https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg



Pope Shenouda III

Forward



We are in an age in which Ecumenical work and attempts towards the recovery of the Christian Unity have flourished. The meetings between the Churches, in councils, conferences and symposiums have increased, and the fields of co-operation and co-working have multiplied.
However, unity is in a much higher level than cooperation. The Christian Unity should be built on the foundation of the “One Faith”. Thus began the theological discussions between the Churches.
This book in your hands is a step in this theological discussion between our brethren the Protestants and us.
Our brethren the Protestants comprise numerous denominations. There are partial variances between them, but as a whole they are enclosed within one frame. We will try in an atmosphere of love to discuss the points they have in common.
Here we do not include our brethren the Anglicans, as most of the topics in this book apply to other denominations of the Protestant Church.
In our discussion we have taken care to depend exclusively upon the Holy Bible, quoting none of the sayings of the Church Fathers or Tradition.
We shall speak with absolute frankness in handling the points of variance between Protestantism and Orthodoxy. We shall analyse them and see the opinion of the Holy Bible on them.
This book is the first volume of our discussion. It will be followed by others to cover the remaining points of difference, with the aspiration that this may bring us to a dogmatic and intellectual understanding.
We are prepared to reply to all the comments that we may receive.
Lastly, we pray that the Lord may preserve our discussion in the atmosphere of love of which we are circumspect.

August, 1988
Pope Shenouda III
.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg



Pope Shenouda III


One Faith and Sound Doctrine


Theology is the discourse about God, blessed be His Name. Only those who have known God, and their disciples, are able to speak about Him.
Theology needs accuracy of expression and interpretation, and knowledge of the reliable sources believed in by all Christians. We, as a traditional and conservative Church, maintain the Apostolic Faith that was once entrusted to us by the saints (Jude 1-3). We do not introduce any innovations in religion, nor do we move an ancient boundary marker set up by our forefathers (Prov.22: 28).
The faith of the Church is "one faith" (Eph.4: 5). The Church reminds us every day of this one faith, in a reading we pray in Matins from chapter four of Saint Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians. This one faith is the faith of every member of the Church. Whoever did not believe was isolated by the Church and forbidden to mix with others lest he corrupt their faith. Therefore, our teacher St. John the Evangelist says: "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds" (2John. 10, 11).
The basic source of the one faith is the Holy Bible. The other sources are the sayings of the saints, the authenticated creeds of the holy councils, and what was recorded in the
Church books, especially the ritual books. All these are in accord with the Holy Bible and are called as a whole 'Church Tradition'.
The criterion by which we validate the accuracy of Tradition is the important condition that it complies with the Holy Bible. Our teacher St. Paul the Apostle says: "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed" (Gal.1: 8). He also says: "As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (Gal.1: 9).

That was why, in the Apostolic era and thereafter, during her early stages, the Church was extremely circumspect to safeguard the teaching and thus safeguard the faith. For this reason, St. Paul the Apostle says to his disciple St. Titus the Bishop of Crete: "But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine" (Titus 2: 1). This sound doctrine was commanded to the first bishop fathers directly by the Apostles, and then from the bishops to other generations through honest teaching. Thus the sound doctrine was handed down from one generation to the next. St. Paul the Apostle says to his disciple Bishop Timothy: "And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2Tim.2: 2) and "Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith" (2Tim.1: 13).

Teaching Is the Task of the Clergy

Teaching was the task of the Apostles and then of their disciples the bishops, priests and deacons. It was never the work of the laity. The Lord Jesus Christ entrusted the task of teaching to the Apostles when He said to them: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:19,20) and "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mark.16: 15). He did not say this to others.
The Apostles considered preaching, teaching, ministry of the word and entrusting the faith to others, their main task, and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. On the occasion of ordaining the seven deacons, St. Peter the Apostle said: "...but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word" (Acts 6: 4) and he said about the Lord: "...He commanded us to preach to the people" (Acts 10:42). St. Paul the Apostle said about the Gospel: "...to which I was appointed a preacher, an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles" (2Tim. 1: 11). Thus this Apostle lived preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 28:31).
St. Paul the Apostle entrusted the task of teaching and preaching to his disciples the bishops. He said to his disciple St. Timothy: "Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching" (2Tim.4: 2). And to his disciple Bishop Titus, he said: "Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you" (Titus 2:15).
The task of teaching was entrusted to bishops, then to priests and clergymen in general, as we will mention in detail in due course, since the Law is sought from the mouth of the clergyman.
Holy councils of bishops were formed and had the authority to legislate laws and canons in the holy Church. The replies of many of the bishops on religious affairs were considered sacred canons recognised by the Universal Church. A vivid example of this is what occurred during the visit of Pope Timothy Alexandrus, the 22nd Pope of Constantinople, to the Ecumenical Council held in 381 A. D. All his replies were considered Church canons. (See Volume 14 of Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers series).
As for the laity, they were always in the position of learners. The clergymen became teachers not only because they preached from the Church pulpit but also because of them being spiritual counsellors in confessions and the like.
Faith and doctrine were the task of the Church, represented by her councils and bishops, and were interpreted by the clergymen to the people. Preachers are not entitled to teach their own opinions on the subjects of faith and doctrine but they must teach what is recorded in the Church doctrine entrusted to them. For if the freedom is given to every person to spread his own opinions, we will have differing dogmas and we cannot call this the Church doctrine.
Man has freedom of belief but he does not have the freedom to teach according to his own thoughts because heresies sprang from the different schools of teaching.
When Luther started to teach according to his own thoughts and was followed by Calvin, Zwingli and others, a new schism occurred in the Church. As time passed, many contradicting dogmas were formed, and what the Church knew as "one faith" began to fade away.
Everyone is free in his belief. But the freedom of belief might divert and turn into heresies and heterodoxies that are exterior to the one faith of the Church. The Church, who has been alert over the faith to maintain it, does not allow this to happen nor does she give the authority of teaching to everyone, but examines the sayings of the teachers against the faith entrusted to the saints. Thus the saying of St. Paul the Apostle (Gal. 1:9) remains a fixed criterion.
Sometimes the reason for an error in faith or teaching is due to mixing with different dogmas, or being influenced by them and their teachers, or by being disciples of such teachers or their writings. Sometimes the reason for an error in faith is due to one's sticking to one's own opinion, neither accepting any change nor obeying the Church. Most probably the reason behind this is pride in the heart convincing the person that he is right and whoever objects to his opinion is wrong, and that he understands what no-one else does.
Throughout her history, the Church has been cautious to safeguard the teaching from distortion. Just one wrong teaching of one ex-priest such as Arius, caused two popes, namely, Pope Peter the Seal of the Martyrs and Pope Alexandrus, to intervene. A council was held in Alexandria attended by a hundred bishops from Alexandria and Libya and another council was held at Nicea in 325 A.D. attended by 318 bishops from all over the world. All this was caused by one priest's error in teaching. There was a danger of his teaching spreading and nobody said: "Leave the matter alone; there is freedom of belief"!
The first schism in the Church occurred in the middle of the fifth century, in 451 AD, due to the different teachings on the Nature of Christ. Another schism occurred in the 11th century between the Roman Catholics and the Byzantine Orthodox due to the different teachings on the procession of the Holy Spirit. A third major schism occurred in the 15th century caused by Luther, the establisher of Protestantism. Different dogmas sprang up afterwards within Protestantism.
Hence arises the necessity of presenting a comparative theology to compare the various beliefs attributed to Christianity, to study the points of differences, and to reply to every teaching that does not conform to the doctrine of the Church.
In this book, we are attempting to expound the main differences in belief which exist between Orthodoxy and Protestantism, to discuss them in the light of the Holy Bible and pray to God to unify our belief because. Especially that our main call with regard to Christian Unity we call for nothing less than "Unity of faith".

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg



Pope Shenouda III






The disagreements between us Orthodox and the Protestants regarding Baptism


The subject of baptism revolves around in five salient points:
(1) What is the importance of baptism and what are its efficacious?
The Orthodox believe that baptism is the way to receive salvation, purification, justification, renewal of life and membership in the Body of Christ? While these things, according to the Protestant denominations, are only received by faith? If the latter is correct, what is then, the use of baptism? Is it just a sign of Christianity? Or is it merely an obedience to the Lord's commandment: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.28: 19)?

(2) Should who administer baptism?
Baptism in the Orthodox Church is administered only by the clergy. But our Protestant brethren do not, at all, accept human Priesthood. So in their churches, a minister and not a clergyman administer baptism. He could be an elder (or a lady elder in case of groups who allow women ministers). Anyhow, according to the Protestant belief, the elders or the ministers are not clergymen.
(3) We believe that baptism is one of the Church Sacraments but our Protestants brethren do not.
(4) We baptise by immersion in water whereas the majority of our Protestant brethren baptise by sprinkling water.
(5) We baptise infants on the belief of their parents, but our Protestant brethren do not believe in Paedobaptism since they condition the belief of the baptised prior to baptising him.

Some of the objections raised by our Protestant Brethren:

1. Isn’t faith sufficient without baptism?
2. How was the Penitent Thief saved without baptism?
3. Does water have the property that gives birth and renewal?
4. Why a clergyman? What happens if the clergyman who administers baptism is a malefactor?
5. If baptism is renewal of life, why do we sin thereafter?
6. How does the infant inherit the sin of his parents who were previously baptised and whose sins were forgiven?
7. Is the water in baptism a symbol of the word? The Apostle says concerning the relationship of Christ with the Church: "... that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph.5: 26).

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg



Pope Shenouda III


The Efficacious of Baptism


(1) Salvation is completed through baptism

This is pursuant to the Lord Jesus Christ's words: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark.16: 16). The Lord did not say: "He who believes is saved", but He put the condition of baptism alongside the condition of belief.


(2) Through baptism we receive the Second Birth which is of water and the Spirit

(a) This is pursuant to the Lord Jesus Christ's words to Nicodemus: "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John.3:3). The Lord explained this to him, saying: "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John.3: 5). Then He added "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. The wind blows where it wishes... So is everyone who is born of the Spirit" (John.3: 6,8). Thus the Lord considers that everyone who is born of water and the Spirit is born from above or born of the Spirit.
It also seems strange that some Protestant brethren want to water-down this text by claiming that the Lord did not say, "unless one is baptised of water and the Spirit", but, "unless one is born"! Of course there is no doubt that both express the same thing, because what is the other meaning of "born of water" except "to be baptised" since the baptised comes out of the womb of the font and moreover the Apostle St. Paul affirms the same meaning when he says:

(b) "...not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration" (Titus 3: 5). And about the Church he said: "... that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph.5: 26). The Apostle considered that the washing of water (in baptism) is the washing of renewal and the washing away of sins.


(3) Baptism washes away sins



This is according to the last two verses and also according to Ananias' words to Saul: "And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptised, and wash away your sins" (Acts 22: 16). Here we see that one of the outcomes of baptism is the washing away of sins. We are surprised at Saul's case: He was called by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself to be an Apostle to the Gentiles and a chosen vessel to bear His name and to suffer for the sake of His name (Acts 9: 15,16). Nevertheless, his sins were not forgiven by his encounter with the Lord or by his faith or by becoming an Apostle,
. He was still in need of baptism to wash away his sins. Probably the Apostle Paul always remembered that washing away of sins through baptism, so he said to the Corinthians: "But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (1Cor.6: 11). This was because they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and received the forgiveness of sins as St. Peter -had said to the Jews.


(4) In baptism there is forgiveness of sins

On the Day of Pentecost, when the Jews believed and were cut to the heart, they said to St. Peter and the other Apostles: "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Then St. Peter and the Apostles replied: "Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2: 37,38).
If the belief of the Jews was adequate for the forgiveness of sins, the great Apostles would not have instructed them to be baptised, especially on such an historical day; the day of establishing the Church; the day on which important principles were being set up for salvation.
One may ask: How are sins forgiven in baptism? We reply:


(5) Baptism is dying with the Lord Jesus Christ and rising with Him

The Holy Bible says: "For the wages of sin is death" (Rom.6:23). The way of salvation began by death: the Lord Jesus Christ died for us. It is necessary to die with the Lord Jesus Christ or at least to resemble Him in His death as the Apostle says: "...that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death" (Phil.3: 10). This is achieved in baptism. How?
The Apostle says: "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death" (Rom.6: 3,4). And he continues to confirm this expression by saying: "...we died with Him... we were buried with Him... we have been united together in the likeness of His death... our old man was crucified with Him." Confirming the same meaning, the Apostle also says in his Epistle to the Colossians: "...buried with Him in baptism" (Col.2: 12).
But why all this? The Apostle says: "Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him" (Rom.6: 8).
Therefore, baptism is essential for salvation because it is sharing in Christ's death. It is a belief in death as a means to life and it is a confession that the wages of sin is death. In chapter six of the Epistle to the Romans, we notice two important points:
(a) The phrase "buried with Him through baptism" means immersion as when the body is lowered into the grave.
(b) It appears that one of the results of baptism is the crucifixion of our old self.

(6) Another Result of baptism is newness of life
The Apostle says: "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Rom.6: 4). The new life is the life we receive through baptism. Therefore our old nature is renewed in baptism. How?

(7) In baptism we put on Christ
The Apostle says: "For as many of you as were baptised into Christ have put on Christ" (Gal.3: 27). Is there a more powerful phrase than this to signify the great efficacy of baptism?
We put on Christ... We put on His righteousness which He bestows upon us in baptism, we put on salvation which He bestows upon us in baptism by His blood, we put on God's image (Gen.1: 26) which we lost through the original sin.

(8) In baptism we become members of the Church
There is no doubt that baptism was symbolised by circumcision in the Old Testament. The Apostle St. Paul says about the Lord Jesus: "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col.2: 11,12).
It is known that in circumcision a part of the body is cut off and it dies. This refers to the complete death in baptism.

Circumcision is a mark that can not be effected
Likewise, baptism can not be erased
As blood is shed in circumcision
likewise, The merit of the Blood shed on our behalf is received in the new life in baptism
As the circumcised was considered a member of God's people(Gen.17: 7)
likewise, The baptised becomes a member of the Church; of God's Body
As the uncircumcised was cut off from the community (Gen.17:14)
likewise, he who is not born of water and the Spirit (John.3:3,5) will not enter the kingdom of God because he was not baptised, he was not buried with Christ and did not rise with Him
As circumcision was a must and a necessity by God's command
likewise, baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins and for the membership in Christ's Body


As man dies only once and then rises, and is circumcised only once, therefore baptism is performed only once: it is not to be repeated because the baptised does not die with Christ more than once.
As for the relation between circumcision and baptism and the forgiveness of sins, the Apostle expresses it in his discourse about the spiritual circumcision; circumcision made by Christ and not by the hands of men; circumcision in which the old sinful body is taken off. He refers to baptism when he says: "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ. And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses" (Col.2: 11,13).

The symbols of baptism in the Old Testament give the same meaning
Noah's Ark was a symbol of baptism
St. Peter the Apostle says: "...while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism" (1Pet.3:20,21). We explain that there is salvation in baptism with water. Similarly, in Noah's ark which is a symbol of baptism, all those who were in the ark were saved from the death of the Flood. This confirms what we have previously said about salvation through baptism according to the Lord's words in (M k.16:16).
Circumcision is another symbol of baptism and we have already explained this point
Another symbol of baptism in the Old Testament is the crossing of the Red Sea
St. Paul the Apostle says: "Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptised into Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1Cor.10: 1,2). It is known that the crossing of the Red Sea was salvation to the people from the slavery of Pharaoh. Here St. Paul refers to the salvation we receive in baptism from the slavery of sin and death. The element of water is clear in both examples. Here Moses resembles priesthood in the same way that Noah resembles priesthood in the symbol of the Ark in the Era of the Patriarch Fathers.
Another symbol of baptism in the Old Testament is found in (Ezek.16: 8,9) where the Lord says to the sinful Jerusalem which here resembles the human soul in its fall: "'When I passed by you again and looked upon you, indeed your time was the time of love. I entered into a covenant with you, and you became Mine,' says the Lord God. 'Then I washed you in water; yes, I thoroughly washed off your blood, and I anointed you with oil.' "
This water and this washing are symbols of baptism and the ointment is a symbol of the anointing of the Holy Spirit. The phrase "you became Mine" means that Jerusalem (the human soul) became a member of Christ's Body (the Church).


Therefore, in baptism there is salvation and forgiveness of sins, not only according to the teaching of the New Testament but also according to the symbolic references in the Old Testament: circumcision, the Ark and the Red Sea.
The remission of sins we obtain in baptism is explicitly professed in the Creed by the phrase "We believe in one baptism for the remission of sins".

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg




Pope Shenouda III


Baptism is the Task of the Clergymen


Baptism should be administered by a canonical clergyman. The Holy Bible shows us that the Lord Jesus Christ did not commend the task of baptism to the public but commanded it to His pure Apostles. Before His ascension, He said to them: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.28: 19). This is also confirmed in (Mark.16: 15,16).

It is very clear that it was the Apostles who undertook the task of baptism as we read in the Book of Acts in the spread of the Early Church. Then the Apostles commanded the task to their disciples the bishops who in turn commanded it to the priests.
For these reasons we do not accept a baptism which was not administered by a clergyman. The clergyman should be an canonical clergyman in the sense that the laying on of hands was carried out by an apostolic and a canonical bishop. He should not be an expelled nor an anathematized priest, but a priest who has the Presbyterian to administer the Sacraments.
The above reasons are our answers to the question, repeatedly asked of us: “why do the Orthodox Church re-baptise the converts from the Protestant denominations”?
We could also say that we adorn them with all the spiritual treasures which they did not receive when accepted their
Protestant baptism. We usually ask of them: "Have you received salvation in your baptism? Have you received righteousness, newness of life and the forgiveness of sins? Have you been clothed with Christ in baptism? Have you been born anew? Especially that you did not consider baptism to carry with it any of those graces
We also repeat the non-Orthodox baptism as a canonical priest did not conduct it, while our Protestant brethren refute human priesthood, as well as the teaching of the holy sacraments.
While it may have been administered in the Name of The Holy Trinity , we tend not to call the baptism of a Protestant convert “a re-baptism” as it lackes three important qualities:
(a) It was not administered by a clergyman
(b) It was not considered a Sacrament
(c) It was not considered to carry any spiritual efficacious

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg




Pope Shenouda III


“ The Necessity of Baptism Ever Since the Establishment of the Church




Since the beginning of Christianity, baptism has been an inseparable part of accepting the . Especially that it is an undisputed commandment by Christ Himself.

His Holy and imperative commandment is “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.28: 19). He also commanded: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark. 16:16). If baptism were meant to be only a sign, the Lord would have not given it all that importance.

Regarding the practical administration of baptism, when the Jews believed on the Day of Pentecost, St. Peter immediately called them to baptism. He said: "Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). On that day 3000 believers were baptised. Undoubtedly, baptising that multitude was a tedious and difficult task and must have taken a long time. Unless baptism was so important for Salvation the Apostles would of bypassed it, avoiding the hassel of baptising all these thousands, and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. It would have been easier for the Apostles to say: "Since you now believe, brethren, you have received salvation. Go, the Lord's blessing be with you."

We find the same situation with the Ethiopian eunuch who himself asked to be baptised immediately after he had believed. He was baptised by Philip and went on his way rejoicing (Acts 8: 36-39).

Saul of Tarsus was called to be baptised to wash away his sins after he had believed (Acts 22:16). Lydia, the woman dealer of purple cloth was baptised together with all her household after they had believed. When Cornelius believed, Peter the Apostle baptised him together with all those who heard the message, after saying: "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptised who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (Acts 10: 44,47)

If salvation was to only be attained through belief, why were all those who believed baptised?

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg




Pope Shenouda III

Baptism by Immersion

(1) It is clear from the Holy Bible that baptism was by immersion and not by sprinkling, even at the time of John the Baptist. The Lord Jesus Himself was baptised by immersion. That is why the Holy Bible says: "Then Jesus, when He had been baptised, came up immediately from the water" (Matt.3:16); (Mark.1: 10). Our Church names the Day on which the Lord Jesus Christ was baptised "Immersion Day" to confirm this meaning in our minds.

(2) The same meaning of the expression "came up immediately from the water" is used in the event of Philip baptising the Ethiopian eunuch. The Holy Gospel says: "And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptised him. Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away" (Acts 8: 38,39). This proves that baptism was by immersion. If it were by sprinkling, it would have been adequate for Philip to sprinkle water on the eunuch while he was in the chariot without the necessity for both of them to go down into the water.

(3) The word 'baptisma' means dye. Dyeing cannot be done without immersion.

(4) Baptism is the action of being buried with Christ and tasting death with Him, as the Apostle says: "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death" (Rom.6: 4) and we were "buried with Him in baptism" (Col.2: 12). The action of burying cannot be achieved except by immersion. The coming up out of the font signifies rising with Christ after having died and been buried with Him, whereas sprinkling does not express the action of dying and rising.

(5) Baptism is a rebirth. Birth is the coming out of a body from another body. This is manifested in baptism when the body of the baptised comes out of the font, whereas sprinkling does not express the action of birth at all.

(6) Baptism is the washing away of sins as said to St. Paul (Acts 22:16) and as St. Paul said in his Epistle to Titus: "He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3: 5). The action of washing needs dipping into water which is represented by immersion but not by sprinkling.

(7) Whoever looks at the buildings of the early churches will notice the existence of immersion fonts which are proof that baptism was by immersion and not by sprinkling because the action of sprinkling does not need a deep font.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg




Pope Shenouda III

Paedobaptism (Infant Baptism)


Our Protestant brethren do not baptise little children, insisting on the necessity of belief before baptism and depending on the Lord's saying: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark. 16:16) and also on the fact that little children do not comprehend what is happening in baptism. So how can baptism be administered without belief or without comprehension?
But we insist on paedobaptism for the following reasons:
(1) We are concerned about the eternal life of children because the Lord says: "...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John.3: 5). So how can we prevent children from being baptised and expose them to God's Judgement as long as the Lord did not exempt children when He said the above words?
(2) Through baptism, little children are given the opportunity to practise the life of the Church and enjoy the divine Sacraments therein together with all their efficacious. They can also enjoy all the means of Grace in the Church and their effects on their lives. In this way, we practically prepare the infants for the life of faith. If we excluded them from the Church we would be depriving them of faith and of the means of Grace.
(3) The Lord's saying: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" is meant for adults who are capable of comprehending the meanings of faith. That is why we cannot baptise adults unless they believe, according to the Lord's words in (Mark.16: 16). As for infants, we apply the Lord's saying: "Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19: 14).
(4) From the point of view of faith, little children are in the stage of believing and accepting everything; they do not refuse or reject faith; the doubt, inquiring, questioning and reasoning of adults have not yet entered their sphere. There is nothing in them to prevent them from the kingdom of heaven. Baptising them conforms to the principle of "Free Salvation" which is believed in and strongly propagated by our Protestant brethren.
(5) If we were utterly strict on the condition of belief, we would have forbidden from baptism many adults who were not mentally mature to comprehend the facts and depths of belief, such as the peasants, labourers, illiterates, the poorly educated and those of too limited understanding to get into the depth of the theological facts. May we ask: What would be the extent of those people's belief? Should we prevent them from being baptised, as little children should be?
(6) Some ask: What happens if the little child refuses the faith when he grows up?

He will be considered an apostate. He may refuse the grace he received in baptism by his own free will. We had done our duty towards him and the matter is left to him. He will be like a person who, after having begun in the Spirit, is now trying to be made perfect by the flesh (Gal.3: 3).
Probably the little children who are baptised and live in the Church, tasting all the means of Grace therein, are less liable to perversion than those who are left without baptism until they grow up.
(7) Those who deny paedobaptism are in fact denying the necessity of baptism for salvation (Mark. 16:16); because if they believe in the necessity of baptism for salvation, it would be a serious matter to deprive little children of salvation.
Since our Protestants brethren hold that belief is a condition for salvation and that little children have no belief, what then, from their point of view, is the destiny of little children who are unbaptised and have no belief? Will they be saved without belief and baptism? The question remains unanswered.
(8) We baptise little children because the Holy Bible indicates this. The Holy Bible mentions baptisms of whole families or of a person with his entire household, and there is no doubt that there must have been children in those families.

The following are a few of numerous examples:

(a) The baptism of the jailer at Philippi: St. Paul and St. Silas said to him: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household" (Acts 16: 31), and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. This means that the jailer's belief would be the first step which would lead his household to salvation. That is why it is said after that: "Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house" and then "immediately he and all his family were baptised" (Acts 16:32,33). The Holy Bible did not exempt little children from the household of the jailer at Philippi but said about their baptisms: "...he and all his family”, of course including little children.
(b) In the event of baptising Lydia, the dealer of purple cloth, it is written: "And when she and her household were baptised" (Acts 16: 15).
(c) St. Paul the Apostle said: "Yes, I also baptised the household of Stephanas" (1Cor.1: 16). Could all these households have been without little children?
(d) The Holy Bible does not mention that there were no little children among those who were baptised on the Day of Pentecost.
(9) Paedobaptism was practised in history. Here we remember the disagreement between St. Augustine and St. Jerome on the origin of the soul: whether is it born or created?. St. Augustine said that it is born with man and St. Jerome said that it is created. St. Augustine asked: "If it is created, it does not inherit Adam's sin. Why then do we baptise infants?" St. Jerome could not reply to this question.
(10) There is not a single verse in the Holy Bible that forbids paedobaptism.
(11) With regard to belief, we baptise little children on the belief of their parents which in essence has many examples in the Holy Bible:
(a) Circumcision in the Old Testament symbolised baptism as we have previously explained. The circumcised was considered a member of God's people according to the covenant between God and Abraham (Gen.l7: 11). It is known that circumcision was to be done on the eighth day after birth, according to God's command (Gen.l7: 12). What understanding did the eight-day old baby boy have regarding the covenant between God and Abraham? To what extent was he aware of this membership in God's people? Undoubtedly, he had nothing of the sort, but he was circumcised on his parents' belief in such a covenant; he became a member of God's people and was entitled to the promises which God endowed upon our Father Abraham. The baby attained all these through the belief of his parents.
(b) The crossing of the Red Sea was a symbol of baptism or a baptism itself as St. Paul the Apostle explained in (l Cor. 10:2). It represented salvation from the slavery of death, Satan and sin. Adults who were aware of God's promise to the Prophet Moses crossed the Red Sea; they knew that they were slaves to Pharaoh; they knew the meaning of salvation from slavery by the Mighty Hand of God and when they crossed the Red Sea (baptism), they were saved. What was the position of the little children who were carried by their mothers and fathers across the Sea? Of course they received salvation from slavery; they were baptised, not on their own faith but on the faith of their parents because those children were not aware of any of the occurring events.
(c) Another important and very strong example 1s the salvation of the little children, through the blood of the Passover lamb, from the hand of the Angel who killed every firstborn son. The Lord commanded Moses to kill a one-year-old male goat or sheep without any defect and put its blood on the sides and tops of their doors, and said: "And when I see the blood, I will pass over you" (Ex. 12:13).
The blood of the Passover lamb was a symbol of the Lord Jesus Christ's Blood through which we have received salvation, as St. Paul the Apostle said: "For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us" (1Cor.5: 7).
And the question now is: What was the belief of the little children who were saved by the blood of the Passover lamb? What did they know about the covenant between God and Moses or of the Passover and the salvation from death by the blood of the Passover lamb? Undoubtedly they were not aware of anything but they were saved by the faith of their parents; the parents who believed in the blood, its effect and the importance of the blood of the Passover lamb for salvation from death.
These little children who were saved by circumcision, by the blood of the Passover lamb and by the crossing of the Red Sea, came to know the meaning of all these things later on when they grew up. Nevertheless, they received salvation freely in their childhood through the belief of their parents in God's promises and covenants with men. When the children grew up, they entered into this belief practically.

If baptism is renewal of life, why do we sin after being baptised?



Baptism is renewal of life according to the teaching of the Holy Bible (Rom.6: 4), but it does not bestow infallibility. We receive new birth, new life and new graces in baptism, and we take a new nature. The Apostle says: "...according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5). This nature has the capability and the potentiality of a spiritual life. Nevertheless we are not infallible as long as we are still in the flesh,

. Here we are in a test, we still possess our freedom to do good or bad because the grace of renewal we received in baptism does not eliminate the grace of freedom which we possess and with which we were created after God's image. That is why a virtuous person falls seven times a day and rises again. But we shall receive infallibility and the crown of righteousness in the life to come. Our teacher the Apostle Paul said effusively when his hour came: "Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day" (2Tim.4: 8).

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III





Does baptism still carry its efficacious if the clergyman who administers it is a malefactor?




Does baptism still carry its efficacious if the clergyman who administers it is a malefactor?
The graces we receive in baptism are from God and not from the clergyman who is but a minister of the Lord the Giver. The graces are based on the true promises of God and not on the deportment of the clergyman.
The clergyman is like the postman who carries a joyful letter to you; whether he is handsome or ugly does not affect the joy your letter brings.
We can also compare the clergyman to the gardener sowing seeds in the earth to bring forth fruits. Whether he is sinful or virtuous does not matter; what matters are the seeds themselves and the life therein, not the hands of the gardener who sows them.
You may drink water from a gold or copper cup, yet the water itself remains the same irrespective of the kind of cup you drink from.
In our discourse about baptism and its efficacious, we shall discuss the dogma objectively. We shall not touch any subjective issue as this leads to judging others and to disregarding what the Lord endowed upon human beings in baptism

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III





How was the Penitent Thief saved without baptism?

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III

If the commandment of baptism had existed in their days, they would have been baptized. But this commandment is laid down in Christianity. Why? Because baptism is dying with Christ and Christ had not died in the Old Testament.
The prophets of the Old Testament practiced what they could in their days: the symbols of baptism such as circumcision and crossing the Red Sea. They also celebrated the Passover lamb, which symbolized the Blood of Christ. We should not expect people to have obeyed a commandment, unknown to them, as it succeeded their time/s.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III



Is salvation through the word and not through water?



Do the Apostle's words about the Church: "...that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph.5: 26) mean that cleansing is through the word, that is, salvation is through the word? What about the other verses which signify the necessity of the word for salvation such as: "...having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever" (1Pet.1: 23) and "Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth" (Jas.1: 18), and which did not say: "having been born again... through baptism" and "saved us through baptism"?

What is the importance of water for salvation? Since the
Lord says: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved", then salvation will be attained this way. But the phrase "He who believes" should be preceded by teaching or preaching, because the Apostle says: "And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?" (Rom.10: 14) The importance of the word arises from here.



The word, which results in belief, comes first and then after belief baptism is administered, the result of which is salvation and renewal of life. Although salvation and renewal of life are received through baptism, yet the word should come first because it leads to faith and faith leads to baptism. That is why the Apostle says: "...He brought us forth by the word of truth" and "...having been born again through the word of God", on the assumption that the 'word' is the origin that led to all these.

The Apostle's words about the Church: "...that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph.5: 26) means that cleansing is completed by baptism (the washing of water) through the word, that is, through preaching and the ministry of the word which result in faith and then in baptism.

Here we observe that the Apostle says: "with the washing of water by the word" and not "with the washing of water which is the word",


. If the washing of water means the word there would have been no need for this repetition. But "the washing of water by the word" means the washing of water which takes place following the effect of the word. Without the word and its effect the people could not have come to the washing of water, that is, to baptism.

We observe that the word ‘belief’ is not mentioned in the phrases "having been born again... through the word of God" (1 Pet.1: 23) and "brought us forth by the word of truth" (Jas.1: 18). Is the word without belief sufficient for the new birth? This is impossible. The word ‘belief’ is not mentioned because it is obviously implied.

There is no need to repeat on every occasion words whose meanings are obviously implied. We cannot on every occasion repeat the words: word -belief- baptism rebirth.

Preaching has its importance; nobody can deny the importance of the ministry of the word. Nevertheless, we can never say that some people are 'brought forth by the word of truth' whether they believe or not. This also applies to baptism.

The phrase 'washing of water by the word' implies two things: the word and baptism. We notice that the word 'belief' is not mentioned since it is implied.

Our Protestant brethren are constantly concentrating on faith. Does the absence of the word 'faith' in (Eph.5: 26); (Jas.1: 18); (1Pet.1: 23) mean that it is not important or necessary? Of course not. Sometimes the absence of a word does not render it unnecessary, but that its meaning is implied. This applies to the word 'baptism'.

(a) Although the word 'water' is not mentioned in the phrases: "brought us forth by the word of truth" and "having been born again... through the word of God", yet it is mentioned plainly in the Lord's saying: "...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John.3: 5). In this verse, it is clear that rebirth is from water. The water meant is real water and not symbolic.

(b) This is clear when Cornelius and his Gentile followers accepted the faith and were joined to the Church. In this case righteous persons were called to the faith by God: An angel appeared to Cornelius and Peter saw a vision; a Divine command. Then St. Peter preached to them the word of God and the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message (Acts 11: 1) and they spoke in tongues.
Was that sufficient for their second birth? Could St. Peter tell them: "Blessed is this second birth to you all"? Obviously this was not the case, as St. Peter, after he had witnessed the descent of the Holy Spirit on them, said: "'Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptised who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?' And he commanded them to be baptised in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10: 47,48).
The writer of the Book of Acts comments immediately on this event by saying: "...the Gentiles had also received the word of God" (Acts 11: 1),
. Here the importance of water goes alongside the importance of the word, and the word ‘water’ does not mean ‘the word’ as some interpret it in the Epistle to the Ephesians (Eph.5: 26).
(c) Another clear example is the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch. When he believed, the Holy Bible says: "Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, 'See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptised?' Then Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.' And he answered and said, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.' So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptised him" (Acts 8: 36-38).
This was a baptism of water, exactly the same as the baptism of Cornelius and his followers; baptism of actual water was necessary immediately after the preaching of the Word. In this case the water was not the word. If the eunuch were born of the word and washed by the word what then was the need for water?
Concerning this, I would like to speak about an important subject: The importance of water and its symbols in the Holy Bible.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III



The importance of water and its symbols in the Holy Bible


In order to understand why water was chosen for washing and renewal in the Sacrament of Baptism, we should remember that ever since the beginning, in the story of creation, there has been a association between water and life.
The Holy Bible says: "And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters" (Gen.1: 2). And God said: "Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens" (Gen.1: 20). Thus life sprang out of water and we can see the connection between water, life and the Spirit of God.

We also read in the Old Testament that God likens Himself to water when He reproached the people saying: "They have forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, and hewn themselves cisterns - broken cisterns that can hold no water" (Jer.2: 13). This correlation is also mentioned in the words of the Lord Jesus Christ: " 'He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.' By this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive" (John.7: 38,39).
These words are similar to the Lord's words about Himself in His discourse with the Samaritan woman about living water, when He said that He is the Giver of living water. He said: "But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life" (John.4: 10-14).
Therefore, water is a symbol of life and sometimes of the Holy Spirit Himself. How beautiful are the Divine Inspiration's words in the First Psalm about the virtuous man: "He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth its fruit in its season" (Ps.1: 3). The fruit is the fruit of the Holy Spirit.
The connections between water, life and the Holy Spirit in the Holy Bible commence from Genesis (Gen.1: 2) and continue until the end of the Book of Revelation: "I will give the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts" (Rev.21:6), "And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb" (Rev.22: 1) and "...let him who thirsts come. And whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely" (Rev.22: 17).
In the crossing of the Red Sea, the water symbolised life and death together; death of the servile man and life of the free man who came up out of the water.
On Maundy Thursday, the water symbolised purification. That is why, after washing the feet of His Apostles, the Lord said: "...and you are clean" (John.13: 10). The Psalmist says:
"I will wash my hands in innocence" (Ps.26: 6). This cleansing is the washing of the new birth with the word; the cleansing which we receive in the bath of the new birth and the cleansing obtained in baptism referred to by the Apostle's words: "...and our bodies washed with pure water" (Heb.10: 22).

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III



Water and Blood



On the Cross, when one of the soldiers pierced the Lord Jesus’ side with a spear, "immediately blood and water came out" (John.19: 34). What is the Divine wisdom thereof?
From His side blood came out to give us the meaning of redemption. But how do we receive this redemption?
We receive it through water in baptism,

. Therefore, the emergence of both water and Blood from the side of Christ showed us the means of redemption. We receive the Blood of Christ which purifies us from every sin through water. How beautiful it is when, in the Eucharist, we blend the Blood with water!
St. John the Beloved, who witnessed the incident of the coming out of the blood and water, clarified this subject when he said: "And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood,. and these three agree as one" (1John.5: 8). This verse explains the redemption, we receive.
Redemption was given to us by Blood (the Blood of Christ) and we receive the merit of this Blood through the birth of water and the Spirit. Therefore the three elements: Blood, water and the Spirit, gather in baptism.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168777714877672.jpg



Pope Shenouda III





Does water have all these efficacious?

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168924625130221.jpg


Pope Shenouda III





Would it not be better if we say that baptism is rising with Christ and not dying with Him because death is harmful and not beneficial whereas rising is beneficial?



Baptism is dying with Christ and rising with Him as the Apostle explained in his Epistle to the Romans: "For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection" (Rom.6: 5) and "Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him" (Rom.6: 8). In this matter no one may depend on his own thoughts and stray from the Church’s teaching, saying that death is useless but resurrection is beneficial. The Holy Bible says: "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life"(Rom.6: 3,4),

. The Apostle repeats this in his Epistle to the Colossians, saying: "...buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col.2: 12). From these verses we see that baptism is both death and resurrection. Truly, those who despise dying with Christ cannot receive the blessing of His resurrection.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168924625130221.jpg

Pope Shenouda III


Why is there death in baptism? And what is its importance?

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168924625130221.jpg

Pope Shenouda III



Why should a person whose parents were baptised and saved from Adam's sin, be baptised as well?




We did not inherit the penalty of death from our immediate parents so that we are saved if they are baptised, but we inherited it directly from Adam and Eve: the first of the human race. We were in Adam's loins. When Adam's nature sinned and he was condemned to death, everything in his loins became mortal,
. We came out of Adam's loins under the penalty of death. Therefore the sentence of death was passed on Adam and all his offspring; not only on Cain, Abel and Seth. Concerning this, the Holy Bible says: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned" (Rom.5: 12) and also "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive" (1Cor.15: 22). Hence death was a judgment on the entire human race, being the offspring of Adam. Every born human being is condemned to death because He was in Adam's loins when Adam was condemned to death.

Salvation from death is an individual salvation, whether or not the parents received it. This salvation needs repentance and belief in baptism and in Christ's Blood as well as in all the means of Grace. There are no parents without sin. The Psalmist says: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me" (Ps.51: 5).

We are born in sin until liberated from the bondage of corruption (Rom.8: 21). When are we going to be liberated from this corruption? The Apostle says about our bodies: "So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1Cor. 15: 42,53). When will this be? When the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168924625130221.jpg

Pope Shenouda III




Seniority of Tradition

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168924625130221.jpg

Pope Shenouda III

The Holy Bible does not mention everything

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III


Tradition is taken from the teachings of the Apostles


Many Apostles did not write epistles. Where are their teachings? Where is the work of the Divine Inspiration in them? Where is the work of the Holy Spirit who speaks through the prophets? It is not possible that some of the Apostles taught only what they wrote. It is not possible that James the Apostle's teaching was only limited to one Epistle nor is it possible that Jude the Apostle taught just one chapter. What about the rest of the eleven Apostles of whose teachings we have received no word? What did they preach? What did they leave for the Church? Most probably those teachings, or some thereof, have reached us through Tradition.
The Apostles used to enter synagogues teaching and disputing against the opposition, however none of this was written. They preached in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria until everyone believed, but only a little of what they preached was recorded in writing. The Apostle Paul entered a house in Rome where he stayed for two years preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ boldly and without hindrance (Acts.28: 30,31). None of that preaching has reached us in a written form. Where did it all go?
Undoubtedly the Apostles laid down disciplines for the Church. What are they?
Is it not reasonable to assume that the Lord's Apostles, after having received all those teachings from the Lord, left the Church without any disciplines or laws to direct her affairs. They did not write these in their epistles either because such things were not for the public or because they would be known to all through practice. Undoubtedly, those disciplines have reached us through Tradition and Entrustment.
St. John the Apostle says in the epilogue of his second Epistle: "Having many things to write to you, I did not wish to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face" (2John. 12). He repeated the same words in the epilogue of his third Epistle (3John.13, 14). What was the content of this face to face dialogue? And why was it not written down? How has it reached us?
From the above quotation in the two Epistles, we notice that the Apostolic Fathers sometimes preferred speaking to writing whenever it was convenient for them. Their verbal teachings were entrusted from one generation to the next until they have reached us today.
Probably the Apostles concentrated in their Epistles on the main principles of faith as much as they could and left the details of the Church disciplines and rituals to the practical arrangements in the churches. People were learning them not from written books but through practising the sacramental life
St. Paul the Apostle says in his first Epistle to the Corinthians: "And the rest I will set in order when I come" (1Cor.11: 34). What were these apostolic instructions? Have we received them through Tradition? St. Paul the Apostle said to his disciple Titus, the Bishop of Crete: "For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you" (Titus 1: 5). He did not spell out in his Epistle how to appoint priests, with regard to the prayers, rituals and the necessary conditions thereof. How did St. Titus know about this matter other than by verbal instruction? That is why the Apostle said to him: "...as I commanded you". The details of this command were not recorded in the Epistle but the disciple the bishop learnt them verbally, 'face to face", and they reached us through Tradition.

The same applies to what St. Paul the Apostle said to his disciple Timothy, the Bishop of Ephesus: "And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2Tim.2:2). Here the Apostle refers to the word ‘hear’ and not ‘write'. He did not tell us what his disciple heard from him. But undoubtedly, that teaching was entrusted from St. Paul to St. Timothy then to faithful and reliable persons who in turn entrusted them to others. Thus the entrustment continued successively until it reached us.
Those who insist on proving everything by a verse from the Holy Bible disregard what the Apostle said about 'face to face" (2John. 12), the Apostles' instructions concerning the churches, which they did not record (1Cor.11: 34), the Apostles' commands to their disciples (Titus 1: 5) and the Apostolic teachings which turned into life and practice in the Church without being a verse from an Epistle or the Gospels.
We mention, to illustrate this point, the consecration of Sunday as the Lord's Day
All Christians who only believe in the Holy Bible and oppose Church Tradition, consecrate Sunday instead of Saturday as the Lord's Day and do not adhere to the literal meanings of the verses: "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Ex.20: 8) and "Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Deut.5: 12),

. From where do they derive the teaching of consecrating Sunday instead of Saturday? Is it from the Holy Bible or from Tradition? Undoubtedly, it is from Tradition because there is not one single verse which says: "Remember Sunday, to keep it holy" or "Observe Sunday, to keep it holy. In it you shall do no work".
The consecration of Sunday has been a Church Tradition, observed by the Apostles who took it from the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ; it is not mentioned plainly in the Gospels but there are references in the Book of Acts that imply this Divine entrustment. So the matter changed to a professed practice of the Church without the need for a written commandment. A proof of acknowledging Tradition is the unanimity of all Churches in keeping Sunday holy.
There is a reference in the Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle that he received teachings from the Lord
Regarding the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the Apostle says: "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread" (1Cor.11: 23). Here the Apostle speaks about the entrustment he received from the Lord and which he commanded to the church in Corinth. The Holy Bible does not tell us how and when the Apostle Paul received it from the Lord. He is giving us an idea about the Church dogmas and how they entered the Church through entrustment.
We know from the Gospels that the Apostles received the Sacrament of the Eucharist from the Lord. But the Apostles did not tell us how they entrusted it to the Church. It was not necessary to write it down but what matters is that the Church lives and practises this Sacrament. However, St. Paul mentioned this entrustment.
The Apostles recorded in their Epistles things they received through Tradition
(a) We have previously mentioned some of them and now we shall add what Jude the Apostle mentioned in his Epistle regarding the dispute between Archangel Michael and Satan about the body of Moses. He said: "Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you!’ " (Jude 9). None of this was mentioned in the Old Testament, so Jude probably knew it through Tradition.
(b) When the Apostle Paul was describing the fear of the people on receiving the Law, he said: "And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, 'I am exceedingly afraid and trembling' " (Heb.12:21). This phrase attributed to Moses was not recorded either in the Book of Exodus or Deuteronomy. So probably the Apostle Paul knew it through Tradition.
(c) We also add what is mentioned in the Book of Revelation about Balaam's perversion, the details of which are not recorded in the Book of Numbers (Num.24: 25). In the Book of Revelation, it is written: "...because you have there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality" (Rev.2: 14). In the Book of Numbers it is mentioned that the people did that but not that it was Balaam's doctrine. So probably St. John the Visionary who wrote the Book of Revelation knew it through Tradition.
Also on the subject of Balaam is what the Apostle Peter mentioned: "They have forsaken the right way and gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness" (2Pet.2: 15), and also what the Apostle Jude mentioned: "...they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error o Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah" (Jude 11).
(e) Likewise, St. Jude spoke about Enoch's prophecy which is not mentioned in the Old Testament. He said: "Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, 'Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgement on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him"' (Jude 14,15). The source of this prophecy must have been Tradition.
(f) We notice that the commandment of circumcision was entrusted to our Father Abraham by God (Gen.17) and commanded to people through entrustment before the existence of a written Law commanding it.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III


Valid and invalid Tradition



Those who reject Tradition build their objection on the pretext that the Lord Jesus Christ rejected Tradition when He reproached the scribes and Pharisees, saying: " Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" (Matt.15: 3), and when He condemned some of the wrong traditions (Matt.15: 4-6).
They also use the pretext of the Apostle's words, "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ" (Col.2: 8).
In our discourse about Tradition, we do not mean the vain traditions laid down by men or do we mean those traditions which are not in accord with the doctrine and spirit of the Holy Bible such as the traditions whose voidness the Lord Jesus revealed,.
But we mean the sound Tradition which conforms with
(1) The teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, which was transmitted to us through Tradition.
(2) The Apostolic Tradition, that is, the teachings of the Apostles, transmitted to us through entrustment from one generation to the next.
(3) The Ecclesiastical Tradition, decreed by the holy
Ecumenical councils regarding the Church canons and disciplines
and what we received from the fathers, teachers and heroes of faith of the Church.This leads us to the next point:
Church authority in teaching and legislation

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III






Church Authority in Teaching and Legislation



This authority was given to the Apostolic Fathers by the Lord Himself when He said to them: "... whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matt.18: 18). The Church commenced this duty of hers by holding the first Church Council in Jerusalem in 45 A.D. The Council discussed the acceptance of faith by the Gentiles, and the Apostles decided not to make it difficult for them, saying: "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality" (Acts 15: 28.29).
Therefore, holy councils, local and ecumenical, were held consecutively through the authority of teaching, legislating and canonising which the Lord endowed upon priesthood. These councils have laid down teachings, decisions and disciplines for the Church which have been included in Church Tradition.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III










(1) It should not be incompatible with the Holy Bible (Gal. 1:8)

(2) It should not contradict other Church traditions

(3) The Churches should accept it

It is known that in every generation, new matters arise which had not existed in the previous generations. The point of view of Religion about such matters is sought so as not to perplex people's thoughts or make them confused between right and wrong, because not all people know the rules of Religion or what is written in the Holy Bible.

Hence the Church, through her teaching and legislative authority, presents the opinion of Religion in such matters, because the Holy Bible says that the Law is sought from the mouth of the priest. Through the succession of generations the Church teachings have become Tradition to be inherited by all generations

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III





The Apostles commanded that Tradition be preserved



St. Paul the Apostle said: "Therefore, brethren, standfast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle" (2Thess.2: 15). He also said: "But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us" (2Thess.3: 6), He also said to the Corinthians: "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions as I delivered them to you" (1Cor. 11: 2).
We regret to say that our brethren the Protestants, in their translation of the Holy Bible (Beirut Arabic Translation), substituted “Traditions” with “Teachings”, in matters which confirm the teaching of Tradition. But kept 'tradition' for incidents relating to repugnant traditions, obviously rejected by the holy Church.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III






Protestants have their own Tradition




Anyhow, although our Protestant brethren deny Tradition, they themselves instituted their own traditions. They maintain their own rituals although they deny rituals. They have recited
prayers and fixed readings on ordinations, matrimony, baptism and funerals although they do not acknowledge recited prayers. They keep their own tradition but deny any tradition that does not agree with theirs. It goes without saying that Tradition is a precious heritage and it would be a great loss for any Church to be devoid of it, such becomes a Church without history and without any rules to protect against people interpreting or teaching things according to their own preferences.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III






Difference between the Mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Intercessions of the Saints


Intercession

Our Protestant brethren reject intercessions of the Virgin Mary or of the angels or of the saints they base their rejection on Saint John the Apostle: "... we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1John.2: 1) and the words of the Apostle Paul: "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (1Tim.2: 5).
(1) In fact there is a fundamental difference between the mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ and the intercessions of the saints

The mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ is an atonement, which means that He mediates for the forgiveness of our sins, being the Atoner who paid our debts on our behalf. His mediation means that He says to the Father: "Do not count their transgressions because I have carried their iniquity" (Is.53:6). Thus He stands as a Mediator between God and men; or rather, He is the only Mediator between God and men; He fulfilled God’s Divine Justice and granted people the forgiveness of sins, by dying for them.



This is what St. John the Apostle meant when he said: "And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world" (1John.2: 1,2). Here, the atoning mediation is very clear. It is a
mediation for the sinner: "If anyone sins", and this sinner needs atonement. The only One who offered this atonement was Jesus Christ the righteous. Hence He can mediate for us through His blood which was shed for us.
The same meaning is given in the words of St. Paul the Apostle about the Lord Jesus Christ being the only Mediator between God and men. He says: "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all" (1Tim.2: 5,6). The Lord Jesus Christ mediates for us as the Redeemer who sacrificed Himself and paid the price of our sins.
This type of mediation is utterly unquestionable. It is attributed to Christ only, whereas the intercessions of the saints has no connection with atonement or redemption. It is intercessions for us to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

(2)The intercessions of the saints for us are merely praying for us; they are of the pleading type, which is completely different to Christ's atoning mediation

This is sanctioned by the Holy Bible which says: "...pray for one another" (Jas.5: 16). The saints themselves asked people to pray for them. St. Paul said to the Thessalonians: "...pray for us" (2Thess.3: 1) and asked the Hebrews the same request: "Pray for us" (Heb.13: 18). He also said to the Ephesians: "...praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints - and for me" (Eph.6: 18,19),

. The request to pray for one another is countless in the Holy Bible. If the saints ask us to pray for them, shall we not ask them to pray for us? If we ask the prayers of those who are still in their spiritual combats, 44 subject to sufferings like ourselves", shall we not ask the prayers of the saints who completed their striving and departed to Paradise, living with Christ? Or have these saints been demoted after their departure from earth to Paradise so that we are only allowed to ask their prayers when they are on earth and forbidden to do so when they are in Paradise close to God? If we ask the prayers of human beings, is it too much to ask the prayers of the angels?

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III





Do angels and saints know our condition on earth?

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III




(a) We ask the intercession of the saints because of the great favour they have with the Lord who loves them and puts them in charge of merciful deeds for the sake of men. Also because of the greater knowledge and extensive capabilities their souls enjoy after leaving their bodies.
(b) Whilst talking about the saints' favour with the Lord, we mention that God sometimes associated His name with their names. He said: "I am the God of your father - the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob" (Ex.3: 6).

(c) That is why the saints used to remind the Lord of His saints so that His compassionate and merciful heart would be moved immediately on hearing their names and remembering His promises to them, and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. In interceding for the people of Israel to be saved from perishing, Moses the Prophet said to the Lord: "Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants, to whom You swore by Your own self, and said to them, 'I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven' " (Ex.32: 13).
(d) We recall that when King Hazael of Syria oppressed the Israelites, the Holy Bible says: "But the Lord was gracious to
them, had compassion on them, and regarded them, because of His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and would not yet destroy them or cast them from His presence" (2 Kin. 13: 23).

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III







The spirituality of asking the prayers of the saints
(a) Asking the intercession of the saints implies belief in the life to come; belief that the departed are still living and have their work to perform; belief in the constant relationship between heaven and earth, and belief in venerating the saints who are venerated by God Himself.
(b) Intercession is a fellowship of love between the members of the One Body. The Church is the body, Christ is the Head and all of us, whether on earth or in heaven, are members of the One Body. Love, prayers and fellowship are peretually exchanged between the members of the One and same Body. We plead for the departed in our prayers and they intercede for us through their prayers; it is an inseparable relationship.
It is regrettable that people who object to intercession seem adamant to destroy this fellowship. They resist our for the sake of the departed and their prayers or intercessions for us? Does the love relationship between God the Father and every believer contradicts the existence of love relationship between God's children? Did the Lord Jesus Christ not ask the Father: "...that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us... that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one" (John.17: 21, 23)?
(c) Intercession is beneficial. Whoever denies it loses its benefits and gains nothing in lieu. Those who believe in intercession benefit from the love relationship between them and the saints. They benefit from the mere connection with the souls of those who have departed. They add to their own prayers the more profound and powerful prayers of those abiding in the next world, without any loss on their part.

However, those who deny intercessions of the saints lose this relationship and these prayers without gaining anything in stead. They lose a simple and an uncomplicated belief manifested by those who celebrate the feasts of the saints, visit their churches and ask their prayers. How would they cope with meeting these saints in the next life after, while they have refused to venerate them or ask their prayers and intercessions?
(d) Intercession entails meekness of heart. The person who asks for intercession is a humble person. He is not conceited about his personal relationship with God, but takes the position of the sinner and the weak who requests the intercession of others for his sake,
. Vice versa is he who denies intercession. He might pompously ask: "What is the difference between me and those saints? The relationship between me and God is too strong to need intercession"! He raises himself to the rank of the saints, martyrs and angels.
Those people will be reproached by the Apostle's words: "Pray for us" (Heb.13: 18) and "...praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints" (Eph.6: 18).

(e) Intercession is proof of God's justice in the principle of equal opportunities. If God permits Satan to fight His children, tempt them in false visions and dreams and torments them, so, according to His justice and the principle of equal opportunities, He permits the angels and the souls of the righteous to help His children on earth. Thus God's justice is manifest in the intervention of the souls of those abiding in the next world in the life of men.
If God permitted Satan to harm Job, He also permits angels to bandage the injuries of men and to minister to His children without them asking. How much more if they pray for it! "Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?" (Heb.1: 14).
So long as the angels are sent forth for this purpose why should we not ask their intervention to help us while they are near us?

(12) Intercession is a living reality
The intercession of the saints for us is not merely a theological research text-proved from the Holy Bible, but it is a living reality we experience. It is a living history through the generations, narrating the amazing relationship between those who departed and those who are still living on earth. It is a living contact with the saints who truly pity our state more than we do to the extent that sometimes our problems are solved for us due to their intercessions for us without our request or prayers. They understand more than we do and they apply the verse: "Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep" (Rom.12: 15) more than we do.
Intercession is proof of the bond between the members of the Church on earth and the members of the Church in heaven. It is one Church: one part of it is on earth, which we call Church Militant and the other part is in heaven which we call Church Triumphant. Both of them pray for each other.
Those who reject the intercession of the saints are in fact disregarding the marvellous miracles that occurred and are testified to by people, through the prayers of the saints on the occasion of their feasts or in their churches and monasteries. It appears that such dogmatic arguments in theology may of resulted in denial of factual history and day to day facts of life.
It suffices to mention the miracles which occurred by the appearance of the Virgin Mary in her Church at Zeitoon. Whether to Christians or Muslims, and which were documented by the people's oral and written testimonials. Also the miracles which occur in the name of St. George, Archangel Michael and other saints. All these should be sufficient to convince our Protestant brethren in coming to terms with the reality of the intercessions of the saints.
Read the life-stories of the saints and you will come to know about the intervention of the angels and saints in people's lives. You will see how they appear, foretell, give promises and guidance and bring good news of the birth of a saint from a barren mother or of God's choice of a saint for His ministry. As far as these people are concerned, the subject of their relationship with the saints is not a one day and night acquaintance but it is ages-long relationship. It is a relationship we can never destroy. It is a relationship between people, the angels and the saints. This is why many of these people find it difficult to understand the Protestant stance of rejecting the inseparable bond between the Church on earth and its members in heaven.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III


The Veneration of St. Mary the Virgin



(1) Our Protestant brethren do not venerate our Lady the Virgin nor do they ask for her intercession. Some of their groups even go to the extent of likening her to the eggshell that loses its value after the chick hatches. This exaggeration in not venerating the Virgin Mary is probably a reaction to the exaggerated veneration given her by the Roman Catholics. Thus our Protestant brethren do not celebrate any of the Virgin's feasts.
(2) Some Protestant groups call the Virgin Mary ‘our sister’.
(3) In addition, our Protestant brethren say that after the Virgin had given birth to the Lord Jesus she consumated her marriage to Joseph and begot children known as Jesus' brothers" or "the Lord's brothers".
(4) Our Protestant brethren also object to some of the titles which our Church gives to our Lady the Virgin.
(5) One of the features which reveals the non-veneration of the Virgin is that, in their translation of the Holy Bible, they
have changed the title given her by the angel from 'full of grace" into "highly favoured". (6) Our Protestant brethren frequently give our Lady the Virgin the title 'Mother of Jesus' instead of 'Mother of God' (Theotokos).

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III




Venerating the Virgin Mary

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III



Titles of Virgin Mary


With regard to God's indwelling in the Virgin during the Incarnation, the Church calls her the Second Heaven and the Tabernacle or the Dome of Moses.
The Church also calls the Virgin the City of God or Zion, as it is said in the psalm: "And of Zion it will be said, 'This one and that one were born in her; and the Most High Himself shall establish her"' and "Glorious things are spoken of you, 0 city of God!" (Ps. 87)
Since the Lord Jesus said that He resembles the manna because He is the Living Bread that came down from heaven (John.6: 58), therefore, the Church calls the Virgin the Manna Pot.
Regarding St. Mary's virginity, the Church calls her Aaron's Rod which blossomed (Num.17).

The Ark of Testimony (Ex.25:10-22) is a type (resemblance) for Virgin Mary because firstly, the Ark was overlaid with gold
on the inside and the outside, symbolising her purity and elevation. Secondly because the Ark was made of Acacia wood which does not decay, symbolising her sanctity. Thirdly because the Ark contained the manna, which symbolises Christ the Living Bread who came down from heaven, and lastly because the Ark contained the two tablets of the Law which symbolise Christ the Word of God (John.1: 1). The ladder reaching from earth to heaven which Jacob saw in his dream, is a type (resemblance) for Virgin Mary. Being this conjunction between earth and heaven in the Incarnation of Christ; She was the earth in which heaven dwelt and whilst she was on earth she bore heaven within her (Gen.28: 12).
The burning bush that was not consumed and which Moses saw (Ex.3), is a type (resemblance) for Virgin Mary, upon whom came the Holy Spirit with His Divine fire and she was not consumed.
Since the union of Divinity and Humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ resembles the union of coal and fire, therefore, St. Mary the Virgin, who bore within her that Union, resembles the censer. She is called Aaron's Censer or the Golden Censer, signifying her exaltation.

The Church also gives the Virgin the title 'The Good Dove’ because:
1. In her meekness she resembles the dove.
2. The Holy Spirit, Who appeared in the form of a dove (Matt.3: 16), came upon her.
3. She brought the message of man's salvation, resembling the dove that brought the message of the return of life to the earth after the Flood (Gen.8: 10,11).
The Virgin is also likened to the Church and many prophecies apply simultaneously to the Virgin and to the Church.
The symbols and resemblances of Virgin Mary in the Church rituals and in the Holy Scriptures are numerous. She is venerated because:
1. the Holy Spirit came upon her,
2. she is the mother of God,
3. she is of perpetual virginity,
4. she is holy,
5. the Holy Bible testifies of her,
6. the Lord Himself venerated her, and
7.because of her miraculous signs and sacred appearances.
This veneration is expressed in the Church rituals, hymns and songs, in the Church prayers asking for her intercession, in celebrating her many feasts and in consecrating one of our fasts in her name.

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III






The Virgin’s Feasts



1. Her (dormition) dying, 21st Toubi and the 21st day of every Coptic month
2. Her nativity, 1st Pashans
3. The annunciation to her parents, 7th Mesra
4. Her presentation into the Temple, 3rd Keyahk
5. Her entry into the land of Egypt, 24th Pashans
6. Her assumption, 16th of Misra
7. Consecration of her church in Philippi, 21st Ba’ouna
8. Her appearance in her church at Zeitoon, Cairo, 2nd April

https://upload.chjoy.com/uploads/168465928575651.jpg

Pope Shenouda III

Two Questions on the Virgin's Titles

(1) Why do we call the Virgin ‘the vine’ in the prayer of the Third Hour, saying: “O Mother of God, you are the true vine bearing the Fruit of Life”, when the Vine is the Lord Jesus Christ who says plainly of Himself: “I am the True Vine and My Father is the Vine-dresser. I am the Vine, you are the branches” (John.15: 1, 5)?
(2) Why do we address the Virgin, in the third watch of the Midnight Prayer, saying: “O noetic gate of life”, when the gate is Christ who says of Himself: “I am the door of the sheep” (John.10: 7)?

(1) The Virgin Is the True Vine
Giving the title 'the true vine' to the Virgin in no way contradicts the title of the Lord Jesus Christ as the True Vine. The Lord is the Vine in one sense and the Virgin is the vine in another.
The Lord is the Vine when we are the branches; He is the Origin and all of us originate from Him; He is the Head and all of us are members of His Body.
As for the Virgin, according to the Church's hymns, she is the one who bore the Fruit of Life - the Son of God. She is the vine who neither experienced senescence nor was reaped by anybody.
Here we would like to record an important point:
The Lord Jesus Christ grants us some of His titles

(1) The Lord says: “I am the good Shepherd” (John.10: 11,14). This title was given to God by David in his psalm when he said: “The Lord is my Shepherd” (Ps.23: 1), and was also given to Him in the Book of Ezekiel (Ez.34: 11-16).

Nevertheless, the Lord appoints some of His children shepherds. While He is concerned to make the whole Church “one flock and one Shepherd” (John.10: 16), He says to Peter the Apostle: “Feed My lambs. Tend My sheep” (John.21: 15,16). In the Old Testament the Lord says: “And I will give you shepherds according to My heart” (Jer.3: 15),
. The title 'shepherd' became the title attributed to the Apostles' successors; the bishops who are to "shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood" (Acts 20: 28). St. Peter says: "Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers” (1Pet.5: 2).
(2) The Lord Jesus Christ calls Himself ‘Light’ when He says: “I am the Light of the world” (John.8: 12); (John.9: 5). Nevertheless, He says to His disciples: “You are the light of the world” (Matt.5: 14) and “Let your light so shine before men” (Matt.5: 16).
There is no doubt that the Lord is the absolute Light in the full sense of the word. His disciples are light because they derive their
light from Him and with His light they shine before others. In the same way, He is the Shepherd in the full sense of the wordbut they are shepherds because they are God's stewards appointed by Him to shepherd His flock.
(3) It is said of the Lord Jesus Christ that He is the Bishop: “The Shepherd and Overseer of your souls” (1Pet.2: 25). Nevertheless, the Apostles' disciples were ordained bishops by the Holy Spirit (John 20:20-23) (Acts 20: 28); (1Thess.3: 2); (Phil.1:1); (Titus1: 7).

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Priest in the sense that He offered Himself a Sacrifice on our behalf. But priests from the human race are ministers and stewards of God's mysteries. They offer the Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Old Testament they offered what symbolised Christ's Sacrifice.
(5) It is written that Christ is the Son of God (1John.4:14,15) and that we also are children of God (1John.3: 1). Christ is the Son of God in the sense that He is of God’s Essence, Nature and Divinity. But we are children through love and adoption. That is why the Lord Jesus Christ is called the Only Son (John.3: 16).

Do we steal God’s glory if we call the Church 'the vine' when Christ Himself has bestowed upon her that title? Do we steal God’s glory if we call people the vineyard, when the teaching of the Holy Bible commands us to do so? Or is this just an attack against the Church of which the Holy Bible says: “Sing to her, a vineyard of red wine! I, the Lord, keep it. I water it every moment” (Is.27: 2,3)?
Moreover, the title ‘the vine’ is given to every blessed mother, as the psalm says: “Your wife shall be like a. fruitful vine in the very heart of your house” (Ps.128: 3).