IS A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH JESUS DANGEROUS?

Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Pope Francis) is at it again.  He is known to be controversial, even among faithful Catholics.  For example, his comments on divorce, LGBT “rights,” and his reluctance to deal with the Catholic Church’s sex scandals, etc., have caused quite a stir.  Another example is some controversial things he said about the “failure” of the cross that we recently addressed here:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-failure-of-cross.html

But this time he said that having a personal relationship with Jesus is “dangerous.”  Do we take this at face value, or is there more to it?  Let’s look at the context.

Pope Francis gave a speech in Rome at St. Peter’s Square on June 25, 2014, in front of an audience of 33,000 Catholics.  In his speech he complains about people who say, “I believe in God, I believe in Jesus, but I don’t care about the Church...”  And he described as “dangerous” and “harmful” the temptation to believe that one can have “a personal, direct and immediate relationship with Jesus Christ outside of the communion with, and mediation of, the church.”

The official Vatican text of the speech is here:

https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2014/documents/papa-francesco_20140625_udienza-generale.html

A condensed version of the message in video form can be found here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_bvGTc6SM8

We just want to address a couple of points here. 

First of all, we don’t know of any true Christians who “don’t care about the church.”  This is not a Christian mentality and it is certainly not scriptural.  The New Testament church is a creation of Jesus Christ, therefore, all believers need to have an active part in a local church body.  We agree that there should be no “Lone Ranger” Christians (or, as he called them, “freelancers,” or “do-it-yourself” Christians).  We agree that Christians need each other (1 Corinthians 12:14-18, 21-22).  The author of Hebrews tells us of the right attitude – “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together…” (Hebrews 10:25).  So, the pope’s complaint about people “not caring about the church” doesn’t even apply to true Christians.

Secondly, concerning the idea of having a relationship with Jesus Christ “outside” the church is just nonsense.  Because if you have a real and personal relationship with Jesus, by definition, you already belong to the church, you are already part of the universal body of believers.  Having that personal relationship means you are saved, that is, you have been added to the church (Acts 2:41, 47; 5:14).

The problem is that so many times the word “church,” when used by Catholics, is equated only with the institution we know today as the Catholic Church – rather than using the term biblically, which is used either as: 

1) the local assembly of true believers (e.g., 1 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 1:2; Revelation chapters 1 through 3), or 

2) the universal body of true believers worldwide (Galatians 1:13; Colossians 1:18).

What the pope really means is that having a personal relationship with Jesus is dangerous unless you are part of, and in communion with, his church, and that we need the Catholic Church’s “mediation” in order to be spiritually healthy.  We must (according to him) be dependent on its sacraments, rituals, and hierarchy to be spiritually safe. 

  

Maybe he is afraid that if you use that relationship to discover the truth of Scripture on your own, that you will not want to be in his Church, since so many of its teachings will be found to be false and unbiblical.  But he wants you to be subject to the Catholic Church, whether you actually have a relationship with Jesus or not.  For the pope, it’s ok to have this relationship… as long as it is controlled and influenced by his church.

The pope’s concern is more about your submission to his church than it is about your relationship with the Savior.  Thus, the pope treats your relationship with Jesus as secondary.   Is a personal relationship with Christ all that important?  We would say that it is absolutely critical, in fact, more important than the local church you join.  That relationship should be what properly guides you to a biblical church in the first place!  The reason that a relationship is so important is because it is the very cause of your salvation, when you surrender to God’s will.

  

Having a relationship means knowing the person.  On Judgment Day Jesus will say to those who aren’t true followers, “Depart from Me: I never knew you…” (Matthew 7:21-23).  Does “I never knew you” mean that Jesus doesn’t actually know certain people, or that He is unaware of them?  Is there anything at all about their thoughts or actions that surprises Him?  Of course not.  He knows everything about everybody.  The word “knew” in this context denotes intimacy, i.e., having a close, personal, robust and meaningful relationship with Him.  This is what those in Matthew 7 did not have. 

Salvation and sanctification depend upon our knowing Him (John 17:3; Philippians 3:8, 10)!  Christianity has always been about a relationship with Jesus.  In Acts 4:13, the Jewish leaders recognized that Peter and John “had been with Jesus.” The Jews observed that the apostles’ lives were greatly affected by this relationship with their Lord.  So why does the pope downplay this concept?  

We’re not saying that the pope doesn’t believe in a personal relationship with Jesus and we’re not saying that he’s telling his audience never to have one, but, once again, he seems far more concerned with your submission to his Church than he is with you having a personal relationship with Jesus. 

Sometimes the issue is not just what the pope says, but what he doesn’t say, or what he should have said.  He had ample opportunity in this case to encourage the members of his audience to have a strong and fulfilling relationship with Christ and His word, but he neglected that opportunity.  Instead, he is implying that it is more important to be devoted to the Catholic Church than it is to have that right relationship with Christ!  But a true relationship with Christ will steer you away from the works-based Catholic gospel.

Any religious group or cult that claims to be Christian can say that having a personal relationship with Jesus is “dangerous” apart from being associated with that particular group.  So how can anyone know that they have the real Jesus?  It is an authority issue and this blog has dealt with that topic over and over.  It is the Word of God, Scripture, that is the true and ultimate authority to determine what is actually dangerous and what is not (2 Timothy 3:16-17). 

The bottom line is that Pope Francis is saying that you don’t know Jesus unless you are in the Catholic Church.  But there are millions upon millions of believers today and throughout history who have enjoyed a vibrant personal relationship with Jesus Christ without ever being part of the Catholic Church.  And to all those who have this true relationship, He promises that He will never leave them, nor forsake them (Hebrews 13:5).

The danger, my friends, is not in a fervent relationship with Jesus Christ, but in the false teachings of Pope Francis’ church.

SOLA SCRIPTURA AND THE “CONSTITUTION” ARGUMENT

As our readers may already know, the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (“Bible Alone”) is a key part of many Protestants’ world view.  Since Catholics believe in an inspired “Magisterium” and an inspired “Sacred Tradition,” both (supposedly) being on equal footing with Scripture, they have come up with a number of arguments against the Bible Alone concept.  One of those is the “Constitution” argument.

The Constitution argument goes something like this:

“Sola Scriptura doesn’t work because, in this view, each person interprets the Bible for himself, causing all sorts of disagreements and confusion.  You Protestants would never allow the interpretation of an important document like the Constitution of the United States of America to be subject to the whims of any and every citizen, would you?  There would be no unity.  This would only lead to chaos!  So why would you allow this kind of abuse to happen to an even greater document, like the Bible?”

   

Ok, first of all, no true Sola Scriptura person believes that the Bible should ever be subject to the “whims” of anyone reading it.  If you truly want to get something out of it, the Bible cannot be read flippantly or haphazardly.  It should be studied carefully and read with a humble, prayerful and reverent attitude (Isaiah 66:2; 2 Timothy 2:15).  It is not a toy to play with, or a book you can mold into anything you desire.  This is a misrepresentation of Sola Scriptura.

Furthermore, there are basic hermeneutical principles involved in Bible interpretation on which we pretty much all agree.  Hermeneutics is the science of Bible interpretation.  Certain rules must be followed when reading Scripture, for example, observing the context of a passage (both immediate and overall), historical perspective, genre, grammar, and the writer’s intent.  So again, the Bible cannot be interpreted “just any way you feel like it,” as those using the Constitution argument would accuse us.

Second, Catholics using the Constitution argument assume that there will be ONE human head over everyone in the church, just as there is one person (or body of persons) over the United States.  But the Bible doesn’t say this about the church.  The Constitution of the United States of America was meant to have a very specific group of elected officials to determine / interpret the exact meaning of the Constitution.  But this concept of one person being over the church is absent from the Bible.  So, this is not an accurate premise to start with, and thus, not a valid comparison.

When it comes to law and order (as in the Constitution), there must be a final human arbiter (to at least make people behave “on the outside”), but Scripture is able to deal with the heart and make people behave “on the inside,” as well.  The law deals with the external behavior, but Scripture deals with the conscience.  The judge’s responsibility is interpreting the Constitution for lawmakers.  But God, the Creator, is able to reveal His truth (Scripture) even to babes, i.e., to the simple, humble and “unlearned” (Matthew 11:25; Luke 10:21). 

Third, concerning unity, remember that unity is not the Constitution’s nor the Bible’s sole reason for existence, nor its greatest emphasis.  Is unity more important than truth?  Is unity greater than righteousness?  Of course not.  Unity is indeed important, but that unity has to be built upon something greater than itself.  But listening to Catholics attacking Sola Scriptura, one would swear that unity has to be the highest of all virtues, the greatest good, and the solution to mankind’s problems.  We have to remember that any cult or unorthodox group can have unity, but God wants us to have UNITY IN THE TRUTH OF HIS WORD (John 17:17; Ephesians 4:11-14).  In the Bible, God puts far more emphasis on truth and sound doctrine than He does on unity.  Without truth and sound doctrine, unity is meaningless.

No doubt, Catholics will say, “But we do have truth and sound doctrine.  In fact, it is only the Catholic Church who has the ‘fullness of the truth’ (CCC #819).”

But not only does the Catholic Church not have the sound doctrine and “fullness of truth” that it claims to have (as this blog and many other websites attest), but it doesn’t even have the level of unity that it claims for itself.  See here:

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2010/12/sola-scriptura-and-divisions.html

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2014/02/there-aremany-important-choices-that-we.html#comment-form

Interestingly, the Catholic Church’s idea of “unity” also includes union with Protestants (for example, the dangerous and unbiblical “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” document) and also union with pagan and demonic world religions, as well.  See here:

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2010/08/cant-we-all-just-get-along-ecumenical.html

We are here warning everyone that this same false unity will also be used by the “man of sin,” the “son of perdition” (2 Thessalonians 2:3), also known as the antichrist, to form his ungodly one-world church (Revelation 13:7-8, 12).  We can only hope and pray that this thought is just as disturbing to others as it is to us.  You see, this craving for unity at any cost is very dangerous.

Conclusion

Having a single “authoritative” human authority over the church does not guarantee truth, just as a single ultimate authority over the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee that the right thing will be done.  An ultimate human authority can become corrupt.  This same “ultimate authority” over the Constitution has produced evil things like the Roe v. Wade decision on abortion, which regrettably, became the law of the land.  In the same way, having a person (pope) over the entire church does not guarantee truth or righteousness, either. 
 
But the Catholic will say, “But, unlike the judges who interpret the Constitution, the pope is infallible!”  Then why try to use the Constitution argument in the first place, since it is a false analogy?  So, now they must admit that the Constitution argument is an invalid “apples and oranges” comparison, and the resulting mismatch negates this whole argument.

So, the bottom line on this unity issue is this - you can either:

1) Accept the fact that there are always going to be differences / disagreements in Bible interpretation, (yet with imperfect, but acceptable, levels of unity in different places) or 

2) You can default and let someone else “infallibly” decide what Scripture says, like a church whose “unity” is an all-inclusive tolerance for false doctrine, or a dictator-type church with its forced unity.

This second type of “unity” does not work, and neither does the “Constitution” argument.