postmodern age of muddled meanings and redefinition of historical terms gets confused, I am referring to the original meaning of the term evangelical not the way it gets recklessly applied today. An evangelical is not one who kisses a lot of kids and has good PR. An evangelical is not one who is for right-winged, Republican, family values. An evangelical is not one who lobbies against abortion (though he ought to do this as well). An evangelical is not one who passes out tracts at the grocery store. An evangelical is one who bears the gospel of Jesus Christ to the world. This is very important because this concept seems to have been lost in our day. Rather than defining proper "evangelicalism" by Scripture's standards, Christians define it by their own notion of moral conduct and sentimentality. If we were really to live consistent with the Bible's definition of an evangelist, we would not hesitate in debunking the false gospels rampant in the world today, because this is precisely what the evangelist Jesus Christ did. He mocked the legalism of the Pharisees. Yet today, most evangelicals will not mock Rome's teachings for fear of being labeled insensitive and cruel. However, Rome's abusive system of purgatory, sacraments, and Mass far outweigh any kind of legalism that Pharisees ever practiced in their day. What we must understand is that mocking a false belief system is not unloving. In our culture today, we have completely misunderstood what true love is. True love is not esteeming people's feelings as top priority. True love is esteeming people's eternal destination as top priority.
With that said, let's examine the veracity of what I stated earlier: that one must be a Protestant if one is to be an evangelical. In reality, the two are inseparable. What does the term "Protestant" mean historically? Well, it means exactly what it sounds like it means. A Protestant is one who protests something. While an objector might claim that evangelicals do not need to be protesting any teachings but merely promoting teachings, evangelicals down throughout the centuries have protested teachings. In fact, the main problem with this kind of claim is that it is a logical, self-contradiction. If I promote an idea, then by default I protest another idea. For example, if I promote pro-life movements, then I will protest abortion. Thus, on a very basic level all evangelicals must be protestors or, put in another way, Protestants. For if we promote the gospel, we protest that which is not the gospel. So, historically, what system of teaching were the original "Protestants" protesting? Well, any history student knows that it was the vices and abuses of the Roman church that the first Protestants protested. We often forget that when Martin Luther wrote his "95 Theses" in 1516, he was a monk. He wasn't seeking to establish a new church. On the contrary, he was seeking "reformation", hence the movement later being called "The Protestant Reformation." And the unavoidable fact of the matter is that the Protestants did reform, Rome didn't. The result of the Protestant Reformation was not a new religion but the restoration of true religion. What was this true religion? The true religion that was rediscovered during the Reformation was the doctrine of justification by faith alone. That doctrine is intrinsic to the gospel. Any system of teaching that denies it, obscures it, repudiates it must be protested by anyone who claims to be a harbinger of the gospel of Christ.
And yet still, the majority of Christians today would much rather wade in a cesspool of vague, ambiguous, unintelligble psuedo-evangelical fadism than stand up for the true gospel of Christ. Here's my advice to all you would-be-evangelical, I-don't-care-for-saying-the-term-Protestant-because-it's-divisive-and-the-Roman-Catholic-is-my-brother types: stop calling yourselves Protestants at all. And I don't just mean in your eccumenical gatherings either. I mean stop calling yourselves Protestants on surveys, stop calling yourselves Protestants amongst your other "Protestant" friends, and most of all, stop calling yourselves Protestant when you take compromising stands on vital doctrinal issues. Instead of specifying your denominational background, and by doing so help others identify your beliefs and traditions (and we all have traditions, whether or not you want to admit it), remain in your anonymous conglomeration of "Don't give me doctrine, just give me Jesus" types. In fact, I would recommend that you go so far as to paint over that awfully divise title in your sign: "Baptist." While you're at it, you might as well take out the term "church" as well, since that bears so many negative connotations of stuffy pews, boring hymns, and didactic preaching for many. Oh but don't stop with just that. It's probably wise if you remove the term "Christian" from your sign as well because we want Muslims and Hindus to feel welcome in our worship. "Neo-orthodox' might be a better term to write on there. After all, you never know when Bishop Spong might visit. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment