11.2.2022

Has This Greco Roman Cultural Add On Become An Idol?

"What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple; as God said. 'I will live in them and walk among them [as Jesus did and still does per Rv2-3] and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Therefore come out from among them, and be separate from them says the Lord..." 
2Corinthians6,16-17 NRSV

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirit and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who belive and know the truth." 
1Timothy4,1-3. NIV

"For we walk in the flesh [as mortal men], we are not carrying on our [spiritual] warfare according to the flesh and using the weapons of man. 4 The weapons of our warfare are not physical [weapons of flesh and blood]. Our weapons are divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses [ie "strongholds]. We are destroying sophisticated arguments and every exalted and proud thing that sets itself up against the [true]  knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought and purpose captive to the obedience of Christ..."
2Corinthians10,3-5 Amplified Bible   

David to God: "be my rock of refuge, a strong fortress to save me." 
Psalm31,2 NIV

How About A Church Kept Together By Courageous Faith And Trust Rather Than Non Biblical Rules And Cultural Customs

An accomplished preacher and teacher- Gene Scott- who has gone home to be with the Lord- had a descriptive definition of faith that always blesses me.

He summed it up this way: "Faith is 90% courage and 10% trust."

Just think if we Christians associated church- and even defined it- in terms of valiant faith actions and trusting Jesus amidst the world, the devil, and the flesh and all that flows therefrom.

Just think if we defined church-as it was immediatly after the first Pentecost- at the "honeymoon" stage- as "90% courage and 10% trust."

What a great church that would be!

And we would be! Today. Now!

But most of us know that our Christian "church" and most individual churches that make it up are not so much about courage and trust (and I don't mean to demean the institution of the church in this article). They are often defined more by our human cultural add ons, and historic accretions, and our customs and styles- and these might not have any real connection, and even contradict, God's Word and Spirit.

And then of course there is the culture of the the lived values and religious personalities and roles and vanities and the likes and dislikes and customs of the leaders and the people in that church.

And of course there is some attempt to keep churches in line with some bit of doctrine- which is about 10% of the lived experience of church- because this keeps our consciences sort of quiet. (This doctrine hopefully would be Word based.) 

Again, I don't mean to dismiss the importance of the church as a Christ's body- His Spiritual Temple- which is a necessary and good and biblical thing. But we have all experienced a Sunday, and maybe the next, that seems 90% culture and 10% doctrine, and we are not too sure if the latter is bible anyway.

Well this certainly calls for reform.

Reform Must Clear Away Cultural Impediments First    

And in Roman church quarters perhaps many have heard the perpetual call for the reform of the priesthood and the church- by better doctrine.

And then issues a plethora of mystical and hopeful and even high and sometimes flowery and or even bible-ish theology. This output leads to varied pep talks flowing therefrom, all of which remind bible students- even perhaps a beginner Catholic with her first bible- that  churches sometimes stray a wee bit from the Word of God as written.

And then these little doctrinal reforms and new customs become great battles within the church and within the priesthood itself. And these might go on for decades, then centuries, even millennials. But what's all the fuss about? It seems to be about a few mere tweaks and quibbles of doctrine and customs about the priesthood and the church.

And amidst little actual word based reform and gospel progress solace among Roman denominational denizens might then found with the claim that our church is still special and others not so much. But, all the while the ruling priestly culture that defines and images the church- barely changes, if at all.

And then perhaps one might hear, the echo of the Apostle Paul  "we are fighting the good fight!" 

"For the right changes and the right church doctrine!"

But as any experienced pastor (in any denomination or any church) knows- much needed gospel change, not just more belle parole, beautiful words, happens not by more minor doctrine changes and more pretty words, but clearly and openly making changes to the ruling and supreme worldly culture that has the church in its strong hold.

Of course this is easier said than done, but there are times in individual churches- and in the whole church denomination itself- when before bible based reform and gospel gets done- the culture itself must first be changed. 

Now that I am happily out of the Roman church (I never really warmed to the lightly and often stated phrase 'married to the church') I can say after all these years as a seeker and a preacher and a prophet that I have seen and heard and even read some about reforming the priesthood and the Roman church by some learned clerical and lay enthusiasts as well.

And well please forgive me for realizing something important before I left. I realized that not only will the priesthood not change much (a closed clerical circle culture meets a hierachical parade culture with the mandatory celibate church militant out front) but the whole church culture itself won't change much by minor doctrinal changes or upgrades to customs- or more gospel sounding words- because the whole church culture is defined by the mandatory celibate priesthood-  typified by the black suit and that plastic Roman collar!

The Roman priesthood has culturally propped up the non biblical custom of mandatory celibacy for about a thousand years now (1Timothy4,1-3 above. See also Colossians2, 20-23).

Where Did Mandatory Celibacy Come From? 

This mandatory celibacy is similar to the pre and post Christian virgin-celibate female priesthood of the goddess Artemis, sister of Apollo, resident in the various Artemesion Temples in Ephesus as administered by their eunich high priest. This manadatory celibate led worship at the Artemesion thrived for about a thousand years, even for a few centuries into the Christian era. (It was preceded for at least about 500 years by an Anatolian version, based on the fertility and fortress mother goddess Cybele. See HCBD "Artemis" 1996)

The Apostle Paul- preaching the one God of universal salvation- really upset the lucrative trade in the shapely offertory idols fit for the Artemesion Temple and their Greco Roman ascetic priesthood. This was all part of Paul fighting against the strongholds, the spiritual beast, of the Artemesion and her regional Ephesian adherents. See Acts19,23-41; 1Corinthians15,32; 2Corinthians1,8. See also William Branham "An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, 2012, pp 77-78. And Jan Bremmer "Priestly Personelle of the Ephesian Artemesion: Anatolian, Persian, Greek and Roman Aspects." 2008

Mandatory Celibacy Creates A Closed Clericalistic Administrative State That Resists Reform

The Roman mandatory celibate led worship has created a clerical based bureaucratic system, an insider church administrative state that is impervious to much change, let alone reform, precisely because those who lead it are comfortable with the honor and status and perks that come from the closed mandatorily celibate system that puts them both in the middle of the circle and at the head of the parade. 

And even amidst any seeming reform everyone- clergy and non alike are still expected to fall in line behind their clerical rulers and happily repeat their ever changing clerical talking points on pretty much everything, even when these and their teaching clearly contradict scripture. 

(By the way-  does the Roman church in the 21st century believe in freedom of speech for Catholics and others?)   

That said, the fact is there is no discernable or winning lobby (let alone a visible and or vocal one) at all for priests being allowed to marry women. To speak up about priests marrying women would be an undiplomatic and a very rare, and optional, clerical ambition sacrifice. 

But I have read, and heard tell now and then, from our Word based gospel and from various Christians, that good pastors are expected to make the right and faithful and excellent biblical decisions regardless of popularity and clerical politics- for the good of the whole people of God, not just their denomination- and the political cliques therein.

As Jesus said "unless your righeteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will have no part in the kingdom of God." Matthew5,20

And yes any excellent and faithful biblical decision against mandatory celibacy will totally wrankle and upset the Roman clerical status quo. But this is the principal and biblical reform doctrine that can and would actually change the culture of the church, and thus prepare it for a a hoped for return to health and strength. This latter would also help the whole body of Christ, not just Catholics, but Protestants and all Christian churches, who themselves often manifest their own brand of clericalistic hierarchy trying to match the worldy influence (and business mode efficiency) of Rome.   

As Soon As Priests Could Marry Change Would Happen

As soon as priests could marry women- well the closed Roman clerical culture and parade would open up a bit. Maybe even admit some woman evangelists. Maybe born again wives of priests, could even speak up in church, not to rule over their husbands or the bishops, but simply speak up like Prisca and Aquila who led the first Roman church. Prisca, wife of Aquila (her name is most honorably listed first in the bible) as you might know, joined her husband in clearly speaking up- because well they both had the eternal gospel of Jesus on their lips and in their hearts. 

And the clericalized Vatican state church culture would also change when the first married pastor takes a much needed family vacation and assigns someone else to tend to the parish, knowing it will be just fine and holy until after he and his family enjoy a bit of recreation. 

It would also change when the priest and or his devoted Christian wife conversed about a future assignment with the local managing pastor- the mere man, not a territorial ruler, Catholics call 'the bishop.' 

Why Bother Changing Catholic Culture At All? 

"Why bother?" Many Catholics and clerics might argue.

"We like our Catholic culture and especially the fact that we can summon sacraments from a priest 24/7 and 365 days a year. That's what we expect! That might not be possible if they are married."

What's An Idol? 

An idol is an image or physical object or a notion, or a false belief or teaching, or anything or anyone that folks allow to take place of the one true God of the bible and His Word.

Idols are "Elilim", powerless ones, HCBD "Idols" 1996. Thus, actual idols and idolatrous notions (Colossians 3,5 says the notion or mental-spiritual stronghold of greed is idolatry) risk weakening the faith of, ie weakening souls, and even actually separating God's people from God and His Word.

Idols and idolatrous notions lead folks away from where we all want to be- that is close to God and saved in the end.

The Israelites got tired of waiting for Moses to come down the mountain with the Word of God, so they instead worshipped the idol of the golden calf (the idol of humanity's own generative power apart from God).

And 1Corinthians10,7 diplomatically says they "rose up to play."

Shortly after that, Israel insisted that they had to have a king to fight wars and defend themselves from the nations that had kings. "We want to be like the other nations" but Israel's destiny and heritage was and is more exalted than that- she is to be God's precious  possession, holy, held close to Himself who is holy. Deuteronomy7,6

The prophet Samuel told them God was their king- but they wanted the strongman type king (not the shepherd like David and Jesus) to defend them against the Philistines. And Saul was physically head and shoulders above the rest- but he was spiritually more akin to a pagan king than to a proper Israelite king filled with the aniointing that kept kings obedient to God's Word and their hearts seeking after God.

Yes God gave Israel Saul as their first king, but he did so reluctantly, sort of like how God might relent to blessing a marriage that he really didn't set up from the start: "you [the people of Israel] said to me, 'No, we want a king to rule over us- even though the Lord your God was your king. 13 Now here is the king you [the people] have chosen, the one you asked for.." 1Samuel12,10c-13

Asking for and choosing their first king, they trusted in themselves, and in sense began to fashion a human worldy pagan notion, ie an idol of kingship. Just as Israel got impatient and carried away and weakened by worshipping the  golden calf, they got impatient and a bit carried away and weakened in seeking King Saul as king when God's plan all along was to give them (and us gentiles) and all the world, Yeshua, in the Davidic line, the one real God-King in the flesh who would rule justly and fairly in the midst of Israel's enemies. 2Samuel7,14; Matthew1, Psalm110,1-3. 

In a sense they fashioned Isrealite kingship in the image of our own fallen human nature, made an idol of it, as if God would protect and perpetuate the king and the Temple even when he and the Temple fell into sin.

We know that the kingship in Israel and Judah was relatively short lived, about 300-400 hundred years, and it definitely ended in 586 BC, never to be revived, until Jesus fulfilled the promises made to the proper kingly line of David. But Israel and Judah first and foremost insisted on their own notion of it. As to the unfit King Saul, and other worldly kings of Israel and Judah, God allowed them- for a awhile- to carry on with their own ideas of kingship even though they did not have the faith courage and trust in God meant to be exercised by all God's faithful.

I don't want to stretch the point too far but I see in Saul the initial seed of the false and idolatrous idea that the office of any kingship must firstly be about a man-king of war, of fortresses, of human violence, like the pagan Philistine Goliath, ie the typology of the final antichrist-beast of Daniel11,38. 

Whereas, Psalm44,4-7 provides the eternal Word teaching about Kingship and Israel :

"You are my King and my God, who decrees victories for Jacob [Jacob is Isreal]. 5 Through you we push back our enemies; through your name we trample our foes. 6 I do not trust in my bow, my sword does not bring me victory; 7 but you give us victory over our enemies."

The first point of Israel's prophetic faith history is that Israel would one day soon see that the Lord God Himself was their protector and king and that he would bring and show His kingdom power and majesty and mercy and justice to Zion and the whole world. Zechariah12,1-5 especially verse 5.

Of course we Christians know this king, our Jesus, the king of kings.

And we know he arrived in the flesh, born of a virgin, and represented our new human connection and blood bought covenant with God. This was a new kind of holy kingship, a truly righteous kingship, a truly divine and human kingship, an actually redeeming kingship not the idolatrous divine assumption that might makes right.

So we humans owe our true worship to our one true King Jesus, him alone, prince of peace and Lord of judgement, Lord of death and eternal life. His kingship is not based on the idol notion of a worldly strongman, either Israelite or pagan, and or the false god of fortresses, like the final false king-beast that will rule in the seven year tribulation, but on our King Jesus and biological descent in the kingly line of David through Mary (Luke3,23-38) and his legal descent in the line of David through His foster father Joseph (Matthew1,1-16. See Michael Rydelnik todayintheword.org/issues/2020/march/questions-and-answer/question-2/) and His status as God's son in the flesh (John1,14) per the actual Spirit of God that gave him physical life through Mary.    

Galatians5,20 lists idolatry as a work of the flesh, ie our fallen human nature.

Romans1,21-29 speaks of it as the reason humans change from the glory and worship of our one immortal God for lesser notions and lesser gods- for our own comfort- but at our own peril.

What does all this talk of Saul and true or idolatrous kingship have to do with mandatory celibacy in the Roman priesthood?  

Bear with me if you will while we take a sweeping look at church history.

Any honest and sober look at Roman church history must mention that mandatory celibacy beginning in about 900-1000 AD had a clear role in creating-saving the political and religious clericalism of Roman Supremacy amidst and throughout the many and early centuries of the Protestant Reformation. The Protestant Reformation surely has weakened Roman Catholicism, but manadatory celibacy forever politically and religiously centralized the Roman church in Western Europe and made it way easier to govern and administer from Rome. It was also central to cementing the Counter reformational church militant cultural parade, and its closed clerical Roman circle culture, that still images and characterizes the political and religious breath, albeit much weakened, of the Roman church today.

Rule is Mere Husk Of Religion Not Life Giving Kernel Of Faith 

Mandatory celibacy was a great administrative and political success, not a gospel Word based success, but a administrative political- religious success, for many centuries.  

Having achieved success in creating and saving Roman religious and political Supremacy, of politically withstanding the Protestant Reformation, is it any great wonder why the mandatory celibacy of the Roman priesthood  has become over the centuries not just the image of the Roman church, but a cultural and religious idol, a non biblical notion-belief, a religious husk (not the kernal of saving faith that produces new life) that much of the Roman church still zealously clings to.

This is so despite its non biblical origins in Greco Roman paganism, its manifest unhealthiness in modern days, and its holier than thou separation from the people of God.

What else but idolatry, and the resulting spiritual stronghold of mandatory celibacy, can begin to fully explain the dismissive and fixed and wide spread resistance to changing this non biblical rule?

Fused With Other Notions

Moreover, it has also been well fused to the popular notion that Peter somehow was the first Roman "Pope"-when there is no historical record that this married (!) Galilean Jewish fisherperson ever even got to Rome- let alone claimed any religious and political pre-eminance there, let alone a complete and full hierachical poiltical and religious jurisdiction over the whole world, notions that developed from the fourth century onward.

A Sacrosanct Culture Is A 'Don't Change Anything' Culture

Is anyone even a little uncomfortable that mandatory celibacy (which relies on the notion that non biblical rules would make one more holy and more fit for religious service) has come to essentially define the whole sacrosanct (don't change anything) culture of the Roman church and its priesthood?

Moreover, does anyone seriously doubt that this administrative rule is the major impediment preventing the much needed cultural change that could open the Roman church to bible based gospel reform and doctrine? 

(Will the possible ordination- ie the clericalization- of woman deacons change the hierachical clerical culture? Not likely. Just more robes and collars. Please just let them preach as what they are- woman evangelists! Will more geopolitics? Not at all- same old same old. Will canceling more Catholics who haven't learned to parse politically correct official church teachings from non politically correct official church teachings? Not a chance!) 

My suggestion- not just for the good of the Roman church but for the whole Christian church- which is still overly influenced by Rome's non biblical hierarchical clericalism [a Western imperial political notion, while Jesus is the Prophet and messiah of Israel, an Eastern, congregational people, called to be separate from non biblical ways] - is that this reform of the priesthood and church is needed now.

Why now? Before the risen Jesus stops knocking on any more Roman parish church doors (cf Revelation3,20). 

(See Ezekiel 9-11- that teaches us that God will and does leave any Holy place- and His Holy place- if it falls into idolatry.) 

As the Lord said way back in the very beginning of the bible - if folks reject His Spirit and Word- and pursue their own ways and notions, and thereby make cultural idols for themselves and of themselves:

"My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal, his days will be a hundred and twenty years." Genesis6,3 NIV

Oh my- if God stops Spiritually contending with and for us- with and for our eternal souls- well then- judgement and eternal death are all that awaits folks who don't know Him yet.  

Prayer For Reform:

Oh Lord Jeus bring biblical reform and restoration to the Roman church (and all churches)! 

Bless her leaders and give them faith courage. Please tell them in ways they cannot ignore- to allow bible based marriage for her priests according to God's Word.

Change this church's clerical culture to a born again, bible based gospel culture.

Billions of souls are in the balance.

In Jesus NAME we pray. 

Br. Tobin           

Prior posts in this series:

What would a consultant say?

https://zionpentecostmission.com/mandatory-celibacy-1.html

It's efficient but that not a good enough reason:

https://zionpentecostmission.com/mandatory-celibacy-2.html

Why is it kept?

https://zionpentecostmission.com/mandatory-celibacy-3.html