Podcasts about roman catholic church

Father Evan answers your questions on whether or not Daniel 2 contains a prophecy about the Roman Catholic Church, the appropriateness of displaying an image of the Shroud of Turin in one's home, the connection between both Adam and Jesus referring to themselves as "flesh and bone," the precise meaning of language referring to the flesh when discussing the Eucharist, how Christ's impartation to us in the Eucharist is different from the divine action of the Holy Spirit, if God singled out Job for Satan's affliction, and advice for those struggling to forgive themselves despite being immersed in the sacramental life of the Church in this week's episode of Orthodoxy Live!

If we get the doctrine of justification wrong, we get the gospel wrong. Today, R.C. Sproul explains what it means to be justified, revealing where the Reformers and the Roman Catholic Church differed on this essential doctrine. Get R.C. Sproul's video teaching series Justified by Faith Alone on DVD with your donation. You'll also receive the companion digital study guide to enhance your learning: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/   Live outside the U.S. and Canada? Request the digital study guide with your donation: https://www.renewingyourmind.org/global   Meet Today's Teacher:   R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, first minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Renewing Your Mind is a donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts

Do Protestants and Roman Catholics still disagree as much as they did in the 16th century? Today, R.C. Sproul confirms that the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church continues to reject justification by faith alone. Get R.C. Sproul's video teaching series Justified by Faith Alone on DVD with your donation. You'll also receive the companion digital study guide to enhance your learning: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/   Live outside the U.S. and Canada? Request the digital study guide with your donation: https://www.renewingyourmind.org/global Join us on November 6–7 for Ligonier's Southern Ontario Conference and discover what it means to live as citizens of God's kingdom today: https://www.ligonier.org/ontario   Meet Today's Teacher:   R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, first minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Renewing Your Mind is a donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts

Title: All We Need Text: 2 Thessalonians 3:16-18 FCF: We often struggle lacking what is necessary to continue following Jesus. Prop: Because the Lord Jesus supplies all, we must seek the Lord for all we need. Scripture Intro: [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to 2 Thessalonians chapter 3. In a moment we will read the concluding benediction of the letter starting in verse 16. I will read from the Legacy Standard Bible but you can follow along in the pew bible or in whatever version you prefer. Last week, Paul officially buttoned up his main application to the church there in Thessalonica. He wants the issue of the disorderly among them dealt with and has laid out exactly how it should be handled. In the last three verses, Paul introduces three new thoughts which all have one basic application. Seek the Lord. It is perfect way to end this letter and for us to finish our study of 2 Thessalonians. Please stand with me to give honor to and to focus on the Word of God as it is read. Invocation: Loving and Merciful Father, You have given Your people Your Son and with Your Son's ascension You have sent Your Spirit. You have given us, You. And You are all we need. The things of this world are often a distraction to us. We pursue all manner of earthly concerns and use earthly means to make our way through life. We know that this ought not to be. Help us Father to see that You alone are what we need. Convince us through this text that we must seek You. We pray this in Jesus' name… amen. Transition: [Slide 2] “Christ is wisdom for your ignorance, strength for your weakness, righteousness for your guilt, sanctification for your corruption, redemption from all the thralldom of apostasy.” Richard Fuller “Christ is not only the Savior but the salvation itself.” Matthew Henry [Slide 3] “In His life Christ is an example showing us how to live; in His death, He is a sacrifice satisfying for our sins; in His resurrection, a conqueror; in His ascension, a king; in His intercession, a high priest.” Martin Luther “He who thinks he has no need of Christ has too high thoughts of himself. He who thinks Christ cannot help him has too low thoughts of Christ.” J.M. Mason [Slide 4] “Everything that is really worthwhile in the morality of today has come to the world through Christ. Dismiss His standards of right and wrong and try to draw up your own ethical code and see where you will be!” G. Campbell Morgan Let these thoughts prepare our hearts for the exposition of the text this morning. I.) The Lord of peace brings peace, so we must seek the Lord for all we need. (16) a. [Slide 5] 16 - Now may the Lord of peace Himself i. In the closing verses of 1 Thessalonians, Paul asked that the God of Peace sanctify them and preserve them complete and holy for the coming return of Christ. ii. When we dissected that title that Paul gave to God, as the God of Peace, we recognize that only Paul and the writer of Hebrews use this title in the New Testament. And they use it exclusively to people who are being persecuted. iii. Because the writer of Hebrews and Paul are what we might call experts in the law of Moses – or Old Testament Scholars, we understood that Paul was probably referencing the name of God Yahweh Shalom. iv. We then recognized the theological significance of the word Shalom. It not only means a cessation of hostilities between two warring parties, but it also means completeness, wholeness, or bringing what was disordered back into order. v. With the ending of 1 Thessalonians it made sense to see Paul's use of this title to refer to the ongoing work of sanctification in the church, that they would be made whole and complete for the Lord Jesus' return. vi. But in 2 Thessalonians, we might see the word peace used in another way. vii. Certainly, Paul is hoping and praying for the Thessalonians to gain peace from those who are persecuting them. viii. But, two other ides from this letter seem to be at the forefront in their need for peace. ix. First, the anxiety caused by the false teaching that the Day of the Lord had come. Paul hopes that Christ will use this letter to assuage that anxiety and lead them to peace and comfort in the truth. x. And after his most recent discussion Paul may want peace to bring them back into order. xi. We have already noted that the disorderly among them are still causing problems because they are not working and mooching off the church while using their free time to be busy bodies. xii. To the disorderly Paul has commanded them to get a job and mind their business and stop mooching off the church. xiii. Paul has called the church as a whole to avoid them and if they persist in this disorderly conduct to mark them out for disassociation with the hope that they would repent and return to fellowship soon. xiv. Now Paul is seeking the Lord of Peace… the Lord of bringing order from chaos… to b. [Slide 6] continually give you peace in every circumstance. i. Ultimately it is the Lord Jesus Christ that has the power to bind us together and bring order to His church. ii. When disorderly or unruly brothers and sisters arise in the church, we have been told to do certain things, we have been given instructions on what to do and how…. But ultimately, it is the Lord Jesus who brings order from chaos. iii. When false teaching arises and tempts us to waffle on core doctrines of our faith and practice, Jesus' presence and teaching brings us back into order. iv. It is always Jesus who brings us back into order. He makes us whole. c. [Slide 7] The Lord be with you all! i. Paul's last comment here is directed at what could be a fractured community. ii. He is not requesting that Jesus be with the orderly, as if all of them are against the disorderly. iii. Nor is he requesting that Jesus be with the disorderly as if in a punitive or corrective way. iv. He is requesting that Jesus be with… all of them. v. The ordered and the disordered alike. vi. Christ will bring them peace. From without and from within. He is our hope. d. [Slide 8] Summary of the Point: Paul has three final thoughts in this benediction to close out what is the last canonical letter to the Thessalonian church. The first of these is a prayer that the Lord of peace would continually give them peace. The truth behind this, of course, is that the Lord Jesus is the Lord of peace. A title given to him by the prophet Isaiah, is that He will be the Prince of Peace. He will bring all chaos into order. He will bring all brokenness into wholeness. He will make all things new. He is doing that right now for His church. And one day, He will do that for the whole world. By application then, the apostle Paul is pointing the Thessalonians to this Lord of peace. We too must trust Him completely to bind us up and make us whole. He will bring us into order. He will set us right. We must seek Him to do that and all else we need. Transition: [Slide 9 (blank)] Paul's first thought was a hope that the Thessalonians would be given order and peace from their persecution, their anxiety, and their disorder. What is Paul's second thought he wishes to leave with the Thessalonians. II.) The Lord has given His instruction to us through His apostles, so we must seek the Lord for all we need. (17) a. [Slide 10] 17 - The greeting is in my own hand— i. The second point Paul raises in his final thoughts to the Thessalonians is one that is somewhat difficult to ascertain at first. ii. We know that Paul used amanuensis (uh-man-yoo-EN-suhs), which was the use of a writer to take down and relay his thoughts in a letter. Probably Silas wrote for Paul in this case, and perhaps he and Timothy also contributed or helped to edit the letter. All of this is by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to convey the exact words of God to the Thessalonians and later to us. iii. Scholars also speculate that this was done primarily because Paul's eyesight has been problematic. Both from his interaction with Christ and the scales forming over them, and then later with a possible bout of Malaria he contracted on his first missionary trip in Cyprus. iv. In any case, Paul takes the pen from whoever is writing on his behalf and chooses to write the words that follow. v. What we have to speculate on, is exactly why Paul calls this out in this letter. He did not do this in his previous letter to them, and he only does this in 5 of his 13 letters in the New Testament. vi. So, what is the significance of his calling out his greeting written in his own hand? vii. Let's keep reading and see if there are more clues. b. [Slide 11] Paul, which is a distinguishing mark in every letter; this is the way I write. i. Here we find out that Paul puts his handwriting in every single letter he has written, whether he calls attention to it or not. Meaning it also appeared in 1 Thessalonians. ii. What is the purpose of him writing a greeting in each letter? iii. He says it is a “distinguishing mark” which is the word sign. As in “signs and wonders.” iv. Now, having studied the book of Acts, we know that sign gifts like tongues, miracles, healings, and prophesy, were used at the foundation of the church to authenticate that those who spoke the gospel were sent by God or to authenticate that people had actually received the gospel. v. In that same vein, we see that Paul's mark, or his handwritten message serves as an authentication that he himself is sending this letter. vi. He identifies himself by his handwriting. vii. Because it is truly from Paul, it bears the authority of an apostle of Jesus Christ, which carries the weight of Christ Himself. viii. So, why is Paul pointing to this letter being authentic and authoritative? ix. Well, way back in chapter 2, remember that Paul was dealing with the Thessalonians receiving teaching, preaching, prophesy, or even letters that were confusing the Thessalonians and convincing them that the Day of the Lord had already come. x. He even mentions that the letter supposedly came from him and his companions. xi. In this letter, Paul has directly contradicted that false teaching about the Day of the Lord. xii. Therefore, he calls out his personal greeting to remind the Thessalonians that unless a letter bears HIS handwriting in some location in the letter – it is NOT FROM HIM. xiii. They are to compare any letter supposedly from him, with this one to verify its authenticity and authority. c. [Slide 12] Summary of the Point: Paul's second thought he wishes to convey to the Thessalonians is the rubric for determining whether something is authentic and authoritative. Of course, we know that the teachings of Paul are not Paul's own invention but are rather handed down from Christ, verified by the rest of the apostles, and then passed on to the churches Paul founded in his missionary journeys. Therefore, this teaching that is being authenticated is teaching that is from Christ Himself. And it is important for the Thessalonians to be clear on that point. In this, they are to trust and obey anything that does come from Christ through His apostles and dismiss or at least treat less authoritatively anything that does not bear those signs or marks. For us then, we must trust what the Lord has said and obey it without question. Again, we are to seek the Lord for all we need including what is true. [Slide 13 (blank)] Transition: Paul now has only one thought left he wants to leave with the Thessalonian's. What could be the last thought Paul wants to leave with them? What else could it be… but the grace of God. III.) The Lord gives grace to His church, so we must seek the Lord for all we need. (18) a. [Slide 14] 18 - The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ i. Paul's final hope or wish for them is that they receive and live in the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. ii. What is grace… C'mon CBC... You should know this by now. iii. [Slide 15] God's Grace is God's power which He grants to people according to His free will, to enable them to be, receive, or do something that they are unable and unwilling to be, get, or do on their own. iv. Grace from God, is what is truly needed by all believers as they endeavor to obey God's commands. v. And Paul has called the Thessalonian church to do some difficult things in obedience to Christ's commands and the Christian tradition. vi. If they are going to obey, they must have the grace of God. There will be no hope without it. vii. Paul has also called them to trust in God's future provision and protection of them from those who are persecuting them, knowing that one day Jesus will judge the living and the dead. viii. If they are going to keep believing that, they will need God's grace. ix. But again – who is the grace for? Is it for just the orderly to do what he has commanded them to do? b. [Slide 16] be with you all. i. Paul asks for Christ's grace to be given to all of them. ii. Even though he has had some harsh words for the disorderly, he believes that with Christ's grace, they can turn from their sin and get back in line and conform to the Christian tradition again. iii. No matter what God calls us to be or do, we too need His grace to see us to and through it. c. [Slide 17] Summary of the Point: Paul's final thought again revolves around the Christian's absolute need of Christ. He hopes that the Lord Jesus will give grace to them all to enable them to be and do all that Christ commands them to be and do. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I can think of no greater hope, wish, prayer that could be offered for a Christian brother or sister than to wish them the grace of God. Don't wish them a great day. Don't wish them to have fun. Don't wish for them to be blessed. Grace to you. It is the best hope and wish you could give to a believer. Because Christ is always what they need. And grace is Christ's power to effectively help them. The Thessalonians are once again told to look to Christ. Christ for Peace. Christ for truth. Christ for grace. Christ for everything. Because Christ said, without me you are nothing. So, we must seek the Lord Jesus for grace to help us be His followers. Conclusion: So CBC, what have we learned today that refines our beliefs and guides our lifestyles? Basics of Faith and Practice: [Slide 18] Paul's primary point of this closing benediction is to turn the attention of the Thessalonians onto Christ Jesus their Lord. He is their source for peace. Peace with unbelievers, peace from doctrinal dismay, and peace among each other. He is their source for truth, to hold fast to and believe. He is their source for grace to provide God's Power to do all that He has commanded of them. The Lord Jesus Christ is their source for everything. And so, the implied application to them is… look to and seek Jesus for all they need. Do they need peace? He is peace. Do they need truth? He is truth. Do they need grace? He gives grace! We too must understand that this is what it means to be a believer. This is what it means to be a Christian. This is what it means to follow Jesus. It is to see Jesus Christ as our source for all we need. Not money. Not fame. Not family. Not power. Christ. And Christ alone. So how does this impact us today? What applications endure into the 21st century here? 1.) [Slide 19] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm that Jesus is the Lord of peace. a. Every single human being on the planet is looking for peace. b. By peace I do not mean world peace necessarily. I don't mean the cessation of war, necessarily. c. I mean order. I mean unity. I mean wholeness. I mean completeness. d. All human beings want this kind of peace. e. This is the reason that those who preach tolerance cannot tolerate someone who is intolerant. f. This is the reason that mob mentality and echo chambers exist. g. This is the reason that political parties have been polarized into two broad factions, but both parties can't seem to keep infighting from happening. h. Everyone wants wholeness on their terms. Everyone wants their own definition of order. i. And conservative or liberal, homosexual or heterosexual, pro-life or pro-choice, everyone wants the other people to change and be conformed into their image. j. Jesus, as the King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Prince of Peace… will make everything new. What does that mean? k. He will fundamentally conform all things to His will. Some by loving guidance, some by forceful rescue, but most by insurmountable power and glory. l. Jesus came as a meek human to die to save His people from their sin. The next time He comes, He will save the world from sinners. m. He will not come in meekness. He will come in power. And He will have peace. n. Blessed are those who seek the peace He offers now. For they will inherit the Kingdom He brings. o. Cursed are those who fight for their own version of order, for they will be part of the chaos He puts down to consummate His Kingdom. p. Jesus is the only path to peace. Continually growing peace in our lives today and perfect and complete peace in the Kingdom that is to come. q. Peace today won't mean the lack of violence, hatred, and hostility. But it does mean completeness, wholeness, and order. The peace of Jesus conforms us to His life, His commands, His ways. In this we are brought into HIS order. We are expected to conform to Him. And as each of us are brought into conformity to HIM – We have peace with one another. r. But peace in His Kingdom will be perfect and it will be complete. We will never have a reason to shed tears again. We will know no sorrow. We will know no war. We will know no failure. s. Jesus is the Prince of Peace. And in Him alone we will find growing peace for today and perfect peace forever. 2.) [Slide 20] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm that Jesus is the source of truth. a. Have you noticed that those who desire conformity and peace to their own standard MUST, by necessity, alter or deny the clear teaching of the word of God? b. Why do you suppose that is? c. Why is there a bible called The Queen James Bible where all “confusing” passages that seem to indicate that God does not approve of the LGBTQIA+ lifestyles have been removed? d. Why did Thomas Jefferson remove portions of the bible he didn't agree with? e. Why do churches bend over backward to explain how when Paul says that no woman should preach and exercise authority over men in the church… that that means women should preach and exercise authority over men in the church? f. Because they have no desire to conform themselves to Christ. So, they must conform Christ to them. g. The Reformation sought to reform the Roman Catholic church in five separate ways. The Reformers argued that if these five things changed in the Roman Catholic Church, they would make progress to go BACK to what the apostles taught, which is what Christ taught. h. And, arguably, the pinnacle of these 5 reforms was the Latin words “Sola Scriptura” i. Officially the Roman Catholic church teaches that the wisdom of church theologians down through the ages, and the traditions and conclusions of church councils, should be held in equal authority to what the Scriptures Teach. j. The Reformers argued, correctly, that the Scriptures alone should have the FINAL authority on faith and practice of every single person in the church. k. In essence, this is EXACTLY what Paul is teaching in this text. The Thessalonians had heard from prophets, letters, and preachers that the Day of the Lord had come. Paul, an actual apostle of Jesus Christ, bearing the teaching directly from Christ, says NO! That is not the truth. It is contradictory to what is the truth. l. Paul does not tell them to hold in equal balance what the others taught and what he taught. Paul does not tell them to find the truth in the middle somewhere. Paul doesn't say that both must be true some how. Instead, Paul says, they are wrong and Jesus is right. m. This doesn't mean that church tradition and church scholars, theologians, creeds, and councils should be eliminated. Far from it. Church tradition, scholars, creeds, councils should be consulted as a secondary source to help put up guardrails on our own personal interpretations of the scriptures. n. BUT… where the Scriptures, which is the Word of God, which is another name for Jesus Himself, where the Scriptures disagree with any human… Pope, priest, scholar, church doctor, saint, or otherwise… We are to trust the scriptures and deny the human's wisdom. For if it disagrees with or contradicts the clear teaching of the scriptures… it is not wisdom at all. It is foolishness. o. This is what the Reformers taught. And it is what Paul is teaching here. p. Jesus is our source for truth. The inspired Word of God in 66 books, is our guide for what we must believe and how we must live. q. We are told to approach the scriptures like they are a mirror. How foolish to approach a mirror and see something off or out of place in the reflection and conclude that the mirror must be broken? How foolish to think that perhaps if we viewed the mirror from a different angle, it would make our reflection better? r. But people who disagree with the clear teachings of the scriptures in order to support their own beliefs or lifestyles are approaching the mirror and concluding that the mirror is faulty. s. Or they stand in front of a mirror in such a way that all the things wrong with them don't appear, and they conclude that they are fine. And they leave the mirror the exact same as they always had been. t. My friends, if you cannot remember the last time the Word of God challenged you to change what you believe or how you live… something is wrong! 3.) [Slide 21] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm that Jesus gives us grace. a. The definition of grace today in the church has become so watered down and so empty that it means little more than kindness. b. Preachers, even in evangelical protestant circles, preach a grace that is spread so thin that it has no power to do anything unless men add something to it. Without men helping it… it lies dormant, powerless, and ineffective. c. But Paul doesn't tell the Thessalonians to make sure to receive and act on Jesus' grace. He simply asks for Jesus' grace to be given to them all. d. Grace… God's grace… is POWERFUL. It is ALWAYS effective. e. It is not grace to give potential to help us. It is grace TO HELP US. f. When God gives us grace… IT WILL DO what it is given to do. g. [Slide 22] That is why I have tried, so very hard, to get you all to memorize this definition of God's grace. Because I think it accurately and effectively teaches a biblical definition of God's grace. A grace with teeth. A grace with power. A grace that is what the biblical authors claim it is. h. God's Grace is God's power which He grants to people according to His free will, to enable them to be, receive, or do something that they are unable and unwilling to be, get, or do on their own. i. And when we have this definition of grace, we recognize that the greatest thing we could pray for a fellow believer and even for unbelievers, is that God would shed His grace on them. j. Unbelievers need His power to see their own sin and to enable them to believe on Christ. k. Believers need His power to be and do all that He has commanded them. l. Humans in general exist by the grace of God. m. I challenge you all to BEEF UP your view of the grace of God. Make it as powerful as Paul makes it here. That the hope and strength for the Thessalonians doing and being all that he has told them to be and do… is the grace of Jesus Christ. n. When we combine the last three truths we must affirm together… 4.) [Slide 23] Evangelism: “What about this text points us to Jesus Christ, the gospel, and how we are restored?” This is the gospel. The gospel is seeing Jesus as our source for everything. If Jesus is anything less to you – you are missing the gospel. a. His words and lifestyle teach us truth. b. His sacrifice and power bring us peace. c. His advocacy and Authority give us grace. d. With the summation of all three of these truths, we conclude that Jesus is everything. e. And my friends… this is the gospel. The gospel is that Jesus is everything. Not just our hope for forgiveness. Not just our substitute. Not just our atoning sacrifice. f. But Jesus is… EVERYTHING. g. To the extent that our whole lives are reoriented around who He is and what He has commanded of us. h. If you are here today, and you either claim to be a Christian, or you desire to be a Christian… this is what it means to be a Christian. It is to have all your life ruled by Jesus Christ. i. He is your hope for peace. j. He is your source for truth. k. He is your supplier of grace. l. He is… your… everything. m. That is what it means to follow Christ. n. If you claim to be a Christian… but Christ isn't your everything and never has been. I don't know what gospel you believed… but I do know that it was false. o. If you have never claimed to be a Christian but want to follow Jesus… You need to speak with someone… right now… that you know is a Christian. They will show you what followers of Christ look like. p. Don't wait for me to get done preaching. Go now… our Elders are prepared to talk to you. q. If you remain, I'll assume that you claim to be someone who is following Christ as best you can. So, what does that mean as we look at this text? 5.) [Slide 24] Exhortation: “What actions should we take?” or “What is this passage specifically commanding us to do that we don't naturally do or aren't currently doing?” We must continue to seek the Lord for all we need. a. There are a lot of sources that we can be tempted to look to provide peace, truth, and even power. b. What do we need to feel whole? Complete? Ordered? i. For many people we look for earthly things to make us feel complete. 1. We look for possessions or things. Things and possessions are not bad in and of themselves. But when we seek them to feel whole… they will not satisfy. 2. We look for family. Family can certainly fill up our lives and make us feel part of something bigger. But family fails. Life is fleeting. And sometimes people don't do what you want them to. 3. We look for a tribe or group of likeminded people. This creates a sense of belonging. All of us are the same. We see the world in the same way. But ultimately you will find something to disagree on… or that unity will not produce the wholeness that you desire. ii. In the end, the only thing that can bring us wholeness, completeness, or order… is the God who created us. He knows exactly what we need and how to put us back together. He watched us break apart and He knows the pieces we are missing. Pieces… we assumed were there… He supplies. iii. Without Christ, you will know no peace. c. What do we need to rest in truth? i. For many people they look to earthly things for truth. 1. Rationalism and reason, materialism, and postmodernism point to contradictory paths to truth. Who is right? Everyone, or no one? We just don't know. 2. Human wisdom, settled science, has long been shown to be anything but wisdom and anything but science. 3. History books are always written by the people who win. Are we sure their telling the whole story? 4. Hospitals and medical schools tell us what is best for us… but they also get paid well to tell us one answer and paid nothing to tell us other answers. 5. What is truth? Does truth even matter? ii. Christ is the truth. He alone provides a foundation, a bulwark of something solid and unshakable. iii. For a true Christ follower, we shouldn't start our sentences with “I think” or “I feel like” we must start our sentences with… “turn with me to…” d. What do we need to get more power? i. Again… people often turn to earthly things. 1. Money is power. 2. Fame is power. 3. Influence is power. 4. Secret knowledge is power. 5. And we can't deny that to a certain degree, all of these gain power for people in this life. ii. But true power, comes from God who gives grace to His people freely. The power to live the way our creator desires us to live, comes from the creator Himself. All other powers are failing and fleeting and will be destroyed when He comes again. e. So, Christians… all we need is found in Jesus Christ. Don't be distracted by lesser sources. He is all we have and He is all we need. 6.) [Slide 25] Comfort: “What comfort can we find here?” or “What peace does the Lord promise us in light of this passage of scripture?” Jesus will never fail. a. The story has been written. b. The end has already been told. c. Jesus is… right now… reigning over the world. d. He has conquered sin and death. And one day soon He will conquer all sinners, angelic and human alike. e. My friends, Jesus wins. Always. f. Take comfort in this as believers… g. But if you are still in the room and not a believer… this shouldn't comfort you at all – but it is a warning. h. Jesus wins. i. Blessed are those who repent and serve Him now. [Slide 26 (end)] Let me close with a prayer by the early church father Methodious of Olympia I long for you, Lord of mercy and Lord of my fathers. You have stooped down in grace as a mediator, bringing peace and harmony between heaven and earth. I seek you, great author of all. With longing I expect you who embrace all with your Word. I wait for you, Lord of life and death. I look for you, giver and successor of the law. I hunger for you, the one who makes the dead come back to life. I thirst for you, who refreshes the weary. I desire you, creator and redeemer of the world. You are our God, and we adore you. You are our holy temple, and we pray in you. You are our lawgiver, and we obey you. You are God of all things, the first. God the Father has begotten no other god, and there is no other son who is of one substance and one glory with the Father. To know you is perfect righteousness, and to know your power is the root of immortality. For our salvation, you were made the headstone of the corner, precious and honorable. All things are placed under you as their cause and author, as he who brought all things into being out of nothing. You steer the universe with your wise and steady hand. You are the principle of order and the bond of unity and peace. In you we live, and move, and have our being. So, I will glorify you, my Lord and God. I will praise your name, for you have done wonderful things. From ancient days your wise counsel is faithfulness and truth. You are clothed with majesty and honor. What is more magnificent than for you, the King, to assume our humanity, illuminating those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death? Your servant, King David, rightly once sang of you as the King Eternal, saying "you are the most excellent of men" (Psalm 45:2). Coming to the earth, you took on righteousness and faithfulness. Yes, you are righteousness and truth, the joy and praise of all. So, we rejoice this day, along with the heavens, for you have shown mercy to your people. Let the clouds drop the dew of righteousness upon the world, and let the earth sound a trumpet blast, for the resurrection is come. I am filled with comfort, and I am overflowing with joy, O Savior of the world! We pray this in Your name. Amen. Benediction: May the Lord prosper your work and defend you, May his goodness and mercy attend you, May you ponder anew what the Almighty will do, That you may rejoice with all your heart and never again fear any harm. Until we meet again, as Paul prayed for the Thessalonians, Grace and Peace to you.

Subscribe to get access to the full episode, the episode reading list, and all premium episodes! www.patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappinessThe Ordinary Unhappiness journey through the origins of narcissism arrives at the early modern period and a Europe in full-blown crisis. It's a world where the hegemony of the Roman Catholic Church no longer holds sway, where political and market forces have created new communities and dislocated old ones, and where traditional familiar theological answers fail to satisfy ever-more urgent existential questions. Working their way through the history of the Reformation and the theologies of Martin Luther and John Calvin, Abby and Patrick trace the contours of this world's emerging conception of selfhood and its many anxieties over interiority, predestination, success, luxury, conformity, modesty, pleasure, and more. They then unpack the particular implications of how this new order views sexual difference, turning to the work of Mary Wollstonecraft and her remarkable account of why “the thoughts of women ever hover around their persons.”Have you noticed that Freud is back? Got questions about psychoanalysis? Or maybe you've traversed the fantasy and lived to tell the tale? Leave us a voicemail! (646) 450-0847  A podcast about psychoanalysis, politics, pop culture, and the ways we suffer now. New episodes on Saturdays. Find us online:  http://www.ordinaryunhappiness.com X: @UnhappinessPod Instagram: @OrdinaryUnhappiness Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/OrdinaryUnhappiness Theme song: Formal Chicken - Gnossienne No. 1 https://open.spotify.com/album/2MIIYnbyLqriV3vrpUTxxO Provided by Fruits Music

IntroductionLast week we considered God's promise to Abram that the Lord is our shield. Lord's Day 21 expands that promise from individuals to the community. It expands to his holy assembly. While our culture prizes independence, Scripture reminds us that Christianity is never simply "my Bible and me." Christ gathers a people for himself, and it is within his church that he nurtures, strengthens, and preserves his saints. The One Triune God Gathers his People When we confess belief in the "holy catholic church," we are confessing faith in the universal church, not the Roman Catholic Church. The Apostles' Creed uses this language to communicate that from the beginning, God has always intended to gather a people who would fellowship with him. In fact, throughout covenant history God has always worked in the context of a community. Man was not created to be alone. (Genesis 2:18). Man was created to spread out across the earth, to produce, and to multiply in God's perfect creation. Unfortunately, we live in a fallen world. The Lord promised to divide the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent (Genesis 3:15). The champion seed, Christ, will rise from the seed of the woman and defeat the serpent. One thing we cannot miss is that the Lord will divide the human race. Now, in a fallen world, we see that Christ gathers his people through his word and Spirit. The ordinary means God uses to call sinners is the preaching of the gospel. That is why the church itself is evangelistic. We invite people into the place where Christ speaks through his Word. We are not invited or called to live on our own apart from Christ's community. Conversion ultimately belongs to God's sovereign work. Some are converted dramatically, others gradually, and covenant children often cannot remember a day they did not believe. Whatever the manner, it is Christ who gathers his elect throughout history into one covenant family. No, the church is not perfect, and in this life there will be hypocrites mixed into the church. (I Corinthians 5; Belgic Confession Article 29)Christ Unites his People in himselfThe church is not some club or just some organization where we pay our dues. No, the church is Christ's body. Romans 8 reminds us repeatedly that we are heirs together with Christ. Salvation is not merely individual but corporate. Every believer shares equally in Christ's inheritance through adoption as we take hold of Christ by faith.Because we belong to one body, every member has gifts to use for the good of the whole. Rather than asking, "What can this church do for me?" we ought to ask, "How can I serve Christ by serving his people?" (Romans 12). Paul reminds us that we have not received a spirit of slavery but of adoption. We are not terrified of God like he is some unstable king. No, we approach God as Abba, Father, sharing the same family privilege Christ has secured for us. Our identity is no longer found in proving ourselves worthy but in belonging to God's family through grace alone by faith alone. Christ Guards his ChurchRomans 8 offers one of Scripture's greatest assurances. Yes, we will suffer. Paul does not deny suffering. Christians grieve. Christ himself wept at Lazarus' tomb and over Jerusalem. We taste Christ's blessing by faith and the Spirit, but we have not arrived at the full glory. Romans 8:28 is not a command to suppress grief but a promise that God will redeem even our darkest seasons and most trying times for our eternal good. We don't just carelessly say this to people who are grieving, as this is not going to be necessarily helpful. However, as we reflect back on life, we can see that God has shaped us and moulded us through those trying times. We say that he did not cause it, but he allowed it for reasons he has not revealed to us. We need to remember that in the fall we wanted chaos, disorder, and abuse. We can get discouraged in this life. So, Paul shows that God's intention is to finish the work that he started. God has chosen us, and God will bring us to full glorification. In fact, as Paul lists 10 and 7 things that can come against us, ultimately we ponder these triumphant questions: Who can bring a charge against God's elect?Who can condemn?Who can separate us from the love of Christ?His answer is emphatic: No one. Christ's work is so sure that there is no power, there is no army, there is no authority that will destroy us. In fact, when Paul cites Psalm 44:22, we read in the Psalm that David is waiting for an answer. Paul gives the answer: “No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.” (Romans 8:37)The Good Shepherd loses none of those whom the Father has given him.ConclusionThe communion of saints is not merely a comforting doctrine; it is the reality that our life is held together in Christ. Because Christ has gathered us, united us, and promised never to forsake us, we are free to encourage one another through every season of life. The emphasis is encouragement. Sometimes we sit quietly with a friend. This is probably the most effective time Job's counselors interacted with him. The reality is that sometimes we have nothing to say, and we just sit with someone so they are not alone. Sometimes we rehearse the promises of Scripture. Discerning what is pleasing to the Lord is not always easy. Ultimately, we want to avoid shallow answers to suffering; we remind one another that our faithful Savior is still working, still defending, and still leading his people home. He may seem silent, but he is actively working in our lives to shepherd us to glory. As we serve Christ by serving his church, we press on together with this confidence: Nothing can separate God's people from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Let that be our hope.

A particular bishop, whom we will name in the podcast, has instituted changes in Roman Catholic Funeral which you may find objectionable. He also has chosen to deny funerals to the LGBTQ Community unless they "confess and repent."Just another way this outdated Church keeps you under there thumb.

This lesson provides an overview of the Old Testament canon, defining it as the divinely inspired collection of scriptures recognized by the Jewish community and affirmed by Jesus and the apostles. The pastor clarifies that the canon was not determined by church councils but emerged through divine providence and historical recognition within a specific timeframe from Moses to Malachi. It addresses the status of the Apocrypha, explaining why these intertestamental writings are excluded from the Protestant canon due to lack of divine inspiration and later inclusion by the Roman Catholic Church. The discussion highlights how the early church accepted the existing Hebrew canon as authoritative, viewing the Old Testament as Christian literature that points to Christ. Ultimately, the message encourages confidence in Scripture's reliability and authority, attributing its preservation to God's sovereign care rather than human decision-making.

Introduction: Martin Luther nailed his famous 95 Thesis as an indictment against the Roman Catholic Church to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany as a warning and a call to reason. He never set out to start a new denomination, but was calling God's people back to faithfulness and was…

US Ambassador Brian Burch recently said that when Pope Leo spoke out against the war in Iran, he was not doing so as a leader of the Roman Catholic Church, adding that he was speaking as a world leader of the Holy See. What authority does the pope have in such occasions? Matthew Bunson joins us with more on this and other Church news.

What is the origin of the Roman Catholic Church? When did the Catholic Church begin? Is the Catholic Church a mixture of true Christianity with other non-Christian religions?

What is Roman Catholicism? What is the Roman Catholic Church? What do Roman Catholics believe?

Thursday, 16 July 2026   Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching, and said, “By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?” Matthew 21:23   “And having come, Him, into the temple, they approached Him, teaching, the chief priests and the ‘elders, the people', saying, ‘In where-such authority these, You do? And who to You, He gave the authority, this?'” (CG)   In the previous verse, Jesus told His disciples, “And all, as much – if you should ask in the prayer, believing, you will receive.” With that thought now complete, it next says, “And having come, Him, into the temple.”   The very place He was surely referring to in metaphor in the previous verses is where He has come to again. Once in the temple, “they approached Him, teaching.”   The temple complex was massive. Being the time of the Passover, there would have been innumerable visitors there to see the sights and to join in conversations, meet old friends, etc. Jesus may have picked a spot and started teaching His disciples. As He talked, others walking by might be curious and start listening as well. Because of this, any number of people might gather around to hear. This is something Jeremiah was instructed to do –   “In the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came from the Lord, saying, 2 ‘Thus says the Lord: ‘Stand in the court of the Lord's house, and speak to all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the Lord's house, all the words that I command you to speak to them. Do not diminish a word. 3 Perhaps everyone will listen and turn from his evil way, that I may relent concerning the calamity which I purpose to bring on them because of the evil of their doings.'” Jeremiah 26:1-3   Jeremiah would have begun speaking, and the people would have flocked to hear what was being proclaimed. Jesus likewise spoke in the temple. When He did, they came, “the chief priests and the ‘elders, the people'.”   When Jeremiah spoke, it is noted in Jeremiah 26 that “the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah.” Later, the princes of Judah came to judge the matter of Jeremiah's proclamation in the New Gate of the Lord's house. Thus, this being challenged by the leaders at Jesus' time is something that is not without precedent. There is a teaching going on that has come to the attention of the chief priests and the elders. Therefore, they were “saying, ‘In where-such authority these, You do?'”   These men had a right to maintain order in the temple complex. Thus, it is a natural question for them to ask. They have heard Jesus' words and are questioning His authority to say what He was saying. In Jeremiah's case, he was accused of wrongdoing. Therefore, his response was, “The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city with all the words that you have heard” (Jeremiah 26:12). As for those confronting Jesus, they continue, saying, “And who to You, He gave the authority, this?”   Again, it is a natural question to ask. If Jesus is at the temple teaching, He must feel He had a right or commission to do so. His response to them will show, however, that they are doing more than just trying to maintain order. From what He says, it can be deduced that they already knew Him and His teachings, just as the people would have known Jeremiah claimed to be a prophet of the Lord.   Therefore, Jesus' answer will be one that challenges their own positions on matters that had transpired in the recent past. What He asks them will be intended to get them to consider their stand concerning those things. There is nothing disrespectful in His words. Rather, they are intended to probe them in an attempt to reveal their state before the Lord as His representatives in the religious and civil lives of the people.   Life application: When Jeremiah spoke to the princes and people, he plainly told them why he was speaking as he did. After doing so, he said –   “Now therefore, amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the Lord your God; then the Lord will relent concerning the doom that He has pronounced against you. 14 As for me, here I am, in your hand; do with me as seems good and proper to you. 15 But know for certain that if you put me to death, you will surely bring innocent blood on yourselves, on this city, and on its inhabitants; for truly the Lord has sent me to you to speak all these words in your hearing.” Jeremiah 26:13-15   His job was to proclaim the word of the Lord. Jesus, the Lord, spoke to the people about matters that He was sent by the Father to convey to the people. In hearing the word of the Lord, choices then have to be made. The main thing we must determine is, “Is this the word of the Lord or a doctrine in accordance with it?”   At Jeremiah's time, there were false prophets galore. The people had to listen to what was said, determine who was telling the truth, and then go forward from that point. The same was true in Jesus' time. Now, these things are recorded for us to read and consider. Is the Bible the word of God? If it is, then it should be listened to.   God doesn't force us to accept His word. He has put it out for people to read and consider. Other religions have their own supposed sacred texts as well. Within the greater umbrella of Christian faith, there are writings that some claim are supposedly on the same level of authority as the Bible. The Roman Catholic Church has teachings that they hold to as preeminent in their theology, which are separate from the Bible.   The Mormons have a third “testament” that they claim is inspired. The Seventh-Day Adventists have the supposedly inspired writings of Ellen G. White. Many people accept extra-biblical writings, such as the Apocrypha, the Book of Enoch, etc. It is our responsibility to consider God, if He has given us His word, and what that word is or is not.    This sacred task has been given to humanity, and we should carefully consider what we will believe and why. Jesus is being asked about His authority. If God gave Him authority to convey God's word, we should be willing to listen. These things are important. Let us pay heed to the word that God has given for us to know Him, treating it with respect and care.   Lord God, we are humans, limited by time and the ability to obtain and remember knowledge. We desire to honor You in the way that You expect of us. Therefore, lead us to Yourself through Your word. May we not be misdirected from this task all our days. Help us in this, O God. Amen.  

Full Text of Readings Thursday of the Fourteenth Week in Ordinary Time Lectionary: 386 The Saint of the day is Saint Augustine Zhao Rong and Companions Saint Augustine Zhao Rong's and Companions' Stories Christianity arrived in China by way of Syria in the 600s. Depending on China's relations with the outside world, Christianity over the centuries was free to grow or was forced to operate secretly. The 120 martyrs in this group died between 1648 and 1930. Eighty-seven of them were born in China, and were children, parents, catechists, or laborers, ranging in age from nine years to 72. This group includes four Chinese diocesan priests. The 33 foreign-born martyrs were mostly priests or women religious, especially from the Order of Preachers, the Paris Foreign Mission Society, the Friars Minor, Society of Jesus, Society of St. Francis de Sales (Salesians), and Franciscan Missionaries of Mary. Augustine Zhao Rong was a Chinese soldier who accompanied Bishop John Gabriel Taurin Dufresse of the Paris Foreign Mission Society to his martyrdom in Beijing. Not long after his baptism, Augustine was ordained as a diocesan priest. He was martyred in 1815. Beatified in groups at various times, these 120 martyrs were canonized together in Rome on October 1, 2000. Reflection The People's Republic of China and the Roman Catholic Church each have well over a billion members, but there are only about 12 million Catholics in China. The reasons for that are better explained by historical conflicts than by a wholesale rejection of the Good News of Jesus Christ. The Chinese-born martyrs honored by today's feast were regarded by their persecutors as dangerous because they were considered allies of enemy, Catholic countries. The martyrs born outside China often tried to distance themselves from European political struggles relating to China, but their persecutors saw them as Westerners and therefore, by definition, anti-Chinese. The Good News of Jesus Christ is intended to benefit all peoples; today's martyrs knew that. May 21st-century Christians live in such a way that Chinese women and men will be attracted to hear that Good News and embrace it.Saint of the Day, Copyright Franciscan Media

Making a return appearance to the Check Your Brain podcast is Mark Mazur, father of host Tony Mazur. Mark just celebrated his 70th birthday, which happened to coincide with America's 250th. In this episode, the Mazurs talked about what has changed in this country since the Bicentennial, the struggles of young Americans while their politicians sold them out, and the schism in the Roman Catholic Church between Rome and the SSPX.   Be sure to subscribe to Tony's Patreon. $3 gets you just audio, $5 gets video AND audio, and $10 has all of the above, as well as bonus podcasts per week. Visit Patreon.com/TonyMazur. Tony is also on Rumble! Go find his video podcasts over there for free. Cover art for the Check Your Brain podcast is by Eric C. Fischer. If you need terrific graphic design work done, contact Eric at illstr8r@gmail.com.

American Evangelical Christianity is in crisis. The story of how it got here is an important part of this series but there are several reasons so many evangelical Christians are discontent and looking for something else, something with historical roots, with a sense of tradition, with a sense of of transcendence, with reverent worship, and with a deeper view of the sacraments. It is the conviction of the Heidelberg Reformation Association that the answer to the longing for more lies not in Rome or in the Eastern Orthodox traditions but, as it were, in Geneva. In this series we will explore the history, theology, piety and practice of Roman Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox traditions, and we will compare and contrast those two traditions with historic Reformed theology, piety, and practice. This episode of the Heidelcast is sponsored by the Heidelberg Reformation Association. You love the Heidelcast and the Heidelblog. You share it with friends, with members of your church, and others but have you stopped to think what would happen if it all disappeared? The truth is that we depend on your support. If you don't make the coffer clink, the HRA will simply sink. Won't you help us keep it going? The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. All your gifts are tax deductible. Use the donate link on this page or mail a check to Heidelberg Reformation Association, 1637 E Valley Parkway #391, Escondido CA 92027. All the Episodes of the Heidelcast Subscribe to the Heidelcast! Browse the Heidelshop! On X @Heidelcast On Insta & Facebook @Heidelcast Subscribe in Apple Podcast Subscribe directly via RSS Call The Heidelphone via Voice Memo On Your Phone The Heidelcast is available wherever podcasts are found including Spotify. Call or text the Heidelphone anytime at (760) 618-1563. Leave a message or email us a voice memo from your phone and we may use it in a future podcast. Record it and email it to heidelcast@heidelblog.net. If you benefit from the Heidelcast please leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts so that others can find it. Please do not forget to make the coffer clink (see the donate button below). SHOW NOTES How To Subscribe To Heidelmedia The Heidelblog Resource Page Heidelmedia Resources The Ecumenical Creeds The Reformed Confessions The Heidelberg Catechism The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, and Pastoral Commentary (Lexham Academic) Recovering the Reformed Confession (P&R Publishing, 2008) Why I Am A Christian What Must A Christian Believe? Heidelblog Contributors Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to: Heidelberg Reformation Association 1637 E. Valley Parkway #391 Escondido CA 92027 USA The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

Join Bobby Harrington and David Young from Renew.org as they dive into the history of the early church, focusing on the Restoration Movement, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Roman Catholicism. In this episode, Harrington recounts the early church period, highlights key historical events such as the fall of Rome, and discusses the development of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the schism that led to the formation of the Roman Catholic Church. The conversation addresses major theological differences, such as the role of scripture, tradition, and the concept of theosis, while exploring the significance of the Protestant Reformation. Engaging and informative, this class provides a comprehensive overview for anyone interested in church history and the key distinctions between major Christian traditions.   Download the free RENEW.org App - https://renew.org/renew-app/  Visit RENEW: https://renew.org/   Check out the following from RENEW.org: Events: https://renew.org/resources/events/ Videos: https://renew.org/media/videos/ Podcasts: https://renew.org/media/podcasts/ Articles: https://renew.org/articles/ Free eBooks: https://renew.org/resources/free-ebooks/ Books: https://renew.org/resources/books/ Audiobooks: https://renew.org/resources/audiobooks/ Sermon Tools: https://renew.org/resources/sermon-tools/ Job Board: https://jobs.renew.org/ Renew University: https://renewuniversity.org/ Real Life Theology Conversations: https://renew.org/rltc/ Sign up for our newsletter: https://renew.org/resources/newsletter-sign-up/

Today is a great feast day, a solemnity in honor of the pillars of the Roman Catholic Church, Saints Peter and Paul. Why did these saints end up in Rome?

American Evangelical Christianity is in crisis. The story of how it got here is an important part of this series but there are several reasons so many evangelical Christians are discontent and looking for something else, something with historical roots, with a sense of tradition, with a sense of of transcendence, with reverent worship, and with a deeper view of the sacraments. It is the conviction of the Heidelberg Reformation Association that the answer to the longing for more lies not in Rome or in the Eastern Orthodox traditions but, as it were, in Geneva. In this series we will explore the history, theology, piety and practice of Roman Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox traditions, and we will compare and contrast those two traditions with historic Reformed theology, piety, and practice. This episode of the Heidelcast is sponsored by the Heidelberg Reformation Association. You love the Heidelcast and the Heidelblog. You share it with friends, with members of your church, and others but have you stopped to think what would happen if it all disappeared? The truth is that we depend on your support. If you don't make the coffer clink, the HRA will simply sink. Won't you help us keep it going? The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. All your gifts are tax deductible. Use the donate link on this page or mail a check to Heidelberg Reformation Association, 1637 E Valley Parkway #391, Escondido CA 92027. All the Episodes of the Heidelcast Subscribe to the Heidelcast! Browse the Heidelshop! On X @Heidelcast On Insta & Facebook @Heidelcast Subscribe in Apple Podcast Subscribe directly via RSS Call The Heidelphone via Voice Memo On Your Phone The Heidelcast is available wherever podcasts are found including Spotify. Call or text the Heidelphone anytime at (760) 618-1563. Leave a message or email us a voice memo from your phone and we may use it in a future podcast. Record it and email it to heidelcast@heidelblog.net. If you benefit from the Heidelcast please leave a five-star review on Apple Podcasts so that others can find it. Please do not forget to make the coffer clink (see the donate button below). SHOW NOTES How To Subscribe To Heidelmedia The Heidelblog Resource Page Heidelmedia Resources The Ecumenical Creeds The Reformed Confessions The Heidelberg Catechism The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, and Pastoral Commentary (Lexham Academic) Recovering the Reformed Confession (P&R Publishing, 2008) Why I Am A Christian What Must A Christian Believe? Heidelblog Contributors Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to: Heidelberg Reformation Association 1637 E. Valley Parkway #391 Escondido CA 92027 USA The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

Was Clement of Rome a pope, as the Roman Catholic Church claims today? What does his letter to the Corinthians, 1 Clement, actually teach about church authority, unity, repentance, faith, leadership, and the resurrection? Clement of Rome is one of the most important early Christian voices outside the New Testament and a bridge from the Apostles to the Patristic era of the church. His letter to the Corinthians, the same church Paul wrote to, was written during a major conflict: certain church leaders had been removed, jealousy and division had taken root, and the church needed correction. In this video, Christian Barrett walks through his letter, 1 Clement, discusses whether the early church in Rome held to the same authority as later Roman Catholic claims describe, and how Clement exhorts us to unity, rest in Christ, and endurance to the end. Whether you are Protestant, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, or simply interested in early church history, 1 Clement offers a remarkable window into Christianity in the wake of the apostles, and is worth a serious look. Want more discipleship resources? Visit emetministry.orgHelp Us Reach the Lost: Support Emet Campus Ministry- https://emet-campus-ministry.churchcenter. com/giving/to/ecm-general-fundHelp Us Make More Resources: Support Emet Ministries- emetministry.churchcenter.com/givingCheck out these sources we love and use our Amazon Affiliate Link: Knowing God - https://amzn.to/3ScwPh4The Holiness of God - https://amzn.to/4ouI7sSThe Resurrection of Jesus - https://amzn.to/4ouitVeWhat is the Gospel - https://amzn.to/4oAFqpUWhat it means to be Protestant - https://amzn.to/3Qkt8W32,000 Years of Christ's Power Vol 1 - https://amzn.to/4edGaxFFollow us on Instagram: @emetministry and @everytuesdayat7Christian's Reading List: goodreads.com/user/show/74696644-christian-barrettCHAPTERS:00:00 Clement of Rome01:33 Is This the Clement from Philippians?03:15 Did the 4th-Century Church Believe in the Pope?04:20 Why Did Clement Write to the Corinthian Church?05:24 Why Is Clement Important?07:00 1 Clement: Why Was It Written?10:21 Chapters 1–3: Praise and Condemnation11:53 Chapters 4–6: The Danger of Jealousy12:18 Chapters 7–12: The Call to Repentance12:42 Chapters 13–19: Walk in Humility13:26 Chapters 20–23: The Creation of the World14:02 Chapters 24–27: The Hope of the Resurrection14:13 Chapters 28–31: Fear God, for He Is Majestic15:11 Chapters 32–35: Justification by Faith Alone?16:24 Chapters 36–38: Unity in Christ and with Christ16:52 Chapters 39–41: Different Roles in the Church17:57 Chapters 42–47: Addressing the Corinthian Crisis19:33 Chapters 48–55: A Call to Repentance19:42 Chapters 56–58: Restore the Elders19:46 Chapters 59–61: Clement's Prayer for the Corinthians19:57 Chapters 62–65: Run the Race20:25 Why Doesn't Clement Take a Magisterial Role?22:30 What Did the Early Church Commit Themselves To?#ClementOfRome #1Clement #ChurchHistory #EarlyChurch #ApostolicFathers #Papacy #ChristianTheology #Protestant #romancatholic #protestantvscatholic

Msgr. Pope and Father Larry join Bill to discuss five common issues that our Protestant brothers and sister have with the Roman Catholic Church

Following the 1989 parish closures, the infrastructure that had supported Black Catholic leadership in Detroit was largely dismantled. Surviving parishes tried to rebuild community, while parishes that were merged struggled to forge new identities. Meanwhile, Cardinal Edmund Szoka, the archbishop who oversaw the closures, left the city for Rome to take a top Vatican finance post.  In the third and final episode of “The City and the Cross,” host and Commonweal Centennial Fellow Aaron Robertson weighs the total cost of the 1989 parish closures—not just the loss of buildings, but the erosion of the systems that once nurtured Black Catholic vocations. He tells the story of Father John McKenzie, a Black priest who tried to serve Detroit'sBlack Catholic community with little institutional support, and whose own struggle raises a pointed question for the Church today: decades after 1989, how committed is the archdiocese to investing in Black Catholic communities?  Slowly, another question also starts to emerge: did the Black Catholic Movement ultimately succeed or did it fail? Robertson asks the very people who lived through it.  Today, as the Detroit archdiocese undergoes another round of restructuring, Black Catholics are bracing for the worst, but they refuse to walk away from the spiritual centers they built and still call home.  Featured Voices Marjorie Gabriel-Burrow, a musician who helped bring Black musical styles into Catholic Mass; Norah Duncan IV, a nationally acclaimed composer who watched the 1989 closures unfold from inside the archdiocesan chancery; Judith McNeeley, the daughter of Deacon Allen McNeeley, who was a member of St. Bernard parish until its 1989 closure; Dr. M. Shawn Copeland, a former nun from Detroit, now one of the world's leading Catholic theologians; Father Tom Lumpkin, a founding member of the Detroit Catholic Pastoral Alliance (DCPA); Father Norm Thomas, the longtime pastor of Sacred Heart and a cofounder of the DCPA who led the public resistance to the 1989 closures (archival); Father John McKenzie, a Black former Benedictine monk ordained a priest in Detroit in 2019, whose path eventually led him out of the Roman Catholic Church; Bishop Walter Hurley, Cardinal Edmund Szoka's chief of staff; Cathey DeSantis, a nun and member of Sacred Heart who became an organizer, and eventually director, of the DCPA; Steve Wasko, a Secular Franciscan and member of a Detroit-area anti-racism coalition that formed in the wake of George Floyd's murder; Dr. Shannen Dee Williams, a historian of Black Catholicism whose scholarship frames Detroit as the radical center of the national Black Catholic Movement; and Patricia Montemurri, a former Detroit Free Press reporter who chronicled the 1989 closures and broke the news of Szoka's Vatican appointment.

Robert Hugh Benson was the youngest son of Edward White Benson, the Archbishop of Canterbury and his wife Mary. Benson was was a prolific and popular writer during his time, and in 1903 he became a prominent convert to the Roman Catholic Church from Anglicanism . In 1904 he was ordained a Catholic priest.This book is his personal story of his journey to the Catholic faith, containing comparisons between Catholicism and the Anglican religion. (Summary by Maria Therese)Genre(s): Biography & Autobiography, Christianity - BiographiesLanguage: EnglishKeyword(s): Catholic (225), priest (23), Anglican (15), convert (3)

Day Of Epiphany by Canadian author/actor, Jerome J Bourgault is the recent winner of CANREADS Award for Historical Fiction 2026, available now on Amazon and Indigo.   Bourgault's highly anticipated book is an exploration of a dark chapter in Canadian and specifically Quebecois history: the “Grande Noirceur” (“Great Darkness”) of 1944–1959.  The Catholic Church wielded its influence through the provincial government, controlling education, healthcare and orphanages. Day of Epiphany is both powerful and unsettling, as it examines the systemic abuse and scars left by religious institutions.  An uncomfortable reminder, some would prefer left alone…   Day Of Epiphany delivers why in shocking detail.Day of Epiphany takes place in 1950s Quebec as the province languishes under the oppressive dual authorities of the Roman Catholic Church and the autocratic government of Maurice Duplessis.  In the small town of St-Jolain, young Sister Cassandra Lalonde works tirelessly as a teacher at the Ste-Madeleine (Ste-M) Orphanage. It's a difficult life for the children, but Cassandra has hope for four of Ste-M's best and brightest young teens—Suzanne, Hélène, Diane, and Eleanora, with whom she has forged a powerful bond.  Day Of Epiphany is their journey. After an explosion closes the orphanage, the nuns and children return to find the rebuilt facility has been re-designated by the Duplessis government as a psychiatric hospital, and the orphans have been “reclassified” as mental patients. To make matters worse, Ste-M has been merged with a notoriously brutal psychiatric hospital from another parish, whose patients and staff are fully integrated with the resident population of the new Sainte-Madeleine Institute. In the living nightmare that follows, Sister Cassandra struggles to recognize God's hand in such darkness. As casualties begin to mount, Cassandra must resort to increasingly drastic measures to protect those under her care.  Bourgault's Day Of Epiphany is a must-read story of moral complexity, personal resilience, loss and redemption. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

The modern relationship between the Vatican and the State of Israel is rooted in a long history of hostility between Judaism and Roman Catholicism. Through the centuries, popes and theologians marginalized the Jewish people, assigning them collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ and claiming that the sacred territory of Palestine was the true patrimony of the Roman Catholic Church. With the advent of political Zionism in the nineteenth century, Catholic fears of a Jewish-dominated Palestine were renewed. Contesting Zion: The Vatican, American Catholics, and the Partition of Palestine (McGill-Queen's UP, 2025) examines the relationship between the Vatican and the Zionist movement from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to the first decade of Israeli statehood. Adrian Ciani considers the transnational nature of Catholic responses to Zionism and the creation of Israel, with a focus on the Catholic Church in the United States. From the 1920s through the 1950s, American Catholic leaders became crucial intermediaries between Washington and the Vatican. Speaking as both loyal American citizens and devout Catholics, they were uniquely positioned to articulate the Vatican's policy objectives to the American government, including on the future of Palestine. American Catholics were also instrumental in advocating the church's Palestine policy at the United Nations, playing a central role in the Holy See's attempts to shape the twentieth-century international order. Roberto Mazza is currently a visiting scholar at the Buffett Institute for Global Affairs at Northwestern University. He is the host of the Jerusalem Unplugged Podcast and to discuss and propose a book for interview can be reached at robbymazza@gmail.com. Blusky and IG: @robbyref Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Hosts Pastor Vincent Fernandez and Pastor Robert Baltodano Question Timestamps: Anonymous, email (1:29) - Should a woman take part in baptism? Bryson, SC (4:44) - How can God regret something He created, if He is a perfect being? Ed, NJ (9:33) - Do angels sleep? Christine, YouTube (12:31) - Can you explain the parables of the talents and five crowns? Theresa, Facebook (14:54) - Why do I feel guilty leaving the Roman Catholic Church? Brian, FL (17:00) - Why did the early church not emphasize that Jesus appeared as The Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament? Mary, email (24:39) - Does my depression mean that I haven't put enough faith in Jesus? Am I not saved? Anonymous, email (28:05) - What are the differences between the precepts, statutes, laws, judgments, and ways mentioned in Psalm 119? Ruby, CA (33:41) - Who will be performing signs and wonders in the end times? Anonymous, email (37:17) - The Presbyterian Church announced that clergy should be in monogamous relationships, is this an example of the falling away mentioned in the Bible? Is this normal for church history? Charles, NY (41:52) - Who will rise from the grave when the dead in Christ rise, if we are already with the Lord? Andy, email (45:05) - Why didn't God give me an answer to my prayers after I finished fasting? Anonymous, email (48:23) - What boundaries are healthy for a pastor to maintain when offering care or counseling to someone? Paul, SC (53:17) - Should priests stop people from taking Communion if they aren't Catholic? Ask Your Questions: Call: 888-712-7434 Email: Answers@bbtlive.org

The modern relationship between the Vatican and the State of Israel is rooted in a long history of hostility between Judaism and Roman Catholicism. Through the centuries, popes and theologians marginalized the Jewish people, assigning them collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ and claiming that the sacred territory of Palestine was the true patrimony of the Roman Catholic Church. With the advent of political Zionism in the nineteenth century, Catholic fears of a Jewish-dominated Palestine were renewed. Contesting Zion: The Vatican, American Catholics, and the Partition of Palestine (McGill-Queen's UP, 2025) examines the relationship between the Vatican and the Zionist movement from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to the first decade of Israeli statehood. Adrian Ciani considers the transnational nature of Catholic responses to Zionism and the creation of Israel, with a focus on the Catholic Church in the United States. From the 1920s through the 1950s, American Catholic leaders became crucial intermediaries between Washington and the Vatican. Speaking as both loyal American citizens and devout Catholics, they were uniquely positioned to articulate the Vatican's policy objectives to the American government, including on the future of Palestine. American Catholics were also instrumental in advocating the church's Palestine policy at the United Nations, playing a central role in the Holy See's attempts to shape the twentieth-century international order. Roberto Mazza is currently a visiting scholar at the Buffett Institute for Global Affairs at Northwestern University. He is the host of the Jerusalem Unplugged Podcast and to discuss and propose a book for interview can be reached at robbymazza@gmail.com. Blusky and IG: @robbyref Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

The modern relationship between the Vatican and the State of Israel is rooted in a long history of hostility between Judaism and Roman Catholicism. Through the centuries, popes and theologians marginalized the Jewish people, assigning them collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ and claiming that the sacred territory of Palestine was the true patrimony of the Roman Catholic Church. With the advent of political Zionism in the nineteenth century, Catholic fears of a Jewish-dominated Palestine were renewed. Contesting Zion: The Vatican, American Catholics, and the Partition of Palestine (McGill-Queen's UP, 2025) examines the relationship between the Vatican and the Zionist movement from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to the first decade of Israeli statehood. Adrian Ciani considers the transnational nature of Catholic responses to Zionism and the creation of Israel, with a focus on the Catholic Church in the United States. From the 1920s through the 1950s, American Catholic leaders became crucial intermediaries between Washington and the Vatican. Speaking as both loyal American citizens and devout Catholics, they were uniquely positioned to articulate the Vatican's policy objectives to the American government, including on the future of Palestine. American Catholics were also instrumental in advocating the church's Palestine policy at the United Nations, playing a central role in the Holy See's attempts to shape the twentieth-century international order. Roberto Mazza is currently a visiting scholar at the Buffett Institute for Global Affairs at Northwestern University. He is the host of the Jerusalem Unplugged Podcast and to discuss and propose a book for interview can be reached at robbymazza@gmail.com. Blusky and IG: @robbyref Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/middle-eastern-studies

The modern relationship between the Vatican and the State of Israel is rooted in a long history of hostility between Judaism and Roman Catholicism. Through the centuries, popes and theologians marginalized the Jewish people, assigning them collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ and claiming that the sacred territory of Palestine was the true patrimony of the Roman Catholic Church. With the advent of political Zionism in the nineteenth century, Catholic fears of a Jewish-dominated Palestine were renewed. Contesting Zion: The Vatican, American Catholics, and the Partition of Palestine (McGill-Queen's UP, 2025) examines the relationship between the Vatican and the Zionist movement from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to the first decade of Israeli statehood. Adrian Ciani considers the transnational nature of Catholic responses to Zionism and the creation of Israel, with a focus on the Catholic Church in the United States. From the 1920s through the 1950s, American Catholic leaders became crucial intermediaries between Washington and the Vatican. Speaking as both loyal American citizens and devout Catholics, they were uniquely positioned to articulate the Vatican's policy objectives to the American government, including on the future of Palestine. American Catholics were also instrumental in advocating the church's Palestine policy at the United Nations, playing a central role in the Holy See's attempts to shape the twentieth-century international order. Roberto Mazza is currently a visiting scholar at the Buffett Institute for Global Affairs at Northwestern University. He is the host of the Jerusalem Unplugged Podcast and to discuss and propose a book for interview can be reached at robbymazza@gmail.com. Blusky and IG: @robbyref Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

The modern relationship between the Vatican and the State of Israel is rooted in a long history of hostility between Judaism and Roman Catholicism. Through the centuries, popes and theologians marginalized the Jewish people, assigning them collective guilt for the death of Jesus Christ and claiming that the sacred territory of Palestine was the true patrimony of the Roman Catholic Church. With the advent of political Zionism in the nineteenth century, Catholic fears of a Jewish-dominated Palestine were renewed. Contesting Zion: The Vatican, American Catholics, and the Partition of Palestine (McGill-Queen's UP, 2025) examines the relationship between the Vatican and the Zionist movement from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to the first decade of Israeli statehood. Adrian Ciani considers the transnational nature of Catholic responses to Zionism and the creation of Israel, with a focus on the Catholic Church in the United States. From the 1920s through the 1950s, American Catholic leaders became crucial intermediaries between Washington and the Vatican. Speaking as both loyal American citizens and devout Catholics, they were uniquely positioned to articulate the Vatican's policy objectives to the American government, including on the future of Palestine. American Catholics were also instrumental in advocating the church's Palestine policy at the United Nations, playing a central role in the Holy See's attempts to shape the twentieth-century international order. Roberto Mazza is currently a visiting scholar at the Buffett Institute for Global Affairs at Northwestern University. He is the host of the Jerusalem Unplugged Podcast and to discuss and propose a book for interview can be reached at robbymazza@gmail.com. Blusky and IG: @robbyref Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Which Church Did Jesus Start?” This question opens a discussion on the distinctions between Catholic and Orthodox beliefs, including what defines the Catholic Church as the one established by Christ. Additional topics include addressing the term “Roman” Catholic Church, the nature of the Eucharist, and the reasons behind the Orthodox separation from Catholicism. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 02:00 – Which Church Did Jesus Start 17:09 – What makes the Catholic Church the one that Jesus started and not the Syrians, the Orthodox, or the Coptics? 22:26 – How do you go about correcting Protestants who use the term “Roman” Catholic Church in a pejorative sense? 36:40 – When the bread and wine is turned in to Jesus' body and blood, why does it still taste like bread and wine? 42:56 – Why is there no list of infallible Church teachings? 46:50 – Why did the Orthodox pull away from the Catholic Church? 51:30 – I have some SDA friends who believe in the long sleep instead of heaven or purgatory. What is the best refutation of the long sleep?

Now here's a little wrinkle to the new Steven Spielberg ‘Disclosure Day' movie that almost no one is talking about. Spielberg says the movie narrative takes the position of the Roman Catholic Church to prepare people to welcome UFOs and aliens into our global society. Remember that Vatican announcement some years back when Pope Francis said when aliens arrive, the Catholic Church will baptize them? Well, hello there! Steven Spielberg and the Vatican in an end times bed together, who knew? Now you know. You won't hear this on any other Podcast, so buckle up.“And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” 2 Corinthians 11:14 (KJB)On this episode of the Prophecy News Podcast, back in 2014, Pope Francis stunningly said Rome would be open to baptizing Martians when they showed up. Now Steven Spielberg is rolling out a UFO disclosure film with a Roman Catholic nun character and theological questions about God, creation, and intelligent life beyond earth based on Roman Catholic doctrine and teachings. Hollywood and the Vatican are not accidentally walking down the same road — they are rehearsing the same end-times script. Amos asks “Can two walk together except they be agreed?” They cannot. This Friday, Steven Spielberg gives the world the gospel of the coming Antichrist as Rome gets ready to sprinkle the aliens upon their arrive. And this lost world, already primed by decades of UFO and extreterrestrial conditioning, will call it revelation while the Bible openly calls it deception, and warns us not to fall for it. Christian, you have no idea how deep this rabbit hole goes, but today, you're going to find out!

Many people know that Martin Luther impacted Christian doctrine when he broke from the Roman Catholic Church. But did you know that Martin Luther also impacted Christian marriage?  Have you heard the story of how Luther helped 12 nuns escape the church, and how he married one of them? In Ruth chapter four, the Bible tells us about another monumental marriage, and that was the union of Ruth and Boaz. What happens in the climax to this story, and what lasting effects are still impacting your story in the here and now? (The Book of Ruth, part 5. Conclusion)

PODCAST NOTES THE HIJACKING OF CHRIST: How Rome Stole Christianity's Soul https://youtu.be/sya5HIcN4aY——- FROM: NWO PLAN REVEALED IN 1969BLENDING ALL RELIGIONS Another area of discussion was Religion. This is an avowed atheist speaking. He said, "Religion is not necessarily bad. A lot of people seem to need religion, with it's mysteries and rituals - so they will have religion. But the major religions of today have to be changed because they are not compatible with the changes to come. The old religions will have to go especially Christianity. Once the Roman Catholic Church is brought down, the rest of Christianity will follow easily. Then a new religion can be accepted for use all over the world. It will incorporate something from all of the old ones to make it more easy for people to accept , and feel at home. Most people won't be too concerned with religion. They will realise that they don't need it." CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS In order to do this, the Bible will be changed. It will be rewritten to fit the new religion. Gradually, key words will be replaced with new words having various shades of meaning. Then the meaning attached to the new word can be close to the old word - and as time goes on, other shades of meaning of that word can be emphasised. and then gradually that word replaced with another word." I don't know if I'm making that clear, but the idea is that everything in Scripture need not be rewritten, just key words replaced by other words. The variability in meaning attached to any word can be used as a tool to change the entire meaning of Scripture, and therefore make it acceptable to this new religion. Most people won't know the difference; and this was another one of the times where he said, "the few who do notice the difference won't be enough to matter." THE CHURCHES WILL HELP US Then followed one of the most surprising statements of the whole presentation: He said, "Some of you probably think the Churches won't stand for this," and he went on to say, "the churches will help us!" There was no elaboration on this, it was unclear just what he had in mind when he said, "the churches will help us!" In retrospect I think some of us now can understand what he might have meant at that time. I recall then only of thinking, "no they won't!" and remembering our Lord's words where he said to Peter, "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church, and gates of Hell will not prevail against it." So yes, some people in the Churches might help and in the subsequent 20 years we've seen how some people in Churches have helped. But we also know that our Lord's Words will stand, and the gates of Hell will not prevail.——-AMERICA IS LOST!!!!Mike Harris: Tulsi, Massie, Israel, State of Society & Non-human Meddling https://youtu.be/qrKNDebO-XE——-Joseph of Arimathea | The Evidence Rome Cannot Answerhttps://youtu.be/2o5KD__RjZ0——- The Second Exodus  - The Great Tribulation Escapehttps://youtu.be/s5oJRTTEulw——- Sorry for language THE ONLY JANUARY 6TH VIDEO YOU EVER NEED TO WATCH / J6https://youtu.be/5D29ytvAuLQ——- Polycarp of Smyrna: The Forgotten Link Between Jesus and the Biblehttps://youtu.be/Bnembd3Jnpg——-A GREAT TEACHING THE POWER OF HOLINESS — 25 REVELATIONS THAT UNLOCK GOD'S PRESENCE IN YOU... https://youtu.be/hNEgm8X6K6w——-WE ARE LIVING THROUGH THIS AGAIN. The great falling away is the Protestant community returning to the harlot church as the one world church is beginning. The joining of Catholic Judaism and Islam.The Forbidden Christians Who Defied the Vatican and Paid With Their Lives https://youtu.be/YRQZ1i5Ci1I——-THE LADY THAT HAD THE VISION I MENTIONED THAT RECORDED 12 videos to tell it!!!1 Prelude HD https://youtu.be/VCKk0ygMHoM——- 2 Meet the Characters HDhttps://youtu.be/-H9p4ILm0Tw——-Your Brain Won't Let You See What Epstein Really Was - Barry's Economics https://youtu.be/sS33crOQvrM——-

Tom: Well, this is part two of our discussion about issues related to the Roman Catholic Church. But it's not just about the Roman Catholic Church (but that's the focus here), and we'll get into how this goes beyond the Catholic Church. My guest to talk about this is Greg Durel. He's the pastor of Heritage Bible Church of Gretna, Louisiana, and he has a weekday radio ministry that's devoted to educating Catholics in biblical doctrine. Greg, welcome back to Search the Scriptures 24/7.Greg: Thanks for having me, Tom.

Your public confession matters. Melancthon warns that the public confession in the Roman Catholic Church is filled with abuses of the papacy, indulgences, invocation of saints, and celibacy of the priests. He explains that these abuses hide Christ's glory and rob consciences of firm consolation. As the Church battles through the questions of the day, she calls out sin and lack of faith as the LORD does and leans upon the full and sufficient work of Christ for forgiveness. Rev. Dr. Jason Lane, Associate Professor of Historical Theology, Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, MO, joins Rev. Brady Finnern for our study of the Power and Primacy of the Pope. To learn more about Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, visit csl.edu. Find your copy of the Book of Concord - Concordia Reader's Edition at cph.org or read online at bookofconcord.org. Study the Lutheran Confession of Faith found in the Book of Concord with lively discussions led by host Rev. Brady Finnern, President of the LCMS Minnesota North District, and guest LCMS pastors. Join us as these Christ-confessing Concordians read through and discuss our Lutheran doctrine in the Book of Concord in order to gain a deeper understanding of our Lutheran faith and practical application for our vocations. Submit comments or questions to: listener@kfuo.org.

“What is the Catholic Church?” This question opens a discussion about the Church’s identity and mission, while also addressing how to navigate family dynamics when dealing with issues like homosexuality. Additional topics include the challenges of engaging with an evangelical perspective on the Catholic Church and fostering relationships with family members who hold anti-Catholic views. Join the Catholic Answers Live Club Newsletter Invite our apologists to speak at your parish! Visit Catholicanswersspeakers.com Questions Covered: 06:45 – What is the Catholic Church? 13:48 – How do I deal with family who is fully immersed in homosexuality? 28:57 – I'm evangelical. The premise that the Church that Jesus founded was the Roman Catholic Church is false. 49:07 – My mom is a evangelical, former Catholic and anti-Cathoic. How do I bridge that gap and have a relationship with her?

Few issues show more clearly show the error of the supposed infallble authority of the Roman Catholic Church (or the Eastern Orthodox Church!) than that of icon veneration. That may sound strange, but both Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theologies claim that the findings of the Second Council of Nicea (787 AD) were infallible. And at this council, the veneration of icons is not just affirmed, but all who reject it are put under a supposedly infallible 'anathema'! This is no small matter. You can watch this message here.

Gary: Welcome to Search the Scriptures 24/7, a radio ministry of The Berean Call featuring T.A. McMahon. I'm Gary Carmichael. Thanks for joining us. In today's program, we begin a two-part series with guest Greg Durel as they discuss the New Catholicism. Here's TBC executive director Tom McMahon.Tom: Thanks, Gary. Well, today and next week we're going to discuss a number of issues related to the Roman Catholic Church, and my guest to talk about this is Greg Durel. He's the pastor of Heritage Bible Church of Gretna, Louisiana, and he has a weekday radio ministry that is devoted to educating Catholics in biblical doctrine—biblical doctrine. Greg, like me, grew up a Roman Catholic, so he knows Catholicism experientially as well as from a study of Catholic Church tradition and its dogmas.Greg, welcome to Search the Scriptures 24/7.Greg: Always great to be with you, Tom. 

Hosts Pastor Robert Baltodano and Pastor Larry Powers Question Timestamps: Michael, NJ (3:07) - Does Isaiah 45 verse 7 say that God created evil? I thought Satan created evil? Pam, email (5:36) - How should I approach speaking to Catholics about the Gospel? William, VA (8:53) - Can a person's name be blotted out of the Lamb's Book of God if they continue to sin? Jeff, email (13:48) - Would an early believer feel more comfortable in a Calvary Chapel or a Roman Catholic Church? John, email (16:10) - How are we supposed to use the Bible? Mickey, email (21:29) - Does my drinking mean that I'm not saved? Maria, MA (25:18) - What are the gifts of the Holy Spirit? Do they still happen today? How are the gift of tongues or the gift of interpreting tongues used today? Greg, NJ (36:07) - Does Proverbs 31 verse 6 say it is okay to drink? I drink to help with health issues. James, SC (41:26) - How are the Jewish people the chosen ones if they don't believe in Jesus? David, SC (47:05) - Is it a sin to worship on Sunday? Anonymous, caller (52:01) - Did Abraham's descendants become oppressed slaves because of Abraham's doubt in Genesis 15? How weighty is our doubt of the Lord? Ask Your Questions: Call: 888-712-7434 Email: Answers@bbtlive.org

Read OnlineOne of the Twelve“You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this apostolic ministry from which Judas turned away to go to his own place.” Then they gave lots to them, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was counted with the Eleven Apostles. Acts 1:24–26Matthias, the saint we honor today, was named an Apostle to replace Judas Iscariot after Judas betrayed Jesus and hanged himself. Matthias was likely from Galilee and had followed Jesus from the beginning of His public ministry. After Judas' death, Peter led the approximately 120 disciples in selecting Matthias through prayer and casting lots, ensuring the Apostles once again numbered twelve. This election occurred before Pentecost, so Matthias received the Holy Spirit alongside the other Apostles, affirming the Twelve as the foundational body of the Church.Matthias' selection is profoundly important for two primary reasons. First, by being counted along with the other eleven Apostles, the group once again numbered twelve. Though there are thousands of bishops today, the foundation began with twelve. Once they received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and began their apostolic ministries, their number grew as the Church expanded. Nonetheless, the foundation remained, symbolizing the Twelve Tribes of Israel and uniting the New Testament Church with the Old Covenant.Second, Matthias' election establishes a biblical foundation for apostolic succession, one of the four marks of the Church: “I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church” (Nicene Creed). By proclaiming the Church as “one,” we affirm that there is only one Church—“the one Church of Christ” (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 8). While not all are visible members of this one Church, all who are united to Christ in a state of grace are part of His one Body. Nonetheless, “This Church, constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him” (LG 8).The Church is “holy” because she is united to Christ, her divine Head, who is all-holy. As members of this Church, we are sanctified by Christ's grace, the sacraments, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that enable us to grow in holiness and reflect the sanctity of God Himself.The word “catholic” in the Creed is written in lowercase because it does not refer specifically to the Roman Catholic Church as an institution but to the broader meaning of the word “catholic,” which means “universal.” The one Church is universal in scope and mission, welcoming all people. It is the responsibility of the Church's members to share the Gospel with every person, seeking to draw all into full communion with the one visible Body of Christ.Finally, the Church is “apostolic,” which is especially celebrated in today's Feast of Saint Matthias. Every bishop alive today, every bishop in the past, and every bishop yet to be ordained until the end of time takes his episcopal roots from the Twelve Apostles, including Matthias, who received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.According to various traditions, the Apostle Matthias engaged in missionary activity in regions such as Cappadocia (modern-day Turkey), the Caspian Sea area (modern-day Georgia), and possibly as far south as Sudan and Ethiopia. He is believed to have died a martyr, either by crucifixion, stoning, or beheading. Though we do not know who succeeded him, we can be certain that he not only spread the Gospel and celebrated the Sacraments, but also ordained others to serve as apostles within the communities he helped to establish.As we honor Saint Matthias today, reflect on God's eternal wisdom in establishing the Church. God did not merely give us a set of rules to follow; He gave us a Church—His one Church—and entrusted His authority to sinful men who act in His name and convey His grace. Rejoice that you are a member of the Catholic Church, in which Christ's Church subsists. Pray not only for the mission of the Church, but also for those entrusted with apostolic responsibilities, passed on to them from the Twelve Apostles.Saint Matthias, you were counted among the Twelve and became an essential participant in the foundation of the Church. Through your apostolic ministry, you spread the Gospel far and wide, bringing grace and truth to those you were sent to serve. Please pray for me and for the entire Church, that we may always remain one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, so that the Gospel will continue to be spread to the ends of the earth. Saint Matthias, pray for me. Jesus, I trust in You.  Image: School Giusepe Ribera de lo Spagnoletta: St. MatthiasSource: Free RSS feed from catholic-daily-reflections.com — Copyright © 2026 My Catholic Life! Inc. All rights reserved. This content is provided solely for personal, non-commercial use. Redistribution, republication, or commercial use — including use within apps with advertising — is strictly prohibited without written permission.

In the heart of Hagley Wood, a skeleton hidden inside a hollow tree sparked decades of eerie graffiti, whispered conspiracies, and chilling rumors that she may have been a WWII spy silenced forever.EPISODE BLOG PAGE (includes sources and full transcript): https://weirddarkness.com/SpyWitchWychFEATURED STORIES IN THIS EPISODE: Was a woman found dead in a wych elm tree in wartime England actually a WWII German spy? (Bella in the Wych Elm) *** Jonathan Reed couldn't bear to be separated from his wife ... so he moved into her tomb. (Til Death Do Us Part) *** Dr. Milton Rokeach forced three men who all believed themselves to be the Messiah to live together for two years in an effort to bring them out of their irrationality. But what Rokeach learned had little to do with the men themselves. (The Three Christs of Ypsilanti) *** A bodiless voice torments a lone beachgoer camping out. (Spirit Voice on the Beach) *** Only months after the infamous ax murders in Villisca, Iowa - the quiet farm community of Payson, Illinois was shattered by its own terrifying murder case. (The Pfanschmidt Murders) *** In an effort to test one of his theories on social behavior, psychologist Muzafer Sherif released twenty-two 12-year-old boys into a sparsely supervised wilderness camp — and then covertly provoked them to fight each other. (The Robbers Cave Experiment) *** Witch hunts and trials. They didn't end in Salem – they live on even today in Papua New Guinea. (Papua New Guinea Witchcraft) *** A man in Japan sees small, childlike ashen white aliens. (Childlike Aliens) *** How can a holy book such as the Christian bible bring bad luck? One paranormal museum in West Virginia has the answer with an infamous display of the 666 Bible. (The 666 Bible) *** The people of Hannibal, Missouri in the late 1800s would remain appalled that one of their most prominent residents could be murdered without retribution. Even a $10,000 reward couldn't bring justice. (The Stillwell Murder) *** A father takes his son to the ruins of an old, burned down building – and the boy sees something his father doesn't. (The Old Factory Visit) *** “The Devil's Advocate” - it's a phrase that can be traced to the Roman Catholic Church that long had an actual official office for a person who was employed to be exactly that – an advocate for the devil. And he still works for the church even today. (The Devil's Advocate)CHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = The Foreboding00:00:51.758 = Show Open00:03:56.427 = Was Bella In The Wych Elm a WWII Spy?00:17:52.860 = Til Death Do Us Part ***00:20:30.246 = The Three Christs of Ypsilanti00:28:17.112 = Spirit Voice On The Beach00:32:35.825 = The Pfanschmidt Murders of 1912 ***00:41:38.517 = Devil's Advocate00:45:43.295 = The Robbers Cave Experiment00:53:23.042 = Papua New Guinea Witchcraft ***00:59:43.636 = Child Aliens00:1:03:02.762 = The 666 Bible01:08:44.469 = The Stillwell Murder ***01:20:23.228 = The Old Factory Visit01:25:09.988 = Show Close*** = Begins immediately after inserted ad breakLISTEN ON PODCAST APPS: Look for this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart Radio, Amazon Music, Pandora, TuneIn Radio, and other podcast apps. Get a list of free listening apps here: https://weirddarkness.com/wdapps*No AI Voices Are Used In The Narration Of This Podcast*SOURCES and RESOURCES:“Was Bella in the Wych Elm a WWII German Spy?” posted at The UnRedacted: https://tinyurl.com/wtxqr7l“The Pfanschmidt Murders” by Troy Taylor for American Hauntings Ink: https://tinyurl.com/uolq6b8“Spirit Voice on the Beach” by Berggraf38, posted at YourGhostStories.com: https://tinyurl.com/qngcm6l“The Three Christs of Ypsilanti” by Taig Spearman for All That's Interesting: https://tinyurl.com/w9delgl“The Robbers Cave Experiment” by Taig Spearman for All That's Interesting: https://tinyurl.com/yx66lpob“Papua New Guinea Witchcraft” by Caleb Strom for Ancient Origins: https://tinyurl.com/rvpyyva“The Devil's Advocate” by Ellen Lloyd for Ancient Pages: https://tinyurl.com/vluuhdg“Childlike Aliens” by Terry Larch for FreakLore.com: https://tinyurl.com/snrkrbm“The 666 Bible” by Theresa at Theresa's Haunted History of the Tri-State: https://tinyurl.com/t8dlnez“The Stillwell Murder” by Robert Wilhelm for Murder By Gaslight: https://tinyurl.com/yd4uupot“The Old Factory Visit” by Mike, posted at MyHauntedLifeToo.com: (link no longer available)“Til Death Do Us Part” by Jessica Ferri at The-Line-Up.com: https://the-line-up.com/mary-reed(Over time links may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2026, Weird Darkness.Originally aired: November 27, 2018

In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse dive deep into Matthew 21:33-46, examining Jesus's parable of the wicked tenants. The hosts unpack how Christ masterfully draws the Pharisees into pronouncing their own condemnation, revealing not merely theological error but intentional usurpation of God's authority. Through careful exegesis, they explore the shocking setup of the parable—where the landowner does all the work while the tenants contribute nothing—and how this mirrors God's sovereign initiative in salvation. The discussion touches on confession, the value of full-time ministry, and the scandal of rejecting the Messiah despite recognizing His authority. This episode challenges listeners to examine whether they, like the Pharisees, attempt to claim God's work as their own. Key Takeaways God Does All the Verbs: The parable emphasizes that the landowner planted, built, protected, and prepared everything—the tenants contributed nothing yet claimed ownership of the fruit. Self-Pronounced Condemnation: Jesus draws the Pharisees into declaring their own judgment, demonstrating that even the unregenerate conscience bears witness to divine justice (Romans 2). Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error: The Pharisees weren't well-intentioned but misguided; they recognized Christ's authority as the heir and deliberately murdered Him to seize His inheritance. The Scandal of Grace: The parable's shocking element is that the landowner prepared everything before leasing the land—far exceeding normal agricultural arrangements and illustrating God's unmerited favor. Ecclesial Support for Ministry: The OPC presbytery's decision to fund a full-time call demonstrates how church structure can honor the ministry of Word and sacrament by freeing ministers from worldly distractions. Particular Repentance Matters: Westminster Confession 15.5 teaches that believers should not content themselves with general repentance but "endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly." The Stone Rejected Becomes Chief: Christ's citation of Psalm 118 reveals that the very rejection by the builders (religious leaders) was God's plan to establish the cornerstone of salvation. Key Concepts God Does All the Verbs The concentration of action verbs attributed solely to the landowner in Matthew 21:33 is theologically significant. The landowner plants, builds, digs, and rents—creating a fully functional, productive vineyard before the tenants ever arrive. This arrangement differs radically from typical first-century agricultural practices, where tenants would lease raw land and develop it themselves, sharing profits with the landowner. Jesus deliberately presents an extraordinary scenario where the tenants receive everything prepared and ready, requiring only stewardship of what already exists. This parallels God's sovereign initiative in election and salvation: believers contribute nothing to their standing before God, receiving instead a fully accomplished redemption. The Pharisees' rebellion wasn't against burdensome requirements but against simply acknowledging God's rightful ownership of what He alone created. Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error The hosts challenge the common sympathetic reading of the Pharisees as well-intentioned legalists who simply got sidetracked. Instead, verse 38 reveals the tenants explicitly recognize the son as heir and plot to murder him to "seize his inheritance." This isn't accidental rejection but calculated rebellion. The Pharisees weren't confused about Jesus's identity or authority—they understood precisely who He claimed to be and deliberately chose to destroy Him rather than submit. This interpretation carries significant weight for understanding the nature of unbelief: it's not primarily intellectual confusion but volitional rebellion. The religious leaders didn't need more evidence or clearer teaching; they needed transformed hearts. This same dynamic appears whenever humans recognize divine truth yet choose self-sovereignty over submission to God's rightful claim on their lives. The Scandal of Grace The parable begins with a scandalous premise that would have startled Jesus's original audience. Unlike normal tenant farming arrangements where landowners simply provided land in exchange for a share of whatever the tenants produced through their own labor, this landowner invests everything. He doesn't just own the property—he plants the vineyard, constructs the protective wall, digs the wine press for production, and builds the watchtower for defense. The tenants receive a turnkey operation requiring minimal effort. This extravagant preparation mirrors God's unmerited favor toward Israel and, by extension, the church. God didn't merely create humanity and wait to see what we would produce; He established covenants, sent prophets, preserved His Word, and ultimately sent His Son—all before requiring any response. The only "payment" demanded is acknowledging His ownership of what He created. The parable thus exposes the absurdity and ingratitude of claiming God's work as our own achievement. Memorable Quotes God does all the verbs. All of the verbs are done by the landowner. There is nothing expected of these tenants—they really add nothing to the landowner's land. Christ is not painting the Pharisees as well-intentioned but ultimately wrong. He's painting them as usurpers who recognize the proper authority and rather than submitting to it, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own. Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man's duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly. (Westminster Confession 15.5) Transcript Welcome to episode 491 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.  [00:01:12] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother.  [00:01:17] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother.  [00:01:18] Parable of Tenants [00:01:18] Jesse Schwamb: So picture this, Tony, your landlord. You've built the perfect vineyard. We're talking wall watchtower, wine, press, the works like what everybody says. Everybody knows you need all those things. You've got it all set up, and then you hand the keys to some tenants. You take a long trip, you go enjoy yourself. And when the harvest rolls around, you send your servants to collect the rent. And shockingly, your tenants, they beat. Stone. Another, the kill a third. So naturally you think, you know what? I'll fix this. Lemme just send more people. That's obviously the problem. There's some kind of just profound misunderstanding about what's going on here and about our relationship in this business. And then when that doesn't work, you send your son now loved ones. If this were a business strategy, we would already be calling hr. But of course it's not a business strategy, it's a parable. And Jesus is telling it to the very people about to prove the parable true. So welcome back to the Reformed Brotherhood because we're in Matthew Chapter 21 and we're gonna be actually getting all the way into the parable of the Vine growers where the patience of God looks, I would say, to almost anybody else, to humanize at least almost reckless until you realize that's exactly the point. So yeah, grab your beverage of choice, grab your Bible, pull the car over, will you? Because this is gonna get real and we're going to reason together. But before we do all of that, let's do a little affirming with or denying against, what do you got?  [00:02:41] Inside Baseball Affirmation [00:02:41] Tony Arsenal: So this is a sort of inside baseball, uh, affirmation. Um, I'm not sharing anything, although it may feel like I'm sharing something that is private and like, uh, like confidential. It's not No, this is good. Um, so I had the opportunity to visit. Um, my presbytery, um, for those who are listeners of the show or people who like, have been with us a long time, um, I was part of a Baptist church. Uh, I've always kind of been a Presbyterian at heart, but, um, our church closed, uh, a little over a year and a half ago now. And, um, uh, I've joined an OPC congregation in membership now. We've been members there for about a year. And, um, so I've been visiting Presbytery, which is the, the meeting of all of the leadership of all of the churches. So we won't do a polity breakdown here, but basically like, it's, it's the regional meeting. It's the regional business meeting or church meeting for a group of churches in the OPC, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. And so a lot of the meetings, you know, have the normal kind of business type stuff. You have reports from different committee committees and stuff. Um.  [00:03:48] Presbytery Call Debate [00:03:48] Tony Arsenal: Where this is affirmation is coming in here is at this most recent presbytery meeting, um, was pretty heavy on, um, licensing or, or, uh, not licensing on approving men who had received a call to formal ministry within the presbytery. And so in the OPC, and I would imagine that other Presbyterian bodies are not like super different, although I'm sure there's some variation in the OPC. Um, when a church intends to extend a call to a pastor, to a teaching elder, um, to a minister, they must have the call, which is. Is both theological but is also eminently practical. Like the call is a physical piece of paper that details, you know, what the pay is, how much vacation time. So it's kind of a combination between like a theological call and also a contract. Um, the presbytery has to approve that call. And so at this most recent one, there was a couple calls that were more or less uncontroversial. There was no question about them, and they were approved pretty quickly. But there was one call, um, one call to ministry that took, I, I, I didn't time it, but it was probably like four or five hours of debate and discussion in various fashion in order to get to a point where the presbytery could approve the call. So this was a call to a minister who is being called part-time, which is unusual in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, the OPC uh, acknowledges the fact that bivocational tent making ministry is sometimes a necessity, but really views the ministry of the word in sacrament as something that should not have. Distractions. And actually our book of church order talks about, doesn't use the word distraction, I think, but it talks about a, a properly ordered call to a full-time minister includes phrasing that the congregation promises to compensate them in a way that allows them to be free of worldly burdens and cares. And I might have not, not have gotten that wording exactly right. But that's the idea. And so this call was. Explicitly, um, not a full-time call it, they actually took the language out of promising to pay him in a way that he's able to ignore or to not be distracted by worldly care. And that was intentional, but there was a lot of question in discussion at presbytery level about the fact that the call did not include the phrase or the wording of part-time or bivocational. So the conversation started out of like, can this call be modified to include that? So it's explicitly known in this man's call that his calling is part-time, which is both theological, to make sure that the call is properly formatted, but also like very practical that the congregation should acknowledge explicitly that they recognize that this person is not, not going to be putting, you know, 40 hours a week or 50 hours a week towards this position. [00:06:34] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:06:34] Tony Arsenal: Um. What I'm affirming is where it got to, right? So there was lots of discussion about that. There was some finagling about the retirement package. The OPC recommends that a, a minister be given a retirement contribution of no less than 5% a year of his salaried package. Um, which there's a couple line items that go into that, but 5%, and this was a little bit less than that. And this is what I'm affirming and this, I, I don't know that this is a super widespread thing that would happen all across the, um, the OPC, but it happened in the presbytery of New York and New England this past week, and it's just amazing. And I just, I just want to lay it out there and then I want to hear your reaction. [00:07:13] Funding Full Time Ministry [00:07:13] Tony Arsenal: And I, I wanna hear your reaction as the son of a minister who labored his entire adult, more or less, his entire adult career in ministry, working two or three additional jobs on top of his ministry, the presbytery decided. That because it did not like the idea of a part-time minister. They didn't think that was appropriate. They didn't think that that was good or that that was really the right goal. The presbytery allocated, I'm not gonna say the figures 'cause they're not super germane, but allocated a significant amount of money to be dis to be dispersed to the church for the next three years in order to take what was a part-time call and enable it to become a full-time call. [00:07:54] Jesse Schwamb: Wow.  [00:07:54] Tony Arsenal: And so there are a lot of, there are a lot of church bodies that would say, yeah, we don't love the idea of bi-vocational ministry. You know, we really think it's ideal that a minister could be full-time. Um, they may even put some, some theological freight behind that. Um, I have never encountered a body, um. That was willing to put a sizable amount of money towards essentially supplementing a part-time call to make it full-time. Um, this was just amazing to me, and the candidate was there. I didn't get a chance to talk to him, but I would love to talk to him about what he felt. I, I can just imagine the phone call to his wife who was not, not at presbytery, but to his wife, following the outcome of this to be like, you are never gonna believe what just happened. Right? This is a family who was intending to move across country. Right. He's currently a student at Westminster, California in seminary, uh, California, Westminster Seminary in California, finishing his M Div. They're planning a cross country move into a part-time position where she's probably gonna have to find a job, and then also he's gonna have to find a part-time job. He had the ability to call her on the break and be like, you're never gonna guess what just happened? You're never gonna,  [00:09:09] Jesse Schwamb: it's wild.  [00:09:09] Tony Arsenal: Uh, sorry, I'm getting a little emotional here. You're never going to. Believe how faithful God is in this. Right. So I'm interested to hear your reaction to that as the son of a, of a try and quad at times Quad vocational. Yeah,  [00:09:23] Jesse Schwamb: for sure.  [00:09:23] Tony Arsenal: Minister who labored his entire, more or less, his entire adult career, um, working full-time in a call as a part-time, part-time minister. You know, like that's a, that's a crazy situation. So I'm just affirming that again, I don't know how common that kind of thing is in the OPC. I don't wanna make it seem like that's the norm. Um, I actually get the sense that this is probably not the norm, but it was amazing to see and it made me in intensely like. Proud in the right way of being a part of this broader body that would, would so emphasize and so value the ministry of the word and the sacrament, and the importance of a man being able to dedicate himself to that without distraction. That they would put forward this amount of money and this kind of money. They had no reason to do so. And there's no real direct benefit to the presbytery for doing this. I mean, there's an indirect benefit of like not having a church with a part-time minister, but like there's no direct benefit to this. There's no direct return on investments that's gonna come out of this. Um, it was pretty amazing to see. It was, it was, it was super encouraging.  [00:10:28] Jesse Schwamb: That is really encouraging. I, I think it's, there's no doubt that for the called pastor, their heart is in the ministry of the word. That's what they want to be doing. They wanna be doing it all the time and as much time as they possibly can, and they wanna be able to have all of their intentional focus on it. So I. I'm excited for that guy. I mean, that's just an incredible blessing to go in hoping for funding, essentially for a part-time role and to basically be told, no, no, no, no, that's, that's not enough. We want you to be committed to this fully as we know your heart is committed. As we validated that call.  [00:11:00] Why Structure Matters [00:11:00] Jesse Schwamb: I do love being a part of churches, well, lemme say it this way. There is, I think, a benefit of being part of congregations that have like a wide resource network that has like appropriate hierarchy and structure and that can be one of them. I've seen something similar in the Christian Missionary Alliance, which is the church that I'm in, not exactly the same, but I've seen some surprising allocations of resources where they basically said, you know, this is important. Like, it even trumps we're, we're gonna. Allocate or resource something so that this can move forward because it is important in a way that was like better than the person who was bringing it before them could have hoped for. Yeah. And uh, suddenly it's as if everything aligned. And it was really in part because there was this structure to come alongside, to validate as you're saying, and then to authenticate and then again to resource assets that could be used. There's, there's something to be said for that interdependency where there is kind of this hierarchical structure in which all that's happening at a level where things are codified. And again, like there's a structure and a way in which we move through those decisions to make sure that they suit the objective of the entire movement. So I guess there's nothing I'll say, but that's a beautiful thing, isn't it?  [00:12:14] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:12:15] Generosity in Action [00:12:15] Tony Arsenal: It was, it was, it was cool because it was like this, it was like this real. Actualization of the principle of outdoing one another and showing honor. Yeah, sure. Because you know, like the initial debate was like, Hey, you know, I'm not sure we can approve this call because the, the OPCs guidelines tell us not to approve a call that has less than 5% of the retirement benefit. And there was a lot of discussion of like, well, the presbytery can't modify the call, but we don't wanna delay this guy coming in and like, we don't wanna delay his ordination, his installation. And so the initial proposal was a, a. What feels like a large amount of money to me. But after I understood more about the, the budget of what's going on in, in the presbytery was actually a very small amount of money. Started with a very tiny, very modest proposal of basically like supplementing the retirement fund to make sure that like we could, they, I say we, like, I was part of this, I was just observing, but to supplement the retirement fund in a way that allowed the church to still proceed with the call as written, but still also make sure that this person had the appropriate retirement fund. And then that just basically was like, there would be some instruction given to the church that like, you've gotta bump this up in the next budget cycle. Like you've gotta get to the 5%. That's, that's the expectation. It went from that. And like I said, I won't give you the specific numbers, but one of the presbyters and I, I'm, I, um, I, I've known this presbyter from a distance for quite a long time and, and I have an immense amount of respect for him. He stood up and he's like, well, if we're gonna give X, why don't we just give 10 times X instead? And then actually, like the discussion was like, well, is, are we sure that 10 times X is even the right amount? Why don't we have this particular group meet over the lunch break and figure out whether that's the right number and then come back after lunch and we'll vote on it. And then they came back after lunch and it was actually a number that was even greater than 10 times X. So it was like this exercise in like. This very small proposal that was still imminently generous, right? The presbytery has no obligation to do this. There's no obligation from any of the presbyters to stand up and say like, we should. We should supplement this fund. They would've been well within their right, and no one would've looked, I think. I think some people would've been frustrated by it, but I don't think anyone would've looked sideways at it or thought it was sinful. If the presbytery just said like, we can't approve this call. You guys are gonna have to come back with it and we'll vote on it at the next presbytery. Like that would've been problematic. This, this kind of poor guy who's coming outta seminary, his call and his beginning of employment would've been delayed, but like. That would've been good and orderly, but instead they were like, one, we don't want this pulpit to stay empty longer. We don't wanna disadvantage this guy who's just getting done with seminary. We want him to get started. We don't wanna discourage him. So here's a small proposal, a very modest amount of money that we can put forward for this purpose. And then it was like, let's just keep seeing how much closer to a real full-time call we can get. And they finally came back and said like, we're gonna do this. We're gonna do this in a wise fashion. They structured it. So like the first year he gets more, the second year he gets a little bit less. The third year the church gets a little bit less with the idea that like each year the church should be adjusting their budget to compensate and get this guy to that with the, the hope that like with a full-time minister, they're able to grow their congregation to the point where they can support a full-time minister. So it was just this really cool, super encouraging exercise. And what I loved about it is the only real debate that was going on was about do we need to do more? There was no one being like, wait a second, why are we, why are we putting more money to this? The whole thing was like, is this actually enough to accomplish what we think God wants to do with this person's call? Because if, if God is truly calling this man to this, this particular church, and we believe that he is. Then what do we as a, as a people of God need to do to enable that call to look like what we actually believe calls to ministry are supposed to look like, which is a full-time call to ministry that is undistracted by the cares of the world. What do we need to do? The answer in this case was like, I think we need to put a sizable amount of money to it. Um, it's a, I mean, and again. I'm not gonna say it on the air. It was not a small chunk of change. Um, it was, it was a, it was a large amount of money that was devoted to this cause and that just goes to show how much this body values the importance of a full-time minister of the word, so. [00:16:50] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:16:51] OPC Love and Recommendation [00:16:51] Tony Arsenal: That's enough about that. I, I could gush about how proud I am to be a part of this body and how encouraged I am and how amazing it was and how awesome this, this guy, how, how much this guy must be thanking God for the providence and like, this is the last thing. I'll say this, this young man younger than me, I think he's graduating seminary. I saw him across the room. He looks like he's probably in his mid twenties, right? Young guy. He's got a wife doesn't have kids yet coming into this ministry, not only is he coming into this ministry, but as a Presbyterian minister, when he's installed as the minister of this church. He will be joining this body of presbyters as the, as his brothers like. He is not a member of the local church. He's a member of the presbytery, which is the regional church. So now he's coming into this fully supported by his brothers in the presbytery that he saw go to the mat to make sure he was properly taken care of, that the congregation was not unintentionally taking advantage of his labor, but also that he knows that all of these men are willing to do what they need to do to make sure that his ministry is successful and edifies the church like that is. Uh, I don't want to gush on Presbyterianism too much, but like that is Presbyterianism at peak form, right? This is the body of elders making sure that every church in the region, even the ones they're not directly ministering in, has what it needs to succeed and to honor God and to do what needs to happen. So I'm affirming the presbytery of New York and New England and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, I have been so blessed by knowing many of these presbyters. I've been so blessed by being a part of the congregation that I am. There are lots of really great churches and really great denominations out there. If you are looking for a church and there is an OPC congregation in your area, absolutely go check it out. I know it feels stuffy sometimes, and I will admit, like sometimes it feels a little bit overly traditional in terms of like just the vibe of the congregation,  [00:18:52] Jesse Schwamb: right?  [00:18:52] Tony Arsenal: But press past that because I don't think, I don't think you will find, um. You may find lots of congregations that are as faithful. I don't think you're gonna find many that are more faithful than your average OPC congregation. So I could be wrong. I just, I just love the OPC. I just really, really love it. So that's my affirmation. What do you got for us, Jesse?  [00:19:18] Denial Catholic Confession Math [00:19:18] Jesse Schwamb: I think I got denial, which is maybe a little bit unusual for me. [00:19:21] Tony Arsenal: As long as you're not denying the OPCI think we're fine.  [00:19:23] Jesse Schwamb: No, it's, it's not, it is church related and I, I'll try to keep it short 'cause I think I can make this way longer than it, it probably should be, but lemme think how to phrase this. So, I don't know with a devil negative, I guess when I'm a denying against is maybe not enough confession by your own standard. So the, I'm gonna try to make this so brief. I, I just happened to be out with my wife this afternoon and we had to run errands. We got stuck in traffic and this gave me longer than usual to sit in front of our. Very local and very large Catholic church. So I happen to be looking at their sign. It's a very large congregation. I've been actually been in this one on a couple of occasions for funerals. So not only do I know its size and scope, but again, if you get, if you get on this road at the wrong time on the Lord's day, you're gonna be stuck for a long time because there are so many people that attend. I say that because I noticed on the sign that there were three times for mass on the Lord's Day. So that also says something about the number of people coming through. And then on the sign though, underneath it said for confessions, go to our website. Mm-hmm. So I was like, man, I gotta lick this up because I can't tell if they're telling me I can confess on the website or if it's go to the website for the times. And I said to my wife, only half jokingly, if I can confess online, I'm gonna confess something. So I went to, I went to the website and, and sure enough it was almost disappointingly. It was just the times.  [00:20:45] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:20:46] Jesse Schwamb: Here's what I've found interesting, which just launched me into this like deep rabbit hole. There were three times for confession. Two of those times were just a half an hour, and the third time was an hour. So, uh, what I did was I went through, actually, I think what they had on there was, was three full hours a week. It was a little bit confusing, but I think it was three full hours. Now I think about it. So I went back, I just couldn't help myself, Tony. So I started to think, alright, let's say. I think it's fair to assume  [00:21:15] Tony Arsenal: math, Jesse is kicking in right now. Yes. You're gonna calculate how many minutes per, per person is what you're doing. I'm thinking, ah,  [00:21:22] Jesse Schwamb: yeah, it's something like that. So what I thought was, I don't think it's, uh, I was gonna be conservative. I wanna be fair. I wanna be fair. So, and now we should say like, I think most people realize that the Catholic understanding of confession and the Protestant one is, is very different. The Catholic sacrament of confession is the right through which Catholics are gonna confess their sins to a priest receive absolution, and it's gonna restore the relationship with God in the church. And, and they're gonna believe that the priest acts as a person of Christ and is bound by the seal of confession and an absolute kind of obligation. Uh, of course never to reveal what was disclosed during that process. So, by the way, the website that I went to, lovely instructions. I mean, I was like, wow. I was reading it to my wife who was, uh, not familiar with this at all, and she was like, they can make you do stuff. And I was like, well, yeah. I mean, obviously like there's, there's a portion of this where there's contrition or penant penance. It could be a prayer, it could be act of charity, like all kinds of stuff. So I went back and I thought. I don't think it's unreasonable that there's 350 persons that would say, let's say an average, uh, that would wanna take part of confession. Now, let's say that they did that at, at least monthly, just once a month. And, and I don't know how people's conviction is on that, but I'm gonna say conservatively once a month. Let's say that, and I don't think this is unreasonable, Tony, but you tell me. Let's say you're, you're trucking, you're moving through confession. Let's say it's five minutes a piece. So we're up to 1,750 minutes, uh, per month. That's the demand on the priest because I was, I was looking at this time and I was thinking something is strange here to me, so. That was the demand then, and I'll spare you the other math, which could be very long and un uninteresting. I'm coming up with, you'd need 2.24, two and a quarter priests, which of course you can't have a quarter priests or a quarter person for any reason. So you'd hire, you'd hire three priests, which satisfy the demand if, and the major assumptions here, that is like everybody can't show up at the same time. Obviously, I'm assuming that like everybody has their own time, they're spreading it out. So everybody gets the confession, but it's just five minutes. And I, I have no idea. I mean, if you're a Luther, that's certainly not sufficient time.  [00:23:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:23:20] Jesse Schwamb: And you would need three priests. Now here's the thing that I just kind of backed into that, besides like three being like, okay, that, that's, you would need three priests just to satisfy this congregation. If they're confessing for five minutes, once per month. Uh, by the way, if you said, well, half the congregation is going to go weekly, uh, then you, you would double the number of priests you need to 5.98 or six. But here's, here's the bottom line for me. This is why the denial comes in about maybe not enough, is. If you were just to distill that down to like, if you could have one priest cover that time, that there's a demand for like 779.4 hours, or excuse me, minutes of confession, that priest would only be allocating approximately like seven and a half percent of their working hours, their work toward handling confession. This seems like not enough confession given the standards of confession in the Catholic church. And again, I know that I'm, I'm now allocating that to one priest and I just told everybody you need three. That's true. So if you had these three now, if you hired three just to meet the demand, that would only be about like three and a half or a little under three and a half percent of their combined time. So the denial is Catholics, I think, unless I'm way off in some of my assumptions here, you might not be confessing enough by your own standards because  [00:24:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:24:34] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, that seems like not enough time.  [00:24:38] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:24:39] Ritual Faithfulness Explained [00:24:39] Tony Arsenal: I mean, I think, um. I don't want to be too bombastic here, but I think,  [00:24:46] Jesse Schwamb: I think I already started this on this  [00:24:48] Tony Arsenal: path. Maybe this, maybe this isn't all that bombastic. Um, because this is so much about ritual and actually I say this is gonna sound really, we, we go, but trying to think from the Roman Catholic perspective, it's actually not, and I'll I'll tell you a brief story, uh, to explain it. Um, a lot of Roman Catholics are just going through the motions. [00:25:13] Jesse Schwamb: That's true.  [00:25:14] Tony Arsenal: But the point, the, the, the point of contention actually is that going through the motions is valuable for the Roman Catholic, right? So I, I knew this, uh, this young woman when I was in college who was a Roman Catholic, and we had many discussions about, about the differences between Protestantism and and Roman Catholicism. And what I came to understand is that going to mass for her. Itself was an act of faith. And so for the Roman Catholic, the concept of, of faith is different than the concept that Protestants operate under. So for the Roman Catholic who, um, goes to mass, even when they feel like they're, like, when they think they're just going through the motions, going through the motions is itself the act of faith. And that's because for most of Roman Catholics, most of Roman Catholicism, faith really equals faithfulness, right? So, so doing the act is the act of faithfulness. Doing the act is faith. Where for the Protestant, like faith is about belief and trust and knowledge. Like it's, it's an. Not entirely intellectual, but it's, it's an inward thing for the Roman Catholic faith is an out is primarily an outward thing. It's what you do, it's how you act. It's faith formed in love. It's faith formed in charity.  [00:26:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:26:37] Tony Arsenal: So I think most Roman Catholics going to obligatory confession first. I think once a month is probably like, probably more frequent than most Roman Catholics go to mass or go to confession. Um, I thought I read a stat that it was like every six months is, is pretty average and I think that's what's required by the church maybe even once a year is, is required by the church. Um, I think like most Roman Catholics go into the, the confessional booth and like father forgive me for I've sinned. It's been such and such a number of days since my last confession. Right. And they may bring up a couple particular things that they've done and, and then I think the priest commonly absolves them of all of their sins. Like, almost like in an omnibus fashion and then prescribes their acts of penance, which is it, it like, honestly, it's probably things they should already be doing as a faithful Catholic saying Hail Marys and doing our fathers and acts of charity and things like that. So I think your math is probably right. [00:27:39] Protestant Repentance Particular [00:27:39] Tony Arsenal: I think your, your theory that more confession is probably like, I'm gonna read this from, uh, the Westminster confession, just to, just to say it here, is, this is chapter 15, which is titled of Repentance Under Life. And this is, uh, this is section five or paragraph five. It says, men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but is every man's duty to endeavor, to repent of his particular sins, particularly. And I think that's just such a beautifully phrased sentence like. Not only is it like potent theologically, but like, it just, it just feels good, like in terms of like the English language to repent of your particular sins, particularly. And like the idea is yes, Protestant reform, Christians affirm a general repentance from sin, right? We repent of our sin before the father, uh, as a result of our, of our coming to faith in Christ. And as part of our sanctification, we mortify our sin and we, Viv we are vivified by the spirit and repentance falls in that ongoing sanctification process. And there is this general repentance of like, I repent of the fact that I'm a sinner and that I commit sins, but there is this element in the reformed faith of like, I should be confessing to God. And I think by extension, like we should be confessing to our fellow Christians, our particular sins, our individual sins, and we should be doing that on particular occasion. And I think like. The Luther style confession of like going into the confessor and confessing like every particular sin. Particularly I think most Roman Catholic priests would, priests. Priests would probably have the same reaction Tobits did where he was like, get outta here. Like, come on dude. Like just go live your life and like deal with it. I think that's probably the reaction most Catholic priests would have. But yeah, I think you're right. Like if we're really talking about like. Five, five minutes of confession once a month and that somehow having some sort of spiritual efficacy. I'm not sure I buy that math. Like I think you're, you're probably spot on.  [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:29:47] Confession Hours Oddities [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: I just was curious about how many priests would be required and then the allocation of the duties. By the way, you are right. So I, because I had to check on this, the, the fourth letter in council of 1215 does say that the church requires confession of any grave or mortal sins at least once a year. But the church, yeah, strongly encourages more frequent confession as a spiritual practice, even for, of course, like the venial or the less serious sins in their eyes. So yeah, my thought here was just that. I think it's actually undervalued by way of the math. Like the, as the kids say, the math just isn't math thing for me on this one. But I was more curious about, since this is one of the seven sacraments, even if you just said like, well, it should have at least one seven of the allocation. That's like, what? Like something like 14%. And so this is, um, almost half of that. I just found it a little bit, a little bit odd and yeah, I think you'd have to be, uh, so in other words, when I looked at the, basically, here's the bottom line. When I looked at the hours for confession one, there were weird times and uh, two, I was like, that doesn't seem like enough hours. Like, it was just more like that. Like how that's like saying like, Hey, the post office is open three hours a week, and by the way, one of those hours is from seven to eight o'clock on Friday. Like they had some hours. One hour just on Friday was like, I guess that's the way you wanna start your weekend is like, let's get all of this off my chest. Yeah. And, and do it. Right. And the last thing I'll say by the way, is you're correct. When you look at the instruction they give you, and this is common of course, toward the end, when they say like, here's how you like wrap up your part. Actually everybody should go read, go to the local, local Catholic church website and read the instructions. 'cause in some ways they're just interesting and kind of, um, I don't wanna say funny 'cause I'm not making fun. I'm just saying like, they have to give you instruction if you've never done it before. And so most of us are not really probably familiar with the process and they give you explicit instruction and toward the end it's like, here's how you kinda like hang up the call with the priest. And it's like you said, you know, these are my sins and all others, would you be willing to forgive? So you're right. Right. They just kinda wrap them all up because it's sins of omission, sense of commission, it's all to be together. But I, I wonder, you gotta think there's people in there that are like. The priests are like, okay, man, just yeah. Wrap, come on, wrap, wrap it up.  [00:31:55] Confession Timing Talk [00:31:55] Jesse Schwamb: And other people that come in are just like, you know, forgive me father. And uh, lastly to your point, when they give you instruction about how you should start, of course you're always to signify how long it's been since your last confession. Right. Confession. And they say parenthetically, like, reference the days, weeks, months, or years. So you're right. There are gonna be people that probably do it very frequently and probably people who do it infrequently still, I would say I just couldn't believe for a church this large, that there was just three hours a week.  [00:32:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:21] Jesse Schwamb: For everybody else.  [00:32:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:23] Vance and Papal Authority [00:32:23] Tony Arsenal: This leads me to two very brief sub, uh, denials slash affirmations. Uh, I don't know if you saw this, um, this is not a political statement, right? I, I have lots of feelings and thoughts about the current administration and I think most of my feelings and thoughts would surprise. Everybody. But I thought it was hilarious because JD Vance, who is a Roman Catholic, uh, confessed Roman Catholic part of the Roman Catholic Church, uh, he ha I, I'm not sure if I'm affirming or denying this, there was this funny, uh, funny exchange. I think he was at doing like a, doing like a TPU, I don't know, speech. He was doing a speech at some conservative event and he said something like, I think that the Pope should be more careful when he makes theological statements. I'm wanna be like, do you understand what the pope is in your religion? That was one of my sub denials. Uh, I don't remember what the other one is, so it must not have been that important. It'll come back to me at the worst possible moment and I will try very hard not to interrupt our show for it, but I probably will fail.  [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:33:25] Reading Matthew 21 [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, we, we gotta get to some scripture because. We're, we're doing this old school style where we take like half the time and just talk about affirmations. It's true in house. It's true. Which is great fun. But let's, let's get back to Matthew 21. And I, I know we did this last time, but I am gonna rock through the passage 'cause of course, that's the best part of any of our discussion, is actually hearing from, from the Holy Spirit through the scripture, uh, which he's given to us. So this is, uh, Matthew 21, starting in verse 33. And you're gonna hear the, the whole thing right here. Uh, this is Jesus speaking. Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard and put a wall around it and dug a wine press in it and built a tower and rented it out to vine growers and went on a journey. Now, when the high risk time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit, and the vine growers took his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Again, he sent another group of slaves larger than the first, and they did the same thing to them. But afterward he sent his son to them saying they will respect my son. But when the vine growers saw the sun, they said among themselves, this is the heir. Come let us kill him and seize his inheritance, and they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine growers? They said to him, he will bring those wretches to a wretched end and will rent out the vineyard to other vine growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons. Jesus said to them, did you ever read in the scriptures the stone, which the builders rejected? This has become the chief cornerstone. This came about from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruit of it. And he who falls in the stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust. And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they understood that he was speaking about them. And although they were seeking to seize him, they feared the crowds because they're regarding him to be a prophet. [00:35:28] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:35:30] Pharisees Condemn Themselves [00:35:30] Tony Arsenal: This is like a super heavy parable. Right. And we talked a lot last week about how like the point of this parable is not necessarily to try to instruct the Pharisees or the Sadducees. Like it's not to instruct the people who were going to reject Christ, uh, the, the builders who would reject the cornerstone. It's really a parable to teach those. Who are observing this process happening. But I think it's, I, I think it's really interesting just listening to you read this and reading through it, and I guess this is a question I haven't asked and I, I need to study a little bit more. It's crazy to me in verse 41, um, Christ seems the, the, the, um, Matthew seems to say here, and maybe I need to do a little bit more Greek study, so bear with me and, and have grace if I'm wrong here. Matthew seems to say that like Christ asks the people he's speaking to, the Pharisees he's speaking to, what is he gonna do to these people? And the Pharisees answer, he's gonna put those wretches to a miserable death.  [00:36:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right?  [00:36:37] Tony Arsenal: Like the people listening to this parable understand the outcome, like they understand the. The consequence that the, the, the vineyard owner or the vineyard tenant tenants are facing based on their lack of faithfulness to the covenant. To me, that is like a really striking part of this parable. And, and it's not even like the parable proper, but like the striking element of the context of this is that nobody listening to this parable, including the Pharisees that this parable has basically spoken against, nobody fails to see the gravity of the consequence of rejecting God's emissary, like rejecting the Messiah. That to me is like a really, I dunno, paradigmatic. Portion of this that I think we need to grapple with. This is not an unclear, an unclear outcome. This is not, this is not masked or vague or OPA opaque. Like everybody understands, the people who reject the Messiah are going to face dire and eternal consequences for that act. [00:37:48] Jesse Schwamb: That does make this really interesting, doesn't it? Because it's not just entirely like Romans one adventures or even Romans two. It's that this is what Jesus does and he does it in a profound way that's not trickery like I think kinda like you're saying like the lead up to this isn't as if he's even leading the witness. He's making it very clear, all like the parameters of the story and the characters involved and what should be the proper judgment. And it's not as if like they start saying, they're like, oh, we shouldn't say anything more like we, we plead the fifth because it's gonna condemn ourselves. He draws his audience in to producing and pronouncing like their own sentence. It's very much like, I think I mentioned this last time, the prophet Nathan and David, isn't it? It's the exact same. Yeah. And the verdict is unanswerable, like even in its own terms. These other, like these other vine growers, prefigures of course like the inclusion of the Gentiles and the apostolic office. But I like that what Jesus does here, even before he gets to that point, is he extorts from them an acknowledgement of the punishment which awaited them. And so in this way there's like, I think the Puritans use this passage a lot actually to demonstrate that the natural conscience even of like the unregenerate, still bears witness to divine justice. That's Romans two. Like they, they can't get out from underneath it and Jesus isn't using any trickery on them to get them to say this thing. They are compelled in their own way, even being unregenerate to, like you said, even as they're rejecting the Messiah to recognize that punishment is due these characters in the story, even as they perceive at the end that they are those characters. [00:39:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:22] Jesse Schwamb: Saying we'll receive the judgment.  [00:39:24] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:25] Usurpers Not Misguided [00:39:25] Tony Arsenal: And I think too, like, um, this is kind of one of those chicken or the egg scenarios, right? Like Christ is both recognizing the intention of their heart as well as prophesying. And, and not just prophesying, but like inception level prophesying the, the outcome of the intention of their heart. And so like, again, like we've, we spent a whole week kind of like leading into the parable and now we spent a whole week, we're gonna spend a whole week again kind of leading into the parable. This is such a deep parable, and that like Christ is not just laying bare. The fact that the, the people who were going to reject him were doing so out of this sort of like attempt and intention of usurping the kingdom of God for their own purposes. I think that brings a layer to this that we don't often appreciate in. Christ's interaction with the Pharisees. I think sometimes, and maybe this is because I just listened to an episode of where Matt Whitman on the 10 minute Bible hour talked about this. I think sometimes we actually have a tendency to sort of be sympathetic to the Pharisees where we think, you know, they were, they were just trying to obey God's law and they got a little sideways on it and you know, they were putting these boundaries in place, but they were doing it in this sort of like misguided attempt to protect the people. Christ actually here seems to contradict that in that the comparison he's making is not to a, a well-intentioned group of people who just get it wrong, but he's painting the Pharisees, the, the religious leaders, the Sadducees, the chief priests. He's painting them as these usurpers who recognize the proper authority of right. The master and his emissaries and ultimately of his son, they recognize this proper authority and rather than submitting to it and submitting to the covenant obligations that they, they already actually agreed to, instead of doing that, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own right. It's not just that they do the wrong thing, it's that they recognize the heir, which is Christ. They recognize this heir and they kill him to try to take his place. That is a really heavy element of this parable. Christ is not painting. Um, the, the, the Pharisees here, the, the religious leaders. He's not painting them as um, well-intentioned, but ultimately wrong, which is I think a lot of times, and I think there's reason to do this right. I'm not being overly critical and I've done this, I've actually done this myself, and I think there's some. Space for it. Like the Pharisees were wrong, but they were wrong, kind of in the right direction sometimes. Um, Christ is not really on board with that, at least in this parable. Right. This isn't about them thinking that the heir was a threat, and so killing the threat in, you know, inadvertently this is them absolutely seeing who the hair, who the heir is, and intentionally deciding to reject that heir and to murder him and to try to take his inheritance. Mm-hmm. That's an affront to not only the heir who they murder, but an affront to the owner of the vineyard himself, which of course in this parable is figured to be God the father primarily. But God in sort of general terms, like the whole Godhead, um, with Christ as the second Adam has, as his representative, as his heir. This is a really heavy parable and I think where this comes into play for us in our own Christian life is. Are there times where we. Sort of do the same thing in refusing to, maybe it's tie into your denial a little bit. Like refusing to acknowledge our own sinfulness, refusing to acknowledge the ways that God has provided for us. Um, do we at times look at what we have and lay claim to it as though it is our own inheritance that we've taken? Um, right. Do we kind of crucify the son of God anew in, in refusing to repent of our sins particularly? I dunno. I think those are some open questions for us to kind of explore as we dig into this a bit more. [00:43:54] Jesse Schwamb: And that may relate as well to, well eventually at some point, I dunno, like 2040, get to like the parable of the talents. There's some similarity there with a little bit, right? You're saying? I think you're right.  [00:44:06] God Does All the Verbs [00:44:06] Jesse Schwamb: And where I think we can anchor some of that is in those first couple of verses. I'm really always impressed by really the number of action verbs that are packed within, like that just initial statement of Jesus explaining the situation. [00:44:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:44:19] Jesse Schwamb: So he sets it all up and he's saying there's a planting that goes on, this landowner puts up a wall, digs a wine press. Builds a tower and then RINs it. So there's all these like amazing things being done, all this action verb. And I, I think in part why he comes against the Pharisees so hard in the same way that we're looking at like the parable that, uh, the, uh, talents for instance of saying like, what did you do with that was entrusted to you was like this great treasure which Christ has entrusted or God has entrusted to his people, which is, is the gospel essentially is, is all a prophetic witness, is like the truth of who God is and his revelation of himself. And so I think. The first thing we gotta see in those verbs is that there's this emphasis that the vineyard was God's sovereign creation. You know, he plants it, he chose it, he established it. Israel didn't plant herself. She was planted. And that sovereign initiative is foundational, I think in, like you're saying, the parables indictment, because these vine growers, they don't possess anything that they did not receive. Right. You know, they did not find a vineyard already planted, but God himself made it from the wilderness that all his glory, all the glory might be his. So. I think it's helpful for us to observe that the church is always the planting of the Lord and that no congregation flourishes that is not first planted by God. And so there is a major offense here when those who are to care for it, who know, like you're saying, that they ought to care for it, who understand something about the hierarchy and the way it has been entrusted to them. Not to only break that covenant, but then seek to try to usurp the power in the roles of those whom they should be, quite frankly, in our own language, like under shepherds too. And so it starts with all, all those verbs. Like I think we could probably spend a. A lot of times just speaking about what does it mean? Why? Why is there all this explicit in particular language about the fact that there's a hedge and there's a press besides just these are part in piece mail or part and parcel of what it means to have a vineyard, apparently, but that they're all part of this narrative of God talking about how he protects and cares for his people and sets them in a place and chooses them and is particular about the construction and does so with great volition and authority and care and concern and creative ability. And then again, you have those who are meant there to do the very job that he's entrusted them with. And not only are they not doing that, and of course you're right. Jesus elsewhere, comes in, comes in hot, right, with a Pharisees saying like, listen, you set burdens on people's backs that you yourselves cannot lift. You're twice as in the hell as anybody else, and that's who you are. Yeah. It's not just hypocrisy, but you're literally setting people up to fail in this. So you can see how you're right. It's not just like, guys, I appreciate that. Like you wanted to set up some additional boundaries and maybe you took it a little bit too far. This parable is just scorched earth. It's, it's nuclear. Yeah.  [00:47:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:47:11] Scandalous Vineyard Setup [00:47:11] Tony Arsenal: And you know, I think, um, we are obviously gonna spend another week on this 'cause we still have not really addressed a single verse in this parable. I, I think like a lot of ink has been spilled on explaining sort of like the feal agricultural arrangements of this passage. What it represents. M my understanding is. A typical arrangement would be that a, a landowner would basically just lease out land and the tenants would be responsible for the planting, for the development. Right. And the, the, the landowner would essentially just collect a portion of whatever they produce. Right. This parable is actually taking this a step further. Exactly. That it's not as though the landowner just says like, all right, you can use this land. Right. And I own the land, so I get a portion of the pro, the profit. He's actually done all the work. Yes. And all that. The, all that the, the tenants need to do essentially is reap the harvest and then provide the portion of the harvest that belongs to the landowner, and so there is a greater investment. Of the landowner into this land than would be expected. We've commented in the past about how a lot of times the, the parables start on sort of a premise of shock. Like there's a, there's an element of the setup of the, of the parable where the audience would kind of like sit back and gasp or kind of be like, wait a second. Like that's not normal. Right. In the parable of the, the, um, lost son, it was the idea that like the son demanded his inheritance. And that wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part was that the father just granted it. Right. Or, um, the lost sheep, like the, there's actually a sort of a shocking element to the fact that like the, the land, the like sheep owner would just go get this other sheep. So we've, we've commented on there's kind of like. There's sort of like a scandalous setup. The scandalous setup in this is not that the land has been leased to tenants, right? It's that the land has been prepared for the tenants before it was leased out in the first place. And I think that's something we might miss if we read over this too quickly, is. The landowner has prepared everything for these, these tenants.  [00:49:30] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:49:31] Tony Arsenal: So the, the, at the, the punchline of the parable where they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty of, um, sovereignty and maybe a lowercase s in the, in the context of the parable, they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty and the rightful claim of the tenant or of the landowner on the, the profit of the land. And sort of like highlighter emphasized by the fact that they actually didn't do any of the work. There's a certain kind of like Amer, like American rugged individualism where we're kind of like, yeah, like if I planted all the crops, then it's kind of lame that this guy's coming in expecting to take a portion of it, right? Like, yeah, I guess he owns the land, so maybe he gets a little piece of it, but like, who does he think he is? All of that already is already short circuited. Like I. The, these tenants are not actually, um, portrayed as doing anything in this parable. That's right. Like they just lease the land. They, they, um, and leased is not really like the right. The right word, the, the Greek word is omi, which is like he gave over the land to them. Um, when we say leased, we have this idea that like the tenants pay to use the land and then like part of their contract is that whatever profits they reap, uh, off the land goes back to the, to the landowner. This is really more like the landowner graciously allowed them to live on this land, and the only payment he required was that they would eventually provide him part of the profit back. Like he's planted the land, he's put up the fence around it. He dug the wine press so that they could make a product out of it. He built the tower so it would be defended. Yes. And he gave it over to them essentially just to like live on until it was time for the harvest. And all he is asking for is basically like, alright, so this is my land. I've planted the vineyards, the profit is mine to have. And so when the time came for him to come claim that that's where they have now rejected him. Yes. That's where they've now said like, I know you did all the work and really graciously allowed us to live in this land, but we're gonna keep all of it for ourselves. That's the scandal of this. That's what I think like the original audience would've set up and like, wait a second here. Like, hold on. They didn't even plant the vineyards themselves. They didn't even build the tower themselves. That's really the force of this that I think we miss when we, when we overemphasize, trying to think through like what the original agricultural arrangements were. 'cause this is painted. Very different than what the original arrangements would've been typical for. Like this is a different scenario and I think intentionally so,  [00:52:09] Jesse Schwamb: and we need those words like rented, at least in English, to help us understand that it didn't belong to them. It wasn't a gift, right? It wasn't as if like it was just turned over in the sense that it belongs to you now do with it what you will. And it's very clear in the passage one, like you said, that the landowner does all those things. So it was a, you know, he completely set it up. I mean, this is just such a beautiful, I think, depiction of the hold of prophetic, you know, understanding of God's word here, but it's very clear that says the, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit. So you're right. The scandal is that they're like, well, obviously. They need to give him his fruits, like  [00:52:48] Tony Arsenal: right.  [00:52:48] Jesse Schwamb: It was all set up before he left on this long journey. He then turned it over to them to care for, and that was really all that they were supposed to do. They had no role in this. And so it does like lead us in into this weird space where it's like, well, well what, what did the Pharisees think they were trying to do themselves? What does actually Jesus commenting on, on their own, like licit on their own initiative here, is he basically saying that not only are they not respecting his sovereignty, but they were trying to claim for themselves what only rightly belongs to God that even their position right. Society in culture as their representatives, God himself, they wanted to take that over for themselves, which he does bring that condemnation upon them in other parts of the scripture. So again, this is really hot. I think it's a, it's both heat and light, but there's no doubt that there's fire to this, right? Because it's a direct indictment that God the father set all of this up. You yourselves are on rented property, but guess what? Even the property that you've rented, I'm not exacting a tax from you as if like you have put forward and grown or supplied or created some kind of profitable outcome here. And I just want a piece of that. He's not even talking about tithing in that sense. What he's basically saying is, none of this belongs to you. Like how? Right? How dare you? None of this is yours. I set all of this up and in fact, because you've done so poor poorly at this, I'm gonna take it away from you and give it to those who actually produce fruit and guess what's gonna be the Gentiles? So it's, there's a wild. Amounts of condemnation packed into a very small story.  [00:54:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. It really is.  [00:54:22] Tenants Add Nothing [00:54:22] Tony Arsenal: Um, there is nothing expected of these tenants. Right. There's no contract, like there's no terms, they, they really add nothing to the, the landowner's land, except I guess maybe they're the ones harvesting these, this fruit. Right. But even that's not explicit in the parable.  [00:54:43] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.  [00:54:43] Tony Arsenal: Right. Right. He, he does all just to steal your thunder, like he does all the verbs. Yes. All of the ves are done by the landowner.  [00:54:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Right  [00:54:51] Tony Arsenal: on. There is an implication that the, the tenants are somehow like the ones harvesting this, or they're the ones producing the wine, I guess, in the wine vat or the wine press. But at the end of the day. A normal tenant landowner agreement would be, I'm, you're, first of all, you're probably gonna pay me to use this land, right? You're paying me to use this land, and the way you pay me is you're gonna plant the, the gr the crop. You're gonna harvest it. You're gonna make the produce, and all I'm gonna do is let you live on this land. I'm gonna take the pro, like the profit, you're gonna pay me outta that profit. There is nothing asked or expected of these, th

In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse dive deep into Matthew 21:33-46, examining Jesus's parable of the wicked tenants. The hosts unpack how Christ masterfully draws the Pharisees into pronouncing their own condemnation, revealing not merely theological error but intentional usurpation of God's authority. Through careful exegesis, they explore the shocking setup of the parable—where the landowner does all the work while the tenants contribute nothing—and how this mirrors God's sovereign initiative in salvation. The discussion touches on confession, the value of full-time ministry, and the scandal of rejecting the Messiah despite recognizing His authority. This episode challenges listeners to examine whether they, like the Pharisees, attempt to claim God's work as their own. Key Takeaways God Does All the Verbs: The parable emphasizes that the landowner planted, built, protected, and prepared everything—the tenants contributed nothing yet claimed ownership of the fruit. Self-Pronounced Condemnation: Jesus draws the Pharisees into declaring their own judgment, demonstrating that even the unregenerate conscience bears witness to divine justice (Romans 2). Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error: The Pharisees weren't well-intentioned but misguided; they recognized Christ's authority as the heir and deliberately murdered Him to seize His inheritance. The Scandal of Grace: The parable's shocking element is that the landowner prepared everything before leasing the land—far exceeding normal agricultural arrangements and illustrating God's unmerited favor. Ecclesial Support for Ministry: The OPC presbytery's decision to fund a full-time call demonstrates how church structure can honor the ministry of Word and sacrament by freeing ministers from worldly distractions. Particular Repentance Matters: Westminster Confession 15.5 teaches that believers should not content themselves with general repentance but "endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly." The Stone Rejected Becomes Chief: Christ's citation of Psalm 118 reveals that the very rejection by the builders (religious leaders) was God's plan to establish the cornerstone of salvation. Key Concepts God Does All the Verbs The concentration of action verbs attributed solely to the landowner in Matthew 21:33 is theologically significant. The landowner plants, builds, digs, and rents—creating a fully functional, productive vineyard before the tenants ever arrive. This arrangement differs radically from typical first-century agricultural practices, where tenants would lease raw land and develop it themselves, sharing profits with the landowner. Jesus deliberately presents an extraordinary scenario where the tenants receive everything prepared and ready, requiring only stewardship of what already exists. This parallels God's sovereign initiative in election and salvation: believers contribute nothing to their standing before God, receiving instead a fully accomplished redemption. The Pharisees' rebellion wasn't against burdensome requirements but against simply acknowledging God's rightful ownership of what He alone created. Intentional Usurpation, Not Mere Error The hosts challenge the common sympathetic reading of the Pharisees as well-intentioned legalists who simply got sidetracked. Instead, verse 38 reveals the tenants explicitly recognize the son as heir and plot to murder him to "seize his inheritance." This isn't accidental rejection but calculated rebellion. The Pharisees weren't confused about Jesus's identity or authority—they understood precisely who He claimed to be and deliberately chose to destroy Him rather than submit. This interpretation carries significant weight for understanding the nature of unbelief: it's not primarily intellectual confusion but volitional rebellion. The religious leaders didn't need more evidence or clearer teaching; they needed transformed hearts. This same dynamic appears whenever humans recognize divine truth yet choose self-sovereignty over submission to God's rightful claim on their lives. The Scandal of Grace The parable begins with a scandalous premise that would have startled Jesus's original audience. Unlike normal tenant farming arrangements where landowners simply provided land in exchange for a share of whatever the tenants produced through their own labor, this landowner invests everything. He doesn't just own the property—he plants the vineyard, constructs the protective wall, digs the wine press for production, and builds the watchtower for defense. The tenants receive a turnkey operation requiring minimal effort. This extravagant preparation mirrors God's unmerited favor toward Israel and, by extension, the church. God didn't merely create humanity and wait to see what we would produce; He established covenants, sent prophets, preserved His Word, and ultimately sent His Son—all before requiring any response. The only "payment" demanded is acknowledging His ownership of what He created. The parable thus exposes the absurdity and ingratitude of claiming God's work as our own achievement. Memorable Quotes God does all the verbs. All of the verbs are done by the landowner. There is nothing expected of these tenants—they really add nothing to the landowner's land. Christ is not painting the Pharisees as well-intentioned but ultimately wrong. He's painting them as usurpers who recognize the proper authority and rather than submitting to it, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own. Men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but it is every man's duty to endeavor to repent of his particular sins, particularly. (Westminster Confession 15.5) Transcript Welcome to episode 491 of the Reformed Brotherhood. I'm Jesse.  [00:01:12] Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother.  [00:01:17] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother.  [00:01:18] Parable of Tenants [00:01:18] Jesse Schwamb: So picture this, Tony, your landlord. You've built the perfect vineyard. We're talking wall watchtower, wine, press, the works like what everybody says. Everybody knows you need all those things. You've got it all set up, and then you hand the keys to some tenants. You take a long trip, you go enjoy yourself. And when the harvest rolls around, you send your servants to collect the rent. And shockingly, your tenants, they beat. Stone. Another, the kill a third. So naturally you think, you know what? I'll fix this. Lemme just send more people. That's obviously the problem. There's some kind of just profound misunderstanding about what's going on here and about our relationship in this business. And then when that doesn't work, you send your son now loved ones. If this were a business strategy, we would already be calling hr. But of course it's not a business strategy, it's a parable. And Jesus is telling it to the very people about to prove the parable true. So welcome back to the Reformed Brotherhood because we're in Matthew Chapter 21 and we're gonna be actually getting all the way into the parable of the Vine growers where the patience of God looks, I would say, to almost anybody else, to humanize at least almost reckless until you realize that's exactly the point. So yeah, grab your beverage of choice, grab your Bible, pull the car over, will you? Because this is gonna get real and we're going to reason together. But before we do all of that, let's do a little affirming with or denying against, what do you got?  [00:02:41] Inside Baseball Affirmation [00:02:41] Tony Arsenal: So this is a sort of inside baseball, uh, affirmation. Um, I'm not sharing anything, although it may feel like I'm sharing something that is private and like, uh, like confidential. It's not No, this is good. Um, so I had the opportunity to visit. Um, my presbytery, um, for those who are listeners of the show or people who like, have been with us a long time, um, I was part of a Baptist church. Uh, I've always kind of been a Presbyterian at heart, but, um, our church closed, uh, a little over a year and a half ago now. And, um, uh, I've joined an OPC congregation in membership now. We've been members there for about a year. And, um, so I've been visiting Presbytery, which is the, the meeting of all of the leadership of all of the churches. So we won't do a polity breakdown here, but basically like, it's, it's the regional meeting. It's the regional business meeting or church meeting for a group of churches in the OPC, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. And so a lot of the meetings, you know, have the normal kind of business type stuff. You have reports from different committee committees and stuff. Um.  [00:03:48] Presbytery Call Debate [00:03:48] Tony Arsenal: Where this is affirmation is coming in here is at this most recent presbytery meeting, um, was pretty heavy on, um, licensing or, or, uh, not licensing on approving men who had received a call to formal ministry within the presbytery. And so in the OPC, and I would imagine that other Presbyterian bodies are not like super different, although I'm sure there's some variation in the OPC. Um, when a church intends to extend a call to a pastor, to a teaching elder, um, to a minister, they must have the call, which is. Is both theological but is also eminently practical. Like the call is a physical piece of paper that details, you know, what the pay is, how much vacation time. So it's kind of a combination between like a theological call and also a contract. Um, the presbytery has to approve that call. And so at this most recent one, there was a couple calls that were more or less uncontroversial. There was no question about them, and they were approved pretty quickly. But there was one call, um, one call to ministry that took, I, I, I didn't time it, but it was probably like four or five hours of debate and discussion in various fashion in order to get to a point where the presbytery could approve the call. So this was a call to a minister who is being called part-time, which is unusual in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, the OPC uh, acknowledges the fact that bivocational tent making ministry is sometimes a necessity, but really views the ministry of the word in sacrament as something that should not have. Distractions. And actually our book of church order talks about, doesn't use the word distraction, I think, but it talks about a, a properly ordered call to a full-time minister includes phrasing that the congregation promises to compensate them in a way that allows them to be free of worldly burdens and cares. And I might have not, not have gotten that wording exactly right. But that's the idea. And so this call was. Explicitly, um, not a full-time call it, they actually took the language out of promising to pay him in a way that he's able to ignore or to not be distracted by worldly care. And that was intentional, but there was a lot of question in discussion at presbytery level about the fact that the call did not include the phrase or the wording of part-time or bivocational. So the conversation started out of like, can this call be modified to include that? So it's explicitly known in this man's call that his calling is part-time, which is both theological, to make sure that the call is properly formatted, but also like very practical that the congregation should acknowledge explicitly that they recognize that this person is not, not going to be putting, you know, 40 hours a week or 50 hours a week towards this position. [00:06:34] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:06:34] Tony Arsenal: Um. What I'm affirming is where it got to, right? So there was lots of discussion about that. There was some finagling about the retirement package. The OPC recommends that a, a minister be given a retirement contribution of no less than 5% a year of his salaried package. Um, which there's a couple line items that go into that, but 5%, and this was a little bit less than that. And this is what I'm affirming and this, I, I don't know that this is a super widespread thing that would happen all across the, um, the OPC, but it happened in the presbytery of New York and New England this past week, and it's just amazing. And I just, I just want to lay it out there and then I want to hear your reaction. [00:07:13] Funding Full Time Ministry [00:07:13] Tony Arsenal: And I, I wanna hear your reaction as the son of a minister who labored his entire adult, more or less, his entire adult career in ministry, working two or three additional jobs on top of his ministry, the presbytery decided. That because it did not like the idea of a part-time minister. They didn't think that was appropriate. They didn't think that that was good or that that was really the right goal. The presbytery allocated, I'm not gonna say the figures 'cause they're not super germane, but allocated a significant amount of money to be dis to be dispersed to the church for the next three years in order to take what was a part-time call and enable it to become a full-time call. [00:07:54] Jesse Schwamb: Wow.  [00:07:54] Tony Arsenal: And so there are a lot of, there are a lot of church bodies that would say, yeah, we don't love the idea of bi-vocational ministry. You know, we really think it's ideal that a minister could be full-time. Um, they may even put some, some theological freight behind that. Um, I have never encountered a body, um. That was willing to put a sizable amount of money towards essentially supplementing a part-time call to make it full-time. Um, this was just amazing to me, and the candidate was there. I didn't get a chance to talk to him, but I would love to talk to him about what he felt. I, I can just imagine the phone call to his wife who was not, not at presbytery, but to his wife, following the outcome of this to be like, you are never gonna believe what just happened. Right? This is a family who was intending to move across country. Right. He's currently a student at Westminster, California in seminary, uh, California, Westminster Seminary in California, finishing his M Div. They're planning a cross country move into a part-time position where she's probably gonna have to find a job, and then also he's gonna have to find a part-time job. He had the ability to call her on the break and be like, you're never gonna guess what just happened? You're never gonna,  [00:09:09] Jesse Schwamb: it's wild.  [00:09:09] Tony Arsenal: Uh, sorry, I'm getting a little emotional here. You're never going to. Believe how faithful God is in this. Right. So I'm interested to hear your reaction to that as the son of a, of a try and quad at times Quad vocational. Yeah,  [00:09:23] Jesse Schwamb: for sure.  [00:09:23] Tony Arsenal: Minister who labored his entire, more or less, his entire adult career, um, working full-time in a call as a part-time, part-time minister. You know, like that's a, that's a crazy situation. So I'm just affirming that again, I don't know how common that kind of thing is in the OPC. I don't wanna make it seem like that's the norm. Um, I actually get the sense that this is probably not the norm, but it was amazing to see and it made me in intensely like. Proud in the right way of being a part of this broader body that would, would so emphasize and so value the ministry of the word and the sacrament, and the importance of a man being able to dedicate himself to that without distraction. That they would put forward this amount of money and this kind of money. They had no reason to do so. And there's no real direct benefit to the presbytery for doing this. I mean, there's an indirect benefit of like not having a church with a part-time minister, but like there's no direct benefit to this. There's no direct return on investments that's gonna come out of this. Um, it was pretty amazing to see. It was, it was, it was super encouraging.  [00:10:28] Jesse Schwamb: That is really encouraging. I, I think it's, there's no doubt that for the called pastor, their heart is in the ministry of the word. That's what they want to be doing. They wanna be doing it all the time and as much time as they possibly can, and they wanna be able to have all of their intentional focus on it. So I. I'm excited for that guy. I mean, that's just an incredible blessing to go in hoping for funding, essentially for a part-time role and to basically be told, no, no, no, no, that's, that's not enough. We want you to be committed to this fully as we know your heart is committed. As we validated that call.  [00:11:00] Why Structure Matters [00:11:00] Jesse Schwamb: I do love being a part of churches, well, lemme say it this way. There is, I think, a benefit of being part of congregations that have like a wide resource network that has like appropriate hierarchy and structure and that can be one of them. I've seen something similar in the Christian Missionary Alliance, which is the church that I'm in, not exactly the same, but I've seen some surprising allocations of resources where they basically said, you know, this is important. Like, it even trumps we're, we're gonna. Allocate or resource something so that this can move forward because it is important in a way that was like better than the person who was bringing it before them could have hoped for. Yeah. And uh, suddenly it's as if everything aligned. And it was really in part because there was this structure to come alongside, to validate as you're saying, and then to authenticate and then again to resource assets that could be used. There's, there's something to be said for that interdependency where there is kind of this hierarchical structure in which all that's happening at a level where things are codified. And again, like there's a structure and a way in which we move through those decisions to make sure that they suit the objective of the entire movement. So I guess there's nothing I'll say, but that's a beautiful thing, isn't it?  [00:12:14] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:12:15] Generosity in Action [00:12:15] Tony Arsenal: It was, it was, it was cool because it was like this, it was like this real. Actualization of the principle of outdoing one another and showing honor. Yeah, sure. Because you know, like the initial debate was like, Hey, you know, I'm not sure we can approve this call because the, the OPCs guidelines tell us not to approve a call that has less than 5% of the retirement benefit. And there was a lot of discussion of like, well, the presbytery can't modify the call, but we don't wanna delay this guy coming in and like, we don't wanna delay his ordination, his installation. And so the initial proposal was a, a. What feels like a large amount of money to me. But after I understood more about the, the budget of what's going on in, in the presbytery was actually a very small amount of money. Started with a very tiny, very modest proposal of basically like supplementing the retirement fund to make sure that like we could, they, I say we, like, I was part of this, I was just observing, but to supplement the retirement fund in a way that allowed the church to still proceed with the call as written, but still also make sure that this person had the appropriate retirement fund. And then that just basically was like, there would be some instruction given to the church that like, you've gotta bump this up in the next budget cycle. Like you've gotta get to the 5%. That's, that's the expectation. It went from that. And like I said, I won't give you the specific numbers, but one of the presbyters and I, I'm, I, um, I, I've known this presbyter from a distance for quite a long time and, and I have an immense amount of respect for him. He stood up and he's like, well, if we're gonna give X, why don't we just give 10 times X instead? And then actually, like the discussion was like, well, is, are we sure that 10 times X is even the right amount? Why don't we have this particular group meet over the lunch break and figure out whether that's the right number and then come back after lunch and we'll vote on it. And then they came back after lunch and it was actually a number that was even greater than 10 times X. So it was like this exercise in like. This very small proposal that was still imminently generous, right? The presbytery has no obligation to do this. There's no obligation from any of the presbyters to stand up and say like, we should. We should supplement this fund. They would've been well within their right, and no one would've looked, I think. I think some people would've been frustrated by it, but I don't think anyone would've looked sideways at it or thought it was sinful. If the presbytery just said like, we can't approve this call. You guys are gonna have to come back with it and we'll vote on it at the next presbytery. Like that would've been problematic. This, this kind of poor guy who's coming outta seminary, his call and his beginning of employment would've been delayed, but like. That would've been good and orderly, but instead they were like, one, we don't want this pulpit to stay empty longer. We don't wanna disadvantage this guy who's just getting done with seminary. We want him to get started. We don't wanna discourage him. So here's a small proposal, a very modest amount of money that we can put forward for this purpose. And then it was like, let's just keep seeing how much closer to a real full-time call we can get. And they finally came back and said like, we're gonna do this. We're gonna do this in a wise fashion. They structured it. So like the first year he gets more, the second year he gets a little bit less. The third year the church gets a little bit less with the idea that like each year the church should be adjusting their budget to compensate and get this guy to that with the, the hope that like with a full-time minister, they're able to grow their congregation to the point where they can support a full-time minister. So it was just this really cool, super encouraging exercise. And what I loved about it is the only real debate that was going on was about do we need to do more? There was no one being like, wait a second, why are we, why are we putting more money to this? The whole thing was like, is this actually enough to accomplish what we think God wants to do with this person's call? Because if, if God is truly calling this man to this, this particular church, and we believe that he is. Then what do we as a, as a people of God need to do to enable that call to look like what we actually believe calls to ministry are supposed to look like, which is a full-time call to ministry that is undistracted by the cares of the world. What do we need to do? The answer in this case was like, I think we need to put a sizable amount of money to it. Um, it's a, I mean, and again. I'm not gonna say it on the air. It was not a small chunk of change. Um, it was, it was a, it was a large amount of money that was devoted to this cause and that just goes to show how much this body values the importance of a full-time minister of the word, so. [00:16:50] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:16:51] OPC Love and Recommendation [00:16:51] Tony Arsenal: That's enough about that. I, I could gush about how proud I am to be a part of this body and how encouraged I am and how amazing it was and how awesome this, this guy, how, how much this guy must be thanking God for the providence and like, this is the last thing. I'll say this, this young man younger than me, I think he's graduating seminary. I saw him across the room. He looks like he's probably in his mid twenties, right? Young guy. He's got a wife doesn't have kids yet coming into this ministry, not only is he coming into this ministry, but as a Presbyterian minister, when he's installed as the minister of this church. He will be joining this body of presbyters as the, as his brothers like. He is not a member of the local church. He's a member of the presbytery, which is the regional church. So now he's coming into this fully supported by his brothers in the presbytery that he saw go to the mat to make sure he was properly taken care of, that the congregation was not unintentionally taking advantage of his labor, but also that he knows that all of these men are willing to do what they need to do to make sure that his ministry is successful and edifies the church like that is. Uh, I don't want to gush on Presbyterianism too much, but like that is Presbyterianism at peak form, right? This is the body of elders making sure that every church in the region, even the ones they're not directly ministering in, has what it needs to succeed and to honor God and to do what needs to happen. So I'm affirming the presbytery of New York and New England and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Um, I have been so blessed by knowing many of these presbyters. I've been so blessed by being a part of the congregation that I am. There are lots of really great churches and really great denominations out there. If you are looking for a church and there is an OPC congregation in your area, absolutely go check it out. I know it feels stuffy sometimes, and I will admit, like sometimes it feels a little bit overly traditional in terms of like just the vibe of the congregation,  [00:18:52] Jesse Schwamb: right?  [00:18:52] Tony Arsenal: But press past that because I don't think, I don't think you will find, um. You may find lots of congregations that are as faithful. I don't think you're gonna find many that are more faithful than your average OPC congregation. So I could be wrong. I just, I just love the OPC. I just really, really love it. So that's my affirmation. What do you got for us, Jesse?  [00:19:18] Denial Catholic Confession Math [00:19:18] Jesse Schwamb: I think I got denial, which is maybe a little bit unusual for me. [00:19:21] Tony Arsenal: As long as you're not denying the OPCI think we're fine.  [00:19:23] Jesse Schwamb: No, it's, it's not, it is church related and I, I'll try to keep it short 'cause I think I can make this way longer than it, it probably should be, but lemme think how to phrase this. So, I don't know with a devil negative, I guess when I'm a denying against is maybe not enough confession by your own standard. So the, I'm gonna try to make this so brief. I, I just happened to be out with my wife this afternoon and we had to run errands. We got stuck in traffic and this gave me longer than usual to sit in front of our. Very local and very large Catholic church. So I happen to be looking at their sign. It's a very large congregation. I've been actually been in this one on a couple of occasions for funerals. So not only do I know its size and scope, but again, if you get, if you get on this road at the wrong time on the Lord's day, you're gonna be stuck for a long time because there are so many people that attend. I say that because I noticed on the sign that there were three times for mass on the Lord's Day. So that also says something about the number of people coming through. And then on the sign though, underneath it said for confessions, go to our website. Mm-hmm. So I was like, man, I gotta lick this up because I can't tell if they're telling me I can confess on the website or if it's go to the website for the times. And I said to my wife, only half jokingly, if I can confess online, I'm gonna confess something. So I went to, I went to the website and, and sure enough it was almost disappointingly. It was just the times.  [00:20:45] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:20:46] Jesse Schwamb: Here's what I've found interesting, which just launched me into this like deep rabbit hole. There were three times for confession. Two of those times were just a half an hour, and the third time was an hour. So, uh, what I did was I went through, actually, I think what they had on there was, was three full hours a week. It was a little bit confusing, but I think it was three full hours. Now I think about it. So I went back, I just couldn't help myself, Tony. So I started to think, alright, let's say. I think it's fair to assume  [00:21:15] Tony Arsenal: math, Jesse is kicking in right now. Yes. You're gonna calculate how many minutes per, per person is what you're doing. I'm thinking, ah,  [00:21:22] Jesse Schwamb: yeah, it's something like that. So what I thought was, I don't think it's, uh, I was gonna be conservative. I wanna be fair. I wanna be fair. So, and now we should say like, I think most people realize that the Catholic understanding of confession and the Protestant one is, is very different. The Catholic sacrament of confession is the right through which Catholics are gonna confess their sins to a priest receive absolution, and it's gonna restore the relationship with God in the church. And, and they're gonna believe that the priest acts as a person of Christ and is bound by the seal of confession and an absolute kind of obligation. Uh, of course never to reveal what was disclosed during that process. So, by the way, the website that I went to, lovely instructions. I mean, I was like, wow. I was reading it to my wife who was, uh, not familiar with this at all, and she was like, they can make you do stuff. And I was like, well, yeah. I mean, obviously like there's, there's a portion of this where there's contrition or penant penance. It could be a prayer, it could be act of charity, like all kinds of stuff. So I went back and I thought. I don't think it's unreasonable that there's 350 persons that would say, let's say an average, uh, that would wanna take part of confession. Now, let's say that they did that at, at least monthly, just once a month. And, and I don't know how people's conviction is on that, but I'm gonna say conservatively once a month. Let's say that, and I don't think this is unreasonable, Tony, but you tell me. Let's say you're, you're trucking, you're moving through confession. Let's say it's five minutes a piece. So we're up to 1,750 minutes, uh, per month. That's the demand on the priest because I was, I was looking at this time and I was thinking something is strange here to me, so. That was the demand then, and I'll spare you the other math, which could be very long and un uninteresting. I'm coming up with, you'd need 2.24, two and a quarter priests, which of course you can't have a quarter priests or a quarter person for any reason. So you'd hire, you'd hire three priests, which satisfy the demand if, and the major assumptions here, that is like everybody can't show up at the same time. Obviously, I'm assuming that like everybody has their own time, they're spreading it out. So everybody gets the confession, but it's just five minutes. And I, I have no idea. I mean, if you're a Luther, that's certainly not sufficient time.  [00:23:20] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:23:20] Jesse Schwamb: And you would need three priests. Now here's the thing that I just kind of backed into that, besides like three being like, okay, that, that's, you would need three priests just to satisfy this congregation. If they're confessing for five minutes, once per month. Uh, by the way, if you said, well, half the congregation is going to go weekly, uh, then you, you would double the number of priests you need to 5.98 or six. But here's, here's the bottom line for me. This is why the denial comes in about maybe not enough, is. If you were just to distill that down to like, if you could have one priest cover that time, that there's a demand for like 779.4 hours, or excuse me, minutes of confession, that priest would only be allocating approximately like seven and a half percent of their working hours, their work toward handling confession. This seems like not enough confession given the standards of confession in the Catholic church. And again, I know that I'm, I'm now allocating that to one priest and I just told everybody you need three. That's true. So if you had these three now, if you hired three just to meet the demand, that would only be about like three and a half or a little under three and a half percent of their combined time. So the denial is Catholics, I think, unless I'm way off in some of my assumptions here, you might not be confessing enough by your own standards because  [00:24:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:24:34] Jesse Schwamb: Uh, that seems like not enough time.  [00:24:38] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:24:39] Ritual Faithfulness Explained [00:24:39] Tony Arsenal: I mean, I think, um. I don't want to be too bombastic here, but I think,  [00:24:46] Jesse Schwamb: I think I already started this on this  [00:24:48] Tony Arsenal: path. Maybe this, maybe this isn't all that bombastic. Um, because this is so much about ritual and actually I say this is gonna sound really, we, we go, but trying to think from the Roman Catholic perspective, it's actually not, and I'll I'll tell you a brief story, uh, to explain it. Um, a lot of Roman Catholics are just going through the motions. [00:25:13] Jesse Schwamb: That's true.  [00:25:14] Tony Arsenal: But the point, the, the, the point of contention actually is that going through the motions is valuable for the Roman Catholic, right? So I, I knew this, uh, this young woman when I was in college who was a Roman Catholic, and we had many discussions about, about the differences between Protestantism and and Roman Catholicism. And what I came to understand is that going to mass for her. Itself was an act of faith. And so for the Roman Catholic, the concept of, of faith is different than the concept that Protestants operate under. So for the Roman Catholic who, um, goes to mass, even when they feel like they're, like, when they think they're just going through the motions, going through the motions is itself the act of faith. And that's because for most of Roman Catholics, most of Roman Catholicism, faith really equals faithfulness, right? So, so doing the act is the act of faithfulness. Doing the act is faith. Where for the Protestant, like faith is about belief and trust and knowledge. Like it's, it's an. Not entirely intellectual, but it's, it's an inward thing for the Roman Catholic faith is an out is primarily an outward thing. It's what you do, it's how you act. It's faith formed in love. It's faith formed in charity.  [00:26:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right.  [00:26:37] Tony Arsenal: So I think most Roman Catholics going to obligatory confession first. I think once a month is probably like, probably more frequent than most Roman Catholics go to mass or go to confession. Um, I thought I read a stat that it was like every six months is, is pretty average and I think that's what's required by the church maybe even once a year is, is required by the church. Um, I think like most Roman Catholics go into the, the confessional booth and like father forgive me for I've sinned. It's been such and such a number of days since my last confession. Right. And they may bring up a couple particular things that they've done and, and then I think the priest commonly absolves them of all of their sins. Like, almost like in an omnibus fashion and then prescribes their acts of penance, which is it, it like, honestly, it's probably things they should already be doing as a faithful Catholic saying Hail Marys and doing our fathers and acts of charity and things like that. So I think your math is probably right. [00:27:39] Protestant Repentance Particular [00:27:39] Tony Arsenal: I think your, your theory that more confession is probably like, I'm gonna read this from, uh, the Westminster confession, just to, just to say it here, is, this is chapter 15, which is titled of Repentance Under Life. And this is, uh, this is section five or paragraph five. It says, men ought not to content themselves with a general repentance, but is every man's duty to endeavor, to repent of his particular sins, particularly. And I think that's just such a beautifully phrased sentence like. Not only is it like potent theologically, but like, it just, it just feels good, like in terms of like the English language to repent of your particular sins, particularly. And like the idea is yes, Protestant reform, Christians affirm a general repentance from sin, right? We repent of our sin before the father, uh, as a result of our, of our coming to faith in Christ. And as part of our sanctification, we mortify our sin and we, Viv we are vivified by the spirit and repentance falls in that ongoing sanctification process. And there is this general repentance of like, I repent of the fact that I'm a sinner and that I commit sins, but there is this element in the reformed faith of like, I should be confessing to God. And I think by extension, like we should be confessing to our fellow Christians, our particular sins, our individual sins, and we should be doing that on particular occasion. And I think like. The Luther style confession of like going into the confessor and confessing like every particular sin. Particularly I think most Roman Catholic priests would, priests. Priests would probably have the same reaction Tobits did where he was like, get outta here. Like, come on dude. Like just go live your life and like deal with it. I think that's probably the reaction most Catholic priests would have. But yeah, I think you're right. Like if we're really talking about like. Five, five minutes of confession once a month and that somehow having some sort of spiritual efficacy. I'm not sure I buy that math. Like I think you're, you're probably spot on.  [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:29:47] Confession Hours Oddities [00:29:47] Jesse Schwamb: I just was curious about how many priests would be required and then the allocation of the duties. By the way, you are right. So I, because I had to check on this, the, the fourth letter in council of 1215 does say that the church requires confession of any grave or mortal sins at least once a year. But the church, yeah, strongly encourages more frequent confession as a spiritual practice, even for, of course, like the venial or the less serious sins in their eyes. So yeah, my thought here was just that. I think it's actually undervalued by way of the math. Like the, as the kids say, the math just isn't math thing for me on this one. But I was more curious about, since this is one of the seven sacraments, even if you just said like, well, it should have at least one seven of the allocation. That's like, what? Like something like 14%. And so this is, um, almost half of that. I just found it a little bit, a little bit odd and yeah, I think you'd have to be, uh, so in other words, when I looked at the, basically, here's the bottom line. When I looked at the hours for confession one, there were weird times and uh, two, I was like, that doesn't seem like enough hours. Like, it was just more like that. Like how that's like saying like, Hey, the post office is open three hours a week, and by the way, one of those hours is from seven to eight o'clock on Friday. Like they had some hours. One hour just on Friday was like, I guess that's the way you wanna start your weekend is like, let's get all of this off my chest. Yeah. And, and do it. Right. And the last thing I'll say by the way, is you're correct. When you look at the instruction they give you, and this is common of course, toward the end, when they say like, here's how you like wrap up your part. Actually everybody should go read, go to the local, local Catholic church website and read the instructions. 'cause in some ways they're just interesting and kind of, um, I don't wanna say funny 'cause I'm not making fun. I'm just saying like, they have to give you instruction if you've never done it before. And so most of us are not really probably familiar with the process and they give you explicit instruction and toward the end it's like, here's how you kinda like hang up the call with the priest. And it's like you said, you know, these are my sins and all others, would you be willing to forgive? So you're right. Right. They just kinda wrap them all up because it's sins of omission, sense of commission, it's all to be together. But I, I wonder, you gotta think there's people in there that are like. The priests are like, okay, man, just yeah. Wrap, come on, wrap, wrap it up.  [00:31:55] Confession Timing Talk [00:31:55] Jesse Schwamb: And other people that come in are just like, you know, forgive me father. And uh, lastly to your point, when they give you instruction about how you should start, of course you're always to signify how long it's been since your last confession. Right. Confession. And they say parenthetically, like, reference the days, weeks, months, or years. So you're right. There are gonna be people that probably do it very frequently and probably people who do it infrequently still, I would say I just couldn't believe for a church this large, that there was just three hours a week.  [00:32:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:21] Jesse Schwamb: For everybody else.  [00:32:22] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:32:23] Vance and Papal Authority [00:32:23] Tony Arsenal: This leads me to two very brief sub, uh, denials slash affirmations. Uh, I don't know if you saw this, um, this is not a political statement, right? I, I have lots of feelings and thoughts about the current administration and I think most of my feelings and thoughts would surprise. Everybody. But I thought it was hilarious because JD Vance, who is a Roman Catholic, uh, confessed Roman Catholic part of the Roman Catholic Church, uh, he ha I, I'm not sure if I'm affirming or denying this, there was this funny, uh, funny exchange. I think he was at doing like a, doing like a TPU, I don't know, speech. He was doing a speech at some conservative event and he said something like, I think that the Pope should be more careful when he makes theological statements. I'm wanna be like, do you understand what the pope is in your religion? That was one of my sub denials. Uh, I don't remember what the other one is, so it must not have been that important. It'll come back to me at the worst possible moment and I will try very hard not to interrupt our show for it, but I probably will fail.  [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah.  [00:33:25] Reading Matthew 21 [00:33:25] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, we, we gotta get to some scripture because. We're, we're doing this old school style where we take like half the time and just talk about affirmations. It's true in house. It's true. Which is great fun. But let's, let's get back to Matthew 21. And I, I know we did this last time, but I am gonna rock through the passage 'cause of course, that's the best part of any of our discussion, is actually hearing from, from the Holy Spirit through the scripture, uh, which he's given to us. So this is, uh, Matthew 21, starting in verse 33. And you're gonna hear the, the whole thing right here. Uh, this is Jesus speaking. Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard and put a wall around it and dug a wine press in it and built a tower and rented it out to vine growers and went on a journey. Now, when the high risk time approached, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit, and the vine growers took his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Again, he sent another group of slaves larger than the first, and they did the same thing to them. But afterward he sent his son to them saying they will respect my son. But when the vine growers saw the sun, they said among themselves, this is the heir. Come let us kill him and seize his inheritance, and they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine growers? They said to him, he will bring those wretches to a wretched end and will rent out the vineyard to other vine growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons. Jesus said to them, did you ever read in the scriptures the stone, which the builders rejected? This has become the chief cornerstone. This came about from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruit of it. And he who falls in the stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust. And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they understood that he was speaking about them. And although they were seeking to seize him, they feared the crowds because they're regarding him to be a prophet. [00:35:28] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:35:30] Pharisees Condemn Themselves [00:35:30] Tony Arsenal: This is like a super heavy parable. Right. And we talked a lot last week about how like the point of this parable is not necessarily to try to instruct the Pharisees or the Sadducees. Like it's not to instruct the people who were going to reject Christ, uh, the, the builders who would reject the cornerstone. It's really a parable to teach those. Who are observing this process happening. But I think it's, I, I think it's really interesting just listening to you read this and reading through it, and I guess this is a question I haven't asked and I, I need to study a little bit more. It's crazy to me in verse 41, um, Christ seems the, the, the, um, Matthew seems to say here, and maybe I need to do a little bit more Greek study, so bear with me and, and have grace if I'm wrong here. Matthew seems to say that like Christ asks the people he's speaking to, the Pharisees he's speaking to, what is he gonna do to these people? And the Pharisees answer, he's gonna put those wretches to a miserable death.  [00:36:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right?  [00:36:37] Tony Arsenal: Like the people listening to this parable understand the outcome, like they understand the. The consequence that the, the, the vineyard owner or the vineyard tenant tenants are facing based on their lack of faithfulness to the covenant. To me, that is like a really striking part of this parable. And, and it's not even like the parable proper, but like the striking element of the context of this is that nobody listening to this parable, including the Pharisees that this parable has basically spoken against, nobody fails to see the gravity of the consequence of rejecting God's emissary, like rejecting the Messiah. That to me is like a really, I dunno, paradigmatic. Portion of this that I think we need to grapple with. This is not an unclear, an unclear outcome. This is not, this is not masked or vague or OPA opaque. Like everybody understands, the people who reject the Messiah are going to face dire and eternal consequences for that act. [00:37:48] Jesse Schwamb: That does make this really interesting, doesn't it? Because it's not just entirely like Romans one adventures or even Romans two. It's that this is what Jesus does and he does it in a profound way that's not trickery like I think kinda like you're saying like the lead up to this isn't as if he's even leading the witness. He's making it very clear, all like the parameters of the story and the characters involved and what should be the proper judgment. And it's not as if like they start saying, they're like, oh, we shouldn't say anything more like we, we plead the fifth because it's gonna condemn ourselves. He draws his audience in to producing and pronouncing like their own sentence. It's very much like, I think I mentioned this last time, the prophet Nathan and David, isn't it? It's the exact same. Yeah. And the verdict is unanswerable, like even in its own terms. These other, like these other vine growers, prefigures of course like the inclusion of the Gentiles and the apostolic office. But I like that what Jesus does here, even before he gets to that point, is he extorts from them an acknowledgement of the punishment which awaited them. And so in this way there's like, I think the Puritans use this passage a lot actually to demonstrate that the natural conscience even of like the unregenerate, still bears witness to divine justice. That's Romans two. Like they, they can't get out from underneath it and Jesus isn't using any trickery on them to get them to say this thing. They are compelled in their own way, even being unregenerate to, like you said, even as they're rejecting the Messiah to recognize that punishment is due these characters in the story, even as they perceive at the end that they are those characters. [00:39:21] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:22] Jesse Schwamb: Saying we'll receive the judgment.  [00:39:24] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:39:25] Usurpers Not Misguided [00:39:25] Tony Arsenal: And I think too, like, um, this is kind of one of those chicken or the egg scenarios, right? Like Christ is both recognizing the intention of their heart as well as prophesying. And, and not just prophesying, but like inception level prophesying the, the outcome of the intention of their heart. And so like, again, like we've, we spent a whole week kind of like leading into the parable and now we spent a whole week, we're gonna spend a whole week again kind of leading into the parable. This is such a deep parable, and that like Christ is not just laying bare. The fact that the, the people who were going to reject him were doing so out of this sort of like attempt and intention of usurping the kingdom of God for their own purposes. I think that brings a layer to this that we don't often appreciate in. Christ's interaction with the Pharisees. I think sometimes, and maybe this is because I just listened to an episode of where Matt Whitman on the 10 minute Bible hour talked about this. I think sometimes we actually have a tendency to sort of be sympathetic to the Pharisees where we think, you know, they were, they were just trying to obey God's law and they got a little sideways on it and you know, they were putting these boundaries in place, but they were doing it in this sort of like misguided attempt to protect the people. Christ actually here seems to contradict that in that the comparison he's making is not to a, a well-intentioned group of people who just get it wrong, but he's painting the Pharisees, the, the religious leaders, the Sadducees, the chief priests. He's painting them as these usurpers who recognize the proper authority of right. The master and his emissaries and ultimately of his son, they recognize this proper authority and rather than submitting to it and submitting to the covenant obligations that they, they already actually agreed to, instead of doing that, they're going to reject that authority and try to take it for their own right. It's not just that they do the wrong thing, it's that they recognize the heir, which is Christ. They recognize this heir and they kill him to try to take his place. That is a really heavy element of this parable. Christ is not painting. Um, the, the, the Pharisees here, the, the religious leaders. He's not painting them as um, well-intentioned, but ultimately wrong, which is I think a lot of times, and I think there's reason to do this right. I'm not being overly critical and I've done this, I've actually done this myself, and I think there's some. Space for it. Like the Pharisees were wrong, but they were wrong, kind of in the right direction sometimes. Um, Christ is not really on board with that, at least in this parable. Right. This isn't about them thinking that the heir was a threat, and so killing the threat in, you know, inadvertently this is them absolutely seeing who the hair, who the heir is, and intentionally deciding to reject that heir and to murder him and to try to take his inheritance. Mm-hmm. That's an affront to not only the heir who they murder, but an affront to the owner of the vineyard himself, which of course in this parable is figured to be God the father primarily. But God in sort of general terms, like the whole Godhead, um, with Christ as the second Adam has, as his representative, as his heir. This is a really heavy parable and I think where this comes into play for us in our own Christian life is. Are there times where we. Sort of do the same thing in refusing to, maybe it's tie into your denial a little bit. Like refusing to acknowledge our own sinfulness, refusing to acknowledge the ways that God has provided for us. Um, do we at times look at what we have and lay claim to it as though it is our own inheritance that we've taken? Um, right. Do we kind of crucify the son of God anew in, in refusing to repent of our sins particularly? I dunno. I think those are some open questions for us to kind of explore as we dig into this a bit more. [00:43:54] Jesse Schwamb: And that may relate as well to, well eventually at some point, I dunno, like 2040, get to like the parable of the talents. There's some similarity there with a little bit, right? You're saying? I think you're right.  [00:44:06] God Does All the Verbs [00:44:06] Jesse Schwamb: And where I think we can anchor some of that is in those first couple of verses. I'm really always impressed by really the number of action verbs that are packed within, like that just initial statement of Jesus explaining the situation. [00:44:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:44:19] Jesse Schwamb: So he sets it all up and he's saying there's a planting that goes on, this landowner puts up a wall, digs a wine press. Builds a tower and then RINs it. So there's all these like amazing things being done, all this action verb. And I, I think in part why he comes against the Pharisees so hard in the same way that we're looking at like the parable that, uh, the, uh, talents for instance of saying like, what did you do with that was entrusted to you was like this great treasure which Christ has entrusted or God has entrusted to his people, which is, is the gospel essentially is, is all a prophetic witness, is like the truth of who God is and his revelation of himself. And so I think. The first thing we gotta see in those verbs is that there's this emphasis that the vineyard was God's sovereign creation. You know, he plants it, he chose it, he established it. Israel didn't plant herself. She was planted. And that sovereign initiative is foundational, I think in, like you're saying, the parables indictment, because these vine growers, they don't possess anything that they did not receive. Right. You know, they did not find a vineyard already planted, but God himself made it from the wilderness that all his glory, all the glory might be his. So. I think it's helpful for us to observe that the church is always the planting of the Lord and that no congregation flourishes that is not first planted by God. And so there is a major offense here when those who are to care for it, who know, like you're saying, that they ought to care for it, who understand something about the hierarchy and the way it has been entrusted to them. Not to only break that covenant, but then seek to try to usurp the power in the roles of those whom they should be, quite frankly, in our own language, like under shepherds too. And so it starts with all, all those verbs. Like I think we could probably spend a. A lot of times just speaking about what does it mean? Why? Why is there all this explicit in particular language about the fact that there's a hedge and there's a press besides just these are part in piece mail or part and parcel of what it means to have a vineyard, apparently, but that they're all part of this narrative of God talking about how he protects and cares for his people and sets them in a place and chooses them and is particular about the construction and does so with great volition and authority and care and concern and creative ability. And then again, you have those who are meant there to do the very job that he's entrusted them with. And not only are they not doing that, and of course you're right. Jesus elsewhere, comes in, comes in hot, right, with a Pharisees saying like, listen, you set burdens on people's backs that you yourselves cannot lift. You're twice as in the hell as anybody else, and that's who you are. Yeah. It's not just hypocrisy, but you're literally setting people up to fail in this. So you can see how you're right. It's not just like, guys, I appreciate that. Like you wanted to set up some additional boundaries and maybe you took it a little bit too far. This parable is just scorched earth. It's, it's nuclear. Yeah.  [00:47:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:47:11] Scandalous Vineyard Setup [00:47:11] Tony Arsenal: And you know, I think, um, we are obviously gonna spend another week on this 'cause we still have not really addressed a single verse in this parable. I, I think like a lot of ink has been spilled on explaining sort of like the feal agricultural arrangements of this passage. What it represents. M my understanding is. A typical arrangement would be that a, a landowner would basically just lease out land and the tenants would be responsible for the planting, for the development. Right. And the, the, the landowner would essentially just collect a portion of whatever they produce. Right. This parable is actually taking this a step further. Exactly. That it's not as though the landowner just says like, all right, you can use this land. Right. And I own the land, so I get a portion of the pro, the profit. He's actually done all the work. Yes. And all that. The, all that the, the tenants need to do essentially is reap the harvest and then provide the portion of the harvest that belongs to the landowner, and so there is a greater investment. Of the landowner into this land than would be expected. We've commented in the past about how a lot of times the, the parables start on sort of a premise of shock. Like there's a, there's an element of the setup of the, of the parable where the audience would kind of like sit back and gasp or kind of be like, wait a second. Like that's not normal. Right. In the parable of the, the, um, lost son, it was the idea that like the son demanded his inheritance. And that wasn't the shocking part. The shocking part was that the father just granted it. Right. Or, um, the lost sheep, like the, there's actually a sort of a shocking element to the fact that like the, the land, the like sheep owner would just go get this other sheep. So we've, we've commented on there's kind of like. There's sort of like a scandalous setup. The scandalous setup in this is not that the land has been leased to tenants, right? It's that the land has been prepared for the tenants before it was leased out in the first place. And I think that's something we might miss if we read over this too quickly, is. The landowner has prepared everything for these, these tenants.  [00:49:30] Jesse Schwamb: That's right.  [00:49:31] Tony Arsenal: So the, the, at the, the punchline of the parable where they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty of, um, sovereignty and maybe a lowercase s in the, in the context of the parable, they refuse to acknowledge the sovereignty and the rightful claim of the tenant or of the landowner on the, the profit of the land. And sort of like highlighter emphasized by the fact that they actually didn't do any of the work. There's a certain kind of like Amer, like American rugged individualism where we're kind of like, yeah, like if I planted all the crops, then it's kind of lame that this guy's coming in expecting to take a portion of it, right? Like, yeah, I guess he owns the land, so maybe he gets a little piece of it, but like, who does he think he is? All of that already is already short circuited. Like I. The, these tenants are not actually, um, portrayed as doing anything in this parable. That's right. Like they just lease the land. They, they, um, and leased is not really like the right. The right word, the, the Greek word is omi, which is like he gave over the land to them. Um, when we say leased, we have this idea that like the tenants pay to use the land and then like part of their contract is that whatever profits they reap, uh, off the land goes back to the, to the landowner. This is really more like the landowner graciously allowed them to live on this land, and the only payment he required was that they would eventually provide him part of the profit back. Like he's planted the land, he's put up the fence around it. He dug the wine press so that they could make a product out of it. He built the tower so it would be defended. Yes. And he gave it over to them essentially just to like live on until it was time for the harvest. And all he is asking for is basically like, alright, so this is my land. I've planted the vineyards, the profit is mine to have. And so when the time came for him to come claim that that's where they have now rejected him. Yes. That's where they've now said like, I know you did all the work and really graciously allowed us to live in this land, but we're gonna keep all of it for ourselves. That's the scandal of this. That's what I think like the original audience would've set up and like, wait a second here. Like, hold on. They didn't even plant the vineyards themselves. They didn't even build the tower themselves. That's really the force of this that I think we miss when we, when we overemphasize, trying to think through like what the original agricultural arrangements were. 'cause this is painted. Very different than what the original arrangements would've been typical for. Like this is a different scenario and I think intentionally so,  [00:52:09] Jesse Schwamb: and we need those words like rented, at least in English, to help us understand that it didn't belong to them. It wasn't a gift, right? It wasn't as if like it was just turned over in the sense that it belongs to you now do with it what you will. And it's very clear in the passage one, like you said, that the landowner does all those things. So it was a, you know, he completely set it up. I mean, this is just such a beautiful, I think, depiction of the hold of prophetic, you know, understanding of God's word here, but it's very clear that says the, he sent his slaves to the vine growers to receive his fruit. So you're right. The scandal is that they're like, well, obviously. They need to give him his fruits, like  [00:52:48] Tony Arsenal: right.  [00:52:48] Jesse Schwamb: It was all set up before he left on this long journey. He then turned it over to them to care for, and that was really all that they were supposed to do. They had no role in this. And so it does like lead us in into this weird space where it's like, well, well what, what did the Pharisees think they were trying to do themselves? What does actually Jesus commenting on, on their own, like licit on their own initiative here, is he basically saying that not only are they not respecting his sovereignty, but they were trying to claim for themselves what only rightly belongs to God that even their position right. Society in culture as their representatives, God himself, they wanted to take that over for themselves, which he does bring that condemnation upon them in other parts of the scripture. So again, this is really hot. I think it's a, it's both heat and light, but there's no doubt that there's fire to this, right? Because it's a direct indictment that God the father set all of this up. You yourselves are on rented property, but guess what? Even the property that you've rented, I'm not exacting a tax from you as if like you have put forward and grown or supplied or created some kind of profitable outcome here. And I just want a piece of that. He's not even talking about tithing in that sense. What he's basically saying is, none of this belongs to you. Like how? Right? How dare you? None of this is yours. I set all of this up and in fact, because you've done so poor poorly at this, I'm gonna take it away from you and give it to those who actually produce fruit and guess what's gonna be the Gentiles? So it's, there's a wild. Amounts of condemnation packed into a very small story.  [00:54:19] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. It really is.  [00:54:22] Tenants Add Nothing [00:54:22] Tony Arsenal: Um, there is nothing expected of these tenants. Right. There's no contract, like there's no terms, they, they really add nothing to the, the landowner's land, except I guess maybe they're the ones harvesting these, this fruit. Right. But even that's not explicit in the parable.  [00:54:43] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly.  [00:54:43] Tony Arsenal: Right. Right. He, he does all just to steal your thunder, like he does all the verbs. Yes. All of the ves are done by the landowner.  [00:54:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yes. Right  [00:54:51] Tony Arsenal: on. There is an implication that the, the tenants are somehow like the ones harvesting this, or they're the ones producing the wine, I guess, in the wine vat or the wine press. But at the end of the day. A normal tenant landowner agreement would be, I'm, you're, first of all, you're probably gonna pay me to use this land, right? You're paying me to use this land, and the way you pay me is you're gonna plant the, the gr the crop. You're gonna harvest it. You're gonna make the produce, and all I'm gonna do is let you live on this land. I'm gonna take the pro, like the profit, you're gonna pay me outta that profit. There is nothing asked or expected of these, th

The so-called sacrament of penance rested at the heart of the Reformation controversy over the role that our merit plays in salvation. Today, R.C. Sproul gives an overview of the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church. Get an exclusive Renewing Your Mind journal with your donation. You'll also receive R.C. Sproul's ebook Are We Together? and his digital teaching series Roman Catholicism: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/   Live outside the U.S. and Canada? Request the ebook and digital teaching series with your donation: https://www.renewingyourmind.org/global Join us in Orlando for the 2027 Ligonier National Conference as we rejoice in the glorious attributes of God. Save 35% when you register today: https://www.ligonier.org/2027   Meet Today's Teacher:   R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, first minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Renewing Your Mind is a donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts

The Reformation brought a needed retrieval of the Bible's teaching on salvation. Today, R.C. Sproul outlines the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on this cardinal doctrine and shows why we must understand where we disagree. Get an exclusive Renewing Your Mind journal with your donation. You'll also receive R.C. Sproul's ebook Are We Together? and his digital teaching series Roman Catholicism: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/   Live outside the U.S. and Canada? Request the ebook and digital teaching series with your donation: https://www.renewingyourmind.org/global   Meet Today's Teacher:   R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, first minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Renewing Your Mind is a donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts

Why does the Roman Catholic Church claim that the pope is infallible? Today, R.C. Sproul surveys the historical, political, and doctrinal factors that contributed to the rise of the papacy. Get an exclusive Renewing Your Mind journal with your donation. You'll also receive R.C. Sproul's ebook Are We Together? and his digital teaching series Roman Catholicism: https://gift.renewingyourmind.org/   Live outside the U.S. and Canada? Request the ebook and digital teaching series with your donation: https://www.renewingyourmind.org/global   Meet Today's Teacher:   R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, first minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's Chapel, first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine. Renewing Your Mind is a donor-supported outreach of Ligonier Ministries. Explore all of our podcasts: https://www.ligonier.org/podcasts

With the Pope once again in the global spotlight, questions about his authority—and the authority of the church he leads—are drawing renewed attention.Both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church claim an unbroken line of leadership stretching back to the apostles. According to this view, today's bishops—and ultimately the Pope—stand in direct succession to the apostle Peter.But how strong is this claim?In this episode of Apostolic Life in the 21st Century, Dr. David K. Bernard examines whether there is credible historical evidence for an unbroken chain of authority—and whether such a lineage, even if proven, would establish theological authority.Dr. Bernard discusses:The origins and development of apostolic succession claimsThe biblical role of Peter in the early churchThe difference between historical continuity and doctrinal authorityWhy apostolic teaching—not just succession—is essential to the identity of the churchThis timely episode brings clarity to a complex and often misunderstood topic, helping listeners evaluate competing claims through the lens of Scripture.If you've ever wondered how to assess claims of church authority—or what truly defines the New Testament church—this episode offers thoughtful, balanced, and biblical insight.Visit PentecostalPublishing.com to shop Dr. Bernard's full catalog of published works. Enter promo code DKB10 at checkout to save 10 percent on your order.If you enjoy this podcast, leave a five-star rating and a review on Apple Podcasts or your preferred podcast platform. We also appreciate it when you share Apostolic Life in the 21st Century with family and friends.

In unusually forceful political remarks, Pope Leo has said the world is "being ravaged by a handful of tyrants". Addressing a crowd during his visit to a region of Cameroon affected by a separatist insurgency, the head of the Roman Catholic Church condemned the people who -- he said -- manipulated "the very name of God" for their own gain. Also: a Lebanese official has told the BBC that President Joseph Aoun is not planning to speak to the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu - despite earlier suggestions from President Trump and Israeli officials. The outspoken South African opposition politician, Julius Malema, is sentenced to five years in prison for weapons offences. At least 17 people die in Ukraine following a massive Russian drone and missile attack. France looks to ban under-16s from using social media platforms, following Australia's lead. A study finds that communication between sperm whales closely parallels human language. And two rare paintings by the French Impressionist, Claude Monet, are sold at auction in Paris for a total of nearly $20m. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: globalpodcast@bbc.co.uk

President Trump is openly condemning Pope Leo XIV after the head of the Roman Catholic Church criticized the U.S. and Israeli war with Iran. William Brangham reports on the rare public battle between the president of the United States and the first U.S.-born pope. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy