Sunday, September 24, 2017
“For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.” —St. Paul, First Letter to the Corinthians, 11:19
“They, therefore, walk in the path of dangerous error who believe that they can accept Christ as the Head of the Church, while not adhering loyally to His Vicar on earth. They have taken away the visible head, broken the visible bonds of unity and left the Mystical Body of the Redeemer so obscured and so maimed, that those who are seeking the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it.” —Pope Pius XII, Mysticai Corporis Christi (On the Mystical Body of Christ), papal encyclical promulgated on June 29, 1943. In this eloquent encyclical, Pius XII emphasizes the importance of all Catholics adhering with loyalty to the Pope — the Vicar of Christ
“Christ did not wish to exclude sinners from His Church; hence if some of her members are suffering from spiritual maladies, that is no reason why we should lessen our love for the Church, but rather a reason why we should increase our devotion to her members… It cannot be laid to her charge if some members fall, weak or wounded. In their name she prays to God daily: ‘Forgive us our trespasses’; and with the brave heart of a mother she applies herself at once to the work of nursing them back to spiritual health. When therefore we call the Body of Jesus Christ ‘mystical,’ the very meaning of the word conveys a solemn warning. It is a warning that echoes in these words of St. Leo: ‘Recognize, O Christian, your dignity, and being made a sharer of the divine nature, go not back to your former worthlessness along the way of unseemly conduct. Keep in mind of what Head and of what Body you are a member.'” —Ibid.
The Pope Accused…
In a new act of opposition to the teaching of Pope Francis which risks opening the door to a dramatic split in the Catholic Church, the Argentine Pope has just been publicly accused of heresy by dozens of Catholic writers and scholars in a text they signed on July 16, delivered to Pope Francis on August 11, but only made public at midnight this morning, September 24, about three hours ago.
These Catholic critics of Francis are saying he has been influenced by the erroneous views of Modernism and are asking him to retract and correct his teaching on seven specific points (see below), for the good of the Church.
It is not clear what Francis will do (though it is clear that he knew of this text since August 11 and did not recognize or acknowledge it in any way).
But if he were to reject these criticisms as wrong and out-of-bounds, and even, as the head of the Church, condemn the position of his critics, there would be a considerable risk of a split in the Church — something with many profoundly negative consequences for the worldwide Church…
In this sense, the present situation, which has emerged today, of public accusations of heresy made against the Pope, opens up dangerous scenarios.
The Catholic scholars charge Francis particularly with doctrinal error in his teaching on marriage, divorce, remarriage, and communion for divorced Catholics whose first marriages have not been annulled — points touched on in his admittedly controversial Apostolic Exhortation in early 2016 called Amoris Laetitia (“On the Joy of Love”).
This is the first time since 1333 — that is, the first time in nearly 700 years(!) — that a reigning Pope has been the object of such a formal denunciation for heresy, suggesting how deep the opposition to Francis has become. (In the 1300s, Pope John XXII, Pope from 1316 to 1334, was formally accused of heresy on a delicate point of doctrine, on the Beatific Vision — he said souls do not see God until after the Last Judgment, while his critics said souls have the vision of God immediately after death (link); he amended his teaching to take account of the criticism while on his deathbed.)
This shows how uncommon is this type of attack on a sitting Pope by prominent Catholic thinkers.
A group of 62 Catholic scholars and writers from around the world, just at midnight, issued a statement which accuses Pope Francis of teaching seven heresies (doctrines not in harmony with the traditional teaching of the Catholic faith), asking him to retract or correct these teachings.
The document is 25 pages long. It originally was signed by 40 Catholics, and now counts 62 signatures from 20 countries around the world.
The list of signatories includes Catholics such as Fr. Linus Clovis, Deacon Nick Donnelly, Christopher Ferrara, Dr. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi (the head of the Vatican bank under Pope Benedict XVI), Martin Mosebach (a prominent, prize-winning German author on the beauty of the old liturgy), Prof. Roberto de Mattei, and Bishop Bernard Fellay (notably, the single bishop to sign the document). The authors say additional signatures are being sought through a form on their website.
The title of the text is Correctio filialis de haeresibus propagatis (Latin for “Filial Correction of Heresies that Have Been Propagated“).
The complete text of this “filial correction” may be found at this link at a website set up specifically for this initiative: https://www.correctiofilialis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Correctio-filialis_English.pdf
This list of signatories strikingly does not include even one cardinal, and, as just noted, only a single bishop, and that one the somewhat controversial Bishop Fellay, head of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), the traditionalist Catholic group founded by the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre after the Second Vatican Council, which Lefebvre criticized on a number of points.
This lack of signatures from prominent members of the Church’s hierarchy led one tradition-minded Catholic internet commenter to write a few minutes ago: “A handful of priests, an SSPX bishop plus the usual group of lay activists… It’s really no more than nuisance value to Francis.”
So, perhaps, in the end, the initiative, though it uses the powerful word “heresy,” may not have a profound or lasting impact.
Still, another American commenter, Steve Skojec, director of the onePeterfive website, had a different view, addressing the question of the statement’s possible impact this way (link):
“It is difficult to predict what, if any, impact this correctio will have on a papacy that has steadfastly ignored a [September 29, 2015] filial appeal with nearly 800,000 signatures [including 201 cardinals, archbishops, and bishops, link], the circulation of a theological censures document authored by 45 theologians and scholars amongst the entire college of cardinals [in July 2016, link], and the five dubia presented [to Pope Francis in September 2016] by four cardinals who have, as yet, not been able to even obtain a papal audience over a year after their initial intervention and in the wake of the deaths of two of their number.
“Nevertheless, the language used in this latest document advances the case further than anything that came before it, and some speculate that it may help establish that the Pope is guilty of public and notorious material heresy. If so, his failure to respond could be an important step in determining that the Pope is ‘incorrigible and pertinacious’ in the promotion of heresy, and possibly trigger additional remedial actions further down the road.” (link)
In other words, this text is being seen as one more step in a continuing vigorous opposition to the teaching of Pope Francis — one more step in a campaign that makes no bones about the fact that it aims to reverse the Pope’s teaching on several contested points, either during this present pontificate (via a retraction and amendment of the teaching), or after this pontificate is over…
In this sense, this document seems to clearly mark a dramatic new stage in the long-simmering battle between Pope Francis, along with his close advisors, and his critics.
Strong words have now been quite publicly spoken. Battle lines have been drawn…
Here is how the text begins:
“With profound grief, but moved by fidelity to our Lord Jesus Christ, by love for the Church and for the papacy, and by filial devotion toward yourself, we are compelled to address a correction to Your Holiness on account of the propagation of heresies [emphasis mine] effected by the apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia and by other words, deeds and omissions of Your Holiness.”
And it later states: “We wish now to show how several passages of Amoris laetitia, in conjunction with acts, words, and omissions of Your Holiness, serve to propagate seven heretical propositions [emphasis mine].”
What are the “seven heresies” of which Pope Francis is being charged?
The text gives the “seven heresies,” presented in the Latin language, as follows (the Latin seems to be used to increase the formality of these charges of heresy, since Latin even today remains the official language of the Church). Here are the Latin passages:
Correctio
His verbis, actis, et omissionibus, et in iis sententiis libri Amoris laetitia quas supra diximus, Sanctitas Vestra sustentavit recte aut oblique, et in Ecclesia (quali quantaque intelligentia nescimus nec iudicare audemus) propositiones has sequentes, cum munere publico tum actu privato, propagavit, falsas profecto et haereticas:
(1) “Homo iustificatus iis caret viribus quibus, Dei gratia adiutus, mandata obiectiva legis divinae impleat; quasi quidvis ex Dei mandatis sit iustificatis impossibile; seu quasi Dei gratia, cum in homine iustificationem efficit, non semper et sua natura conversionem efficiat ab omni peccato gravi; seu quasi non sit sufficiens ut hominem ab omni peccato gravi convertat.”
(2) Christifidelis qui, divortium civile a sponsa legitima consecutus, matrimonium civile (sponsa vivente) cum alia contraxit; quique cum ea more uxorio vivit; quique cum plena intelligentia naturae actus sui et voluntatis propriae pleno ad actum consensu eligit in hoc rerum statu manere: non necessarie mortaliter peccare dicendus est, et gratiam sanctificantem accipere et in caritate crescere potest.”
(3) “Christifidelis qui alicuius mandati divini plenam scientiam possidet et deliberata voluntate in re gravi id violare eligit, non semper per talem actum graviter peccat.”
(4) “Homo potest, dum divinae prohibitioni obtemperat, contra Deum ea ipsa obtemperatione peccare.”
(5) “Conscientia recte ac vere iudicare potest actus venereos aliquando probos et honestos esse aut licite rogari posse aut etiam a Deo mandari, inter eos qui matrimonium civile contraxerunt quamquam sponsus cum alia in matrimonio sacramentali iam coniunctus est.”
(6) “Principia moralia et veritas moralis quae in divina revelatione et in lege naturali continentur non comprehendunt prohibitiones qualibus genera quaedam actionis absolute vetantur utpote quae propter obiectum suum semper graviter illicita sint.”
(7) “Haec est voluntas Domini nostri Iesu Christi, ut Ecclesia disciplinam suam perantiquam abiciat negandi Eucharistiam et Absolutionem iis qui, divortium civile consecuti et matrimonium civile ingressi, contritionem et propositum firmum sese emendandi ab ea in qua vivunt vitae conditione noluerunt patefacere
And here is the English translation of these passages, given by the text’s authors, describing the “seven heresies” of Pope Francis:
“By these words, deeds, and omissions, and by the above-mentioned passages of the document Amoris laetitia, Your Holiness has upheld, directly or indirectly, and, with what degree of awareness we do not seek to judge, both by public office and by private act propagated in the Church the following false and heretical propositions:
1). ‘A justified person has not the strength with God’s grace to carry out the objective demands of the divine law, as though any of the commandments of God are impossible for the justified; or as meaning that God’s grace, when it produces justification in an individual, does not invariably and of its nature produce conversion from all serious sin, or is not sufficient for conversion from all serious sin.’
2). ‘Christians who have obtained a civil divorce from the spouse to whom they are validly married and have contracted a civil marriage with some other person during the lifetime of their spouse, who live more uxorio [Note: in the manner of a married couple, that is, engaging in intimate relations] with their civil partner, and who choose to remain in this state with full knowledge of the nature of their act and full consent of the will to that act, are not necessarily in a state of mortal sin, and can receive sanctifying grace and grow in charity.’
3). ‘A Christian believer can have full knowledge of a divine law and voluntarily choose to break it in a serious matter, but not be in a state of mortal sin as a result of this action.’
4). ‘A person is able, while he obeys a divine prohibition, to sin against God by that very act of obedience.’
5). ‘Conscience can truly and rightly judge that sexual acts between persons who have contracted a civil marriage with each other, although one or both of them is sacramentally married to another person, can sometimes be morally right or requested or even commanded by God.’
6). ‘Moral principles and moral truths contained in divine revelation and in the natural law do not include negative prohibitions that absolutely forbid particular kinds of action, inasmuch as these are always gravely unlawful on account of their object.’
7). ‘Our Lord Jesus Christ wills that the Church abandon her perennial discipline of refusing the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried and of refusing absolution to the divorced and remarried who do not express contrition for their state of life and a firm purpose of amendment with regard to it.’
===============
What do the signers of this document want Pope Francis to do?
They want him to reject these seven “heretical” positions that he is accused of holding and teaching.
They write: “At this critical hour, therefore, we turn to the cathedra veritatis, the Roman Church, which has by divine law pre-eminence over all the churches, and of which we are and intend always to remain loyal children, and we respectfully insist that Your Holiness publicly reject these propositions [emphasis added] thus accomplishing the mandate of our Lord Jesus Christ given to St Peter and through him to all his successors until the end of the world: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.”
And they conclude: “We respectfully ask for Your Holiness’s apostolic blessing, with the assurance of our filial devotion in our Lord and of our prayer for the welfare of the Church.”
==============================
Here is the list of the 62 present signers of the document, from 20 countries
1. Dr. Gerard J. M. van den Aardweg
European editor, Empirical Journal of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior
2. Prof. Jean Barbey
Historian and Jurist, former Professor at the University of Maine
3. Fr Claude Barthe
Diocesan Priest
4. Philip M. Beattie
BA (Leeds), MBA(Glasgow), MSc (Warwick), Dip.Stats (Dublin) Associate Lecturer, University of Malta (Malta)
5. Fr Jehan de Belleville
Religious
6. Dr. Philip Blosser
Professor of Philosophy, Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Archdiocese of Detroit
7. Fr Robert Brucciani
District superior of the SSPX in Great Britain
8. Prof. Mario Caponnetto
University Professor, Mar de la Plata (Argentina)
9. Mr Robert F. Cassidy STL
10. Fr Isio Cecchini
Parish Priest in Tuscany
11. Salvatore J. Ciresi, M.A.
Director of the St. Jerome Biblical Guild, Lecturer at the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College
12. Fr. Linus F Clovis,
Ph.D., JCL, M.Sc., STB, Dip. Ed, Director of the Secretariat for Family and Life in the Archdiocese of Castries
13. Fr Paul Cocard
Religious
14. Fr Thomas Crean OP STD
15. Prof. Matteo D’Amico
Professor of History and Philosophy, Senior High School of Ancona
16. Dr. Chiara Dolce PhD
Research doctor in Moral Philosophy at the University of Cagliari
17. Deacon Nick Donnelly MA
18. Petr Dvorak
Head of Department for the Study of Ancient and Medieval Thought at the Institute of Philosophy, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague; Professor of philosophy at Saints Cyril and Methodius Theological Faculty, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
19. H.E. Mgr Bernard Fellay
Superior General of the SSPX
20. Christopher Ferrara Esq.
Founding President of the American Catholic Lawyers’ Association
21. Prof. Michele Gaslini
Professor of Public Law at the University of Udine
22. Prof. Corrado Gnerre
Professor at the Istituto Superiore di Scienze Religiose of Benevento, Pontifical Theological University of Southern Italy
23. Dr. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi
Former President of the Institute for Works of Religion (IOR), Professor of Ethics at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan
24. Dr. Maria Guarini STB
Pontificia Università Seraphicum, Rome; editor of the website Chiesa e postconcilio
25. Prof. Robert Hickson PhD
Retired Professor of Literature and of Strategic-Cultural Studies
26. Fr John Hunwicke
Former Senior Research Fellow, Pusey House, Oxford
27. Fr Jozef Hutta
Diocesan Priest
28. Prof. Isebaert Lambert
Full Professor at the Catholic University of Louvain, and at the Flemish Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
29. Dr. John Lamont STL DPhil (Oxon.)
30. Fr Serafino M. Lanzetta STD
Lecturer in Dogmatic Theology, Theological Faculty of Lugano, Switzerland; Priest in charge of St Mary’s, Gosport, in the diocese of Portsmouth
31. Prof. Massimo de Leonardis
Professor and Director of the Department of Political Sciences at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan
32. Msgr. Prof. Antonio Livi
Academic of the Holy See
Dean emeritus of the Pontifical Lateran University
Vice-rector of the church of Sant’Andrea del Vignola, Rome
33. Dr. Carlo Manetti
Professor in Private Universities in Italy
34. Prof. Pietro De Marco
Former Professor at the University of Florence
35. Prof. Roberto de Mattei
Former Professor of the History of Christianity, European University of Rome, former Vice President of the National Research Council (CNR)
36. Fr Cor Mennen
Lecturer in Canon Law at the Major Seminary of the Diocese of ‘s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands). Canon of the cathedral chapter of the diocese of ‘s-Hertogenbosch
37. Prof. Stéphane Mercier
Lecturer in Philosophy at the Catholic University of Louvain
38. Don Alfredo Morselli STL
Parish priest of the archdiocese of Bologna
39. Martin Mosebach
Writer and essayist
40. Dr. Claude E. Newbury M.B., B.Ch., D.T.M&H., D.O.H., M.F.G.P., D.C.H., D.P.H., D.A., M. Med; Former Director of Human Life International in Africa south of the Sahara; former Member of the Human Services Commission of the Catholic Bishops of South Africa
41. Prof. Lukas Novak
Faculty of Arts and Philosophy, Charles University, Prague
42. Fr Guy Pagès
Diocesan Priest
43. Prof. Paolo Pasqualucci
Professor of Philosophy (retired), University of Perugia
44. Prof. Claudio Pierantoni
Professor of Medieval Philosophy in the Philosophy Faculty of the University of Chile; Former Professor of Church History and Patrology at the Faculty of Theology of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
45. Father Anthony Pillari, J.C.L., M.C.L
46. Prof. Enrico Maria Radaelli
Philosopher, editor of the works of Romano Amerio
47. Dr. John Rao
Associate Professor of History, St. John’s University, NYC; Chairman, Roman Forum
48. Dr. Carlo Regazzoni
Licentiate in Philosophy at University of Freiburg
49. Dr. Giuseppe Reguzzoni
External Researcher at the Catholic University of Milan and former editorial assistant of Communio, International Catholic Review (Italian edition)
50. Prof. Arkadiusz Robaczewski
Former Professor at the Catholic University of Lublin
51. Fr Settimio M. Sancioni STD
Licence in Biblical Science
52. Prof. Andrea Sandri
Research Associate, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan
53. Dr. Joseph Shaw
Tutor in Moral philosophy, St Benet’s Hall, University of Oxford
54. Fr Paolo M. Siano HED (Historiae Ecclesiasticae Doctor)
55. Dr. Cristina Siccardi
Historian of the Church
56. Dr Anna Silvas
Adjunct research fellow, University of New England, NSW, Australia
57. Prof. Dr Thomas Stark
Phil.-Theol. Hochschule Benedikt XVI, Heiligenkreuz
58. Rev. Glen Tattersall
Parish Priest, Parish of Bl. John Henry Newman, archdiocese of Melbourne; Rector, St Aloysius’ Church
59. Prof. Giovanni Turco
Associate Professor of Philosophy of Public Law at the University of Udine, Member Corrispondent of the Pontificia Accademia San Tommaso d’Aquino
60. Prof. Piero Vassallo
Former editor of Cardinal Siri’s theological review Renovatio
61. Prof. Arnaldo Vidigal Xavier da Silveira
Former Professor at the Pontifical University of São Paulo, Brazil
62. Mons. José Luiz Villac
Former Rector of the Seminary of Jacarezinho
================
On the Unity of the Church (link)
By St. Cyprian, Bishop and Martyr
St. Cyprian was bishop of Carthage in North Africa from about A.D. 249 until his martrydom on September 14, 258
(Excerpts)
The Lord speaks to Peter, saying, “I say unto you, that you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates fell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
And again to the same He says, after His resurrection, “Feed my sheep.”
And although to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, “As the Father has sent me, even so send I you: Receive the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins you remit, they shall be remitted unto him; and whose soever sins you retain, they shall be retained,” (John 20:21), yet, that He might set forth unity, He arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as beginning from one.
Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity.
Which one Church, also, the Holy Spirit in the Song of Songs designated in the person of our Lord, and says, “My dove, my spotless one, is but one. She is the only one of her mother, elect of her that bare her.” (Song of Songs 6:9)
Does he who does not hold this unity of the Church think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives against and resists the Church trust that he is in the Church, when moreover the blessed Apostle Paul teaches the same thing, and sets forth the sacrament of unity, saying, “There is one body and one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God?” (Ephesians 4:4)
5. And this unity we ought firmly to hold and assert, especially those of us that are bishops who preside in the Church, that we may also prove the episcopate itself to be one and undivided. Let no one deceive the brotherhood by a falsehood: let no one corrupt the truth of the faith by perfidious prevarication. The episcopate is one, each part of which is held by each one for the whole. The Church also is one, which is spread abroad far and wide into a multitude by an increase of fruitfulness.
As there are many rays of the sun, but one light; and many branches of a tree, but one strength based in its tenacious root; and since from one spring flow many streams, although the multiplicity seems diffused in the liberality of an overflowing abundance, yet the unity is still preserved in the source.
Separate a ray of the sun from its body of light, its unity does not allow a division of light; break a branch from a tree — when broken, it will not be able to bud; cut off the stream from its fountain, and that which is cut off dries up.
Thus also the Church, shone over with the light of the Lord, sheds forth her rays over the whole world, yet it is one light which is everywhere diffused, nor is the unity of the body separated. Her fruitful abundance spreads her branches over the whole world. She broadly expands her rivers, liberally flowing, yet her head is one, her source one; and she is one mother, plentiful in the results of fruitfulness: from her womb we are born, by her milk we are nourished, by her spirit we are animated…
7. This sacrament of unity, this bond of a concord inseparably cohering, is set forth where in the Gospel the coat of the Lord Jesus Christ is not at all divided nor cut, but is received as an entire garment, and is possessed as an uninjured and undivided robe by those who cast lots concerning Christ’s garment, who should rather put on Christ.
Holy Scripture speaks, saying, “But of the coat, because it was not sewed, but woven from the top throughout, they said one to another, Let us not rend it, but cast lots whose it shall be.” (John 19:23-24)
That coat bore with it an unity that came down from the top, that is, that came from heaven and the Father, which was not to be at all rent by the receiver and the possessor, but without separation we obtain a whole and substantial entireness.
He cannot possess the garment of Christ who parts and divides the Church of Christ…
8. Who, then, is so wicked and faithless, who is so insane with the madness of discord, that either he should believe that the unity of God can be divided, or should dare to rend it — the garment of the Lord — the Church of Christ?
He Himself in His Gospel warns us, and teaches, saying, “And there shall be one flock and one shepherd.” (John 10:16)
And does any one believe that in one place there can be either many shepherds or many flocks?
The Apostle Paul, moreover, urging upon us this same unity, beseeches and exhorts, saving, “I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be joined together in the same mindand in the same judgment.” (1 Corinthians 1:10)
And again, he says, “Forbearing one another in love, endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Ephesians 4:3)…
9. Therefore also the Holy Spirit came as a dove, a simple and joyous creature, not bitter with gall, not cruel in its bite, not violent with the rending of its claws, loving human dwellings, knowing the association of one home; when they have young, bringing forth their young together; when they fly abroad, remaining in their flights by the side of one another, spending their life in mutual intercourse, acknowledging the concord of peace with the kiss of the beak, in all things fulfilling the law of unanimity.
This is the simplicity that ought to be known in the Church, this is the charity that ought to be attained, that so the love of the brotherhood may imitate the doves, that their gentleness and meekness may be like the lambs and sheep.
What does the fierceness of wolves do in the Christian breast? What the savageness of dogs, and the deadly venom of serpents, and the sanguinary cruelty of wild beasts?
We are to be congratulated when such as these are separated from the Church, lest they should lay waste the doves and sheep of Christ with their cruel and envenomed contagion.
Bitterness cannot consist and be associated with sweetness, darkness with light, rain with clearness, battle with peace, barrenness with fertility, drought with springs, storm with tranquillity. Let none think that the good can depart from the Church. The wind does not carry away the wheat, nor does the hurricane uproot the tree that is based on a solid root. The light straws are tossed about by the tempest, the feeble trees are overthrown by the onset of the whirlwind. The Apostle John execrates and severely assails these, when he says, “They went forth from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, surely they would have continued with us.” (1 John 2:19)
10. Hence heresies not only have frequently been originated, but continue to be so; while the perverted mind has no peace — while a discordant faithlessness does not maintain unity.
But the Lord permits and suffers these things to be, while the choice of one’s own liberty remains, so that while the discrimination of truth is testing our hearts and our minds, the sound faith of those that are approved may shine forth with manifest light.
The Holy Spirit forewarns and says by the apostle, “It is needful also that there should be heresies, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.” (1 Corinthians 11:19)
Thus the faithful are approved, thus the perfidious are detected; thus even here, before the day of judgment, the souls of the righteous and of the unrighteous are already divided, and the chaff is separated from the wheat…
(to be continued)
Facebook Comments