Salvation by the grace of God
Fourth Sunday in Lent, 26th March, 2006
The Rev'd Dr Craig D'Alton
Assistant Priest, St Peter's, Eastern Hill
The chief theological argument at the heart of the European Reformations of the sixteenth century concerned the question "How am I saved?" The traditional Catholic answer was, put very simply, that we attain salvation by being good Christians; by performing the right spiritual works and living good and pious lives. For Martin Luther, however, this proved an unsatisfactory answer. He was, in his own terms, "the best of monks". He did all that the Church required and more, but still he felt that he was not in right relationship with God. For Luther, it was the reading of St Paul, and of Augustine's interpretation of Paul, which produced the answer. And that answer led to a re-thinking of almost every aspect of religion and belief. We have heard it again today: We are saved by the grace of God, through faith. God, not ourselves, not even the Church, is the one who saves. We have merely to say "yes" to the offer.
The major danger in the doctrine of justification by grace through faith is that faith itself can become a work – "you MUST believe x, y or z in order to be saved." It's not that far from saying you'll be saved by saying the right number of Hail Marys before the right statue.
This week I've been reading Muriel Porter's new book on the rise of Fundamentalism in diocese of Sydney, called The New Puritans. It covers a lot of material I was already familiar with, but I also learnt quite a lot; in particular about the key Sydney figure Broughton Knox, principal of Moore Theological College for over 20 years. One of the keys to Knox's ongoing influence in Sydney, well beyond his death, has been the widespread adoption of his model of propositional faith. Under this model, one is saved, effectively, not by the grace of God, but because one has made an intellectual and spiritual commitment to a series of propositions, the most important of which is that Jesus died on the cross for my sins. There are then a whole series of other consequential propositions which, basically, prove or not to the hearer that the believer has fully grasped what the fundamental propositions mean – examples might be that all gay people are destined for hell, that women cannot teach men anything, and that the ordained ministry is worthless. I caricature here, but only very slightly. And it is the Sydney argument that if you believe all these things, you are saved; if you don't then you're out of the Kingdom.
It's here that we come to today's Gospel, one of Sydney's favourite texts: 'For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.
'Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God.'
Interestingly, we are not told in the text of Scripture itself exactly WHAT it means to believe in the name of the only Son of God, merely that belief is necessary. One might ask, therefore, is it necessary to believe the full range of fundamental propositions proposed by the hierarchy of the diocese of Sydney in order to be saved? Do I have to take on board the notion that only a full commitment to Jesus as my personal saviour who died on the cross in direct compensation, in penal substitution, for my sins and the sins of the whole world, will save me? Not to mention all the other sub-propositions? Many of the followers of Broughton Knox would say yes.
At the other extreme, do I need merely to believe that Jesus existed? Is that enough? Personally I'm a bit uncomfortable with that, which seems to me to be a very liberal reading indeed, but I wonder.
So what is the answer? What must I believe? I want concrete, black and white details!
Well, guess what, the Bible doesn't give any!
And so, in my opinion, neither should we; at least not in a dogmatic "you will go to hell if you don't believe this" kind of a way. Because faith, belief, is not about assenting to propositions, it is about walking a journey with and towards God. I am prepared to say that it is a sin for leaders and teachers in the Church to inform people that they, or those they love, are condemned to hellfire because they have not assented to a predetermined series of propositions about Jesus. Such people are preaching salvation not by grace but by works. Such people have abandoned Scripture, abandoned St Paul's teachings, abandoned the ambiguities which make the Gospels such rich documents, indeed, abandoned the key Reformation doctrine, and replaced that which God has given us with idols of their own creation. Just this week I spoke with a woman who is terrified that her husband and children are going to go to hell because they do not believe in the right way – and her faith is faltering as a result. Hardly surprising, because she has been taught dangerous untruths.
St Paul is so very, very clear: God saves us, and it is God, and God alone, who has the power to condemn. And St John is equally clear:
'God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.
'Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.'
Muriel Porter in her book is quite correct. The theology, and particularly the theological methods presently taught in Moore College and in many parishes of the diocese of Sydney and beyond, is no longer mainstream Christianity. It is time, I believe, for the rest of us to follow Muriel's lead and to call this for what it is: deviation from the mainstream of Christian belief. Another word for that is heresy: heresy that is misrepresenting Scripture and leading some people at least down unhelpful and even dangerous spiritual paths. We are saved through faith by grace, by the free gift of an overwhelmingly generous God, who sent his son to walk with us through the joy and the pain of human existence, to take upon himself the weight of our sins and failure, who was raised for our redemption, and who now welcomes us to our heavenly home. This is the God of Scripture; our God: a loving God who sent his very self to us not to condemn, but to save.
|
Views is a
publication of
St Peter's Eastern Hill, Melbourne Australia.
|
