Regular readers of this blog will be familiar with Bosco, who has been here from the start, telling us all that Jesus will save us all if we just ask. This has always struck me as both laudable and strange. Laudable in so far as he is motivated by the desire to ‘save’ us all, and strange because by his own confession, he did not ask Jesus for help, he just (if I recall aright) received a new spirit. But then if his new spirit has told him that Catholics (or ‘cathols’ in Bosco-speak) are not saved, then one can see why he is not asking why God does not treat each of us as he treated Bosco. He has just made a long comment to which I have replied in part, but on which, because it contains matter of wider interest, I want to essay a broader commentary.
He begins by doing something he occasionally does, but which often gets lost in the general rant sometimes – that is by saying something nice about Catholics:
I spent 7 weeks listening to Immaculate Heart Radio 93 KHJ AM. Ive heard testimonies of changed lives and what have you. I think that’s great. They profess a want and love for Jesus. They repeat some passages of scripture and say that its what they do. Sounds great, and for the most part, it is.
But we know there is going to be a ‘but’, and here it comes:
Then Bosco comes along and calls them idolaters and other terrible names. Where does this Bosco clown get off calling gods people idolaters? Us cathols profess faith in Christ and do all sorts of good works. You know what? Unsaved is unsaved. I got born again and I was in the choir of my church. The reverend was a family friend and I knew him and his family all my life. Dinners and BBQs, birthdays. After meeting Jesus, I took him into his office and asked him if he knew Jesus personally. He said he didn’t. Then I said to him…how can you talk about him when you don’t know him? I left it at that and I don’t think I ever attended another service there. Why would I? I don’t need anybody to tell me about Jesus. I know him and he shows himself to me
In not needing anyone to tell him about Jesus, Bosco stands in a place many modern people seem to stand, but it is far from clear that it is the only way to encounter the Lord. We read in Acts 8:26-40 about one of the earliest Gentile converts, an Ethiopian Eunuch who is reading Isaiah is asked by St Phillip if he understands what he is reading? We are told the it was the Holy Spirit who inspired Phillip to ask. Phillip did not ‘do a Bosco’. He did not tell the Eunuch to ask Jesus to open the door to him. The Eunuch asked how he could understand what he was reading without a teacher? Phillip still did not say ‘ask Jesus to come into your heart, he stands at the door.’ Instead he told the Eunuch the Good News, and the Eunuch asked to be baptised. That is one way of coming to the Lord, and one many of us have followed. Of course, no one denies that there are other ways, such as the one Bosco describes, but that is not the point: the point is there are many ways, and it is a relatively late phenomenon for people to decide that they, unlike the Eunuch, need no help to understand what it is they are reading in the Bible. It was for that very reason that the Church was wary of people reading the Bible on their own.
We are told that the sheep of Jesus’ fold know their master’s voice, but Bosco takes this a stage further and often tells us that he knows who and who is not saved by what they say. This again, is profoundly unscriptural, as nowhere does the Bible tell us that the ‘saved’ will know each other. God alone knows who is saved, and if we feel able to judge as he judges, we have gone wrong because we have arrogated to ourselves something that is God’s alone. The danger here is clear, we end up relying on our own judgment and attributing what we feel and say to God. If someone points out another reading, or that Christians have not believed this traditionally, that can be dismissed by saying such people are not ‘saved’. That not a single Apostle behaved in such a manner seems to give no pause for thought to Bosco or to others who feel the same way.
We can quarry the Scriptures for the meaning we think they ought to have and act as unlike the Eunuch as possible and proclaim we need no help. As one who does, and who finds the help of many St Phillips of great assistance, I cannot attain such exalted heights. I know whatever I see now I see as through a glass darkly, and it is through faith that I believe I shall one day see him face to face. God brings us to him in the way he considers best, and I consider myself ill-equipped to tell him there is only one way he can do that. As the theme of today’s sermon was humility, I am glad to think I learned something from it.
All Along the Watchtower 
Chalcedon – not sure I agree with your exegesis of Acts 8v26-40 here.
And the eunuch said to Philip, “About whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?”
The eunuch was basically asking ‘who is this man?’ Seems to me that he was already at the stage of asking Jesus to reveal himself to him (to use Bosco speak), and looking for clarification as to who the Messiah actually was.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think that is eisegesis – not one of the Church Fathers or any of the early commentators read it that way – indeed, no one did until the Reformation – which I think underlines my point.
LikeLike
Well, of course you know more about the early church fathers and the reformation than I do, but in this case I suspect you are probably wrong for two reasons: (a) there was no new theology introduced at the reformation; everything in the reformation had been accommodated within the church, at least to some extent, before the reformation and (b) based on your own blog posts about the writings of the early fathers, I find it difficult to believe that they thought that the Ethiopian eunuch was bamboozled at some intellectual level; his difficulty in understanding what the text meant was a moral difficulty – the clear and plain meaning of verse 34.
Note: I don’t intend to defend Bosco here; I simply don’t think that your piece presents a sharp argument against him.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You may well be right about the last point Jock. To clarify, most the Fathers take the line I take (which is why I take it, of course) which is that the Eunuch needed instruction if he was to understand. You are right, though, to point out that something had happened to quicken his spirit. That is more familiar to me than Bosco’s talk of being filled with a new spirit. I don’t doubt he means what he says, or that it happens, what I am questioning is the idea that that is the only way it happens.
LikeLike
Having promised myself a rest day today, after weeks of physical labour building fences and stable and food store, I thought I would pay a visit to AATW. What is happening? Anything new? No, it’s still all about Bosco… !
Actually, this is a very good piece, John. Sadly, as anyone knows who has observed the disruptions of the clown over several years, no logic or measured exegesis will help him towards authentic Christian belief. He justs gets off on his own clown parody of the born again ‘saved’. He doesn’t even belong to any Christian community and by his own admission rarely attends any church or chapel. The internet is full of nutters, so why does this one require my particular attention?
As I said, a good piece, nevertheless. Have a good Sunday. And heed the advice I heard one old lady say to another on a London bus some years ago, “Never mind dear, be philosophical: don’t think about it.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
Good to hear from you Gareth. On the whole I have shied away from engaging with Bosco when he ‘does a Bosco’ – that is repeat the same old stuff beyond nauseam. But here he said something more meaningful about his own experience, and something one hears elsewhere – so if it is of no use to him, it might help someone else. That said, there’s much to be said for that definition of being ‘philosophical’ 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good brother Gareth like to besmirch me, but look at what he and his fellow Marys do….they use graven images to direct their prayers. Not that I am Mr Perfect. But I don’t belong to a patently idolaterous religion like he subscribes to.
LikeLike
Idolatry is worshipping idols, we have already established no one does that. Your constant repetition of obvious lies undermines your calim to know Jesus personally. If you did, you would not tell lies.
LikeLike
Perhaps it is also worth mentioning that context is important regarding words like “saved” and “elect” in Scripture. Israel was (and is) God’s elect, but that doesn’t entail that every single Israelite was saved. The records of idolatry and apostasy in the historical books serve as evidence that many failed to live up to their calling.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed, and St Paul would hardly have written a word, let alone so many letters, had those he helped bring to Christ been ‘once saved, always saved’.
LikeLike
Romans 11 seems particularly relevant here, where he introduces the idea of grafting branches into Israel. St Paul’s use of imagery and OT verses is actually very important in teaching us about “literal fulfilment”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed, and one of the problems with Bosco’s position that he needs no one to interpret the Bible for him is that he misses so much.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Truly. I am increasingly convinced that we should take advantage of all the resources available to us – this does of course mean that we will need to exercise discernment. However, we have already accepted the premise that we are morally culpable, therefore we must assume that we have an obligation to use our free will properly – searching the Scriptures rather than being passive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think so too – we can use, as you say, our discernment, and for me as a Catholic, official approval matters a great deal.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, and now I understand a lot better why you value Tradition, Magisterium, and the concept of the “Living Church.” Having gone “down the rabbit-hole” now I am at risk of losing my mind without such guidance. One of the principles I use to “pull myself together” is the principle of consistency. The Bible has to be ultimately consistent otherwise the whole framework falls apart. I know that Christ is true and that the Bible is His word.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like to give a vote to posterity. Those who have gone before us also knew the Lord, and much they have to teach us – if we will but humble ourselves to receive it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed, and I must admit, more recently I have been much more persuaded by the claims of Catholicism (of a kind, anyway), because I understand better what one might term the “How do I know?” question. Once you really start exploring the deeper questions and accepting as valid much of the recent scholarship, you find yourself presented with a kind of epistemological crisis. This past year or so I have been very tempted to go nihilist or existentialist. Like Adam and Eve, I feel that my “eyes have been opened”. There is no going back to the naive Christianity I once had.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Congratulations on avoiding the snare, Nicholas – many lose their faith before they come to the realisation you have reached. Whether one accepts the Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church as the Church founded by Christ, they have the Fathers in common and many saints, and it is there that one might find rock and common ground where safety lies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is at times like those that I value the relational aspect of the faith. I could make all sorts of sophistic arguments, but I cling to my experiences of God to remind me that He is there. I know that will be lambasted as “subjectivism”, but I don’t think that is a fair criticism. I have rational grounds of my faith, and I can challenge the so called “objectivity” of the empiricists with the same arguments as Descartes used.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If we know God is there, it is for that very purpose.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed. Thank you, by the way, for the interview on Thomas Aquinas’ scholasticism. It was very interesting. I didn’t know he had also written commentaries. Those must be really fascinating.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Glad you liked it – yes, he did, and they are. You can find them on line here:
http://dhspriory.org/thomas/
LikeLiked by 1 person
If anyone had the logical skills needed to keep up with St. Paul, it was Aquinas. That being said, I wonder what Aquinas would have made of Augustine’s original sin interpretation of Romans 5. I read an interesting set of essays on that topic recently that rejects Augustine’s position (which will please the Orthodox no end, I’m sure).
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am never sure that the Orthodox quite understand that the Church does not just adopt the Augustinian view.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hard for me to say personally as my own experience is limited. One of my best friends is Russian Orthodox and he expressed concern over the issue but we didn’t get into it at the time. I am still mulling over the implications, because it seems to me that there are problems either way. I suspect it will have to be one of those mysteries I accept on faith – by which I mean how the whole thing works and squares with theodicy. I have no problem believing that sin exists -we experience it every day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Chesterton once said Original Sin was the only doctrine we could prove by looking in the mirror. In my experience few Orthodox have read much Augustine, but they have read much by Orthodox commentators criticizing what they think Augustine wrote.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It seems to me that there is something in us – “the flesh”, if you like – that co-operates with sin, and I don’t think that can be attributed solely to genetic (in the materialist sense) and educational factors. It seems to me more like a person, a will, and this “hunch” on my part fits better with the original sin model than it does with the alternatives.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree – Romans 7 catches it perfectly.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“My sheep know my voice”
The unsaved are quick to make judgment. “oh, Bosco can tell who is saved by how they talk….how ridiculose”
Silly ninnies, where else would I hear the Masters voice….coming thru thin air? That’s what Jesus meant…hear his voice from his elect. You guys just don’t get it. Well, that shouldn’t be a big problem. You too can ask Jesus to come in and sup with you. Don’t delay.
You never know when god will say…”Thou fool, tonite your soul is required of thee”
LikeLike
There you go again, telling us what Jesus ‘really’ meant. I simply believe what Jesus said and don’t need to explain it away. Jesus said we know his voice, he did not say we know who else is saved. Can you provide me with some scripture that backs up your claim he really meant to say what you do? If not, then I have to choose between you and Jesus, and you can guess where that one will go.
LikeLike
Tell me, where would we hear his voice?
LikeLike
We hear his voice in all sorts of places, but that does not give us God’s power to know who is saved.
LikeLike
Where do you hear gods voice? In a babbling brook? In the wind? Gods church is men. Your religion has you thinking all sorts of madness. The born again know Jesus and anyone who knows Jesus talks like they know him. Not every word, but they get around to it. And we don’t even have to talk. We can feel it. Its like people who were fished out of the sea after their ship sank. They don’t have to know each other or say anything. They sit there grateful they were rescued.
Today is the day of salvation. Harden not your hearts.
Jesus stands at the door and knocks.
Crackers and child molesters with fish hats will not, I repeat, will not get you into heaven.
LikeLike
Jesus founded a church. You have been unable to provide scripture for your view that he just tells everyone everything without any need for that church. I follow Scripture and his church, you follow yourself.
LikeLike
Chalcedon – believe me, it pains me greatly to find myself coming in on the side of Bosco on any matter. I sincerely believe him to be a 24 carat plonker and the assessment of Gareth Thomas has much truth in it.
However, even though Bosco hasn’t provided the appropriate backing, try 1 John 2v27
‘As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.’
I find this largely true. Some commentators trivialise this and make it mean the opposite by saying ‘after all, John is teaching when he writes this.’
But if you look at your own thoughts and writings, you will see that you yourself don’t need anybody to teach you; if The Pope spouts garbage, there is something within you (the brain guided by the Holy Spirit) which tells you that it really is garbage.
So what is the ‘teaching’ of Scripture all about – and what is Church all about? Well, it is much easier to be true to the calling and remain in Him in the context of fellowship. For example, Elijah and the ministering angels of 1 Kings 19v5.
You mentioned Romans 7 in your discussion with Nicholas. Again, what I see in Romans is that Paul starts with indicatives and then moves on to exhortations. The indicatives tell us great truths of what we are ‘in him’ and then he move on to the imperatives and exhortations telling us to act like it and giving us encouragement.
There is very little in the way of teaching in the sense of him telling us a moral truth that we never knew before.
LikeLike
I agree on that last point Jock, but then perhaps I would. The practical application of those moral truths is, perhaps, a more complex matter – as Jesus constantly reminds the religious hierarchy of his own day who seemed to think that man was made for the Sabbath. It is here we need, at the least, fellowship. But is that enough? We know from St John’s own letters that the community which looked to him for guidance had in it those who rejected him and his teaching on the ground, it seems, that their Spirit taught them something rather different from what John taught. Yet they had come to the Lord via John. So we are left with the problem that has haunted us ever since – what to do when one set of Christians says that the Spirit tells them x and another set say otherwise? That seems to me the problem.
LikeLike
My understanding of 1 John 2v27 is that the Holy Spirit has given us sufficient. The problem will be resolved on the Day of Judgement; those who have followed a lying spirit will see clearly that they only have themselves to blame.
I’d also say that I believe that those who have followed a lying spirit already have some innate understanding of this; this is the main reason why Christians get persecuted both by those outside ‘The Church’ and those within, for stating simple, innocent truths. The persecution comes from a guilty conscience clinging to a lying spirit and rejecting the Holy Spirit.
LikeLike
And therein lies the problem. Were that so, why did those who had been brought to Christ by John himself disagree with him? John said they were anti-Christs, no doubt they said the same about him. Who judges? This seems to me why Jesus founded a Church. I have met many who thought that those who disagreed with them must know in some way they were following a lying a lying spirit, but never met anyone in that position who agreed they were. The persecution comes from many sources, most often from thinking we are in the right of it and infallibly guided, whilst that lot over there are wrong and rejecting the Spirit. They, of course, think the same as we do, except to them we are the ones being misled. And so it goes, and what a splendid witness to love as in 1 Cor 13 we have offered. And we dare wonder why the world is not convinced by us?
LikeLike
Chalcedon – I do understand the problem that you outline; I simply don’t see how ‘The Church’ (or your understanding of what it is and what it is supposed to be doing) presents any solution at all. Your recent post ‘Cafeteria Catholics and Others’ explains quite clearly that it doesn’t.
When you ask – who are you to judge the priests and bishops – you don’t give any esoteric example of an issue that is just too complex for your average joe (i.e. me); you give the example of abortion – where the principle is completely clear for a Christian.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is precisely on the questions which cause schism that the Church, in my view, is necessary. If, as I hold, the Church is the one founded by Jesus, then when the disciples are told to take issues to the Church, it is for the Church to decide. So, if the Church says the Trinity is a dogma to be believed, I believe it, and am not going to get myself wrapped up in unitarian arguments. You may feel qualified to pronounce on the Procession of the Holy Spirit, I’m not, I accept what the Church says because the Church speaks with the authority of its founder. It’s that sort of thing I have in mind. And yes, and of course, any church composed of sinners is going to have different views on many things, and the Church is fine with that; but when it comes to dogma, someone has to have the authority to say x is right and y is wrong. It does not seem to me that history suggests this is easily done, or indeed done at all, in the absence of a recognised Magisterium. Were it so, there would not be quite as many churches as we appear to have acquired 🙂
LikeLike
Chalcedon – yes, I have to admit that I do feel qualified to pronounce that the doctrine of the Trinity is correct. I probably wouldn’t have arrived at it without the work of the early fathers, but when it is presented to me, it all makes very good sense and adds up. This is a result of the brain guided by the Holy Spirit.
And if you’re being honest with yourself, you do, too. If the doctrine of the Trinity seemed wrong or wiggy to you in some sense, I don’t believe that you would have had anything to do with Anglicanism, Orthodoxism or Catholicism. Those responsible for the Nicene creed may have pointed you towards this, your church may have endorsed it; there was something more than that which led you to accept it.
LikeLike
I agree entirely, but your caveat is the important one – on your own you would not have got it – and I’m entirely one with you. Left to a Bosco reading of the Bible, I. like Bosco, might come up with some odd reading of what it means – indeed, I almost certainly would. It is, for me, the same with Scripture. The Church tells me what it is. To suppose it so inspired that it can so pronounce, and then to suppose I am better qualifies than it to pronounce on how it should be interpreted seems to me unlikely. If I accept these things, I do so because of the Church. And yes, the Spirit in me tells me the Church is correct. Your Spirit and Bosco’s do not lead you there. Yet, in all sincerity, I believe you are both guided. So in the end it is a mystery to me. I have two fine sons who are evangelical Christians – better young men, more Christian young men I could not hope to find. In my judgment they are better men and better Christians than I am – and yet on this issue of ‘the Church’ we have to agree to disagree in love.
LikeLike
Poor brother Chalcedon…he gets it on one side from me, and on the other side from his sons. Haaahahahahaha.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have no problem with dialogue, not least since I don’t subscribe to the idea that the only people who know who is saved are those who claim they are.
LikeLike
” I know that Christ is true and that the Bible is His word.”
Then dont vainly repeat prayer and call no man on this EARTH Father and dont bow yourself befor graven images
LikeLike
No one ‘vainly’ repeats prayers, Bosco; we make them from the heart and with faith to God; are you saying we pray in vain then? God commands us not to worship images, you admit no one worships them, so it isn’t very useful to go back over that. On the old chestnut of ‘father’ here’s a good answer.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/how-can-we-respond-to-the-call-no-man-father-question
Do you call your father ‘pater’ or ‘old chap’ then? When mine was alive, God rest his soul, I called him father – was that wrong?
LikeLike
you wont go to hell because of it
LikeLike
For which great mercy, thanks be to God.
LikeLike
No one ‘vainly’ repeats prayers, Bosco
No cathols say god commands us to make images.
Do you have Babylonian beads? If not, the rest of your fellow Marys have them and in vain they repeat prayer thinking god will hear them for their much speaking. Can I condemn you for doing these things? No. Because I did the same and worster. What I can do is remind you that Jesus stands at the door and knocks. Open and he will sup with you. Are you ready to meet Jesus? Are you ready to give up your hollow religion? Are you tired of child molester priests? Jesus burden is light and his yoke is easy. No religious court of law and jail and religion lawyers.
LikeLike
You do know the Bible isn’t like Chinese fortune crackers, don’t you? You take one bit of it and repeat it whilst ignoring most of it. Jesus founded a church. What happened to it?
LikeLike
‘Bosco and milk’?
LikeLiked by 1 person
If the motive is attention seeking, then this must count as a success.
I have known C for many years and as far as I am aware we agree on a great deal, as long as politics are put to one side. In spite of this, he has never devoted a page to my beliefs. Could it be that the naughty children are simply more interesting?
Whatever the reason I give thanks to the good Lord for his many mercies.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This is, I think, the first time Bosco has offered anything like an explanation of what he believes, so it seemed a chance to say something about a view which is not uncommon. You and I have a great deal in common in terms of our beliefs as Christians, and I have learnt a lot from you – for which, thanks be to God.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, about that lunch … 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed – I’ll message you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You and I have a great deal in common in terms of our beliefs as Christians,
Excuse me….you two are not Christians. You are cathols, Queen of Heaven worshipers.
LikeLike
Actually, Cathy is an Anglican.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I want to clear up something befor people get mad at me. The born again are Christians. God came down to earth and was born of a woman and lived the life of a miserable human, and the he took on himself all of our sin and was beaten to death to save us.
Those who are not born again, as he commanded us, we, the saved don’t call or consider Christian. You guys are in good company. We don’t consider Benny Hinn, Paula White, Paul Crouch, Joel Osteen, Creflo Dollar, TD Jakes, and many more we don’t consider as Christian, even though they and their followers would beg to differ. They sound good but they aren’t born again.
LikeLike
You continue to fail to provide any Scripture to back your man-made belief that the ‘born again’ know each other by some magic power. When you do, the rest of us can respond, until then, you provide us with an interesting case study of what happens when the profoundly ignorant pick and choose how they try to understand the book given to us by the Church.
You are a strange fellow Bosco. You have a book which you don’t understand, given to you by a Church you don’t understand, and from it you derive odd beliefs no one else understands. That’s very American, but has nothing much to do with Christianity.
LikeLike
Good brother Jock understands. He doesn’t like to admit im rite, but he does. Its not rite or wrong…its truth vs fiction. You religious don’t believe the holy ghost actually does what scripture says it can do. Whos fault is that? Your disbelief is your problem. Your faith is in costume holymen, and vile buggers they are at that. If it doesn’t come from a costume holyman, you don’t want any part of it. When I say you, I mean all you religious people out there.
I wish I had a nickel for everytime a Mary told me that the Catholic Church gave us the bible. And now its claimed that I, Bosco the Great don’t understand the bible. I know what is says. its in black and white. Simple things like …don’t make images and bow befor them, or call men Father. Not hard to understand. The Devil understands them but its not going to save him.
LikeLike
How did we get the Bible then, Bosco?
LikeLike