This is being written as the apparent terminal illness of Pope John XXIII seems about to remove from the world scene one of the most unusual popes of all times. Or to use the words of another: "the most popular pope of modern times-and perhaps ever." Time, Jan. 4, 1963.
The one great development of his pontificate was the calling of the Ecumenical Council in Rome, known as Vatican II, which according to Catholic statistics is only the 21st such council in Christendom. The first was in the year 325; it was called by the Emperor Constantine the Great to settle the question about Arianism which denied the true deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. The present council convened on October 11, 1962. It is now in recess, but is set to reconvene on September 8, 1963. A necessitated change of popes could alter this.
Most Christians little realize what great importance may be attached to this Vatican II council, or how momentous and far-reaching its effects may be. Time commented that, by his calling this council, Pope John made the biggest individual imprint on the year 1962, and quoted Dr. Carroll L. Shuster, an executive of the Presbyterian Church, as saying, "The council may have an effect as profound as anything since the days of Martin Luther." Jan. 4, 1963.
Two things stand out prominently in the aims of Pope John; they are, the rejuvenation of the Catholic Church and (mistakenly) to make it without spot and blameless. He also envisages another revival, as at Pentecost, in which Protestant and Orthodox Christians will all embrace the Roman Church, but which he hopes to make more Catholic and less Roman.
This has touched off a serious schism within the Roman Church. There is a very strong, long-entrenched, conservative body in Rome, frequently referred to as the Curia. Webster's Collegiate Dictionary describes the Curia as "The body of congregations, tribunals, and offices through which the Pope governs the Roman Catholic Church." It opposed the calling of the council in the first place, and has withstood Pope John in his plans for reform and liberalization. This central administrative body is composed of (and we quote):
"Mostly aging Italians quite insulated from the modern world. They have exerted vast influence and control not only on the worldwide church but on the Pope himself. . . . This top-heavy, slow-moving and ultra-conservative body controls all the seminaries that teach young priests, all the church's missionary activities, all of its ecclesiastical and liturgical legislation. . . . It is the genius of Pope John XXIII that he sensed that the time was ripe for internal renewal in the church, and opened the way for it. . . . It was a major accomplishment that the Vatican Council ever got going at all." Time, Jan. 4, 1963.
The same article tells of the Pope's having said to Richard Cardinal Cushing, "I'm in a bag here." Through careful maneuvering, the Pope was quite satisfied with results when the first session of the council ended.
Every effort was made by the Curia to block the Pope's intent and to frustrate the bishops from around the world. They were mostly for change, and in one case voted 1922 to 11 for allowing bishops to decide whether they wanted part of the Mass to be said in the language of the people. At one point, Holy Office Consultor Antonio Piolanti told one of his classes in the Latern University,
"Remember, the Pope can be deposed if he falls into heresy." ibid.
The Pope and the bishops realize more than the Curia that while Rome numbers her communicants higher than ever before, they have a smaller portion of dedicated Catholics percentagewise, and that atheism, humanism, and plain materialism have cut into the power and influence of Christianity. Monsignor John Tracy Ellis said, "religion is just an irrelevancy in the lives of many people—the great majority." ibid.
They are beginning to realize that present conditions are even harder to overcome than the paganism of the early days. Theologians even speak of the "post-Christian" age (ibid).
Now some of our readers may rightly inquire, But what has all this to do with us, or with living Christ in this present evil age? It has just this relevancy for us: the end of this age is upon us, and in the light of current developments which presage the imminence of our Lord's return, "What manner of persons ought [we] to be in all holy conversation and godliness." 2 Pet. 3:1111Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, (2 Peter 3:11). We are not looking for a post-Christian era, but awaiting the coming of the Lord to take us out of the world first.
Only stoicism, or blind unbelief, can fail to discern these times. Even the ungodly know that the profession of Christianity is empty, and that in its debilitated state offers nothing for this weary world to grasp. In spite of man's achievements, and his boastfulness, death still stalks in all lands; and there is a conscious feeling of uneasiness, and at times of impending doom. For this, devitalized and empty profession offers no solution. Man is without God and without hope still.
Another question is in logical sequence. What good will the reform movement in the Roman Catholic Church accomplish? Will it strengthen true religion? Will it save souls for heaven? Our judgment is that it will serve no useful purpose; and for the most part it will, if it has not already done so, unleash the inherent infidelity of the human mind. We have known for some time that modernism has been at work in the Roman Church; now the present council attitude will tend to make it honorable. Modernism—basic infidelity—has thoroughly permeated Protestantism. There is scarcely a segment of it where the leaven of the Sadducees is not at work. It is now free to accelerate rapidly within Roman Catholicism.
Now let us take a look at Rome in this light. In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, an Oratory now offers the 8,000 Catholic students at "Pitt, Carnegie Tech. . . . and Chatham College" seminars of such subjects as,
"modern Biblical criticism or the psychology of religious experience, often using texts by avant-garde theologians—Austria's Karl Rahner, or France's Henri de Lubac. . . . One Oratory student recalls how
he was stunned by his discovery of experiments in modern genetics that offer man the distant prospect of creating life. 'But I consulted one of the priests here,' he says, 'and I discovered that there is no dogmatic—denial of the possibility of the spontaneous generation of life.'" Time, March 15, 1963. [This is a basic ingredient of the hypothesis of evolution.]
The article further quotes Father Walsh as saying that "opening up new dimensions of reality which reason unaided by faith is capable of knowing." ibid.
Is such "progress" helping man to know his relationship and responsibility to God better? It plainly undercuts the Word of God, and, while it may for a time hold young Catholics, reason will soon take over and Christianity be cast aside. God's Word says, "overthrowing reasoning and every high thing that lifts itself up against the knowledge of God, and leading captive every thought into the obedience of the Christ." 2 Cor. 10:55Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; (2 Corinthians 10:5); J.N.D. Trans.
And everything we KNOW is by faith—"We know that the Son of God is come" (1 John 5:2020And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. (1 John 5:20)); "We know that we are of God" (v. 19); "We know that we have passed from death unto life" (chap. 3:14); we "know" we "have eternal life" (chap. 3:14); "We know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 8:99For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich. (2 Corinthians 8:9)). "Faith is the substantiating of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Heb. 11:11Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11:1); J.N.D. Trans. It enables us to lay hold of that which is not seen, but which is eternal, and of that to which we confidently look forward, as though we actually possess it.
Now lest any of our readers suppose that we are grasping at little straws in the wind, we quote again:
"The battle, now nearly a decade old, is between the progressive majority of Catholic Biblical scholars and a cadre of Roman theologians who follow the rigidly conservative views of the Holy Office. . . . Theologians tend to emphasize the divine inspiration and the factual truth of Scripture, and can fall into literalist absurdity—believing, for example, that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, even though Deuteronomy tells of his death." Time, May 3, 1963.
Now this is plain infidelity, though called by any other name. As Mr. William Kelly said, If Moses did not write it, then who did? It is clear that God buried him, by angelic hands, but no one else was there to see it. So those conceited critics who say that Moses could not have written it before his death, create an even greater problem; for no one else could have written about it in detail, except by inspiration.
Then there is another crass statement of unbelief; namely,
"It has long since been established, for example, that Isaiah was written by two, perhaps even three, writers who lived centuries apart." ibid.
We need not go outside of the pages of inspiration to expose the infidelity of the supposedly scientific study that "established" that the book of Isaiah was written by "at least two, or perhaps three" Isaiahs. The Word of God says in John 12:37-4137But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: 38That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? 39Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. 41These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. (John 12:37‑41) that Isaiah the prophet said, "Lord, who hath believed our report?" This beyond question came from the 53rd chapter; then it also says, Isaiah said again, "He hath blinded their eyes," etc. Beyond controversy this is taken from the 6th chapter. Now according to their educated guesswork, these two chapters fall into separate parts written by different authors. Who tells the truth, the Word of God or the modern false prophets?
The article says that "Pope Leo XIII cautiously encouraged Catholic scholars to join the scientific investigation of Scripture begun by Protestant Germany's 'Higher Criticism.' It was a false dawn. Under Leo's successor, Pius X (1903-14), church officials took arms against the heresy of modernism." ibid.
Now the Higher Criticism of Germany, plus many more modern features of infidelity, is well entrenched in the Roman Church. We could quote much more to prove our point, but there is no profit in expanding on man's daring unbelief, be it Catholic or Protestant, or Jewish. We just noted a statement elsewhere, that Israel is 40% agnostic. Perhaps a stronger word might be fitting for a large part of the 40%. Even the Premier Ben Gurion seldom attends a synagogue.
And what shall we say of Protestantism? We have no yardstick by which to compare the inroads of infidelity in Roman Catholicism and in Protestantism, but our supposition is that it is far more advanced in the latter, so that the whole is permeated by it.
Catholic scholars are relegating the visit of the wise men to see the Child Jesus to the realm of myth, as well as the disturbances at the time of the death of Christ (darkness, rocks rending, graves opening, etc.); but Protestants praise this bold step as making Scripture more comprehensible. It all tends to make infidelity more reprehensible to a true believer, wherever it is found. The critics also approve of saying that the sermon on the mount was a compilation. To be sure it was. Any spiritual Christian believes that, but he also understands that the compilation was exact and was dictated by the Holy Spirit in order to bring together those statements that will be realized in the introduction to the coming kingdom.
No matter where we look—Europe, the United States, Canada, or elsewhere—there is the sad spectacle of giving up the belief in a personal God with whom we have to do. The Holy Word of God is relegated to the myth category, and its precepts are despised. Who would ever have thought that enlightened, so-called Christian nations would so soon depart from God.
The "Right Reverend" John A. T. Robinson of Woolwich, England has recently published a book, the title of which we will not reprint; yet it has become a best seller book in England. He calls in question every basic and elementary truth of the Word of Him who cannot lie. He says that the gospel message must be "demythologized." He also believes with a German Lutheran that we are approaching "religionless Christianity." And the "Reverend" Peter Hollis of Birmingham, England gave him support. Even the Archbishop of Canterbury gives him comfort by saying that
"when the ordinary Christian speaks of God as being up there, he does not literally mean that God is in a place above the bright blue sky." Time, April 12, 1963.
Well may we cry, "How long, 0 Lord"? 0 the marvel of the patience and forbearance of God! How longsuffering He is! But such will not always be so. We read in the Scripture of the Master of the house being angry. Yes, God will soon show His anger and wrath against all ungodliness of men, specially against those who hold the truth in unrighteousness.
In Los Angeles, Dr. James W. Fifield, Jr., of the First Congregational Church, instituted "an inspiring program . . . for the Lenten season . . . and the Congress of Faiths."
This rank modernist used in it a picture he once saw in China about the "Eternal Supper" where the [blessed Lord of glory] was seated at a table with Buddha, Mohammed, and Confucius—on equal terms evidently with great imposters. Was not Peter rebuked for putting the Lord on the same level as those saints of old, Moses and Elijah? What will God have to say to such bold effrontery? This daring man also suggested that all people who hold such varied and opposing beliefs can amalgamate into a theistic front army without deserting their particular order. Truly "God is not in all their thoughts" -not the God of the Bible at least.
During the latter part of May, the Presbyterians held a conference in Des Moines, Iowa. They censured Bible reading and prayer in public schools as not being an "effective witness." While the head man, stated clerk, Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, said that unless the Christian Church changes, it will be bypassed. Time, May 31, 1963. They also noted with evident pleasure the
"increasing warmth of Presbyterian relations with Roman Catholics." ibid.
The whole sad story of deterioration of Protestant and Catholic loyalty to the Word of God is being written in indelible ink by Him who searches the heart. He who stands in the midst of the "seven golden candlesticks" judging the state of Christian profession will soon spew it out of His mouth as a most nauseous thing (Rev. 3:1616So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Revelation 3:16)). What solemn words! "Because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of My mouth." We can see that rampant infidelity has infiltrated and permeated both Romanism and Protestantism, and the end result will be that the whole herd will run violently down a steep place into the sea when the unclean spirit enters into them. (See Mark 5:1313And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea. (Mark 5:13).) And of combined profession, God has foretold that it will become "the habitation of [demons], and the hold of every foul spirit" (Rev. 18:22And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. (Revelation 18:2)).
Much is delineated in Revelation 17 and 18 about the final consummation of religious iniquity. It may attempt to join hand in hand to fight atheistic materialism today, but it will in the end be destroyed in toto by those very forces in the hand of the Roman beast who will be in league with Satan himself.
It seems evident that the Roman pontiff's burning desire to re-invigorate Catholicism and to make it attractive to the Protestant communions is not a mere flash, but has much ground under its feet. It is doubtful that a sudden shift of popes could change the picture. Let us remember that our God is moving all the scenes about us, and His will will be done.
A recent book, THE COUNCIL, REFORM AND REUNION, by Hans Kung of Germany, is an important part of what he calls "rapprochement." He carefully notes how so-called critical research has brought the two sides closer together. A common denominator will be the callous giving up of one vital point after another, until nothing separates them. Take all of the truly saved people out of all confessions at the coming of the Lord, and nothing remains but chaff to be cast into the fire.
Dr. Hans Kung correctly evaluates Protestantism as a whole when he said:
"Is it not true that every sort of 'liberalizing' is allowed, so long as it does not lead in the direction of the Catholic Church? Is one not free to deny or minimize the divinity of Christ, and 'interpret' his resurrection away to nothing, so long as one does not show too much understanding of the New Testament witness to a Petrine or episcopal office? . . . Are Protestants trying to immunize themselves against the impressiveness of the present-day Catholic Church to the point of having a fixation about compromise?" p. 99.
Dr. Kung sees through the hollow shell of profession now extant in Protestantism, and yet wants to bring it all into the Roman fold. The emptiness of profession is very apparent to any who have eyes to see. No wonder that the Lord says to Laodicea—the last state of Christendom—"thou art lukewarm." Anything opposed to Christ—His name and His Word—is tolerated. It is no wonder the Spirit calls to true believers, "Come out of her My people."
To prove that Dr. Kung's evaluation of Protestantism is correct, we will quote from the dust jacket of the book which is printed by the Catholic publishers of Sheed and Ward. It is from the pen of a notorious modernist—"Rt. Rev." James A. Pike, Episcopal Bishop, Diocese of California:
"The Rev. Dr. Kung's book is one of the most important works on the Christian scene today. . . . More than any other book I have read, this one affords a measure of hope—as to the ultimate possibility of the reunion of the Roman Catholic Church and other churches. . . . Upon its publication, I shall provide a copy for every priest in my Diocese."
Then under Dr. Pike's endorsement is a short one from a noted Catholic who speaks approvingly of Dr. Kung's book thus:
". . . He has forthrightly expressed the hopes we all have for the coming Council." Gustave Weigel, S.J.
The heart that beats true to the Lord Jesus Christ must feel the prevailing and increasing apostasy; it must also be conscious of one, and only one, way of deliverance; that is, the COMING OF THE LORD to take His beloved Church to Himself in the Father's house. "Lord Jesus, Come."
Now it is press time: The Pope has died and his mortal remains have been placed in a casket which is encased in two other caskets. The election of a new pope is to begin on June 19. The length of time required to reach the deciding vote may indicate the measure of the difficulty to reach an accord,
for the recent conflicts within the Vatican are almost sure to come to a head in the election of Pope John's successor.
An editorial in a Jewish newspaper expressed sorrow at the Pope's death; it also made the following comments:
"As he [Pope John XXIIIl lay on his deathbed, this man of God turned to the Old not the New Testament when his confessor Monsignor Cavagna approached him. The Pope greeted him with Psalm 121 [this is according to the numbering used in Catholic Bibles-it is Psalm 122 in Protestant Bibles] referring to the One True God, to the rebuilt Jerusalem, the tribes of Israel, the House of David and the Torah." -B'nai B'rith Messenger, Los Angeles, June 7, 1963.
The Jewish people would doubtless seize on such an event to indicate what they consider the pre-eminence of Judaism over Christianity, but it is common for professed Christians to not distinguish between the shadows of the Old Testament and the more blessed realities of the New. In many quarters Christianity and Judaism are scarcely distinguished. As to whether or not Pope John knew the Lord Jesus Christ as his personal Saviour, we have no way of knowing. The darkness of the Roman system is not conducive to either the assurance of salvation or to having joy in the Lord. There cannot be any delight in the thought of instantly departing from the body to be with Christ in paradise when the horror of pergatory looms before the soul.