In this video, the speaker discusses a document that has been circulated by certain evangelical personalities. The document states that justification is not earned by good works, but is a gift from God through His grace. However, the speaker points out that the document also endorses baptismal regeneration, which goes against biblical teachings. The speaker argues that the use of the word "conferred" instead of "imputed" in the document denies the authority of Scripture and promotes Catholic teachings. The video concludes by providing contact information for the organization that is circulating this message and promoting Reformation resources.

Quite a serious topic that I have called the alignment of New Evangelicals with apostasy. New Evangelicals have endorsed a false gospel and I'm going to document that in this paper and then to state what we should do regarding New Evangelicals and their endorsement of Roman Catholic inherent righteousness. Evangelicals throughout history have maintained that justification by faith alone is the way in which sinful human beings are made right in Christ Jesus. Before the all-holy God, it is that justification is a judicial act of God. It is His imputing Christ's righteousness to the believer based solely and wholly on what Christ Jesus has done in His perfect life and in His absolutely sufficient death for His people. Historically, Evangelicals have been in alignment with the Apostle Paul in what Paul said, for example, in Romans 4, to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. That was all the historical position of Evangelicals before the Reformation, after the Reformation and in all the great confessions of faith we have had throughout history, a belief in the righteousness of Christ alone for salvation. A person calling himself Evangelical is professing to be committed to this gospel as proclaimed in Scripture. The true gospel demands separation from all who teach another gospel, as the Apostle declared in the Scripture in Galatians. But though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than which ye have believed, let him be accursed. Without such separation, the name Evangelical signifies nothing. If an Evangelical will not separate for the sake of the gospel, he is not an Evangelical in fact. New Evangelicalism has willingly compromised with another gospel over the last 50 years or so, particularly since 1960. Since then the Evangelical world has changed beyond recognition. This is fully documented in Ian Murray's new book called Evangelicalism Divided. Where it all became center stage and very apparent was in the UK and Britain. The first and second National Evangelical Anglican Conferences that met at Keele and Nottingham in the UK in 1967 and 1977 respectively showed a willingness to be united with ritualistic Anglicans and those who were liberal Anglicans and who in practice look very much like Roman Catholics and liberals who held to a fallible Bible. Such leading Evangelicals as J.I. Packer and John Stott who signed the conference statements of Keele and Nottingham in 1967 and 1977 by that very endorsement set aside the gospel of Christ. The gospel of accepting, or the so-called other gospel of accepting Anglicans as brothers and sisters in Christ. That was the first overt departure in our own times. 17 years after Nottingham we had here in the United States of America in Dallas, Texas at the end of March 1994 a declaration to the United States and the world was published called Evangelicals and Catholics Together the Christian Mission in the Third Millennium. This document which has not been revoked but has been continually defended by its signers has made some devastating effects on what was called Evangelicalism. The two main instigators, the two main men to perpetrate this Evangelicals and Catholics Together were Charles Colson and Richard John Newhouse, a Lutheran pastor turned Roman Catholic priest. The specific task was begun in September 1992 according to themselves and they were joined in the writing process by Larry Lewis of the Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, Jesse Miranda of the Assemblies of God, John White of Geneva College and the National Association of Evangelicals and others including two Jesuits, the very well-known Avery Dulles and Juan Diaz-Vilar and two more Jesuits signed the document and such as Bill Bright of Campus Crusade, Mark Knoll of Wheaton College, Pat Robinson of the 700 Club and the Catholic signers included the very well-known Cardinal John O'Connor of New York who is since deceased, Archbishop Sevilla, Archbishop Stafford and Bishop Francis George who is presently Archbishop of Chicago. The gospel was presented in this horrendous document. Having said that there were differences that cannot be resolved here, the exact words of the document, the document goes on to explain that they are motivated by a desire to solve moral and cultural issues and then they go on to proclaim that Catholics are our brothers and sisters in Christ and that they are truly Christian and then they go on to proclaim what they say they have agreed on in the gospel and this is exactly the words from the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together. Quotation, we affirm together that we are justified by grace through faith because of Christ. Living faith is active in love that is nothing less than the love of Christ. Now had they been biblical and were giving a truly biblical message they would have said that we are justified, we affirm that we are justified by grace alone, through faith alone and in Christ Jesus alone. Why did they not say that? Because if they did, the Roman Catholic Archbishops would not have signed and the Catholic Church could not agree to sign. And so they take away from the gospel the very thing that makes the gospel. They take away the righteousness of Christ because they leave out the word alone signifying the righteousness of Christ Jesus. That faith is his righteousness alone and it is God's gift of grace based on his righteousness alone. The very thing that the martyrs of old died for and that the true Evangelicals always stood for is taken away from the so-called gospel of ECT. Most serious, a deficient other gospel because the righteousness of Christ alone is taken out of it. And then they add to what is in scripture by their following statement. Living faith is active in love. Living faith is a Catholic terminology and it is the very thing that the Council of Trent has said that we were to have living faith active. Living faith because the Catholics cannot accept a faith that is faith alone. It has to include their sacraments. And so we have the declaration of Trent, quotation, for faith unless hope and charity be added to it, neither unites one perfectly with Christ nor makes him a living member of his body. The concept therefore had to include works and particularly the Roman Catholic sacraments. And so these Evangelicals include then the Catholic definition of faith as living faith to make room for her priests and her sacraments. The new Evangelical signers have concurred with Roman Catholic definition of living faith active in love. And this is exactly what the New Catechism of the Catholic Church says. The New Catechism of the Catholic Church declares in paragraph 1814, quotation, the very root of the Church's living faith is principally by means of baptism, end of quotation. So living faith is to make room for her sacrament of baptism. And this is what the Evangelicals have declared is the Gospel. First of all in taking out the word alone so that the righteousness of Christ is excluded. And then defining faith as not faith alone but as living faith active in love so as the Catholic sacraments are again included. It is not faith alone that is taught by these Evangelicals. We have here exactly what Trent had said. And if these men such as Packer, Oskin, T.M. Moore and others who have now endorsing both Evangelicals and Catholics together, one and two, if they were to be logical, they would say the words of Trent. If anyone shall say that by faith alone the sinner is justified so as to understand that nothing else is required to cooperate in the attainment of the grace of justification and that it is in no way necessary that he be helped, be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema, that is eternally cursed to hell. So the Catholics stand in this document in having the righteousness of Christ removed, in removing the word alone and then in having their concept of living faith and not faith alone placed in the document signed by Jesuits and so-called Evangelicals. To endorse this document is to deny many repeated texts in Scripture. For example, the words of the Apostle, but after the kindness and love of God our Saviour towards man appeared, not by the works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us. Amen and praise his name. Now it gets worse because that was their so-called gospel, another gospel, but then they go on explicitly to endorse baptismal regeneration in the same document. Under the general heading of we witness together and to use the words of the document in the context of evangelization and re-evangelization, end of quotation, that is the gospel, the message to the world by these new evangelical personalities such as Packer, Coulson and Bright is, quotation, for Catholics all who are validly baptized are born again and are truly, however imperfectly, in communion with Christ, end of quotation. They might as well have said what the Code of Canon Law says. The Code of Canon Law says, quotation, baptism by which men and women are freed from their sins are reborn as children of God and configured to Christ. They said the same thing in different words as does official Catholic teaching, that you are born again by baptism. And these are men who are called leading evangelicals now endorsing baptismal regeneration. In contrast to what these evangelicals have signed and what is the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, the risen Christ Jesus the Lord says, he that is, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. He that believeth not shall be damned. Faith is the key of saving grace and unbelief its damning sin. Faith is what is necessary for salvation and baptism is simply an ordinance that follows faith and testifies to faith. The proof of this is found in the omission in the second half of the verse, it is not he who is not baptized shall be damned but rather he that believeth not shall be damned. Over the years repentance has been demanded of these men, in letters personally to them, in emails and formally as a group of over 600 of us at the ex-Catholics for Christ conference, exactly five years in the same city of Dallas, where as a group of evangelicals true to the gospel, we demanded that these men repent of teaching a false gospel. They have not done so and they have continued to defend their abominable position. Even in my own Ireland, J.I. Parker went from north to south defending this very document and establishing in my own homeland of Ireland, Evangelicals and Catholics together Ireland. A new document for the Irish to say that the Catholics and the Evangelicals are one in faith in Ireland. They have done so in other nations as well. So not only have they defended their position, but they are bringing it across the world to try and see that it is implemented. What is the implementation of it? What is the purpose of it? They declare it in the document itself. The real purpose is to put a stop to the gospel going out to Catholics across the world. It is a compromise so that Catholics are not evangelized. The impact has been seen most of all in the southern part of the Americas, South America, Central America and in Spain, Portugal and the Philippines. It has already become apparent that many missionaries are not returning to some of these nations for lack of support and because they are told that these nations are for the most part now considered as brothers and sisters in Christ. So we have a devastating effect on millions of lives and in countries that need to be evangelized. And this is the exact purpose as stated in the document itself. Quotation. We are aware that our experience reflects the distinctive circumstances and the opportunities of Evangelicals and Catholics living together in North America. At the same time we believe that we have discovered and resolved, that what we have discovered and resolved is pertinent to the relationship between Evangelicals and Catholics in other parts of the world. And they declare also, quotation, it is neither theologically legitimate nor prudent, a prudent use of resources for one Christian community, they mean church, to proselytize, and they mean evangelize, among other active adherents of another Christian community. It is not legitimate to proselytize, to evangelize another Christian community. Since when is it not legitimate to give the gospel to those who know it not? Since when is it illegitimate to expose heresy and error? Since when are men and women not to contend for the faith that this is not legitimate? We have here now not simply a departure from the gospel and an addition of a faith that is not faith in Christ alone, but we have its purpose so that nations and millions of souls are not evangelized. It wasn't long after this that I got a telephone call from a man returning from the mission field in Spain. He phoned me from Sacramento and he said, Richard, I've been already hit with churches not wanting to support me since Evangelicals and Catholics together have been published. Robert Colton, working in Malaga, Spain. This is horrifically disastrous when it comes to giving the gospel. The gospel says we are to separate from such men and for those who support them. In the words of the Apostle John, 2 John 1.9-11, Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ hath not God. He that bringeth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come unto you any that bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Godspeed. For he that biddeth him Godspeed is a partaker of his evil deeds. It's clearer than that we cannot get. We are to separate from men of evil deeds who teach not the doctrine of Christ. You would think that that is bad enough, Evangelicals and Catholics together, 1994. But what happened in 1997 was even worse. A more compounded and erudite and subtle and worthless presentation of what was officially called the gift of salvation. It was November the 12th, 1997, the document, the gift of salvation, published by leading Evangelical and Roman Catholic leaders. It expressed the intention was to show a common faith and that Evangelicals were to acknowledge one another as, quote, brothers and sisters in Christ. It was published in the magazine called Christianity Today on December the 8th, 1997. Explicitly, the Roman Catholic signers of the document, such as Richard John Newhouse and the Jesuit Avery Dulles, state in the document, quotation, Catholics who are conscientiously faithful to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Because the Catholic signers say that they are conscientiously faithful to the teaching of the Church, we would presume that the document teaches Catholic form of justification. And that is indeed what the document does. It teaches inferred, conferred inner righteousness. It endorses Rome's own teaching on justification. And this is signed now not just by men who signed the first document, but they are joined now with such as Timothy George and the PCA man T.M. Moore, former president of Chesapeake Seminary, and John Woodbridge. We have now a nerodite, extremely clever presentation of Catholic conferred inner righteousness. The document states that justification, quotation, is central to the scriptural accounts of salvation and its meaning has been much debated between Protestants and Catholics. However, it goes on to state that the signers have reached an agreement and they give you in words what the agreement is. Quotation, it's two sentences, quite long, and please listen. Quotation, we agree that justification is not earned by any good works or merits of our own. It is entirely God's gift conferred through the Father's sheer graciousness. Out of the love that he bears us in his Son, who suffered on our behalf and rose from the dead for our justification. Jesus was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification. In justification, God, on the basis of Christ's righteousness alone, declares us to be no longer his rebellious enemies, but his forgiven friends. And by virtue of his declaration, it is so. The subject under review is clearly said in the first sentence. We agree that justification is conferred through the Father's sheer graciousness. And by careful reading, studying the grammar of these long sentences, we see what is the pivotal statement that these men are trying to make. It, that is justification, is entirely God's gift conferred, not imputed. Conferred. And by virtue of his, that's God's, declaration, it. Justification conferred is so. Justification conferred is so. So we have here, quite cleverly, wrapped up the traditional Roman Catholic teaching that we have conferred justification. To use the word conferred instead of the biblical word imputed is a denial of the scriptural authority of God's scriptural authority in his written word. We have here a setting aside of the importance of scripture and its terminology. And we have an implementation of the Catholic word that was used to defend Catholicism against the concept of imputation. This has been done right through from medieval times onwards. I spent four years studying Thomas Aquinas and studying how it was that because justification is conferred, it is a quality of the soul and is in a person. It was what I was trained in, in my Dominican theology. It was the very thing that Trent insisted on, that justification is conferred, not imputed. And it was what Trent declared as a curse, that if anybody did not accept this concept, they were damned forever. Quotation from Trent, if anyone shall say that by the said sacraments of the new law, grace is not conferred from the work which has been worked, ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices to obtain grace, let him be anathema. That is, if you do not believe that conferred justification automatically works, that is ex opere operato, and if you believe only in faith alone to obtain the divine promises, you are eternally cursed. Such as R.C. Sproul has said correctly that that is in writing the Church of Rome's condemnation of the biblical gospel. And the new catechism has endorsed the teaching of Trent and has called it, as well as other councils, infallible. So we have the Catholic Church insisting on the word conferred, as the new catechism does, quotation from its very words, justification is conferred in baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy, end of quotation. Because inner righteousness is located in the person and not, as the scriptures say, in Christ, it is possible to lose this conferred righteousness. And so, logically, the Catholic Church needs it to be conferred again and again and again. In the scriptures, conferred righteousness does not exist. Justification is a one-time declaration by God that Christ's righteousness is held to your account. But the Catholic Church, because of their idea of it coming through the sacraments, has repeated the idea of getting it again and again. And so they say, formally and officially, in their new catechism, they say the following, 1446, the new catechism, quotation, the sacrament of penance offers a new possibility to convert and rediscover and recover, I beg your pardon, and recover the grace of justification. The Fathers of the Church present this sacrament as the second plank of salvation after shipwreck, which is the loss of grace. So, again and again, this grace of justification can be given to you as the priest gives his absolution. And so the need for the word conferred. And the Church says that it is necessary to have the sacraments. Sacramental grace is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament. The utter blasphemous words that this conferring through their physical sacraments is necessary for a man or woman to be saved. In the scripture we have a declaration of the righteousness of Christ unto all them that believe. There is no difference. It is, in the words of the Apostle Paul, and to be found in him not having my own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is by faith in Christ. It is the wonder of being found in him having his righteousness imputed to me or to you. The Roman Catholic Church, by its concept of conferred instead of imputed, is replacing her physical sacraments for the Lord of glory and believing on him and him alone. In face of the biblical clarity and in face of history of this word that was set up to deny imputed righteousness, we now have leading evangelicals using the precise term of Rome. This is a perversion of biblical truth and it is an attempt to subsume the so-called gospel as replacing the gospel of Christ and bring it into conformity with Roman Catholic teaching. Evangelicals such as J. I. Packer, when he was Orthodox, wrote splendid things about faith alone and Christ's righteousness alone. As has done Timothy George of the Foundation Movement, that is the Reformed within the Southern Baptists, and Osk Innes, men famous for writing about the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer. We are not talking about ordinary scholars, we are talking about men of renown who know this distinction and now put their names to a document that holds to the Catholic terminology. This is a betrayal of what the gospel stands for and what Paul said, for example, 11 times even in one chapter of Romans alone, chapter 4, logizimae in Greek, imputed, reckoned, credited, counted. The word logizimae, 11 times in Romans 4 alone, summed up we could say in the very words of Romans chapter 4 verse 5, but to him that worketh not, but that believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. And now we have the blasphemous, horrendous statement endorsed by so-called evangelicals saying, and by virtue of God's declaration, it, justification conferred, is so. The lie of Satan, that justification of Christ's righteousness is in a person, it is in Christ and in him alone. Part of my own search in becoming a biblical Christian was that very truth as I kept reading Romans and I kept reading particularly Ephesians 1 and 2. 18 times in Ephesians 1, for example, Paul says in him, in whom, in Christ. 18 times he shows that our righteousness is in him and in him alone in the first chapter of Ephesians. We have here an endorsement of the message of Satan and what the scriptures say, have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, rather reprove them, expose them, show them for what they are. Now instead of repentance we have had a consistent defense of these horrendous things. We've had a book published right across the world, it's called Evangelicals and Catholics Towards a Common Mission. And in here, some of these same men who signed it, together with Newhouse and Colson who put the book together, try to defend what they have done. To distinguish this book from the document ECT, we call it by the words in the subtitle, the Christian Towards a Common Mission, or just Common Mission. The architects have now designed this book to defend their unbiblical gospel and their endorsement of baptismal regeneration. And I would like to show you just what has been said in this book. Packer writes in the Common Mission quotation, Neither Evangelicals nor Roman Catholics can stipulate that things they believe which the other side does not believe be made foundational to partnership at this point. So ECT lets go of Protestant precision on the doctrine of justification and the correlation between conversion and new birth. What does Packer say? Let me read a little bit of that again. ECT lets go of Protestant precision on the doctrine of justification. He says it in his own words, that he and others have let go of the Protestant precision, definitiveness, on the very doctrine of justification. That such a compromise is heretical is seen from what he says earlier in the same article, and I quote his own words about Roman Catholic teaching. Quotation, Roman teaching obscures the gospel and indeed distorts in a tragically anti-spiritual and un-pastoral manner. Roman teaching obscures the gospel, so he says. And still he goes on to say that this is not to be foundational to the partnership that Evangelicals are to have with Catholics. And then he declares, and listen to this quotation. Rome's official doctrine disorders particularly on justification, merit and the mass sacrifice so obscure the gospel that were I as a gesture of unity invited to mass, which of course as a Protestant I am not, nor shall be, I would not feel free to accept the invitation. End of quotation. So he says that it so obscures the doctrine of justification that were he invited to mass he wouldn't go. And still he's willing to say that we should evangelize together with Catholics. And that this is not of importance even though they distort the very doctrine of justification. Showing his own heresy in the one article that he has written. Towards the end of the same article he shows why he is doing all of this. He is trying to rebuild a Christian consensus, and so he proposes quotation. Domestic differences about salvation and the church should not hinder us from joint action in seeking to re-Christianize the North American milieu. So that you are to work together to re-Christianize the North American situation with doctrines that distort the very gospel of Christ Jesus as he himself has said. In the words of Paul, but there be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Packer continues even in a more serious vein in the same book to defend his position and also in other articles. And I'd like to quote from another article that he has read, that he has written in the J.I. Packer collection produced by Alistair McGraw. He says the following, Can conservative Protestants, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics of mainstream type join together in bearing witness to all I have spoken of? I urge you that we can, despite our known and continuing differences about the specifics of the salvation process and the place of the church in that process. To be sure, fundamentalists within our three traditions are unlikely to join us in this. For it is the way of fundamentalists to follow the path of contentious orthodoxy. As if the mercy of God in Christ automatically rests on persons who are notionally correct. And is just as automatically withheld from those who fall short of notional correctness on any point of substance. For this concept of, in effect, justification not of works, but of words. Words, that is, of notional soundness and precision is near to being a cultic heresy in its own right. And need not detain us further now, however much we may regret the fact that some in all our traditions are bogged down in it. Orthodox evangelicals have never maintained that notional soundness and precision ever saved anyone. Doctoral theory has never been held by any evangelical over the years who has been authentically evangelical. All evangelicals throughout history have been consistent upholding Romans 10.10. For with the heart man believes unto righteousness. And with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Belief in the righteousness of Christ alone. Packer appears to be doing casuistry. Trying to preempt his critics by raising a false contrast or dichotomy between heart religion and head religion. This is an old liberal tactic by which you try to insinuate that all who do not agree with your definition or your contrast or dichotomy are unloving and un-Christian. This is an old tactic that men who were liberal before have employed. There has been none in historical evangelicals and of our evangelical confessions of faith who have ever declared that anyone is sound by notional correctness. This is an absurd caricature that Packer has invented. Rather evangelicals today as in the days of Paul declare that Christ's righteousness alone is what saves fallen and dead humanity. The righteousness of Christ alone. This is the precise point that Christ Jesus proclaimed. The precise point of the gospel. The precise point that Paul stood against the Judaizers on. The precise point that the reformation was fought on. The righteousness of Christ and that alone. And now the righteousness of Christ and that alone is inferred to be a domestic issue. And this is horrendous. Not only in the face of what has been declared to be evangelical and biblical faith over the years but what men and women have died for. Not notional correctness but faith in Christ alone. They went to the stake and were willing to be burnt alive. And so we had such as John Huss, William Tyndale, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, John Rogers, the wonderful 25 year old Anne Eskew, John Bradford, John Philpott and I could go on many others. Who gave their lives for justification by Christ's righteousness alone. And now this is declared to be a domestic issue of no importance. We have here quite a horrendous defamation of biblical faith. We have biblical faith downgraded to be called a cultic heresy. What J. I. Packer has done is to deny the importance of the gospels and the scriptures. On the precise point of justification by faith alone. Sola Fide. What Packer has done is set aside the very confessions of faith for which men and women have contended for throughout the centuries even before the reformation. And he has set aside the very blood of the martyrs who died for this very cause. And the scriptures say that God's judgment is on such. In the words of Hebrews 10, For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth to me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again the Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Another defender in very erudite and clever words in the common mission, and the one who put the book together with Chuck Colson, Richard John Newhouse. He declares in his article in this book, quotation, and it is emphasized in a book in which we don't have emphasis much at all, it is emphasized in italics, quotation, if at the end of the 20th century separation for the sake of the gospel is not necessary, it is not justified. Newhouse declares that the gospel is no longer relevant to Christian unity. And this is the intent and purpose of ECT 1 and the gift of salvation ECT 2. That the gospel is no longer relevant to Christian unity. If this is not contended for by men and women who stand for biblical truth, then this very declaration by Richard John Newhouse can come upon the heads of this generation and on the children coming after this generation. If separation for the gospel is no longer justified, it is no longer necessary. That is the gauntlet laid down before the people of God. And it has not been answered by the people of God. It falls into Roman Catholic teaching. That unity with Rome is what is necessary. As the Vatican Council II documents declared, little by little, as the obstacles to perfect ecclesial communion are overcome, all Christians will be gathered in a common celebration of the Eucharist as the mass. Into the unity of the one and only church. This unity we believe dwells in the Catholic Church as something we can never lose. And this is not just little by little, this is a big step towards unity with the Roman Catholic Church. Taken by men calling themselves evangelical and expressed in precise terms by Newhouse. It is more frightening because it comes from a Catholic. We discussed in my previous talk about the Inquisition, the 600 years of torture, confiscation of property, and of burnings at the stake of millions across Europe, and particularly in Spain. The 600 years of the Inquisition done by the same church that Newhouse believes in. And so separation from the Gospel is no longer necessary for unity. The very intent of ECT I and II. We saw, those who were on the internet last week, that the sectarian rules are now being enforced in France. The churches who are outside the pale when it comes to what is acceptable by the state in France. The type of churches that you would be from, who hold to justification by faith alone. What was declared and published by the Evangelical Times in 1998 in Belgium. Quotation, the Belgian Chamber of Representatives recently passed a law creating a sect oversight organization that would scrutinize 189 religious organizations listed in the Belgian parliamentary sect A report published in 1997. And it goes on to list some of the churches involved. So we have sectarian persecution of churches already happening in Europe. When will it happen on this side of the Atlantic? All the pieces are already in place. The Gospel is at stake. And we declare what our brother Spurgeon declared in his own day. Quotation, since he was cursed who rebuilt Jericho, much more the man who labors to restore potpourri among us. The words of Spurgeon. And this is the very thing of restoring potpourri among us that ECT I and II strives to do. And are we to remain like dumb dogs or sleeping shepherds? Or are we to sound the trumpet as men and women did in ages of the past? We are told by Paul in Titus 3.10 A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject knowing that he that is such subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself. We've reached a breaking point period in history. What is at stake is the Gospel, the power of God unto salvation. And those who are ambassadors for Christ must defend the Gospel of grace. Because we are considering who our God is and what the Gospel of Christ is. We are considering not a temporal affair. When we have contaminated food, we put it aside. Or we have infectious diseases, they are quarantined. But this is not simply a temporal matter, we are talking about the salvation of souls. And the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. And men who are implementing and upholding a false gospel. Ought they not to be quarantined and separated as the Bible says they should be from the people of God. The Bible warned about false teachers. We had this warning right through the Scriptures from the Lord Himself speaking about false Christ. Paul speaking about the grievous wolves. And Peter speaking about the false teachers. All speaking about the many and the few believers who would remain faithful. And we are told, now the Spirit speaketh expressly that in latter times some shall depart from the faith giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. The infallible word of God warning us about false teachers. This is not simply something of history. It is more evident in our own day. Only in our own day men and women seem frightened to name names as did Paul. And to say exactly who it is that are now denying the very Gospel of God's grace. Contend for the faith once delivered for the saints. A commandment. Stand fast in one spirit the Lord says to you. With one mind striving together for the faith of the Gospel. And this demands naming those who are not doing so. And who have denied the very Gospel and to continue to defend their position. Such as J. I. Packer. Like a pied piper drawing thousands of evangelicals onto himself. And such as Charles Colson on the radio each day and his email messages sent out each day. Twisting and contorting the very Gospel of Christ. Such as Bill Bright and Campus Crusade right across the world. With millions of dollars behind them. Such as Mark Knoll from Wheaton College. Pat Robertson of the 700 Club. The famous Os Guinness. Now in the mire of a false teaching and a false denial. A denial of a false Gospel. Richard Land. Timothy George. Who has defended this in Christianity today. And such as T. M. Moore. Just to name a few names. We have here another denial of the very Gospel of the Lord and Saviour. We have anti-biblical terms and the doctrinal intent of Rome stated in very clever ways. And Catholics identified as brothers and sisters in Christ. This delusion to bring the damnation on souls to whom the Gospel should be given. In the past the greatest harvest field to make up most Bible believing churches was from the Catholic Church. And if these men persist and are not addressed in their heresy. The purpose is to prevent the Gospel going forth to souls who are in these systems. Of the Roman Catholic Church and others that were addressed in ECT 1. Such as the Orthodox. We have the righteousness of Christ himself in the mud and trodden on by men. And it is for you and for me to defend the Gospel of grace. And one thing that I have never asked and that I ask of you today and for those who are listening to this tape. That we not only defend but we cry out to God in prayer. That he would vindicate his name and his Gospel. And that he would bring his wrath and vengeance against these men. And I quote from Psalm 94. The very prayer of God in the scripture that I pray with you now. O Lord God to whom vengeance belongs. O God to whom vengeance belongs. Show thyself. Show thyself O Lord. Show thyself in this wicked and apostate age. And may the God of all glory exhibit his wrath. May the God of all glory show his face. And may the God of all glory equip you the saints of God. For those listening on tape who may wish to get a copy of this. You may write to PO Box 192 Del Valle. Two words D-E-L-V-A-L-L-E. Texas 78617. Or visit our webpage where this will be put and posted. For all to see at bereanbeacon.org. B-E-R-E-A-N-B-E-A-C-O-N.org. Or you can email us from the email address given on our webpage. I ask that if anybody here wants to get a copy. We have some copies on the table of this address. And when it is on our webpage and other webpages that you take it and email this to others. Of all addresses that I have given in my 15 years as a believer. I think this is the most serious presentation I have ever given. And I pray to God that as we have prayed. That God's wrath may be seen. And that his believers contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. Amen and Amen. Praise God. This message is being circulated worldwide by Berean Beacon Ministries. Post Office Box 192. Delval. D-E-L. V-A-L-L-E. Texas 78617. United States of America. In the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. It is circulated by Reformation Ireland. 15 Lakeview Avenue. Newton Abbey. 20 Antrim. BT36. 5ZG. Northern Ireland. United Kingdom. This Reformation audio track is a production of Stillwater's Revival Books. SWRB makes thousands of classic Reformation resources available. Free and for sale. In audio, video and printed formats. It is likely that the sermon or book that you just listened to is also available on cassette or video. Or as a printed book or booklet. Our many free resources as well as our complete mail order catalog. Containing thousands of classic and contemporary Puritan and Reform books, tapes and videos at great discounts. Is on the web at www.swrb.com. We can also be reached by email at swrb at swrb.com. By phone at 780-450-3730. By fax at 780-468-1096. Or by mail at 4710-37A Avenue. Edmonton, that's E-D-M-O-N-T-O-N. Alberta, abbreviated capital A, capital B. Canada, T-6-L-3-T-5. You may also request a free printed catalog. And remember that John Calvin, in defending the Reformation's regulative principle of worship. Or what is sometimes called the scriptural law of worship. Commenting on the words of God. Which I commanded them not, neither came into my heart. From his commentary on Jeremiah 731. God here cuts off from men every occasion for making evasions. Since he condemns by this one phrase. I have not commanded them, whatever the Jews devised. There is then no other argument needed to condemn superstitions. Than that they are not commanded by God. For when men allow themselves to worship God according to their own fancies. And attend not to his commands, they pervert true religion. And if this principle was adopted by the Papists. All those fictitious modes of worship. In which they absurdly exercise themselves. Would fall to the ground. It is indeed a horrible thing for the Papists. To seek to discharge their duties towards God. By performing their own superstitions. There is an immense number of them. As it is well known. And as it manifestly appears. Were they to admit this principle. That we cannot rightly worship God. Except by obeying his word. They would be delivered from their deep abyss of error. The prophet's words then are very important. When he says. That God had commanded no such thing. And that it never came to his mind. As though he had said. That men assume too much wisdom. When they devise what he never required. Nay, what he never knew.