Rome’s True View of Scripture
Last month, the Pope commended regular reading of the Bible and said that the Vatican II Council document of 1965, Dei Verbum [the Word of God] on Scripture and tradition, was one of the Council’s pillars. One clear benefit, he said, is the revival among “Catholics” of the habit of daily Bible reading, which will hasten “a new spiritual springtime” for Roman Catholicism. But, of course, the Pope has not abandoned the dogma that tradition is a pillar equal to Scripture.
A few weeks earlier, as was noted in this Magazine in November, the Roman hierarchy in Britain issued a pamphlet, The Gift of Scripture, claiming that “not all of the Bible is true”, and, “you should not expect total accuracy in the Scriptures. . . . We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision in secular matters. . . . Genesis chapters 1 to 11 are not to be taken literally, though they may contain historical traces,” and so on.
These mixed messages from the Pope and the Roman hierarchy in Britain echo Rome’s low view of Scripture and high view of tradition (as expressed in numerous papal pronouncements). Dei Verbum itself says that “it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence.” The Pope went on to say, “It is this tradition that makes the entire canon of Holy Books known, rendering them correctly understandable and effective” – teaching that the interpretation of Scripture relies on tradition, and that one is dependent on Rome for light!
May the day soon come, as it surely will, when Roman Catholics, by reading the Scriptures – and taught by the Holy Spirit of truth – will join Luther in saying: “Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason – I do not accept the authorities of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other; my conscience is captive to the Word of God”. As Herbert Carson observes in his The Faith of the Vatican, “This refusal to accept any other authority above or alongside Scripture was to become the driving force of the Reformation”. Let us pray that the increased reading of the Bible among Roman Catholics will lead to a reformation which will be “a spiritual springtime” for them, and be the demise of Roman Catholicism.
NMR
Limbo
Probably few who speak of something being “in limbo” think of the religious connotations of the term. These have been brought before the public with the announcement that the Pope is likely to endorse proposals to abandon the view voiced by a predecessor in 1905, and commonly believed for centuries previously. It is that “children who die without baptism go into limbo, where they do not enjoy God, but they do not suffer either, because having original sin, and only that, they do not deserve paradise, but neither hell nor purgatory”.
Limbo was originally invented as a temporary abode for Old Testament believers who died before Christ came (known in that case as the Limbus Patrum). It was claimed that they were all released and taken to heaven after Christ’s death. The Limbus Infantum was also recognised by the Council of Florence in 1439 as another potential state beyond death, along with heaven, hell and purgatory. There is, of course, no biblical basis for the concept of a border land which is neither heaven nor hell, though that in itself would scarcely weigh with Roman theologians. More likely, in this age of the friendly face of Rome, the idea has become an embarrassment. The last pope expressed the hope that there was a way of salvation for children who died without baptism and the present pope has in the past described limbo as only “a theological hypothesis”.
One problem for Rome is the traditional belief (embedded in the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, with an anathema on anyone who denies it) that it is in baptism, by the grace of Christ, infants are born again and the guilt of original sin is remitted, so that they “are made innocent, immaculate, pure, harmless, and beloved of God” (session 5, section 5). An endeavour to avoid the harsh implications of this belief, if baptism by a Roman priest were to be held absolutely necessary to keep an infant from hell, accounted for the readiness to recognise baptism in the name of the triune God virtually wherever and by whomsoever administered and for the invention of limbo. It will be interesting to see how Rome resolves this problem. No doubt it will come up with something which will not diminish the place of “the Church” but will foster the illusion promoted by Vatican II (1962-65) that everyone is embraced within the circle of salvation other than those who consciously and determinedly refuse to believe in God against their better judgement.
Rome continues to repudiate the doctrines of grace and salvation, the truth concerning eternal destiny and biblical views of the sacraments, and so continues to imperil the souls of those who follow her guidance. It is sad that so much nominal Protestantism is also astray from the truth and is deluding its followers. On the particular subject matter of this note, nothing can better the wise and reverent statement of the Westminster Confession of Faith in its chapter on Effectual Calling: “Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how He pleaseth”.
HMC