"Anaxagorians"*

"I beg you, mark this well. For by this method, not only the Church, but every passing swindler will be at liberty, according to this master, to turn all the commands, institutions and ordinances of Christ and the apostles into a mere "permission".

Martin Luther - The Babylonian Captivity of the Church.

I erred, I was told. I gave my reason, even my understanding of scripture, on the present crisis over to an accumulation of exotic and outlandish notions. I failed to see what was actually unfolding, and so, rather than remaining calm and wise about what mattered - keeping in line with a sensible, pragmatic approach, I stated all manner of severe pronouncements and conclusions that were excessive and certainly unwarranted.

That's a line, generally stated, I heard once again today. I should 'walk back' on the 'ferocity' of holding other Christians accountable for, to some degree, becoming 'mute' amidst the pandemic requirements of the last year.

These were, after all, exceptional circumstances, and it's imperative that we, of all people, show ourselves to be those who are compliant with what must be required.

So, what's to be done?

Have I truly stepped out of line - like those 'others' in churches that have remained open, who presumably have acted contrary to the current public requirements?

What's to be said here, for the good of us all?

Some years ago, I was asked if I would do some work for a Protestant charity that needed some immediate assistance. Although it meant quite a steep learning curve, taking on a DTP system that was rare in this country to put it mildly, I volunteered, and was pleasantly surprised when the group decided to commence paying me for my services a few weeks after pitching in. The trouble came when this became the basis for my being there, for along with a salary, would emerge a whole set of particular 'requirements' that the organisation stated marked me as a 'Protestant' -using only the KJV bible, keeping Sunday as a strict sabbatarian, and so on.

As providence would have it, I found myself around the same time on a day visit to a Reformed theological college in London, where I could spend the afternoon roaming through the library of one of their prior theologians. I recall opening a book of exchanges between some of the first English reformers - Tyndale and Frith - which included a superb little treatise on Christian liberty, underlining that if any man or authority sought to demean our freedom in Christ by the manner of 'requirements' about issues such as the sabbath, we should do all in our power to counter such miserable theology.

My time with the charity grew progressively bumpy as I sought to point out what our relation to 'the law' in the light of the Gospel (see Michael Horton's excellent book, "The Law of Perfect Freedom") was, but what truly mystified me was how could a body which supposedly existed entirely to affirm the teaching of the Reformers be so woefully detached from what they actually said.

Which brings me to Luther's assault on the "theology" of the church of his times.

After initially accommodating both a measure of value in some indulgences and the authority of the Papacy, Luther soon realised he had erred on both counts - there simply was no room in the faith for such outlandish and erroneous constructions, which lead him to see how unfounded Rome's teaching was on many other matters.

In his 1520 work, the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, he opens by examining one of these - withholding the cup from the congregation in the sharing of the Lord's supper - and shows why this is construed out of some very dubious and dangerous theological thinking.

This is where the quote above comes into play.

The church had in effect laid out a method of interpretation whereby what the Lord commands us to do as His church can be re-defined as something permissible, but not essential - only that which is metered out to us by those in authority is actually necessary in respect to our Christian obedience.

"Tradition" (what is defined for us as correct) becomes equal to, indeed, superior to, what scripture tells us is necessary.

This amounts, as Luther correctly states, to a theft, a murder, of what God has ordained by Christ and His Apostles.

He proceeds to affirm that this amounts to nothing more than the ministry of Satan at work amongst us.

This, in essence, is why I have argued as I have done.

Back in March of last year, the various governments of the world, including our own, gave the populace the distinct impression that the situation to be faced was extremely serious, but could be quelled if everybody restrained from normal social life for a short period. By the end of the Spring, churches in some quarters were already consulting their congregations to determine how to return to full services in the foreseeable future. Others were already implementing ways and means so that sacraments, for example, could be provided - it all clearly spoke of the imperative to move out from under the 'temporary' requirements and re-establish church as church.

The problem since that moment, almost a year ago, is that numerous congregations, especially here in the UK, have stayed where they were - under full restrictions, meaning that genuine worship and practice, as required by scripture, have been shelved for some point in the future when society warrants life 'safe' enough to grant permission for 'religious' activities of a 'non-essential' nature to occur.

This, in conclusion, is not church, and Luther's inditement, based soundly on the requirement of Christ Himself, against the 'teachers' of his day, stands just as completely against us if we refuse to repent.

I therefore will continue to write as I have on these pressing matters, constrained by the mercies that God grants to His body, urging, praying, speaking when and where possible, by God's mercy, to point us back to these essential truths.

"The Church owes its life to the word of promise through faith, and is nourished and preserved by this same word. That is to say, the promises and commands of God make the Church, not the Church the promise of God. For the Word of God is incomparably superior to the Church, and in this Word the Church, being a creature, has nothing to decree, ordain or make, but only to be decreed, ordained and made (by the Word alone). For who begets his own parent? Who first brings forth his own maker? This one thing indeed the Church can do – it can distinguish the Word of God from the words of men".

*Anaxagoria was a Greek philosopher who believed that mind was an ordering principle of the universe. Ultimately this was ascribed to a divine being, but Luther looks upon the teachers and theologians of his day as applying the same ability to themselves, hence their being able to 'adjust' theology to their own liking and requirements.