Dealing with Grief

Justin Taylor writes:

I once asked Matt Chandler about the unhelpful things people said to him in his fight against cancer. He refused to give examples but explained, “I think people can get a little weirded out by pain, suffering, and death. They don’t know what to do so they end up saying things that are hurtful to people who have experienced loss.”

For those of us self-aware of the propensity for foot-in-mouth disease, we sometimes choose simply to ignore those who are hurting so that we don’t make things worse.

Jill Sullivan, who lost a 16-year-old daughter to a highly aggressive form of brain cancer, explains why it can be so hard to return to church after the death of a loved one. She writes:

Our churches are full of people who are hurting, many of whom have lost children or other loved ones. For me personally, returning to church was one of the most difficult things to do after my loss, and I’ve talked to many other bereaved parents who have expressed the same thing.

She offers some reasons why this might be the case:

•Families tend to sit together at church, and when your family is missing someone, their absence is particularly acute in the pew. Looking around and seeing other intact families worshiping beside you can also be very painful.
•The songs we sing in church can bring up very strong emotions. Songs about heaven can conjure up an almost unbearable longing in our hearts, and songs of praise can be difficult to sing when your heart is broken.
•There is an unspoken expectation at church that everyone is filled with the “joy of the Lord.” You know what I mean . . . we put on our best clothes and our Sunday School smiles and give the appearance that all is right in our world. A grieving parent may simply not have the emotional stamina to play that role.

She then asks, “So how do we as the body of Christ reach out to bereaved parents and give comfort without adding to their pain?”

Here are her suggestions for both those who are grieved and for those who can comfort:

•Be patient with them. Grief is a marathon, not a sprint, and it’s important to respect the fact that people need time to heal. The grieving parent may not be ready to resume regular church activities right away, whether that’s teaching Sunday School, singing in the choir, working in the nursery, or greeting at the door.
•Grief comes in waves. Don’t assume that a person is “over it” if you see them smiling or laughing, and don’t assume that a person is “not doing well” if you see them grieving outwardly.
•They may not be interested in small talk. Someone who has lost a child is grappling with deep spiritual issues and may not be interested in shallow conversation. Listen to them if they want to talk, and don’t feel that you need to answer all their questions. Remember how well it went over once Job’s friends started talking!
•Grieving people are vulnerable and often hyper-sensitive, and they may have been hurt by things that well-meaning people have said to them. Some of those things might include:
“I know what you’re going through. My grandmother died last year.”
Something along the lines of “God always picks His best flowers first” or “God must have needed another angel in heaven.”
“She’s in a better place.” (There’s nothing really wrong with that because it’s true…it’s just that the grieving person really wants their loved one here with them!)
“It’s a good thing you have another child.”
•They also may have been hurt by those who have intentionally avoided them or who have said nothing to them at all. So what should we say to a grieving mom or dad?
“I love you, and I’m praying for you.”

She writes, “That’s it? Could it be that simple? Yes, it really is. This statement, maybe accompanied by a warm hug, is all that’s needed to assure a bereaved parent of your care and concern.”

You can read her whole post here.

For those who are grieving, this workshop from Nancy Guthrie (at the TGC Women’s Conference) may prove instructive and edifying.

What Romanism Really Is

By Dr. James White – Part 1:

Jason Stellman just announced his defection to Romanism in these words:

More specifically, I no longer see the Reformed doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide as faithfully reflecting what the Bible teaches, which is why I will, Lord willing, be received into full communion with the Catholic Church sometime in the next several months.

Dr. James White writes: Just a few weeks ago I leaned over and looked Jason in the eye. He was sitting on the couch in my office, a matter of feet from where I am sitting right now. I’m sure he noted with some humor my lava lamps, which would have been directly behind me as I spoke. “If you are going to Rome, go all the way. Mary, Popes, the whole nine yards. Then debate me on it.” He laughed.

As I sadly read the above cited words I could not help but shake my head. Jason knows the Apostles did not teach what Rome teaches on so many things. He knows there wasn’t a single person at Nicea who believes what Rome requires him to believe de fide today, and that he has to buy into a massively complex, easily challenged house of philosophical cards to keep the Roman authority system standing. I do not understand what drives the kind of agnosticism about the authority of God’s Word that has driven him into a system that offers no peace and no finished work of Christ. He refused to defend Romanism when we talked, he only wanted to pose hypotheticals that Rome has no meaningful answer to. But in any case, I can report with honesty that I gave it to him straight: if he went to Rome, he was abandoning the gospel, abandoning his call, abandoning all that is good and right and just and true, for a man-made system of endless penances, alter Christi, non-perfecting sacrifices, satis passio, and enough mythical dogmas about Mary to make the devotees of the Queen of Heaven blush. It will not satisfy, it will leave him empty and forlorn, once that initial “honeymoon” phase is over. When he sees it from the inside, when the glow of the New Convert Syndrome wears off, he will see he has accomplished nothing outside of the destruction of his own ministry and the trust others had placed in him. It is sad to see, but he will have to testify: I warned him clearly, and without compromise. I even asked him, “Has anyone else spoken to you with as much passion?” “No” was his reply.

Immature Christians are often troubled by conversion stories like Jason’s. Look! A minister joined Rome! Look, another joined Islam! Another became a Mormon! Look how many have left the faith and become agnostic or even atheist! There must be something wrong! Such immaturity is borne out of an ignorance of the context of the early Church. The little epistle of First John shows us that even during the days when the Apostles still lived, apostasy was rampant. Opposition was everywhere. False teachers flourished. And the young Christian body could see, out there in the fellowships of the anti-Christs, those who had once stood with them and made a profession of faith. Has Christ failed? Is the Gospel without power? No, the problem here is a false assumption: that it is God’s intention for the church to ever live in ease, without opposition, without false brethren and false teachers to battle, without persecution from the world, and tribulation within. No one who seriously reads the NT literature would come to that conclusion, but sadly, that is the idea many have. John told the young believers,

They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us. (1 John 2:19)

There is a reason for apostasy: “so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.” The gospel drives out the hypocrite, the false professor. In fact, if hypocrites and false professors are comfortable in your church, then you have a good reason to question whether the gospel is being preached with clarity and power. Christ knows His sheep. They hear His voice. They do not listen to a man who claims to be the Vicar of Christ, who arrogantly allows himself to be called “Holy Father.” They are satisfied with His Word, which is why false teachers tirelessly seek to inculcate dissatisfaction and distrust in the Word. That is how they get the false disciples to follow them. And we see it happen every day. We should expect to see it happening every day. It is a fulfillment of God’s Word.

Part 2:

More specifically, I no longer see the Reformed doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide as faithfully reflecting what the Bible teaches, which is why I will, Lord willing, be received into full communion with the Catholic Church sometime in the next several months. – Jason Stellman

Dr. James White writes:

Let’s ponder this a moment. Scripture never directs us to a higher authority than God’s own voice, and identifies itself as theopneustos, God-breathed. Scripture tells us we are justified by grace, by faith, and by the blood of Christ, and that works can never justify. But…that is not what the Bible actually teaches.

What does it teach? It teaches about an infallible Magisterium, and the bishop of Rome; it teaches about an oral tradition no one can identify but which existed outside of the Bible (and, in the case of the Marian dogmas, outside of—everything); it teaches about transubstantiation in all its Aristotelian glory, a never-perfecting sacrifice of Christ, propitiatory sacrifices overseen by men called alter Christus (“another Christ”), purgatory, satis passio, (the suffering of atonement in purgatory), indulgences, and the whole range of Marian dogmas and corollaries including de fide definitions of beliefs utterly unknown to the Apostles or the first ten generations of Christians. Yes indeed, that’s what the Bible teaches because, of course, once you lose confidence in the Word, well, the Word becomes the slave of whatever authority you submit yourself to. And Rome has said it, therefore, that’s what you are to believe.

Compare:

For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” – Romans 4:3–8 ESV

(employing a great measure of sarcasm, Dr. White continues….)

Now remember, that’s unclear. We can’t really know what it means, or trust what it says. We need an infallible interpreter, which has instead given us these clear, compelling and truly apostolic words:

1. The doctrine and practice of indulgences which have been in force for many centuries in the Catholic Church have a solid foundation in divine revelation which comes from the Apostles and “develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit,” while “as the centuries succeed one another the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.”

For an exact understanding of this doctrine and of its beneficial use it is necessary, however, to remember truths which the entire Church illumined by the Word of God has always believed and which the bishops, the successors of the Apostles, and first and foremost among them the Roman Pontiffs, the successors of Peter, have taught by means of pastoral practice as well as doctrinal documents throughout the course of centuries to this day.

2. It is a divinely revealed truth that sins bring punishments inflicted by God’s sanctity and justice. These must be expiated either on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and calamities of this life and above all through death, or else in the life beyond through fire and torments or “purifying” punishments.

Thus is explained the “treasury of the Church” which should certainly not be imagined as the sum total of material goods accumulated in the course of the centuries, but the infinite and inexhaustible value the expiation and the merits of Christ Our Lord have before God, offered as they were so that all of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. It is Christ the Redeemer Himself in whom the satisfactions and merits of His redemption exist and find their force. This treasury also includes the truly immense, unfathomable and ever pristine value before God of the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, who following in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by His grace have sanctified their lives and fulfilled the mission entrusted to them by the Father. Thus while attaining their own salvation, they have also cooperated in the salvation of their brothers in the unity of the Mystical Body.

That is from Indulgentiarum Doctrina, a post Vatican II document defining, and defending, the doctrine of indulgences. I challenged Jason Stellman to read it. He hadn’t when we met. I’ll be honest, I sorta doubt he took up my challenge. Not that reading this kind of stuff will dissuade someone who has lost their foundation and are grasping for anything, but for most folks, these words are sufficient warning of the emptiness of Rome’s non-gospel. They are so plainly non-apostolic, so plainly contrary to everything the Apostles cherished and proclaimed, that to believe them is to show, clearly, the true direction of one’s heart. But, in any case, when you hear a wide-eyed Tiber Swimmer talking about how the Bible doesn’t teach sola fide, remember that what they are really telling you is that you can’t know what the Bible really does teach, and that what you should believe is what you just read from Indulgentiarum Doctrina. And once you realize that, well, you realize what Romanism really is.

Saved at the Cross?

Question: If Christ actually “saved” the elect on the cross, isn’t it true to say that the elect are born already justified and there is no need to exercise faith?

This is an important issue and the fact that someone would ask this question is a clear indication that they have failed to grasp the full measure of what the Bible teaches concerning Divine election.

Jesus said, “All that the Father gives to Me will come to Me” (John 6:37). Think about that for a moment, as a vital point is being made; namely this: THE EFFECTS OF GOD’S CHOICE IN ETERNITY (the Father’s giving) ARE WORKED OUT IN TIME (the people’s coming).

The elect are a love gift from the Father to the Son (in eternity past) but this does not negate the fact that these same people will (IN THE REALM OF TIME) come to the Son. It is not the coming to the Son that CAUSES the Father to give them to the Son. Just the opposite is true in fact. It is the Father’s giving (first) which results in the elect’s coming. All that the Father gives to the Son will come to the Son.

Christ was the Lamb slain BEFORE the foundation of the world (as the Scripture says in Revelation 13:8) yet this did not mean that Christ did not need to be slain in the realm of time. Christ was marked as the slain Lamb in eternity past, and yet Christ came into the space/time dimension with the purpose of dieing for the sins of His people. Likewise, it is also true to say that all the elect were purchased/redeemed at the cross, even though these elect would still need to come to the Son in time also.

It is not unregenerate man who authors the faith that saves. Jesus is the author and perfector of faith (Heb 12:3). Repentance and faith are GIFTS from God (2 Tim 2:25; Phil 1:29), given to the elect (in time). Jesus secured everything necessary for the salvation of the elect at the cross, including these precious gifts. Not all have faith. The elect will come to Christ in faith (John 6:37, Acts 13:48).

Was Christ the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world? Yes.

Were the elect saved in eternity past? Certainly, the Father’s choice to save them took place in eternity past, yes.

Does this negate the need for events to be carried out in time? By no means. The choice in eternity past DETERMINED events that would undoubtedly take place in time.

Therefore the answer to the question is a resounding “No.” No one is born justified. Since the Fall of Adam, all of us are born spiritually dead in need of regeneration and justification. Justification is by faith (Romans 5:1) not by election. Election merely explains who will come to Christ in faith (Acts 13:48). Christ redeemed His people by His blood, and secured their salvation there, even though the effects of His death would be carried out in time (past, present and future), as His people come to Him in saving faith – this being the gift of God, not as a result of works, lest no one should boast.

My own observation is that when people have an issue with Particular or definite atonement, when questions are asked and the issue is pressed, it is almost always due to the fact that they really have an issue with unconditonal election.