Heresy of the Week: Anabaptism

This week's heresy is one of the three main categories of protestantism.

Anabaptism is a 16th-21st century protestant heresy which teaches that Jesus did not derive his humanity from his human mother, Mary. This is known as the “doctrine of heavenly flesh” and “Incarnational Christology”. They believed that if Jesus was human like us, because of the fall of Adam, that redemption was impossible through the “seed of the Devil”. Some sects of Anabaptism also deny the trinity in the vein of Socinianism. Additionally, many of the other teachings of the “Radical Reformed” church are suspect. They believe in “believer baptism” only, meaning a public confession of faith must occur first, and if that didn’t happen (as in the case of an infant or Roman Catholic baptism), one must be re-baptized. Anabaptists adamantly deny being “rebaptizers”, since they consider the initial baptism to be invalid. Holy Communion was viewed as merely symbolic or memorial (see Symbolism). They taught that Christians should be separated from the world, should not make oaths or hold political office of any kind and should not exercise self-defense or ever go to war (pacifism). These teachings are still prevalent in churches who trace their roots back to the Radical Reformed churches, such as the Amish.

Heresy of the Week: Symbolism

This particular heresy is one that really bugs me because of how prevalent it is.  If you can doubt the clear saying of Scripture here, where else are you allowed to fill in your own meaning?

Symbolism is a term to describe the protestant Eucharistic heresy taught by the Arminians, Calvinists, and Radical Reformed. Their teaching is that the bread and wine simple “represent” or “symbolize” the Body and Blood of Our Lord. This teaching was resoundingly rejected by Martin Luther at the Marburg Colloquy with Zwingli, and is also condemned by the Catholic Church.

Morality and Spirituality: Christians, please stop confusing the two!

For those who don't know me in "real" life, I do politics for a living.  Specifically, I do political strategy and campaign consulting.  I generally try not to cross streams between politics and theology as much as possible, but there are too many Dispensationalists (read here for a little background if you are unfamiliar with that term) in politics for me to often get away with that, much to my frustration and chagrin.

One of my biggest pet peeves both in politics and in Christendom today is the utter confusion of the Two Kingdoms--or worse, the fact that most Christians I encounter in politics don't even know what Two Kingdoms theology is.  This is something I have written about before, but I feel like it's time for a refresher after several conversations last week on the topic.  From my previous post on the subject:

Two Kingdoms Theology refers to the Lutheran teaching of the proper distinction between the Left-hand Kingdom (or the Kingdom of Man) and the Right-hand Kingdom (or the Kingdom of God).  I personally consider Romans 13 to be the original separation of Church and State document.  By this, I don't mean that they are completely severed from each other at all, but as another Pastor reminded me, it shows the proper distinction of the Kingdoms, and more importantly, the proper role of a Christian in both Kingdoms.   

I also mean by "separation of Church and State" that a) theocracies are a BIG no-no (basically, preachers are preachers and rulers are rulers, the two roles should not be combined--that is, no blurring of the clear lines between the two Kingdoms); b) that the Left-hand Kingdom is meant to not interfere with the Right-hand Kingdom (First Amendment, anyone?); and c) Christians are called to be involved in government, not using government to advance Christianity, but rather, to advance Natural Law (which we'll get to in a minute). 

For a better illustration, here are some of the differences between the two Kingdoms:

Left-hand Kingdom	Right-hand Kingdom
Kingdom of the Man (State)	Kingdom of God (Church)
Law	Gospel
Sword: Internal* and External**	Word, no swords
Power	Grace
Exists for Order	Exists for Mercy
External Righteousness	Internal Righteousness
Realm of Morals	Realm of Faith
Ruled by Reason	Ruled by Scripture

 *Internal Sword = police, etc.**External Sword = military 

Now, from the Christian (and particularly Lutheran) perspective, Natural Law is exemplified in the second table of the Ten Commandments.  The first table deals with the Right-hand Kingdom, or our faith in God, and the second table deals with the Left-hand Kingdom, or Natural Law and interaction with our neighbor.

While our faith is to govern our actions, we have to understand the clear distinction between the Two Kingdoms to properly function in the political sphere.  We are not to be like the Anabaptists (Radical Reformed), who eschew all political involvement by Christians (in the world, but as far removed from it as possible).  We are also to not be like the Dispensationalists specifically (Calvinists and Arminians alike) and Calvinists in general, who seek theocracies (in the case of Calvin himself, socialist theocracies...).  We are also not to be like the Roman Catholics, who see the Pope as the head of both the Left-hand and Right-hand Kingdoms (I'll be posting on that soon--I should note that the RCC has a right division of the two from my reading of their own church documents, my only complaint is that they put both under the authority of the Pope, which is not a correct application of a correct division, but they are far and away the closest to Lutherans on this issue).

Some pertinent notes on this topic from a sermon my Pastor preached in October 2012 (same post that I quoted above):

• Many Pastors say that you must "Take your faith into the voting booth," but that is wrong
• It is not faith, but reason, by which we should vote because the Left-hand Kingdom is ruled by reason (the Right-hand Kingdom is ruled by faith)
• We should bring not the Apostle's Creed but the 10 Commandments into the voting booth
• We don't need to elect someone who is Orthodox, but someone who understands and values Natural Law
• Pagans and Christians should vote the same, because it is by reason and natural law that we should all cast our votes
• The 10 Commandments are the Christian's "Cliff Notes" of Natural Law
• Knowing the 10 Commandments makes us reasonable, keeping them makes us wise
• The State exists for order and the Law, the Church exists for mercy and the Gospel

Beyond a misapplication/misunderstanding/total ignorance of Two Kingdoms Theology, there seems to be this misunderstanding that the United States of America is a "Christian Nation".  Because of the separation of the Two Kingdoms, and because of how utterly dangerous it is to blur the two together, that is simply impossible.  One can say that America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles (although, more accurately, it was founded on Natural Law, which I would argue stems from Judeo-Christian principles since I believe that Natural Law was written on the hearts of all men by God, but that's another topic).  One can also say that America's Founding Fathers were largely (but NOT entirely, as some foolishly attempt to argue contrary to fact and reason) Christians.  In the first segment of Table Talk Radio, Episode 150, there is a great explanation of this (as well as a succinct explanation of why Dispensationalists totally get it wrong about the nation of Israel, another theological pet peeve of mine).

Finally, there seems to be this misconception that, even if we aren't right now, we are supposed to be a Christian nation.  No.  No, no, no, no, no.  Just no.  That is, again, a Dispensationalist construct.  Theocracies are dangerous and never work (anyone remember what happened to Israel and Judah when they tried doing a theocracy their way?  how about Islam? what about the Holy Roman Empire? etc.).  If man were not fallen, there would be no need for anything else but a theocracy--but we are fallen and sinful human beings, and that simply doesn't work with our fallen nature.

However, we are to be a nation of morals, based on Natural Law.  Morality, being a Left-hand Kingdom thing, is not the same as spirituality, a Right-hand Kingdom thing (see the chart above).  The two should not be confused.  I know many moral non-Christians, and many immoral "Christians".  Morality deals with Natural Law and the conscience which, as I've already mentioned, I would certainly argue are given to all men by God--but the key thing there is that all men possess this, whether or not they are Christians.  One does not need to have faith to be moral, and it is a fallacy at absolute best to say otherwise.

UPDATE: Why I am not Catholic

I'm going to keep this simply to the topics why, rather than explaining them at this point.  I'll also do "why I am not [fill in one of three protestant sects]" posts soon.

Part of what I am working on now is a study of why the Book of Concord (UAC) is still necessary today, which is why I have been more and more convicted that the teaching of the dogmas below are why I cannot be Catholic.  As my project progresses, my hope is to post short summaries on a number of theological topics with the Catholic, Lutheran and other protestant teachings on each of them so you can see more clearly from where I am coming.  My first topic is Original Sin.

That said, if I was forced to choose between Catholicism and protestantism (Arminianism, Calvinism, Radical Reformed), I wouldn't hesitate for a second to choose to be a Catholic.  Thank God I can be a Lutheran instead, though.

1. The Infallibility of the Pope
2. The Office of the Pope (in general)
3. The deification of Mary*
4. Worship of the Saints**
5. Purgatory and penance
6. Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus 
7. Definitions of Justification and Sanctification
8. The number of Sacraments
9. Transubstantiation
10. The Theology of the Cross vs. the Theology of Glory

P.S. I haven't forgotten about the Heresies family tree list, it is just taking longer than I expected to finish up.


* Update 1: For clarification, I am referring to four separate things here: 
1) The hyper-Marian Catholics, a few of whom I have had conversations with, who are a small but vocal sect pushing for Mary to become the fourth part of the Godhead (but not part of the Trinity as I understand it) which is not, from my understanding, common Catholic teaching.  
2) The immaculate conception of Mary, which from a Lutheran perspective would make her God (since God is the only perfect being, and no human since the Fall can be perfect, therefore for any human, such as Mary, to be perfect, she cannot be truly human because of Original Sin). 
3) The use of the term "co-redemptrix" (which makes it sound as if Mary plays a role not in being the Mother of our Savior, but in our own salvation with Jesus, which is false).
4) Prayer to/in the name of Mary--which, from a Lutheran perspective, is the same as worship of Mary in addition to and/or in place of God.  

There are other items which would be of concern from a Lutheran perspective as well, such as the assumption of Mary, but are less of an issue than the four above.

** Update 2: By "worship" I mean prayer to, or (probably more specifically) prayer in the name of, Saints.  As a Lutheran, we believe we need no intercessor but Jesus, and, as the redeemed children of God, we are even bold enough to pray in the name of Our Father, through Jesus Christ, as taught to us in Matthew.  Again, prayer is a form of worship, and to pray in the name or to the name of anyone but God is tantamount to worship of that person rather than God from the Lutheran perspective.


Originally published on 28 August, 2012; updates on 13 October 2012.

Why I am not "protestant"

It might be easier for all three "protestant" sects to share only what I actually agree with them on, rather than disagree.  I think the "agree" lists will be much shorter in all three cases than the "disagree" lists.

I'm referencing below strict adherence to Arminianism, Calvinism and Radical Reformed teachings, rather than the various denominations and their further misunderstandings of theology today.  Most of them are even worse and I would agree with them less than I do with their root sects.

Arminianism

1. The existence of Free Will (although they seriously over-emphasize it to the point of heresy)
2. God
1. The Trinity
2. Who God is
3. The Humanity and Divinity of Christ
3. Infallibility of the Word of God

Calvinism

1. Original Sin (or Total Depravity from TULIP)
2. Unconditional Election ("U" from TULIP, although they misapply and misunderstand it)
3. God
1. The Trinity
2. Who God is
3. The Humanity and Divinity of Christ
4. Infallibility of the Word of God

Radical Reformed

1. God
1. The Trinity
2. Who God is
3. The Humanity and Divinity of Christ
2. Infallibility of the Word of God

---------------------------------------------------------

And... that's all I can think of off the top of my head.  I'll add to these lists as I think of more, because I feel like there has to be more than this, but I honestly can't think of anything else at the moment.

They're so short because I disagree with all three on everything from tradition in the church to Justification and Sanctification, to eschatology, to free will/predestination (none get it right on this count), to the sacraments, to soteriology, to civil affairs and the church's role in that, to law and gospel, to the office of the keys, to confession, to even simple things like the creeds... and on and on.  When so much that is basic to our faith can't be agreed upon... we have problems.

This is why I've often said if I can't be Lutheran, I'd be Roman Catholic.  I agree with them on far more than I disagree with them, certainly in comparison to "protestants" at least.

History of Denominations

While I'm finishing up my family tree of heresies (these things always take longer than I'd like them to), I thought I might post a few other things I've been working on lately.  This first one is a look at which sect of theology (in protestantism, that means Arminian, Calvinist, Lutheran or Radical Reformed) our modern denominations trace their theological heritage.  If you notice any glaring errors or thing I've miscategorized something, leave me a comment or shoot me an email.


---

Christendom began united in the Early Church.  However, quickly, heresy and heterodoxy began creeping into the Christian faith.  That is when various sects began to form and break off from the main church body (Roman Catholic Church).  However, even the Roman Catholic Church sunk into heresy, which was the initial cause of the Lutheran Reformation, and the other reformation movements that followed.  This is a brief guide to who these groups are and when and why they broke off from the Roman Catholic Church, as well as a look at to whom modern protestant churches trace their theology—Lutheranism, Radical Reformed, Arminianism or Calvinism.

Assyrian Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches

After the Council of Ephesus in 431, we see the first major “fracture” in the church, with the Assyrian Orthodox Church (Church of the East) splitting from the rest.  20 years later saw the exodus of the Oriental Orthodox sect.  Both are still in existence, but neither are “major” churches.

Eastern Orthodox Church

The Great Schism occurred in 1054, resulting in the separation of the Eastern Orthodox Church from the Roman Catholic (Western) Church.

Pre-Reformation Sects

Rumblings of reformation began in 1170 in Lyons, France, with the Waldensians.  In the early 15^th century, the Hussites emerged, lead by Jan Hus.  The Hussites are known now as the Moravian Church, or “Unity of the Brethren”, a title which became common in 1457 in Bohemia.  It is still an active, though small, sect of Christianity today.  The Utraquists movement was started by Jacob of Mies, a University of Prague philosophy professor, in 1414.  This merged largely with the Hussites, as it was more a dogmatic movement than a denomination.

Anglican Church

While the Reformation was going on in other parts of Europe, the Church of England (Anglicans) broke off from the Roman Catholic Church in the mid 16^th century to assert local authority and control over the church.

Protestant Sects

There are essentially four branches of Protestant theology: Lutheranism, Radical Reformation (Anabaptists), Arminianism, Calvinism (of which Zwinglianism is a subset).  To at least one of those each branch of the modern “reformed” or “protestant” church can trace its roots.  Lutheranism is really the only branch of Protestantism that didn’t splinter further into other denominations besides its own.

Modern Sects and Denominations

Anglican, Episcopalian, Orthodox (Eastern, Greek and Russian in particular) and Catholic churches (all originating from Roman Catholicism) still have strong roots in American Christianity.  In America, there are several fairly distinct groups of Protestant churches, under which a number of denominations fall.

Anabaptist and Friends

Anabaptist churches trace back to the original radical reformed movement, including the Amish, Brethren, Friends and Mennonite denominations.

Baptist and Stone-Campbell

The Baptist churches grew out of the Puritan (Anglican) and Anabaptist (Radical Reformed) movements, and include a variety of Baptist denominations (including Southern Baptist and African-American Baptist) as well as Stone-Campbell Restorationist churches.

Charismatic

The Charismatic movement grew out of the Pentecostal church, which traces back to Methodism (Arminianism), and includes denominations such as: Born Again Movement, Calvary Chapel, Faith Christian Fellowship International, Full Gospel, New Life Fellowship Association, and Sovereign Grace Ministries.

Holiness and Pietist

The Pietist movement traces back to unorthodox Lutheranism, while the Holiness movement traces back to Methodism (Arminian), these sects include a variety of denominations, such as the Evangelical Free Church of America, Church of the Nazarene, Salvation Army, Seventh-day Adventist Church and Wesleyan Church.

Lutheran

There are three major Lutheran synods in America: the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the latter two are traditional Lutheran synods, while the previous follows fallen Lutheran teachings (such as subscribing to the Variata and picking up on Pietism).

Methodist

The Methodist church traces back to Arminianism, and there are several Methodist denominations in America, most notably the Free Methodist Church and the United Methodist Church.

Pentecostal

The Pentecostal church grew out of the Holiness movement, which traces back to Methodism (Arminianism), and includes the following denominations in their sect: Assemblies of God, Full Gospel Fellowship, Intl. Church of the Foursquare Gospel, Pentecostal Church of God.  Oneness Pentecostalism is an antitrinitarian subset of this sect.

Presbyterian and Reformed (Congregationalists)

The Presbyterian, Reformed and Congregationalist sects are Calvinist in their lineage, and include the following denominations: Conservative Congregational Christian Conference, Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), Presbyterian Church in America, Reformed Church in America, and United Church of Christ.

Other

These churches don’t seem to fall into any other category, most (but not all) are heretical and not really Christian at all.  They include: American Unitarian Conference, Church of Christ Scientist (Scientology), Grace Gospel Fellowship, Jehovah's Witnesses, LDS Church, Messianic Jewish Alliance of America, Non-denominational churches, Plymouth Brethren, and Vineyard USA.