I hope you've all had your legs stretched and so on. Well, not literally. It sounds as if you've been on the rack. But good to have you back again. Now, our second speaker tonight, you've already heard an accent from the northern part of Ireland. I hope you were able to cope with it. Because you might have difficulty with the next one. He talks with a rogue. It's a great joy to invite Stephen in a moment or two to come and talk on the subject of Mary. Just a couple of items on the bookstall which might be of interest to you just in relation to this subject. There was a video issued just before Christmas called Messages from Heaven. It analyzes many of the Marian apparitions that have appeared over the last centuries and the messages that have been emanating from these apparitions. And various evangelical Christians from around the world were interviewed for their thoughts and so on. And you might recognize one of the people who was interviewed. He's got a Northern Irish accent and he's got grey hair. But I do believe it is a very good and timely video. What encouraged me was I showed a good portion of it in January at a public showing in Northern Ireland. And quite a number of folks who were formerly Roman Catholics and are now converted, they took copies of the video because they felt that it would be a suitable witnessing tool to people within their own family circle. So that video is available. And then there's a little booklet. I obviously promoted it very well last Saturday, because I think I only have about half a dozen copies left, but it is The Blessed Virgin and an Irish Family, written by a man called Dick Cughe, or Cughe, as they say, I think, in the south of Ireland. Again, Dick is a former Roman Catholic, but it's fascinating to read of him growing up in a family which was very much devoted to Mary, and then when he converted his analysis of the seen, and so on. So those are just a couple of items that might be of particular interest if this topic is of particular interest to you. But I'm going to hand over to Stephen now. And you probably have to about half nine, I would say, or thereabouts. But keep going if you feel you have to. OK, Stephen, thanks very much indeed. Well, can I echo what has been said already and the sentiment behind what has been said already? We appreciate being here. We appreciate the opportunity that the Church has afforded us to come and speak on these issues. We're speaking on them because we feel that they are timely and necessary, and it's a duty that God has given us to speak on these issues as the need arises. I want to introduce what I have to say this evening by reading some very familiar verses from the Gospel of John and chapter 7. John chapter 7. Beginning to read at verse 37 and reading to verse 39. On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out saying, if anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this he spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in him would receive. For the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." You know, in those short verses, we find the heart, don't we, of what the Lord Jesus came to do. He came to do such a work that those who would believe in Him would be brought through Him directly to God. And God directly to them. God directly in them. through him. It's the very heart of the glory of real Christianity. And that's the issue I want to talk about, because that's the very issue that is challenged by the Roman Catholic doctrine of Mary. Nothing less than a direct challenge to what the Lord Jesus, he alone, has accomplished. The title that I've been given to speak on is an assessment of the Roman Catholic Church's teaching on Mary, the mother of Jesus, with particular reference to Catholic Catechism, paragraph 969, which states, the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate helper, benefactress, and mediatrix. Where would we start to try and put together to understand what the Catholic Church is saying? The material is virtually endless. In the Catholic Catechism, which Cecil showed you earlier, there are no less than 50 sections on different aspects of the Catholic Church's teaching on the person and role of Mary. Now, that's just the Catholic Catechism alone. As well as the Catechism, there are what's known as papal encyclicals, or teaching letters which come from the Pope. There's conciliar documents, documents produced down through the centuries by the various councils, references in the church fathers. The material goes on and on and on. What I propose to do this evening is something very simple. We're taking one of those documents, produced not 400 years ago, but 14 years ago by the present pope called Redemptoris Mater, on the Blessed Virgin Mary and the life of the Pilgrim Church. We're going to take some very important sections from that. By the way, you can freely get this. If you got connected to the internet, you can download it for the price of a local phone call. That's important, because what I want to get across to you tonight is that we're not giving you a false view of what the Catholic Church says. Insofar as we can, in the time allotted to us, we're wanting to let that particular institution speak for itself. And then, very importantly, we're wanting to bring what God says from his word and hold the two up to you together and say, here's the comparisons, here's the contradictions, here's the choices that have to be made. Well, even the subtitle of the pope's encyclical, Redemptoris Mater, subtitled The Role of Mary in the life of the pilgrim church presupposes, doesn't it, that Mary has a role, a continuing role, in the life of the church. So where I propose to start is not with what he says, but with what the Bible says. How would we summarise the Bible's teaching on Mary? What does the Bible actually tell us? The Old Testament, there are three statements made which don't mention Mary obviously by name, but the obvious implication refers to her. The first, of course, in Genesis chapter 3, where the seed of the woman, the seed being the Lord Jesus, the woman obviously Mary, the seed of the woman, the Lord Jesus, will crush the serpent, Satan, the serpent's head. Secondly, in Isaiah 7, 14, probably the best known reference in the Old Testament, behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Emmanuel. And another more obscure one, again by implication in Micah 5, she talks about until the time that she who is in labour has given birth. Speaking of the coming of the Messiah. When we come to the New Testament, of course, Mary is mentioned by name, mostly, in Matthew and Luke, chapters 1 and 2 in Matthew, chapter 1 in Luke, the birth of the Lord Jesus. In Luke chapter 2, that incident where Mary and Joseph bring the Lord Jesus as a young man to Jerusalem, he gets lost there in Jerusalem. They go back to find him. Crucially, John chapter 2. The Catholic church makes a lot of play with this. There's a lot of emphasis put on the wedding at Cana. And that held up to us as a supposed pattern of how Mary continues to have a role in the church. More about that later on. Another key group of verses, Matthew 12, Mark 3, Luke 8, and Luke 11, where various people make statements about Mary in the presence of Jesus, and he comments on those statements. Again, we'll develop that more as we go on. Again, of course, Mary appears at John 19 at the crucifixion scene. Again, the Catholic Church goes to John 19 to find a supposed continuing role for Mary on the basis of that passage of Scripture. In Acts 1.14, we see her with the rest of the disciples awaiting the Spirit at Pentecost. Two final references, she's not mentioned by name, but again by implication in Romans 1, 3, as the one through whom Jesus is the literal descendant of David. And then the famous statement in Galatians 4, 4, the one through whom, when the time had fully come, God sent forth his son to be born under the law that he might redeem those who are under the law. And that is what the Bible says about Mary from first to last. The reason it doesn't say more is because she's not the theme of the Bible. The theme of the Bible is the glorious work of our God from Genesis to Revelation. But what the Bible does say about her and those occasions where it does refer to her, we do need to look at in something of more detail so that we can deal with the claims that are made, not by her it might be added, but by the Roman church. supposedly on her behalf. So, what does the Bible say about Mary? Well, it gives us the response that she made to the angel when he comes with that amazing message from God. She describes herself, you can read it in Luke 1, 46 through 55, as magnifying the Lord. She says furthermore that she rejoices in God her Saviour. She says that she rejoices that such a God as he would regard the lowliness of his handmaiden. She says interestingly that God has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. In short, it's the type of response we would expect to get from somebody who is a disciple and has encountered the Lord and is amazed by his graciousness to somebody who is so unworthy. It's a response that each one who's a disciple here would say amen to. But by and large, throughout the ministry of the Lord Jesus, we look long and hard to find Mary saying very much indeed. It's mostly silence with regard to herself. Anything that is said is usually said about her rather than by her. And then it's only in the context of helping us to understand what is happening through the birth, the life, and the ministry of the Lord Jesus, who is the theme of Scripture. At times, Mary definitely seems confused about what's happening in the life of her son. The classic case in Luke 2, When Jesus is missing, they discover he's missing, they go back, and he says, why do you seek me? Did you not know that I must be about my father's business? Do you ever think about that? When the angel had come over 12 years before this to Mary, he had explained to her that she was going to miraculously conceive a son. He would be miraculously conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit. Joseph had been told not to hesitate to take her as wife, because that which was conceived was holy and would be called the Son of God. But she'd forgotten. It's so human, isn't it? Even somebody who's a disciple can sometimes forget what the Lord has said. Far from the scripture exalting Mary above ordinary believers, she's painted for us very much on the same level as every other believer, with all the faults and failings that we have. Certainly not sinless, certainly not perfect, which is why she needed a saviour. In John 2, at the wedding feast at Cana, she's only recorded as making two statements. First of all, the obvious one, they have no wine. Notice it's not a command. It's not even a request. It's simply a statement. And when Jesus turns to her and says, woman, what does your concern have to do with me? My hour has not yet come. She doesn't repeat the request. She doesn't assert any maternal rights, so-called. In fact, she turns not to Jesus, but she turns to the servants and says, whatever he says to you, do it. Now, I think if we were to learn anything from Mary as a model, surely that would be the text to go to. Whatever he says to you, do it. Again, mostly silent, but on the rare occasions that she did speak, pointing away from herself to God and to God's Son who was graciously in the flesh allowed to be her son. Now, we've already said that that's the picture that the Bible gives us of Mary. When we turn to the document that the Pope has produced, it's a whole different world. I'm sure many of you, when you were younger, maybe not so much younger, read the famous classic by Lewis Carroll called Alice in Wonderland. And he also wrote another piece called Through the Looking Glass. You remember in that story, when Alice went through the looking glass, everything was reversed. Nothing meant what it meant before. And to be honest, that's the impression you get as you read this document. because the plain meaning of scripture suddenly no longer means what it means. Here's what he says about that passage we've just looked at very briefly in John 2. He says, from the text, it appears that Jesus and his disciples were invited together with Mary as if by reason of her presence the son seems to have been invited because of his mother. I missed that when I read it, did you? I think the reason I missed it was because it didn't say it, which is a very good reason to miss it. From then on, he builds a case based on finding what's not there and then elaborating on it. He says, Mary is present at Cana in Galilee as the mother of Jesus, and in a significant way, she contributes to that beginning of the signs, he's quoting there from the text, just that phrase, which reveal the messianic power of her son. Now can you see where he's taking us? Jesus is there because Mary's there. Therefore, now the scripture doesn't say that, We have to remind ourselves of that. But he has said it. Now he begins building on what he has said rather than what the scripture has said to take us to the next conclusion that therefore Jesus now, because he's there because Mary's there, Mary has made a vital contribution to him revealing himself as the Messiah. Now he will go on, as we'll see, to base on this, which has no basis, the fact that Mary continues to be vital to reveal Jesus as the Messiah. As you might think, he would need to justify doing this. And here's how he justifies it. This event already quite clearly outlines the new dimension, the new meaning of Mary's motherhood. Now, there is no new meaning, but he's presupposed that there is. And now he's building on that. Her motherhood has a significance which is not exclusively contained in the words of Jesus. In other words, Jesus missed it, but he's seen it. and the various episodes reported by the synoptics, they missed it too. What he's saying is we need to go outside of the Scripture, including the very words spoken by Jesus, to find what God's saying to us. And he's going to tell us what God is saying to us. Here, we're faced with a very, very important issue, that the Roman Catholic Church's teaching on Mary is linked in with her teachings on all other vital issues. And in this case, in a very particular way, her understanding of scripture. Now, the very brief. The glimpse I've given you on how the Pope handles that portion of scripture, it's horrendous, isn't it? I mean, I'm sure if we went to this church and asked the youngest person in the Sunday school, they'd make a better job of it, but they certainly couldn't make a worse one. And this is the person who holds himself above the scripture. What is the scripture actually telling us about the role of Mary? We don't want to lose sight of this. It's telling us that she was graciously used by God to have the privilege of being the mother of our Saviour. She was conscious that it was a privilege and basically there her role ended. That's the scriptural picture. But if you don't want to settle for the scriptural picture in any one area of doctrine, then by definition you must go beyond the scripture. And that's what's happening here in this teaching on Mary. We're going to look in more detail later on about some of the dangers that's involved in that. I'm sure you're beginning to think of some of them already, but we'll look at them in more detail as we go on. The second set of scriptures which are really crucial for us to look at are those four that I mentioned together. In Matthew 12, you can look up these references later on, 46 to 50, the parallel passages in Mark 3 and Luke 8, and a further passage in Luke 11, 27 to 28. Well, very briefly, all of these scriptures deal with situations where Mary, the mother of Jesus, is there. Jesus himself is there. The disciples are there and usually a group of others as well. In Matthew 12. The word comes to Jesus from somebody, look your mother and your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak with you. Now that's a simple statement of what's happening. I think as well as the statement, there may be an expectation. Notice I'm saying maybe, I'm not reading into it. There may be an expectation there that they're so important that Jesus is going to stop everything and go to be with them or meet with them or hear what they have to say. Just maybe. And I'm saying if, if that was the expectation, Jesus killed it there and then. But remember the buts in the Bible. But he answered and said to the one who told him. Who is my mother? And who are my brothers? He answered one question with another, didn't he? To get people's attention. But he immediately then answers the question he asks. He stretched out his hand towards his disciples and said, here are my mother and brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother. In that statement alone, if that's all we had, the words of the Lord Jesus devastates the whole Roman doctrine of Mary. Because the Lord Jesus there draws a totally level foundation. There is no room whatsoever for earthly, physical relationship to him to have any spiritual significance whatsoever. In fact, furthermore, John 7 tells us, we didn't get to read it earlier, that at the time Jesus made that wonderful statement we looked at, his own brothers were not yet believers. So not only did physical relationship with Jesus not guarantee spiritual privilege, it didn't even guarantee spiritual life. Yet the whole Roman doctrine of Mary is based on exactly the opposite assumption. that physical relationship with Jesus guarantees spiritual privilege and spiritual exaltation effectively on a par with Jesus himself and practically above him. Well, you might think that that was a hard text to handle. Well, let's go through the looking glass again. Listen to how the Pope exegetes these verses. He poses the question, is Jesus thereby distancing himself from his mother according to the flesh? But before you get a chance to say yes, does he perhaps wish to leave her in the hidden obscurity which she herself has chosen? If this seems to be the case, we're going through the looking glass now. From the tone of those words, one must nevertheless note that the new and different motherhood which Jesus speaks of to his disciples refers precisely to Mary in a very special way. That's clear, isn't it? You see, what he's saying effectively is that although the scripture seems to be saying one thing, No, we don't say it seems to be saying it, we're saying it is saying it. He's saying you don't really understand or you are not capable of understanding what it's really saying. And the particular doctrine that he's denying here is what we call the perspicuity of Scripture. Which put in very simple terms means God meant to say what he said. He said what he meant to say. and we can understand what he meant to say by reading what he did say. That's the Irish way of explaining it. Therefore, to understand what God's saying is, go read it. You see, that's the issue, isn't it? Can you and I understand what our God is saying to us by reading the Bible? Yes, we say. effectively no, the Pope says. And this doctrine of Mary is one of the cases in point, as it were, of this. What Rome is saying is this, even though you suppose that's what the scripture says, no matter how much scriptural evidence you bring, no matter how carefully exegeted, no matter how scripturally consistent your argument may be, Scripture must only mean what Scripture says it means. You remember what the first article of the Christian faith is according to Cardinal Bellarmine? The Roman pontiff is supreme. Supreme over your conscience, my conscience, and the word of God itself. You see, really what we've got here is a case in point of what Cecil was saying earlier with regard to the papacy. so that the Roman doctrine of Mary is an expression on the one hand of their view of scripture and also their view of the papacy. It's interesting that all the key anti-evangelical Marian doctrines have been defined by who? The popes. The two last ones that we had over the past century the Immaculate Conception, and of course, the Assumption. We've looked at a number of scriptures here. On the one hand, what the scripture is clearly saying, and on the other hand, how Rome interprets what the scripture is saying to effectively negate what the scripture is saying As they do so, there's five, if you like, aspects of the teaching that emerge, which I want us to look at in the time that's remaining. We'll reply to them as we go through them, and then I want to summarize what we need to be doing as Christians in the light of this situation. What Rome is saying, first of all, is that there exists in the person of Mary something that they call a spiritual motherhood of mediation. That Mary, because of these alleged special privileges arising from her natural relationship with the Lord Jesus, by definition has a mediation role. That's what the Pope says in the document I've quoted. He says, in these texts, Jesus means above all to contrast the motherhood resulting from birth with this motherhood in the dimension of the kingdom of God. Now listen very carefully to the next phrase that he uses. This is a new kind of motherhood according to the spirit, not just according to the flesh. That is to say, Mary's solicitude for human beings, her coming to them in the wide variety of their wants and needs. Friends, what the Pope is asserting there for Mary is exactly what the Bible asserts for Jesus, isn't it? By the way, how could Mary come to human beings in the wide variety of their wants and needs unless she were an infinite being? There is only one infinite being, the triune God. That statement alone is blasphemous to the very godhood of God himself. That's the level of the issue we're dealing with. Many people today say, well, these are only side issues. These are matters of indifference. They're not matters which we should be divided over. These are not matters which divide Christian from Christian. These are matters which divide Christianity from every and any other religion. If we can't settle on the Godhood of God, what can we settle on? So secondly, the Roman Church does not hesitate to describe Mary, by this supposed spiritual motherhood, as a real mediator. Again the Pope says, I'm just continuing the sentence I quoted earlier. She brings these needs within the radius of Christ's messianic mission and saving power. She brings them within the radius of his messianic mission and saving power. Thus, there is a mediation. I'm still quoting. Mary places herself between her Son and mankind. in the reality of their wants, needs, and suffering. She puts herself in the middle. That is to say, she acts as a mediatrix, not as an outsider, but in her position as mother. Now friends, this is not something we're imposing on the Catholic Church. It's not something we're misrepresenting them as saying. This is the words of the Pope himself quoted from the encyclical. But what does God say? What does the scripture say? It says of Jesus in Hebrews 9.15, And for this reason he is the mediator of the new covenant by means of death. Mary died a natural death many years after Jesus died. It was the death that, unless the Lord comes, you and I will die. She died because she was a sinner, a saved sinner, but a sinner nonetheless. She died. But there is only one who, by virtue of his death, is the mediator of the new covenant. Jesus Christ. It's to Him the writer to the Hebrews would go on to say that we come. To Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel. It's the blood. That crowning sacrifice at the end of a life perfectly lived in obedience to the law of God, He offers Himself as a sacrifice for the lawbreakers. He alone is qualified to do it. He alone did it, and to him alone we look for the virtue of it. But thirdly, the Church of Rome asserts that Jesus depends upon Mary's mediation to exercise his mediation. Again, quoting from the Pope, she knows that as such, as the mediator, she can point out to her son the needs of mankind. And in fact, she has the right to do so. Her mediation is thus in the nature of intercession. Mary intercedes for mankind. Do you realize the implication of what he's saying here? that Jesus needs Mary to tell him our needs. But what does the Bible say? It says that because Jesus was not simply a perfect man but the Son of God become a perfect man he had within him an inherent omniscience John 2, 24 and 25. He knew all men, and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for he knew what was in man. Now if the Scripture does not hesitate to say that of the Lord Jesus at the low point of His humiliation, does He know any less at the high point of His glorification? It would be absurd, wouldn't it? Fourthly, the Roman Church asserts that we depend upon Mary to know Jesus well. Now you can see what's happening here. They've put her in every aspect of Christ's mediatorial role between us and Him. Quoting from the Pope again, It's not my favourite person to quote from but it just has to be done for. Another essential element of Mary's maternal task is found in her words to the servants. He's bringing us back here to John 2. Do whatever he tells you. The mother of Christ, he says, presents herself as the spokeswoman of her son's will. We don't know what her son's will at that time was. She didn't know. Pointing out those things which must be done so that the saving power of the Messiah may be manifested. But the Bible tells us that when she was on earth as a saved sinner like the rest of us, she wasn't always aware of what God's will was. She sometimes forgot what she already knew. And God forbid that we were dependent on anyone like us to reveal God's will to us. It's the unique role of the Holy Spirit, and Cecil has touched on this point already, to be the representative of Christ on earth today. Not just in the ruling role, which the Pope robs him of, but in the revelatory role. which Mary, or the Mary of Roman Catholicism, robs him of. Here again, the attack is on the doctrine of Scripture, as we alluded to earlier. I want to develop, as I said I would, why that is so crucial. Why do we fight to the death for the doctrine of Scripture, for sola Scriptura, for Scripture alone, as God's will revealed to us. Well, it's for this, and here the sad departure from the truth of the Roman Church is a case in point. If any church, not just the Roman Church, if any church, once lets go of sola Scriptura, the Scripture alone, for the sake of any doctrine that they want to bring in, then not only will they go wrong in that area, but they are leaving themselves open to the inevitability of going wrong in every other area as well. If you leave the door open, it's only a matter of time before the burglar comes in. And so the scripture is a door nailed shut in the face of the deceiver. At least it's meant to be when we hold it in place. It's the immune system of the spiritual body, isn't it, of the church. It's the immune system which recognizes error and destroys it. And a church that lets go of sola scriptura will be like those sad cases we see, those AIDS patients whose immune system is gone and they're torn apart by every disease possible. Fifthly, the Roman doctrine of Mary is a case in point of their false doctrine of human nature. The doctrine of Mary betrays the fact that Rome has put a radical limitation on the fallenness of man. That, I believe, is one of the reasons why they have instinctively developed that doctrine. and so much of what they believe is built upon that doctrine. Now, if you read many of the Roman pronouncements in the Catechism and so on, you will find that they officially teach a doctrine of the Fall. They contend that God's grace is essential for salvation. Yet, what they really believe is betrayed in their view of how man is saved. And specifically in this case that we're looking at, on the role of Mary as co-mediatrix and co-redemptrix. Mary is just the high point, maybe we should say the low point, of their doctrine of what man can do. It's based on a grossly inflated view of what was happening when Mary submitted herself to the Lord's will as revealed to her through the angel as we looked at in Luke 1. Here's what the Pope says was happening in that incident. Here's the doctrine he builds on it of what of what Mary's vital role was, the vital role of human nature. He says that it marked Mary's acceptance of God's will, marks the moment when the Holy Spirit, who had already infused fullness of grace into her, formed in her womb the human nature of Christ. This fullness marks the moment when, with the entrance of the eternal into time, time itself is redeemed, being filled with the mystery of Christ." He goes on to say this, the church salutes Mary as the church's own beginning. In the event of the Immaculate Conception, the Church sees projected and anticipated in her most noble member, the saving grace of Easter. And above all, in the Incarnation, she encounters Christ and Mary in the solubi joint. What he says basically here is that When the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, became man, since Mary was the physical vehicle through which this happened, there was established an indissoluble spiritual link. So that he says, he who is the church's Lord and head, and she who, uttering the first fiat of the new covenant, prefigures the church's condition as spouse and mother. What he's saying is this, and if we had time to go through the document, he develops it in many, many places. He's saying that the salvation of God's people is contingent upon Mary. that what we call the plan of salvation hinged upon Mary's acceptance of God's will. Not as we would understand it, that Mary's acceptance of God's will was only possible because God himself willed it. There is a dividing line, isn't it? He's attributing to human nature in the person of Mary the hinge upon which salvation turns. And what he's saying is this, that because Mary was supposedly indispensable in her own way to the coming of the Lord Jesus, she continues to be indispensable to his continuing ministry. that because she was the human contact point of his entrance into the world, she continues to be the human contact point for humans. That's what he's saying, nothing less than that. And that's why if you read through Roman Catholic devotional material, Mary is described for example as the refuge of sinners. She's described as the mother of mercy, our life, our sweetness, our hope. And any of you who are here from a Roman Catholic background would know that I could spend the next two hours quoting other titles that are given to her. The bottom line is summed up in the statement the pope has in the following words. This motherhood in the order of grace flows from her divine motherhood. Because she was, by the design of divine providence, the mother who nourished the divine Redeemer, Mary became an associate of unique nobility. the Lord's humble handmaid who cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the Saviour's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. You see there's a logic, albeit a perverse logic, in all these doctrines. Human nature, the Catholic Church says, must of itself. And it has within itself the ability to cooperate with the grace of God. After all, look at Mary as the prime example. This is how he concludes this particular section. This maternity, this motherhood of Mary in the order of grace will last without interruption until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Now it's been difficult to go through that because I would much rather use this pulpit for expounding the text that I began with. But what we've been reading here flies in the face of the text we began with and we must deal with it. So as Bible believers, how do we respond to all of this? Firstly, I believe there's an obligation on us to be honest and to say that we believe that Rome means what Rome says, not what our ecumenical evangelical brethren would tell us Rome says. I mean, the one thing I can say about the Pope is he tells me what he says. I don't have to go to Charles Colson or Billy Graham and ask them what the Pope says. The Pope tells me what the Pope says. I don't like it, but at least it's clear. That has to be our starting point, doesn't it? If we're going to engage in argument and debate for love's sake, With those who are lost, we must come to terms with the manifestation of their lostness. And that's nothing less than what we're dealing with here. It's the manifestation of spiritual blindness. You cannot be wrong about the Godhood of God, the mediation of Christ, and the way of salvation, and be spiritually enlightened. You see, the issue in facing up to what Rome actually teaches is our own integrity as evangelicals and the spiritual welfare of Catholic people. How are we going to be sacrificial, as our forefathers were, even to the point of death, to bring the truth to those who are lost if we don't believe they're lost in the first place? It just won't happen, will it? And by and large, it's not happening today. That's one of the reasons it's not happening, is we, not just has Rome gone through the looking glass, we've gone through our own looking glass. They have gone through the looking glass with regard to scripture. And they've made it say something other than it does. But we've gone through the looking glass with regard to what Rome says. And we wish that they had believed something else. But they haven't. We start by saying, sadly, but the truth is they believe what they say they believe. That's what we've got to deal with. Secondly, what they teach is unbiblical. It's unbiblical because we can clearly understand what the Bible says, and in the short time we've had here this evening, On some of these vital issues, we've been able to compare what the Church of Rome says with what the Bible says. Thirdly, we have to remember that it's unbiblical teaching on biblically vital issues. Now, all of what I don't know what background everybody, or anybody for that matter, is here tonight. But if we had folk here from, say, a Methodist background, or Baptist, or Presbyterian, there's things we disagree on. But hopefully, there's certain things we would agree on, which would be the very center and heart of the gospel. But the difference with Rome is in the areas which are the heart of the gospel. Who is Jesus Christ? Is he the unique mediator? And the issue of Mary brings that difference into its sharpest focus. That our difference with Rome is because their teaching is unbiblical, and it's unbiblical on the issues of vital importance, the person and work of Christ. We mentioned earlier the importance of the scripture alone, the doctrine of sola scriptura. Sola scriptura leads us to sola Christus, that Christ alone is the mediator. And sola Christus focuses us on sola fide, faith in him alone. There's an unbreakable chain of heavenly logic that links all of these together. You see, man is saved if he is to be saved by turning to Christ alone, by placing all his faith in Him alone. Where do we discover that truth? In the Scripture alone. What is attacked by Rome's doctrine of Mary? All of those solas in one way or another. So what is at issue? Fourthly, by implication of what we've said already, is the very doctrine of salvation itself. The issue of Mary as supposed mediator, mother of the church, etc., etc., is not some mere academic ivory tower argument. It's not theologians seeking to work themselves into a job. It has vital pastoral and eternal significance. Because the issue tonight that we're really tackling when we ask who is Mary is who is Jesus. Is He not manifestly revealed to us by the Scripture as the One who by His very nature is alone qualified to be our mediator? If He is true God and true man, then he is the only one qualified to be our mediator. How do we invite sinners to respond to Jesus? Is it personally, person to person, or at one remove through an institution, be it the church, be it the papacy, or Mary? It's one or the other. It can't be both. One excludes the other. but that Jesus himself not say, come unto me. All you who labour and are heavy laden, I will give you rest. It's as personal, as awesome, as wonderful as that. Jesus said, come to me. Isn't that how the early church understood what he said? The writer to the Hebrews said, looking unto Jesus, the author and the finisher of our faith. What do we look to Jesus for? He's saying we look to Jesus for everything. We come to him directly and we receive from him completely. I am, Jesus said in the last book of the Bible, the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last. You know, I much prefer to finish with his words than his words. But these other words are still there, aren't they? They carry powerful influence in the world today. None of our communities are totally immune from them. What are we as Christians expected, therefore, to do? Well, the Bible tells us, Jude 1 and verse 3, Beloved, while I was diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you. exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. Brothers, sisters, we have a faith worth contending for because our faith isn't just some list of propositions. Our faith is a faith in the person of the Son of God who loved us and gave himself for us. whoever lives to make intercession for us, who is coming again to receive us unto himself, that where he is we may be also. That's a faith worth contending for. Ought not our hearts to burn with indignation that any institution or any person would say, you can't come to him, when he says, yes, you can. I'm putting it in very simple language, but that is the issue. But finally, let's be careful how we contend. This may sound a little bit Irish, but I'll say it anyway. We need to contend without being contentious. The servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient." You know, our hearts must go out to those who are still blinded by what we read earlier. I mean, I was once there. All the people in my church back in Dundalk were once there, but they're not there now. because the scripture was brought to me and was brought to them and they're being taught and we're being taught and we're continuing to be taught. That's how falsehood is demolished. By the argument of the scripture of truth. Patiently, lovingly applied. In humility, Paul said, correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance. We believe it's in the grant of our God to grant repentance. To the hardest of sinners, in the most hopeless of conditions, no matter how long they've been blinded by error. That should be our goal. So that they may know the truth, and they come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil. That's our real enemy. Having been taken captive by him to do his will. Our enemy is not the people of the Roman system. It's the system and particularly the one behind it. But greater is he that is in us than he that is in the world. And I'm not depressed. when I look at these issues. Because when you compare error with truth, it just makes truth shine all the more brightly. Cecil told us earlier that that whole system that seems so powerful now will be destroyed not by might or by power, but by the breath of his mouth. by the Word of the Living God. May it be so, and may the Lord use even us in doing so. Amen.