On 19 June 2009 – “a day traditionally devoted to prayer for the sanctification of the clergy” – Pope Benedict XVI inaugurated a “year for priests” in celebration of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the ‘dies natalis’ [that is, birthday] of John Mary Vianney, the patron saint of parish priests worldwide”. Though the Pope refers to “situations which can never be sufficiently deplored, where the Church herself suffers as a consequence of infidelity on the part of some of her ministers”, he could not have expected the present
widespread outcry concerning the scandalous behaviour of many priests – particularly in the abuse of children – and the accusations of systematic covering up over the years by Roman Catholic authorities, including himself when he was responsible for dealing with doctrinal and moral deviations.
Protestant churches have their own scandals and often do not deal with them in the most open and God-honouring way. The fact, however, not often recognised, is that the distinctive dogmas and practices of Romanism, together with a concept of the sanctification of priests and others which is sacramental and external, provide the soil in which scandalous behaviour can flourish. The state of the Church in Europe prior to the sixteenth-century Reformation demonstrated this, and the passing of centuries does not alter the effect of error on fallen human nature.
In his inaugurating letter, Benedict assumes and enunciates many of the fundamental errors of Romanism regarding “the priesthood”, which he considers to be an “immense gift . . . not only for the Church, but also for humanity itself”. In support of “the grandeur of the gift and task entrusted to a human creature” he quotes Vianney: “Without the Sacrament of Holy Orders, we would not have the Lord . . . After God, the priest is everything. . . . God obeys him: he utters a few words and the Lord descends from heaven at his voice, to be contained within a small host. . . . Without the priest, the passion and death of our Lord would be of no avail. It is the priest who continues the work of redemption on earth. . . . The priest holds the key to the treasures of heaven: it is he who opens the door: he is the steward of the good Lord, the administrator of His goods.”
The letter reaffirms the centrality of “the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass”. Coming to adore the Host or participate in the Eucharist is equated with “coming to visit Jesus”. The Confessional and “the sacrament of Penance” are urged as “an inherent demand of the Eucharistic presence”. “From Saint John Mary Vianney we can learn to put our unfailing trust in the sacrament of Penance, to set it once more at the centre of our pastoral concerns, and to take up the ‘dialogue of salvation’ which it entails.”
Vianney “was greatly devoted to the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin; in 1836 he had dedicated his parish church to Our Lady Conceived without Sin and he greeted the dogmatic definition of this truth in 1854 with deep faith and great joy”. He reminded his people that “after giving us all he could, Jesus Christ wishes in addition to bequeath us his most precious possession, his Blessed Mother”. Benedict entrusted this Year for Priests to Mary: “I ask her to awaken in the heart of every priest a generous and renewed commitment to the ideal of complete self-oblation to Christ and the Church”.
There is reference in this letter to the love and mercy of God, to Christ’s saving activity, to the salvation of souls, to living in union with God and dwelling in His presence. But all is made dependent on the Church, on the priest and on the mass, so denying the doctrines professed and turning poor sinners away from direct dealing with the one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
There are those within Roman Catholicism who believe that another Reformation is required. But it is not enough to bemoan, however passionately, with Bishop Treanor of Down and Connor, “inept management and cover-up by some bishops” and “seemingly inadequate communications systems in the Church”. There were those in the Roman hierarchy of the sixteenth century who saw the need for reform on account of widespread ignorance and immorality, but failed to recognise that the root of the problem was doctrinal and spiritual. The Council of Trent (1543-1563) met, in response to the Protestant Reformation, to reform the Church’s discipline and settle its doctrine. It settled the doctrine in a way so opposed to biblical truth as rendered all true reformation impossible. In that tradition, Benedict’s Pastoral Letter “to the Catholics of Ireland” (19 March 2010) proposes penances, adoration of the Eucharist, prayer to Mary and the intercession of saints as steps which he is confident will “lead to a rebirth of the Church in Ireland”.
It was said of John Knox that “others sned the branches of the papistry, but he striketh at the root also, to destroy the whole”. He did this, he tells us, by comparing “the doctrine of justification expressed in the Scriptures – which teach that ‘man is justified by faith only’, and that ‘the blood of Jesus Christ purgeth us from all our sins’ – and the doctrine of the Papists, which attributeth justification to the works of the law, yea, to the works of man’s invention, as pilgrimages, pardons and other such baggage”. What is required is not the reform of the priesthood but its abolition. “Come out of her, My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Rev 18:4). It seems that disillusioned thousands are abandoning the Roman Church. It should be our prayer that many of them will come to know the “great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God” (Heb 4:14) and be made by Him “kings and priests unto God and His Father” (Rev 1:6).
HMC
Prayer and the Papal Visit
On 16 September, the Pope will begin his four-day visit to Britain by being received by the Queen – if God permits it. His coming to our Protestant land on the four-hundred-and-fiftieth anniversary of the Reformation is an arrogant affirmation of his view (stated to the Scottish Roman Catholic bishops) that
Scotland “has suffered the tragedy of division” by that great event. The visit also bodes ill for biblical Christianity because his aim is to heal what he calls “the wounds that were the legacy of that period”. “Through your participation in Action of Churches Together in Scotland,” he exhorts the bishops, “see that the work of rebuilding unity . . . is carried forward with constancy and commitment. While resisting any pressure to dilute the Christian [that is, Roman Catholic] message, set your sights on the goal of full, visible unity.”
Nationally, we have basely declined from our Protestant heritage and deserve that God should leave us to the further encroachments of the papacy. But this does not mean that the godly should not beseech God to prevent the papal visit. In fact, they should do so urgently and humbly. When David cried to God (see Psalm 54:1-3) when he was in danger of being captured by King Saul, God in providence granted deliverance. “Wherefore Saul returned from pursuing after David” (1 Sam 23:28). When King Hezekiah plead with God (2 Ki 19:19) as King Sennacherib threatened the destruction of Jerusalem, God answered: “By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the Lord. For I will defend this city, to save it, for Mine own sake, and for My servant David’s sake” (2 Ki 19:33,34). God is the same God still. “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb 4:16).
NMR
The Turin Shroud
That curious relic, the Turin shroud, is shortly to go on display again, for only the fifth time in a hundred years. The relic consists of a single sheet of cloth with markings on it which appear to show the form of a bearded man with wounds in his feet, wrists, chest and head. The wounds are consistent with those of someone who suffered crucifixion. The markings on the cloth are more clearly seen when viewed on a photographic negative. In 1988 carbon-dating tests indicated, with 95% confidence, that the cloth was made between 1260 and 1390 AD. The tendency in the Roman Catholic Church is to regard the shroud as the burial cloth of Christ, but the Vatican has prudently refrained from committing itself to that position. In 1958, however, Pope Pius XII “approved of the image in association with devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus” and declared that the shroud’s feast was to be celebrated on the day before Ash Wednesday.
Those who believe in the inspiration of the Bible are certain that the shroud was not the burial cloth of Christ. In John 17:6-7 there is a description of the burial clothes of Christ, and these consisted of more than one piece of
linen for His body and a separate napkin for His head: “Simon Peter . . . seeth the linen clothes lie, and the napkin, that was about His head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself”. This biblical argument is decisive, whereas scientific arguments about the age of the cloth yield only “confidence intervals”, and are based on scientific techniques which may be open to doubt. The 1988 carbon-dating study, for instance, has recently been challenged more than once in the scientific literature, while other scientific studies – of the pigment, blood, pollen, dirt, and weave of the fabric – have come up with different answers. The shroud is said to be one of the most minutely-examined objects in human history.
If the shroud is a fourteenth-century forgery it is certainly a most impressive one. The remarkable “negative image”, in that case, would simply be a fortuitous coincidence for the forgers, as would the three-dimensional properties of the image found by “image analysis” researchers in 1983. Roman Catholic proponents are anxious that the shroud should date to the first century AD while secular atheists are equally anxious that it should not. Protestants can afford to be neutral on the matter. It is not the burial shroud of Christ, but what its actual origins are remains a subject of considerable interest.