The RADEN Report                                             July 10, 2003

Rome And Daughters E cumenical News

Charles Colson on baptismal regeneration

The following is an unedited personal letter from Charles Colson. He is responding to my letter in which I asked,

 "Mr. Colson, do you believe that any person can actually be born again who continues to believe that the new birth was originally bestowed

upon him or her through the sacrament of baptism?"

 I had informed Mr. Colson this question is the result of his statement published in the first ECT document… ”Those converted -- whether understood as having received the new birth for the first time or as having experienced the reawakening of the new birth originally bestowed in the sacrament of baptism -- must be given full freedom and respect as they discern and decide the [church] community in which they will live their new life in Christ.” As you may recall, this is the pivotal statement for which our church confronted ECT endorsers. Mr. Colson is co-founder of the ECT ecumenical dialogue and is one of today’s most popular proponents of false-ecumenism. His books and other materials which contain promotions of ecumenism’s broad-gospel heresy are widely available through Christian bookstores.

 PRISON
FELLOWSHIP
                          Ministries

June 27, 2001

Dear Pastor Moser,

You are concerned about who I believe is a true Christian. The answer to that is fairly simple: Anyone who believes in his heart and confesses with his mouth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is God and the Son of God, died for our redemption, rose again for our justification, is ruling as our King and Master, and will return to our vindication and eternal salvation must be regarded as a disciple of the Lord (Romans 10:9-13).

Such a view leaves room for differences in secondary matters. Calvin wrote, “What is more, some fault may creep into the administration of either doctrine or sacraments, but this ought not to estrange us from communion with the church. For not all the articles of true doctrine are of the same sort. Some are so necessary to know that they should be certain and unquestioned by all men as the proper principles of religion. Such are: God is one; Christ is God and the Son of God; our salvation rests in God’s mercy; and the like. Among the churches there are other articles of doctrine disputed which do not break the unity of faith...Does this not sufficiently indicate that a difference of opinion over these nonessential matters should in no wise be the basis of schism among Christians? (Institutes, IV.1.12)

Baptists refuse to take into church membership anyone who cannot in conscience submit to their view of the ordinance of baptism. Few Baptists will state the matter as baldly. But in practice, it is nonetheless true. To be a true Christian, defined as a member in good standing in the Baptist church, one must have been immersed at some point.

There are other Protestant denominations which have a “presumptive regenerationist” view of infant baptism (the view that baptized infants are saved), including some branches of the Reformed church and most Lutherans. Surely, Mr. Moser, you do not want to say that because they hold to this view – though they profess the belief I summarized in the first paragraph above – they are not Christians either? And surely you do not want to assert that only a proper Baptist view of the ordinance qualifies one for salvation.

The issue is as I have summarized it above. In the Roman Catholic Church there are many, many who believe that one is a Christian – or, at least, confirms his or her Christian faith – following the tenets outlined above. Such people recognize using the same criteria from Romans 10, that there are many who are true believers but not members of the Catholic Church. Among these are the theologians I have been working with in ECT. We do not quibble over disagreements on secondary matters. Rather standing together on our common belief in justification by faith alone (refer to “The Gift of Salvation,” the second ECT document), we are looking for ways of further clarifying and elaborating our common convictions as believers in Christ before a secular, watching world.

I would say that a faulty view of baptism, or of when one actually comes to be “born-again” – does not disqualify one for a place in the Kingdom of Christ. The key issue is believing in the heart and confessing with the mouth, accompanied by a life that demonstrates the fruit of such genuine, saving faith.

I am not embracing Roman Catholicism. There are too many critical differences, some irreconcilable for that to take place. However, I do recognize that there are many in that church who claim Christ alone as Savior and Lord. On the authority of the Scriptures, I accept the fact that we have the same Father and are therefore brothers in Christ.

In many ways we all fall short of a full and proper understanding of Biblical doctrine. Charity requires that we recognize our own fallibility and sinfulness and grant the same to those who share our profession of faith in Christ. Our calling requires that we not allow such secondary issues to get in the way of building the Church of the Lord through professing and laboring together in his love.

Yours in His service,

Charles W. Colson

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

While I don’t want to be unkind…

We will do well to remember that Mr. Colson has had a lifetime of training and experience as both a lawyer and a politician. I’m not saying this is either good or bad; I’m just saying it’s something to consider. The fact is, Mr. Colson knows how to use words to carefully navigate the seas of public opinion. He knows how to couch his responses so as to disarm those who might challenge his propositions. If we wish to discover the truth, then it is important that we not be sidetracked by the disarming tactic of polite cleverness.

Let’s examine what Mr. Colson is really getting at. (Aside... I’m not trying to sound cute here, but I’m just not interested in basing my beliefs on what Mr. Colson thinks John Calvin taught. As the authoritative instruction in truth, the Scriptures will do just fine.) Jesus said that not everyone who says to Him “Lord, Lord” will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And Jesus clearly taught that there will be those on judgment day surprised to be rejected even though they had done great things in the name of Jesus. So, we must accept that at any given moment there may be false teachers, even some who are self-deceived, within the Lord’s Church. We need to seriously consider that deceivers do NOT appear to be deceiving. They are cloaked in apparent credibility. Certainly, false teachers would pose no threat at all, they would have no influence at all, if they did not profess to believe a majority of sound doctrine!

While we would certainly agree with Mr. Colson regarding his profession of many important doctrinal beliefs, the heart of his argument falls on its face in light of God’s Word. You see, in Galatians 1-2 we find exactly what Mr. Colson is proposing, that is, the idea that we must accept as Christians individuals who make a proper profession of true doctrine but continue to cling to some elements of a works-based faith. Much in the New Testament epistles was written to refute adding onto the Gospel such things as faith in any necessary religious works (circumcision, baptism, or what have you). Mr. Colson would have us believe that such additions are mere “secondary matters” which needlessly divide Christians from other Christians. To the contrary, according to God’s Word these additions divide true Christians from those who profess a false Christianity.

The telling problem with what Mr. Colson is saying may be found in his fourth paragraph. There he expresses his belief that we must consider a person a Christian, even if this person continues to hold to a view of baptismal regeneration (that’s what is meant by a “presumptive regenerationist” view). Dear friends, as I have tried to explain to Mr. Colson on other occasions - regardless of how orthodox a person’s other beliefs may seem to be, regardless of how moral he may claim to be, and regardless of all his good works and worthy intentions - anyone who believes in baptismal regeneration is a person who is trusting in a religious work done by man to obtain salvation. If circumcision, baptism, or any other religious practice can possibly play ANY part in gaining or meriting salvation, then salvation is not of grace. As the Bible presents it, God’s grace must stand alone and completely separated from human works. Scripture clearly teaches that adding any religious work onto the Gospel, in fact, makes it no gospel at all.

If we are to be faithful to God’s Word, then we must conclude that Mr. Colson’s broad gospel is not the narrow Gospel of Christ. Do we dare to be offended by the narrowness of the Gospel just as our Lord has entrusted it to us? Dare we change the Gospel to include those whose beliefs contradict the teachings of Scripture? Are we so arrogant that we think we can improve upon the Gospel?

Mr. Colson asserts that all of his ECT cohorts agree on biblical justification by faith alone, yet the ECT document he sites openly states that its Roman Catholic signatories are faithful to the official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. One can not escape the FACT that the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church presents an unbiblical sacramental system of belief, with baptismal regeneration as a key element. By redefining “justification by faith” to include the possibility of merit gained through a system of sacramental religious works, the Roman Catholic Church’s official teaching contradicts the biblical truth of how we are justified before God.

Apparently, the biblical Gospel is just too narrow for Mr. Colson and his ECT “theologians.”

Regardless of how nicely a person may voice his personal viewpoint of a more inclusive, broader gospel, the Scriptures plainly teach that we are justified only by and because of the grace of God freely offered in Christ Jesus and not in any way assisted by sacramental religious works. Biblical faithfulness, as well as intellectual integrity, demands that we conclude it is impossible for anyone to hold onto a works gospel and the true Gospel of grace at the same time. These are mutually exclusive positions.

In view of the faithfulness, truthfulness, and authority of God’s Word, I find it utterly offensive for Mr. Colson to relegate the issue of how one is saved to a “secondary matter.” It certainly is important whether one believes he may be saved through the assistance of sacramental religious works or by grace through faith in Christ alone. This is an issue of fundamental importance. Even the hint of such a perversion of the Gospel caused an apostle-to-apostle public showdown in Antioch. The Holy Spirit chose to include this incident in authoritative Scripture for our instruction [Galatians 2]. Dare we set aside the clear teaching of God’s holy Word for the sake of avoiding the same conflict today? How dare anyone to say that what the Holy Spirit so plainly instructs us regarding salvation is of “secondary importance.”

Mr. Colson is tragically mistaken; a “faulty view of baptism” may indeed disqualify one for a place in the Kingdom of Christ. And this has absolutely nothing to do with “a proper Baptist view of the ordinance;” it has everything to do with a proper view of what the Bible teaches. If a person believes ”the new birth [may be] originally bestowed in the sacrament of baptism (ECT-I),” that person believes ANOTHER GOSPEL. Regardless of how sincere a person may be, believing another gospel does disqualify one for a place in the Kingdom of Christ. This is not up to anyone’s personal judgement; the Bible condemns any gospel other than the pure Gospel of Christ. In fact, warning against adding religious works onto the Gospel, the Bible says,

“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-- which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!  (Galatians 1:6-9)

Setting aside the verbal embroidery Mr. Colson places around his error, we will do well to consider the apostle Paul’s words, inspired by the Holy Spirit, “Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth….” Largely unchecked, this distortion of the truth regarding salvation, this broad-gospel heresy that deceives those who are just turning to seek the truth, is gaining influence day by day right in the midst of churches around the world.

And that’s not all folks!!!!

While most Christians seem distracted by other issues, ecumenism’s “broad-gospel heresy” marches on. During the past year the “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” alliance has published two new documents… ECT-Your Word Is Truth and ECT-The Communion of Saints. These ecumenical documents are built upon the same “broad-gospel heresy” of the original ECT;The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium and are endorsed by Roman Catholic leaders Richard Neuhaus and Avery Cardinal Dulles,S.J, as well as influential Southern Baptists Charles Colson and Dr. Timothy George.

So, what’s the big deal? After all, false teachers have always come and gone. Well, the big deal is that even though false teachers pass away, the heresies they promote outlive them, continuing to pervert the Gospel and confusing those who are seeking the Truth. In the case of Mr. Colson and his ECT Alliance, his books and influence continue to gain a hearing among evangelicals. For instance… ECT-Your Word Is Truth may be ordered through the website of the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Mr. Colson’s books promoting the ECT and its false-ecumenical agenda continue to be marketed by the SBC’s LiveWay Christian Resources. What should be our position regarding those who dare to teach such error among the Lord’s people? At the very least, Mr. Colson’s books should be withdrawn from sale and promotion through such influential Christian ministries.

So, what can we do? Or what should we do?

Here we are once again at the same question. It is good to consider what we do know. We can be sure that the Lord wants His people to hold onto and proclaim the pure Gospel, tolerating no perversion whatsoever. It is obvious that the “broad-gospel heresy” is a very serious perversion of our Lord’s Gospel that is gaining acceptance on a world-wide basis. Therefore, we can be confident that this issue is of great importance to our Lord. He has not instructed us to be silent nor to retreat regarding the Truth of His Word.

There are various passages of Scripture where we may find relevant instruction. Jude 3-4 says we are to earnestly contend for the Faith, opposing those who would bring in a different teaching. In chapters 2-3 of the book of Revelations we find personal letters from the Lord to seven local churches. There were very serious problems affecting most of these churches, including false teachings and serious perversions of the Truth. Even so, the Lord did not instruct any of His people to run away and hide; He instructed His servants to continue to hold onto the Truth they already had and to persevere, thus overcoming falsehood. He even reproved the brethren for putting up with those promoting error. It is tragic but true that today many Christian leaders act as if a “polite” toleration of those promoting error is more godly than confronting such for the sake of the Gospel. Even for some who claim to believe in biblical authority, cultural politeness seems to have taken the place of obedience to God’s Word.

In Titus 1:7-11 we are told that a person called to leadership in the Lord’s church is to “hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.” Certainly, throughout the New Testament we find a continuous flow of example and command that the true followers of Christ are not only to present the Truth of the Gospel, but also to contend for the Faith, once for all entrusted to the saints. Thus, we continue to promote and defend the Gospel of our Lord, and we encourage others to do so as well. We must make every effort to conduct ourselves with gentleness and respect, but it is not always possible to please everyone by telling the truth. As kind and gentle as He was, there were many times when Jesus’ words and actions cut across what was considered culturally polite. Telling the truth eventually gained Jesus a crown of thorns and death on a cross. He endured it all for us. Will we not risk the disfavor of men to stand faithful to Him?

To effectively contend for the faith we must make the effort to become informed and biblically sound in our position; we MUST have a God-given love for those with whom we disagree; and we must learn to confront with conviction but without anger. Personal attacks distract from the issue. Much of the time, a loving persistence in the Truth is more likely to bring change.

We will discuss this more in future editions of The RADEN Report. May the Lord bless you as you hold out the light of the Gospel and contend for the Faith.

======================================================