Cardinal Newman a Saint?
On 13 October, the fraudulent process of “canonisation” is due to reach its end for Cardinal John Henry Newman, who will then be regarded as a “saint” by the Roman Catholic Church, having allegedly been responsible for two “miracles”. Newman’s real influence, however, has been powerful and widespread. He wilfully and deceptively sought to undermine the Protestantism of the Church of England through the Tracts for the Times which he and others of the so-called “Oxford Movement” produced when Newman was still an Anglican.
Newman was also influential in articulating a theory of “development” in the field of doctrine whereby the blatant differences between Roman Catholicism and the Christianity of the Bible could be explained away. He held that Roman Catholic teaching has become more detailed over the centuries but that, nevertheless, such grossly unbiblical tenets as transubstantiation, purgatory and the worship of Mary and the “saints” were contained in the Bible and “tradition”, albeit in seed-form waiting to be developed by the Church. The great attraction that Newman’s writings have for the modern Church of Rome is that they subtly enable her to profess to be unchanging while simultaneously developing her doctrinal teaching.
Newman’s personal integrity was questioned during his own lifetime and he admitted to having often been less than straightforward in his dealings with others. In 1851 he was found guilty of criminal libel. It is very solemn to consider that a man who professed Evangelical conversion, who adhered to Calvinistic teaching for a period of his life and who then regarded the pope as antichrist, could be left to apostatise as far as John Henry Newman did. It should serve as a stark reminder to us of our need to be kept from error as individuals and as a Church, and how powerful the attraction of Popery can be to the unenlightened minds of many able men, such as Newman undoubtedly was.
AWM
Notes and CommentsThe Skull of a “Human Ancestor”
The press is reporting the discovery of the skull of a “human ancestor”, supposedly dating from 3.8 million years ago. The skull is reasonably complete, whereas most similar finds, apparently, have been “mere fragments of bone”. After the initial discovery of an upper jawbone in Ethiopia, an area of 25 square metres was sieved by archaeologists who then found “a crucial cheekbone”. The area was then examined by geologists who determined, through potassium-dating, that some rocky volcanic substance below the find was 3.8 million years old, whereas some above was about 3.77 million years. They concluded that the skull was buried in a river delta on a lakeshore, surrounded by shrubland and patches of trees. The discovery of the skull has caused an “evolutionary shake-up”, overturning some of the paleoanthropologists’ previous theories about relationships among supposed human ancestors. To top it all, a “paleo-artist” has reconstructed the face of the ape, which looks out with near-human eyes.
Probably the journalists are more confident in their assertions than the scientists, who are trained to be circumspect; but even so, the rashness of basing so much on so little is obvious. At the scientific level, there are theoretical assumptions underlying potassium-dating – which may not be correct – and there are difficulties in knowing that a rock sample is not contaminated in some way. One cannot really know everything about a new species merely from a skull. What happened during the 30 000 years which supposedly elapsed between the two rock samples? Was the lake serenely quiet all that time, or were there perhaps earthquakes moving soil around (there have been at least nine major earthquakes in Ethiopia in the last 300 years). A theory is hardly secure when a single new piece of evidence leads to a major “shake-up”.
But it is not only scientific theories which are built on this sort of flimsy foundation; many people are doing so with their whole atheistic way of life. Their defence for the Day of Judgement is that because of some skulls and fossils, and newspaper articles about them, they considered it safe to ignore God and to blaspheme and to live immorally and to abort their unborn children. Their consciences told them that their conduct was wrong, but they decided to take the risk anyway. They are building on the sand of erroneous and changing scientific theories, and their house will collapse when the storm comes. Christians are building on the rock of the resurrection of Christ. Whatever the true explanation for this skull – and there are many possibilities – Christ is risen and He will return in judgement. DWBS
Grace Church, Larbert
In 2013 the Church of Scotland General Assembly agreed that congregations should be free to call homosexual ministers who were in a civil partnership. Following this, the minister of Larbert Old Church, Rev Andrew Randall, and 150 members of his congregation left the Church. He said, “It is because the Church of Scotland has effectively rejected the Bible as the authoritative standard of faith that we could not remain within the denomination – leaving the national Church was the only way we could continue to commend the Bible’s message with integrity”. A member of his congregation, who had attended Larbert Old Church for 50 years, said, “We feel that the old church has departed from Scripture, which is the foundation of all we believe in; we leave with very heavy hearts”.
The new congregation, calling themselves Grace Church, Larbert, began worshipping in the dining hall of a local school and has since become affiliated with the International Presbyterian Church.1 They have now submitted a planning application to build a church on derelict ground in the Kinnaird area of Larbert. The proposal has provoked a virulent campaign of opposition from the community, including claims that the church is homophobic and preaches hatred for LGBT members of the community, and encouraging as many as possible to object to the planning application.
A “No Grace Church in Kinnaird” Facebook page has been set up. One comment, among many in a similar vein, states, “The top and bottom of this is that the group is openly discriminatory and preach against the LGBT members of our community; hence this is not a community facility at all. It’s a clubhouse for straight Christians to peddle hate.”
Mr Randall preaches the scriptural truth concerning homosexuality and its sinfulness, that women should not preach or hold office in the church, that marriage is between a man and a woman, that adultery is a sin, that there should be no sex outside of marriage, and much more that is faithful to the Word of God. All of this enrages the LGBT faction and their sympathisers, because it condemns the modern way of life. Mr Randall says that people “have made grossly inaccurate accusations about who we are and what we believe. The message we stand for is one of love for all people, and we welcome everyone without exception.”
To proclaim the truth about sin is not to hate the perpetrators but to show how the Scriptures require us to live our lives and where salvation is to be found. This cannot be compromised when faced with opposition. How fearful it is that Christians are now facing such open and vitriolic abuse when
1Brief comment on the International Presbyterian Church appeared in the Notes and Comment section of this Magazine for August 2012.
seeking to set up a place of worship. At the time of writing there is no information on the progress of the planning application and there may be other, legitimate reasons to reject it, but one prays that it does not fail as the result of ill-informed and wicked opposition.
The Larbert and Kinnaird area is no stranger to evangelical religion: the revered Robert Bruce (1554-1631) ministered there and is buried in Larbert, Robert Murray M’Cheyne was assistant minister to John Bonar in the parish of Larbert and Dunipace from 1835-36 and wrote to Mr Bonar after he had left: “What an interest I feel in Larbert and Dunipace! It is like the land of my birth. Will the Sun of Righteousness ever rise upon it, making its hills and valleys bright with the knowledge of Jesus?” FRD