Chapter XI: Salvation
How Can Helen Possibly be Filled with the Holy Spirit? She Can’t be.
She is Not Even Saved.
Regardless of how Chick defines
salvation to be, a person can be filled with the Holy Spirit for one specific
reason: God, as an all powerful being—which the Abrahamic God is traditionally
defined to be—allows it. Just like God
can allow a donkey to speak (Numbers 22:22-35), God can allow a person to be
“filled with the Holy Spirit,” even if he or she is not “saved.” Just like God can allow someone who is “not
among his chosen people” to be his “anointed,” or “Christ,” (Isaiah 45:1), he
can allow someone to be “filled with the Holy Spirit,” even if that person is
not “saved.”
Salvation Comes from Ephesians 2:8-9
and Romans 4:5
Chick cites these two passages in
his attempt to show that Helen is “not saved.”
Essentially, he is referencing the issue of “faith and works,” which is
an issue between Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism, and Anglicanism;
however, I am not for certain how the issue of “faith and works” has been
referenced in the comic/tract so far, as nothing has been specifically
mentioned.[1]
In any case, let me go into more detail on this issue.
I remember when I was in graduate
school, someone referenced the Protestant teaching of “faith alone,” but, when
this happened, one of my peers responded with, “James.” “James” is a reference to the Letter of
James, which has been seen as refuting this particular Protestant teaching
(James 1:22-25, 2:14-26).[2] With that said, let me turn to one of the
letters referenced by Chick. In this
case, I will focus on the Letter to the Ephesians, which is attributed to the
Apostle Paul.[3]
The passage in question is not so
much an attack on works as it is an attack on “superiority.” That is to say,
somebody trying to make the argument, “I did all these good things. Therefore, God has blessed me more than this
other person,” which is why the author is trying to make the case, “It was not
of your own doing. It was by God’s
grace. Therefore, you can’t boast.”
At the same time, one needs to
realize that when Paul is discussing “works,” he is not referring to “good
actions” or “bad actions.” He is
referring to the “works of the Torah/Law,” the 613 Commandments within Judaism. In fact, throughout his letters, Paul
mentions works in the sense of “actions to do,” and “actions not to do” (For
example: Philippians 1:3-7, 2:12-13;
First Corinthians 6:9-10, Second Corinthians 5:6-10, Romans 2:1-11).[4]
According to the Council of Trent, Anyone
Who Says They Have Assurance of Salvation is Anathema
Chick
does not list the specific canons from the Council of Trent, but they seem to
be canons 12-17.[5] Essentially, the Council of Trent seems to be
attacking an idea of “once saved, always saved,” which would have its origin
within Calvinist theology. From the
Catholic Church’s position, salvation can be lost due to sin—more specifically,
mortal sin (First John 5:16-17). Chick
may not agree with this particular theological teaching, but he cannot prove it
wrong anymore than someone who does agree with it can prove it right.
Poor Helen is Completely Brainwashed
I
find this statement to be quite amusing, considering that those who take Chick
Tracts/Comics very seriously are known to live in an “alternate reality.”[6] At the same time though, one would think that
God, as an all loving being, which is one of the traditional characteristics of
the Abrahamic God, would take “pity” on Helen, because she could not help
holding the set of beliefs that she did.[7]
She [Helen] Believes Her System is the Only Way to Heaven
It
is true that the Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation outside of
the Church,[8]
which is an idea that would have its origins with the First Letter of Timothy
(First Timothy 3:15) and the writings of the early Church Fathers: Ignatius of
Antioch,[9] Irenaeus
of Lyons,[10]
Origen of Alexandria,[11] and
Cyprian of Carthage.[12] At the same time though, the Catholic Church
also teaches that there is “innocent ignorance” for those who do not know, or
cannot understand, how the Catholic Church can be the “true church,” which
means that a non-Catholic is not automatically “damned to Hell.”[13]
Yet,
I find it interesting, almost amusing, that Chick would complain about the
Catholic teaching that there is “no salvation outside the Church,” but all of
his writings hold that if one does not agree with his theological understanding
of the Bible, that individual is to be condemned to Hell for all eternity. Unlike the Catholic Church, I do not see any
“innocent ignorance” within his tracts/comics.
The Catholic Institution Claims it is Infallible and Has Never Lied nor
Made a Mistake
The
teaching on infallibility within the Church is only on issues related to
faith and morals (rules), which have been defined by the Bishop of Rome
speaking from his “official teaching position”—the Chair of Sts. Peter and
Paul—or from an ecumenical council with the bishops in communion with him.[14] This theological understanding is based on
the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 16:13-19, 18:15-18, 28:18-20) and the First
Letter of Timothy (First Timothy 3:15).
But,
as mentioned earlier, infallibility only extends to those issues. It does not extend to individual
members of the Church, in of themselves (be they members of the clergy or
laity), or to ethics (actions).
[1]One of the pillars of Protestantism is “sola fide,” or “faith
alone,” which is in contrast to the positions of the Catholic, Orthodox, and
Anglican Churches, who hold the position of “faith and works.” At the same time, the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, signed between
the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation in 1999, showed that, in
my many respects, their two faith communities were in agreement all along on
the issue of faith and works.
[2]Luther has a strong dislike for the Letter of James. He would refer to it as “The Epistle [Letter]
of Straw,” and it was one of the works of the canonical New Testament that he
wanted removed. See Luther, “Preface [to
the New Testament]” in Martin Luther, 19.
Luther,
“Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude” in Martin Luther,
36.
[3]Historians question if Paul is truly the author of Ephesians. One of the reasons for why is the rhetorical style of the letter.
[4]On the issue of “faith and works,” I have often wondered why the
attitude of Jesus (Matthew 25:31-46) is often ignored on this topic. One would think that the attitude of Jesus of
Nazareth would “carry more weight” than the attitude of Paul of Tarsus.
Also, one of the few works that Chick
cites, even if incorrectly, is The Council of Trent. I am certain that Chick would agree with
Council Fathers on Canon One of the sixth session of that council: “If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by
his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of
the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.” See
“On Justification” in The Council
of Trent, canon 1. Accessed from ~The Council of
Trent - Session 6~. Accessed on 11
August 2024.
[5]“On Justification” in The Council of Trent, canons
12-17. Accessed from ~The Council of Trent - Session
6~, accessed on 26 March 2024.
[6]I think of the person who showed me this tract/comic as a
teenager. Let me give some dialogue:
Me: Do priests ever come into your store?
Him: Oh, yeah, they came in wanting to bless a
bunch of things.
Me: And what did you say?
Him: I let them do it.
Me: Well, maybe it will keep the demons away.
Him: I think all it will do is summon demons.
There
are a lot of problems in this story told to me by the clerk. First, priests (be they Catholic, Orthodox,
or Anglican) just do not randomly go around blessing things. For them to bless a particular location—in
this case, a business—it would require the consent of the owner, and
considering the anti-Catholicism found within the store, that seems extremely
unlikely.
But,
for the sake of argument, let us say that a priest actually did show up, and
wanted to bless objects in the store.
Considering the anti-Catholicism of the clerk, it would seem unlikely
that he would allow for the priest to perform a blessing, especially when he
thought it would “summon demons”—and why he would still be working there, after
the blessing, is another question in of itself.
Or, another
possibility, is that the clerk made the “whole story up.” The same is true with a lot of the contents
found in Chick tracts/comics.
[7]In the Chick comic/tract Last
Rites, there is a scene where the Catholic in the story, “John,” tears up a
supposed Chick tract/comic, which told the “truth” about Catholicism. “Light bulb Jesus” informs John that if he
would have read that tract/comic, he would have seen the errors of the Catholic
system. But if John, just like Helen,
has been “brainwashed,” no, he would not, because John, just like Helen, lives
in an “alternate reality.” See Chick, Last
Rites, (Rancho Cucamonga, CA: Chick Publications, 1994), 17-19. Accessed
from Chick.com: Last Rites.
Accessed on 11 August 2024.
[9]Ignatius of Antioch, “Letter to the Philadelphians,” in The Faith of the Early Fathers, 1:22,
section 56.
[11]Origen of Alexandria, “Homilies of Josue [Joshua],” in The Faith of the Early Fathers, 1:214,
section 537.
[12]Cyprian of Carthage, “Letter of Cyprian to Jubaianus, A Bishop in
Mauretania,” in The Faith of the Early
Fathers, 1:238, section 597a..
Comments
Post a Comment