Should We Still Commemorate October 31?

Is Rome Really Changing?

Dr. K. Runia. Trowel & Sword, October 1964

Preamble: Is Reformation day still remembered and celebrated by your local church? In our church, Reformation day was always celebrated with a combined service with the Presbyterian and Reformed Presbyterian churches. Then came the covid lockdowns and the service had to be cancelled. To this day it has not yet been revived. In this article Dr. Runia gives a concise outline of the reasons for the Reformation and the differences in theology between the Church of Rome and the Reformation churches. While at one time there were hopes held that reunification might be a possibility, this possibility, even today, seems unlikely. His closing paragraphs also sound a warning for churches faithful to the teachings of the reformation in 1964, (and even more so today); to beware of churches “who call themselves Protestants, but they are not”. He writes, “we do not want to glorify history. But we want thankfully to commemorate that great re-discovery of the Gospel.

Should We Still Commemorate October 31?

At the end of this month we shall again commemorate Reformation day. Usually we take October 31, 1517 as the starting point of the Reformation. To a certain degree this is correct, for on that day an action was performed, which was to be of decisive importance for the whole Christian Church. At the same time we must remember that at that time no one, not even Luther himself, was aware of the tremendous significance of this action. At that moment Luther definitely did not envisage a break with the Church of Rome, his own Church. As someone has said: “It had never been Luther’s aim either to found a new Church, or even within the historically existing Church to carry out any elaborately pre-arranged form of organisation”.

And yet it was bound to come! For Luther had made the greatest discovery of his day, of much greater importance even than the discovery of the new world by Columbus. Luther had re-discovered the original Gospel, the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the only Saviour, the Gospel of justification by faith in this Saviour, as expounded by Paul and all the other writers of the New Testament. This re-discovery was not a thing that could take place ‘in isolation’. It could not but break the old ecclesiastical structure, which had been erected on the basis of an entirely different understanding of the Gospel. And so it happened. After a few years only, there was a new Church, the Church of the Reformation.

It cannot be denied that the old Church, too, did some cleaning up. Rather soon after the Reformation a council was convened, the famous Reformed Council of Trent (1545-1563). This council did some good work. Some of the worst and most conspicuous abuses were removed. Yet on the whole, this council was one loud and strong confirmation and perpetuation of the old understanding of the Gospel and of the ecclesiastical structure based on it. The council consciously and intentionally took a position which was in direct opposition to the Reformation. At this council the theology of the Counter-Reformation was doctrinally formulated and fixed. And as such it has been decisive for the Roman Church and it’s theology. The decisions of the First Vatical Council (1870), which defined the infallibility of the Pope, were an immediate continuation of the theology of Trent. The doctrinal decisions regarding the Mariology (1854: the immaculate conception of Mary herself; 1950: the ascension of Mary) were another manifestation of the same theology.

In our day one hears many voices which say that the situation has completely changed, for Rome is in the process of a new reformation. They point to the new interest in the study of the Bible in Roman Catholic circles, to the new attitude of openness towards the Protestants (John XXIII), to recent changes in Church polity (the mass may be said in the vernacular, etc.), and other matters. Some observers are so optimistic that they do believe in possible union of the Roman Church and the various Protestant Churches. Of course, no one expects it in the near future, but there is such a fundamental change in the Roman Catholic Church that such a union does not belong to the impossibilities any longer.

But – is Rome really changing?

Of course, the above mentioned things are true. There are certain changes in Church polity (although they do not go very far), There is a different attitude to believers of other churches. What has never happened before, has happened in our day: we Protestants are called ‘separated brethren’ (although one does not notice much of it in Australia). There is indeed a growing and gladdening interest in the Bible. In some countries of Europe (e.g. Germany and The Netherlands) all members of the Church are encouraged to read and study their Bibles daily. Roman Catholic scholars are studying’ the Bible as never before and many valuable commentaries are being produced by them, The present Vatican Council has rejected the theory of the two sources of revelation: the Bible AND the tradition as being on a par.

But does all this mean a real change? Can we expect much for the future?

Viewing the situation as it is today we doubt it very much. Why? For the simple reason that we see nothing of a NEW UNDERSTANDING OF THE GOSPEL! This was the secret of the Reformation of Luther and Calvin and the other Reformers. In their case there was the re-discovery of the original Gospel and THEREFORE they became the Reformers of the Church.

At this moment there is no trace whatsoever of such a new understanding of the Gospel in the Church of Rome. On the contrary. On all sides we are assured, even by the most prominent representatives of the new, ‘open! attitude, that the dogma of the Roman Church (that is, Rome’s old, unscriptural understanding of the Gospel) is and remains infallible. We give some examples.

Professor Hans Kueng, one of the younger and leading theologians, brilliant spokesman of the ‘new theologie’ (the so-called ‘theologie nouvelle’), wrote a book in 1961 entitled “The Council and Reunion”. In this book he shows his openness towards the Churches of the Reformation and expresses his hopes that his own Church in this council may pave the way to a better understanding and, if possible, a future reunion. Here and there he makes amazing statements, but on page 163 he tells us : “Dogmatic definitions express the truth with infallible accuracy and are in this sense unalterable”.

Cardinal Auguste Bea, president of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity and the uncrowned leader of the new movement in the Roman Catholic Church, has more than once expressly stated that re-union, as far as his church is concerned, can only take place, when the other churches submit in matters of doctrine and discipline under “the Supreme Pastor the successor of St. Peter, the bishop of Rome”.

The new ‘Catholic Dictionary of Theology’, now being produced, declares that reunion always means acceptance of “the supremacy of the Holy See and the doctrinal definitions of 1854, 1870 and 1950, together with those of the Council of Trent”.

In a recently published volume of essays on ‘The Church’, written by the present Pope, when he was still a cardinal, we read among others: “The Church’s present juridicial structure certainly does need a few touches, though it cannot be substantially changed”. Of the Papacy he writes: “It is in the Pope that the Church centres its unity. The raising of the Pope, not only to the centre but to the summit as well, both moves and intoxicates the Church. His titles… do not signify that the Pope derives his functions from the Church, but rather that he sums up in his person the full powers of the whole Church. The Pope can act with full authority and efficacy without a council”.

From these few quotations it is more than clear that Rome continues to maintain its theology, that is, it’s old understanding of the Gospel. In my opinion this means that, humanly speaking, we cannot expect any real reformation. It remains a matter of reform, not of reformation. And therefore we have every reason still to commemorate the great Reformation of the 16th century. Yes, particularly in our day we should do this. For this is a day of utter confusion. Many Protestants seem to have lost every sense of discernment. They are so much caught up in their own ecumenical desires that they do not realise any more that between Rome and us (and also between us and many who call themselves Protestants, but they are not) the understanding of the only and true Gospel of grace in Jesus Christ is at stake.

No, we do not want to glorify history. But we want thankfully to commemorate that great re-discovery of the Gospel. This Gospel can be summarised in a few expressions: SOLA GRATIA-by grace alone; SOLUS CHRISTUS – Christ alone; SOLA FIDE – by faith alone; SOLA SCRIPTURA Scripture alone.

These are four different expressions, but they all say the same thing; there is but one Gospel, the Gospel of God’s grace in Jesus Christ, revealed to us in Scripture and to be accepted by us in true faith. There is no other Gospel, and we dare to say with the apostle Paul: “Even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed, (‘ Anathema sit’). As we have said before, so now I say again: If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed (‘Anathema sit’).! (Gal. 1:8,9). 

K. RUNIA

We look forward to receiving feedback about any of our posts. We also encourage you to share our posts with family, friends and acquaintances; in fact anyone you think may appreciate and/or benefit from the knowledge and wisdom handed down to us from the past.

To view previous posts visit our website at www.tsrevisited.com