← Back to sermon library

Well, as we look to Matthew 16, 
we're going to focus again on that section in verses 13 to 
20. because of time constraints I don't want to go too long this 
morning we're gonna just focus on verse 18 what we see in verses 
13 to 20 is a question concerning Christ's identity in verses 13 
to 15 we see the confession made by Peter in verse 16 of the attitude 
pronounced by Christ in verse 17 and then the declaration concerning 
the church in verses 18 and 19. And I understand this to teach 
two primary things. Verse 18 is the establishment 
of the church And verse 19 is the authority of the church. 
So we'll look at those two subjects, those two doctrines in consecutive 
Lord's Days. Actually, not next Sunday, Pastor 
Porter will be preaching. But this morning, we'll look 
at the declaration concerning the church, specifically its 
establishment in Matthew chapter 16 and verse 18. But I'll read at verse 13 to 
the end of the chapter to give us the sense of the context. 
When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked 
his disciples, saying, Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, 
am? So they said, Some say John the 
Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets. 
He said to them, But who do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered 
and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus 
answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for 
flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who 
is in heaven. And I also say to you that you 
are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates 
of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will 
be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed 
in heaven. Then he commanded his disciples 
that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ. 
From that time Jesus began to show to his disciples that he 
must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and 
chief priests and scribes and be killed and be raised the third 
day. Then Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him saying, 
far be it from you Lord this shall not happen to you. But 
he turned and said to Peter, get behind me, Satan. You are 
an offense to me, for you are not mindful of the things of 
God, but the things of men. Then Jesus said to his disciples, 
if anyone desires to come after me, let him deny himself and 
take up his cross and follow me. For whoever desires to save 
his life will lose it. Whoever loses his life for my 
sake will find it. For what profit is it to a man 
if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul? Or what will 
a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man will 
come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He 
will reward each according to his works. Assuredly, I say to 
you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death 
till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. Amen. Well, let us pray. Our Father, we thank you for 
the Holy Scriptures and we pray now for the ministry of the Holy 
Spirit. We confess because of our own 
sin, because of our own waywardness, we don't always rightly receive 
the Word of Truth. So we confess that sin now and 
pray for forgiveness in and through the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. We pray for the Holy Spirit to 
illumine us and to shine the light upon our minds and hearts 
and cause us to appreciate the things spoken by our Lord Jesus 
Christ concerning His Church. We ask as well, Father, that 
this would be the day of salvation for those who have ventured into 
this place outside of Christ. We pray that they would hear 
the gospel clearly, that the Spirit of God would apply these 
things to them savingly. and that you would cause there 
to be rejoicing in heaven, rejoicing in this place, rejoicing in the 
hearts of those who were dead in their trespasses and sins 
and have passed into everlasting life. We do not look to the ingenuity, 
the wisdom, the goodness of men. We look to a sovereign God who 
has almighty power, who saves to the uttermost all who draw 
nigh unto him through his most blessed Son. And we pray through 
Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Well remember the specific 
context here in verses 13 to 20, the Lord and his disciples 
are now in Caesarea Philippi, this is in the about 23-25 miles 
north of the Sea of Galilee. After this particular event, 
after he makes this announcement in verse 21 concerning his death 
at Jerusalem, they then make the track down from the north 
all the way down into Judea specifically into the city of Jerusalem, where 
the remainder of the book will indeed transpire. And what Christ 
says concerning his death is going to be fleshed out in the 
passages, or in the pages rather, that follow. But when they come 
into this region of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus asks, who do 
men say that I, the Son of Man, am? Now this is the most important 
question anyone can ever consider. They give the varying reports 
about the people at the time. Some say John the Baptist. Some 
say Elijah the prophet, others say Jeremiah the prophet, and 
others say one of the prophets. And then Jesus moves from out 
there to in here. He says, who do you say that 
I am? And this, as I said, is most 
important. And when we answer that question 
properly, thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, I 
actually believe that we will have a high view of His church. In other words, the fact that 
Jesus is confessed as Messiah and as divine, Jesus then pronounces 
Peter blessed for having received this revelation from the Father, 
and on the heels of that, Christ mentions, or Christ declares, 
or Christ specifies his particular task in building the Church. If we regard Christ If we love 
Christ, if we believe Christ, then we will esteem the bride 
of Christ equally. If you say that you like me and 
you insult my wife, I find it very difficult to believe that 
you actually like me. If you speak well of me and then 
say horrible things about my bride, I am not convinced that 
you actually do esteem me. And the same is true concerning 
Christ. How do we say we love Him, and 
we esteem Him, and we prize Him, and He is precious? And then 
we disregard the place of the church. I'm not preaching a high 
church-ism, but rather a regard for that bride. Valuing her and 
prizing her and seeing the blessed reality that she serves in this 
world. To be that means by which God 
gives his people grace. He blesses, he sustains, he nourishes 
through the bride of Christ Jesus. So let's take up verse 18 very 
specifically and the declaration made by Christ concerning the 
church specifically its establishment. One commentator made this observation 
concerning verse 18 in Matthew 16. He said, if this paragraph, 
13 to 20, is the most discussed paragraph in Matthew, then this 
verse is the most discussed verse in the most discussed paragraph. In other words, there is a lot 
of information extant, that means out there, concerning what Jesus 
meant and what Jesus says in chapter 16 and verse 18. We've seen that Jesus has pronounced 
Simon Peter blessed. You are blessed Simon, son of 
Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but 
my Father who is in heaven. Christ acknowledges that the 
Father reveals to Peter something concerning the deity and the 
Messiahship of Christ. Now Christ gives Peter more revelation. Christ gives Peter more information. Christ instructs him further, 
specifically with reference to the Church. And I want to look 
at four things with reference to the Church this morning. First, 
its definition. Secondly, its foundation. Thirdly, 
it's triumph. And fourthly, it's builder. So 
that's a bit of a map as to where we're going this morning with 
reference to the establishment of the Church of the Lord Jesus 
Christ. It's definition. The word church 
is found in the Gospel records three times. And all three of 
those times are in Matthew's Gospel. The word church is here 
in Matthew chapter 16. once. Later in Matthew chapter 
18, in a passage that deals with church discipline, it's used 
twice in verse 17. The word church that we use does 
not necessarily correspond to the Greek word that is used called 
ecclesia. But church corresponds more so 
to a word that means belonging to the Lord. The Scottish people 
use it this way, I believe the Dutch as well, and German. The church is called Kirk. And 
Kirk is not corresponding to Ecclesia. Kirk corresponds to 
that word which I said pertains to that which belongs to the 
Lord. That word is used twice in the New Testament. First Corinthians 
11. And verse 20, it tells us it 
is the Lord's supper. It is the supper that belongs 
specifically and peculiarly to the Lord. Certainly in His sovereignty, 
God is over every meal that ever goes across our plates. In His 
sovereignty, God owns the cattle on a thousand hills. God in His 
sovereignty owns the burritos that you're going to have. for 
lunch this afternoon. But there is this one meal, this 
one peculiar gathering together that is identified as the Lord's 
Supper. It is that which belongs to Him. The other place in the New Testament, 
the Greek word is koreakon, it is in Revelation 1.10, when John 
says he was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day. Certainly Christ 
is sovereign and possesses ownership of every day. but there is a 
day of the week that is peculiarly designated as the Lord's Day. And so church or Kirk is related 
to that idea of something that belongs to the Lord. The Greek 
word ekklesia, which church translates in the New Testament, is related 
to an Old Testament word called kahal, which means assembly. Sometimes people take the word 
ekklesia and they say, well it means called out ones, so it 
is the gathering of the called out ones. That is etymology, 
but that's probably not the meaning in the New Testament. The emphasis 
isn't on the called-outness of the people. The emphasis is upon 
the assembly, the convocation, the congregation. And so the 
Old Testament concept, the kahal, the assembly of Yahweh, in the 
New Covenant setting, it's not replacement, it's fulfillment 
and realization and correspondence. It is the church of the Lord 
Jesus Christ. As well, as RT France reminds 
us, the great term ecclesia never denotes a physical structure 
in the New Testament. Now it's common parlance for 
us to say, I'm going to go to church. It's common for us to 
say, I saw you at church. And typically what we mean by 
that is that you wandered in from out there, in here, and 
we call this the church. Well, the New Testament does 
not use ecclesia that way. The church is not a building. 
The church is not a place. The church is not a structure. 
The church is not architecture. Again, France, the Greek term 
ecclesia never denotes a physical structure in the New Testament, 
but always a community of people. The New Temple is not a building 
of literal stones, but consists of living stones. 1 Peter chapter 
2 and verse 5. As well when Jesus speaks here 
in 1618 he is probably referring to the universal church, the 
universal church. In 1817 he is probably referring 
to the local church. In matters of church discipline, 
you don't tell it to the church universal. You don't blog about 
it, you don't Facebook it, you don't Twitter it, that we excommunicated 
a man. And we want the entirety of God's 
people through all ages in all places to know about that particular 
event. No, the local church carries 
out discipline. And when we tell it to the church, 
we tell it to our local church. But in 1618, when he says, I 
will build my church, I think our confession of faith is a 
very good description of what he means here. In 26.1 it says, 
the Catholic or universal church. Now I want to explain what Catholic 
means. It means universal. I'm going 
to tell you right now, if you are easily offended and you have 
a very delicate conscience or a sensitivity, to things that 
are Roman Catholic, you are probably going to be upset during the 
course of this sermon. Because the Roman Catholic Church 
puts a lot of weight on 1618. It's because of 1618 that they 
have a Pope in Rome. And we're going to look at that 
in a little bit more detail as we progress. But the word Catholic 
is a good word. It is legitimate. We ought to 
use it and employ it. Catholic simply means universal. Roman Catholic is sort of an 
oxymoron. How do you have universal that's 
localized in Rome? You just don't do it. Catholic 
is a good word. Now, as long as we qualify and 
define and indicate what we mean. But back to our confession, the 
Catholic or Universal Church, which with respect to the internal 
work of the Spirit and truth of grace may be called invisible, 
consists of the whole number of the elect that have been, 
are, or shall be gathered into one under Christ, the head thereof. and is the spouse, the body, 
the fullness of him that filleth all in all." So that's what Jesus 
means when he says, I will build my church. He doesn't mean one 
specific place in Chilliwack, one specific place in Ephesus, 
one specific place in Vancouver, but it is the entirety of the 
work of Christ based on his redemptive power to gather his people from 
every tribe, every tongue, every people and every nation and assemble 
them unto one great bride that serves and glorifies him forever 
and ever world without end. So that's its definition that's 
what we mean when we understand in first Matthew 16 18 and on 
this rock I will build my church. Now secondly its foundation. Jesus says, you are Peter and 
on this rock I will build my church. Now again, this is an 
area of controversy over the ages. Actually it wasn't. Probably 
eighty percent, and I'm going based on memory from being in 
the commentaries this week, of men agreed on a particular interpretation 
and that wasn't that this text taught the papacy. Even within 
the Roman Catholic tradition, when you go way back into the 
history of Christianity, they did not believe that this was 
the place to ground the papacy in. But there is no little controversy. So there are three views concerning 
the identification of the rock. Again, this is important stuff. 
You need to get this. If you ever read our confession 
of faith, and you get to chapter 26, and there's some pretty anti-papacy 
statement in there, you go, wow, that just doesn't seem right. 
I mean, aren't we all brethren? Aren't we all believers? Aren't 
we all brothers and sisters in Christ? Well, you need to understand 
that there is a debate, there is a controversy that goes back 
a long ways concerning this whole idea of the Pope of Rome and 
his place, if he is legitimate, if he is to be in that particular 
office. But there are three positions. 
Notice, Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood 
has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 
And I also say to you that you are Peter. So Peter confesses 
Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Now Jesus 
confesses or says something concerning Peter. He says, you are Peter 
and on this rock I will build my church. The three predominant 
views on the text, first of all, is that Peter is the rock. Peter 
himself is the rock, the person of Peter. He is the foundation 
of the church and this is what Roman Catholicism teaches. The 
second view is that the rock is Peter's confession of faith. 
In other words, when Peter confesses the messiahship and the divinity 
of Christ, Jesus says on this rock, on this confession, I will 
build my church. Ryle explains it this way. The 
true meaning of the rock in this passage appears to be the truth 
of our Lord's messiahship and divinity, which Peter had just 
confessed. The third observation, or third 
particular view, is that the rock is Christ himself. So two 
and three really go hand in hand. I mean, there's not a lot of 
difference between 2 and 3. But with reference to 3, the 
rock is the Christ who Peter confessed. John Owen says it 
is not the person of Peter who confessed Christ, but the person 
of Christ whom Peter confessed. That's the rock upon which the 
church is built. So secondly, there is the Roman 
Catholic position. The Roman Catholic Church teaches 
that Peter in his person, Peter personally, we'll see that this 
is a faulty interpretation as we move through the passage, 
that Peter himself is the rock upon which the church is founded. 
Here is how Roman Catholicism defines the role and the purpose 
of the Pope. The Pope, as Bishop of Rome, 
is the successor of Saint Peter, and therefore the visible head 
of the Church on earth, the vice-regent of Christ, and the supreme ruler 
of all Christians. Now, if you ponder that for just 
a moment, you'll say, no, the supreme ruler of all Christians 
is Christ speaking in his word. It's the Holy Spirit. It's not 
any man, it's not any earthly agency, it's not some vice-regent 
of Jesus, it's not a vicar of Christ on the earth. Vicar means 
substitute. When the Pope claims the title 
vicar, he is saying that he substitutes for Jesus on the earth. Any Protestant 
worth his weight ought to ask the question, why does Christ 
need a substitute? According to the Bible, he is 
stationed and enthroned at the right hand of God Most High, 
where he rules and reigns over all things for the good of his 
church. Doesn't sound like he needs a 
vicar, doesn't sound like he needs a substitute, doesn't sound 
like he employs men to fill in for him in his particular absence. Now we grant and we affirm that 
Peter had a place of priority. That's not under debate. Certainly 
he had a place of priority and I think a Protestant extreme 
could be to negate that reality. You know Roman Catholics see 
great value upon marriage. Well, we ought not to go to the 
other extreme and just totally denigrate her in the same way. When Roman Catholicism sees greatness 
in Peter, we ought not to swing the other way and just say he 
was, you know, the worst of every human being that ever lived. 
No, that's not it. We grant or affirm that Peter 
did occupy a place of priority among the disciples. Who is Acts 
1-12 basically focused upon? Peter, who stands up on the day 
of Pentecost and preaches and says, this is that which the 
Prophet Joel spoke. It's Peter. That's the Jerusalem 
Pentecost. And then in Chapter 8 of the 
Book of Acts, we might call that a Samaritan Pentecost. Peter 
and James go to investigate what had gone on there. And then in 
Chapter 10, we might have what we call the Gentile Pentecost, 
and it's Peter who preaches to the household of Cornelius, and 
the Holy Spirit falls upon them. Yes, Peter was certainly used 
of God. There was a priority there. But 
was there a primacy? Was he a vicar? Was he a pope? Was he the Bishop of Rome? Arguably, 
there is no historical substantiation that he ever even went to Rome, 
let alone ministered in Rome. You take the fact as well that 
Peter himself was a married man. Didn't Jesus heal Peter's mother-in-law? Strange wording if in fact he 
was a celibate. No, he was married. How come 
you deduce papal succession and you don't allow the Pope to marry 
the way the main Pope did? There's so many inconsistencies 
and fallacies and contradictions involved in the process, let 
alone the fact there's no exegetical basis in the passage whatsoever. We remind that the Apostle Peter 
was not infallible. Isn't that the claim of the papacy? They have infallibility, at least 
in certain instances. When they're making ex cathedra 
pronouncements, when they're doing official business. Look 
at Peter's official business in the passage. Jesus announces 
that the Messiah must be crucified, and Peter tries to oppose that 
agenda. Peter tries to resist that agenda, 
and then Jesus says, get behind me, Satan. What happens later 
on in the passion narratives when we get to all about chapter 
26? We see Peter deny our Lord Jesus not once, not twice, but 
three times. We get to the book of Acts and 
we see that Peter was not the primary leader in the church 
in Jerusalem. Again, arguably, no one knows 
whether he went to Rome or not. As well, when we get to the New 
Testament letters, what does Paul say concerning Peter? I withstood him to his face. In other words, Peter by his 
conduct was betraying the gospel that he preached and the Apostle 
Paul withstood him to his face. Consider as well that if there 
was such a thing as papal succession, if Peter was the first pope and 
upon his death another pope took his place, it'd be an interesting 
thing in terms of history. Because history tells us that 
Peter died before John the Apostle. Do you think it would have been 
the case that John the Apostle was under the influence and the 
authority of the Pope of Rome? It just makes no sense whatsoever. We maintain that the Lord Jesus 
was not instituting a succession of popes. If he had, this text 
doesn't designate it whatsoever. We affirm that this position 
of the Roman Catholic Church established is not the fruit 
of responsible exegesis, but an existing ecclesiology that 
is thrust upon the text. In other words, a practice evolved 
in the early church. And when we had that particular 
practice, now we have to look for theological justification. 
Think paedal baptism. We have a practice and now we 
have to find a justification for the practice. The same is 
true with the papacy. This thing evolved, it came together 
and now we need a proof text and so it must be the declaration 
of Matthew 16, 18. I love what Spurgeon says. He says, no unsophisticated reader. Don't miss that. No unsophisticated 
reader. Spurgeon's implication is, you've 
got to be sophisticated to get the papacy out of Matthew 16. He says, no unsophisticated reader 
of his Bible sees any trace of potpourri in this passage. Again, 
let me define two types of potpourri. There's the little bowl of stuff 
that smells good in your bathroom. Think that has a tea in it. Don't 
think we pronounce the tea, though. I don't know about it. Sounds 
French to me. Something I absolutely know nothing of. Popery, P-O-P-E-R-Y, 
the papacy, the office of the Pope. He says, no unsophisticated 
reader of his Bible sees any trace of popery in this passage. 
The wine of Romanism is not to be pressed out of this cluster. to modern divines, to modern 
theologians, at least one is a New Testament scholar. He writes 
this, the text says nothing about Peter's successors, infallibility, 
or exclusive authority. These late interpretations entail 
insuperable exegetical and historical problems. It's just impossible 
to get the papacy out of 1618. That was D.A. Carson. Robert 
Raymond in his New Systematic Theology, who by the way discusses 
this for several pages and very well. If you're interested in 
this more in detail, go home, read Raymond, and investigate 
the various claims and the various arguments that he puts forth. 
But in a concluding statement he says, Rome's exegesis of Matthew 
16 and its historically developed dogmatic claim to authoritative 
primacy in the Christian world simply cannot be demonstrated 
and sustained from scripture itself. This claim is surely 
one of the great hoaxes foisted upon professing Christendom, 
upon which false base rests the whole papal sacerdotal system. Sacerdotal is a word that means 
it's the sacraments that convey grace. The sacraments in and 
of themselves, actually that's sacramentalism. Sacerdotalism 
means the priest has the ability to convey grace. The priest, 
the church, has the ability to actually impart grace to the 
persons. And Raymond's right. We see Spurgeon, 
Carson, Raymond all tell us there's no exegetical warrant in Matthew 
16, 18 for the doctrine of the papacy. But what sayeth Peter? You can turn to 1 Peter chapter 
2 for just a moment. If Peter was installed as the 
first pope in Matthew 16, 18, he sure seems to have missed 
it. If he in fact was the foundational rock upon which the church would 
be built, he didn't get it. Notice in 1st Peter 2.4, coming 
to Him, Christ, as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, 
but chosen by God and precious, you also as living stones are 
being built up a spiritual house. You see, Peter's conception is 
that Christ is the chief cornerstone, and that we as his bride, we 
as his temple, we as his church are living stones built upon 
that. It is the good confession that 
we make, thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. It 
is that passing from death unto life that institutes us as a 
living stone. Peter never says I am the one 
and all of you are built upon me. Notice what he goes on to 
say. You also as living stones are being built up a spiritual 
house a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable 
to God through Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is also contained 
in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, 
elect, precious, and he who believes on him will by no means be put 
to shame." Isaiah 28, 16. Peter didn't think that was about 
him. Peter understands who the foundation is. Peter understands 
who the chief cornerstone is. Peter had no problem with Matthew 
16.18 because Jesus in Matthew 16.18 was not instituting the 
papacy. That's just not what was going 
on. Verse 7, Therefore to you who believe he is precious, but 
to those who are disobedient the stone which the builders 
rejected has become the chief corner stone. So the Roman Catholic 
interpretation of Matthew 16, 18 falls short. Now when we say that, that is 
huge. This isn't a small thing. Papal 
infallibility. doctrines invented that are on 
par with scripture, doctrines that are concocted in men's heads 
impressed upon the people of God by way of commandment. Do you see why the reformers 
spent so much time on the doctrine of Christian liberty? It wasn't 
so you could have a beer with your pizza. It was so the Pope 
of Rome couldn't command you to blaspheme. Couldn't command 
you to bow at altars of abomination. That's the gist and the thrust 
of the Christian liberty stuff. It's that the state doesn't have 
any right to command us not to obey our Lord, speaking in Scripture. But neither does the Pope, neither 
does the Church of England, neither does any other structure of man 
have the right or the ability or the power invested to command 
God's people in areas where God hasn't commanded. Christ alone 
is Lord of the conscience, not the Pope of Rome. Brethren, men 
have died over this doctrine. To us today, we go to the Christian 
bookstore and it's common to have a Catholic section. It's 
common for us to think not really harshly about Catholicism. I'm 
not talking about people. I love Roman Catholic people. 
My dear departed mother was a Roman Catholic who I loved earnestly. It is the dogma, it is the system, 
it is the church that lies. You cannot derive from Matthew 
16, 18 a papal structure. And upon this papal structure 
hangs the bulk of the Church of Rome. You get rid of that 
structure and what happens? It collapses. It's gone. We as Protestants need to realize 
that Christ is the foundation of the Church. Most assuredly, 
we all affirm that. But brethren, in our reaction, 
we mustn't negate the role that the apostles played. It was Peter 
who stood up on the day of Pentecost. It was Peter who investigated 
the new believers in Judea and Samaria. It is Peter who preached 
to the household of Cornelius. It is Peter that was given this 
priority in terms of the church. And in our excess, we ought not 
to say, you know, he was just an ordinary guy like you and 
I. Yes, he was an ordinary guy like you and I in terms of blood 
and sweat and tears and all the things that make man. But as 
an apostle of Jesus Christ, the New Testament Scriptures tell 
us that they were foundational. This is why at times for us as 
believers, we are different than the apostles. Some of the things 
that were conducted and done in the apostolic church are not 
to be duplicated in the church today. This was an era before 
the closing of the New Testament canon, where God worked through 
the apostles, where God worked through these men to get the 
word of God out to the people. But let us not react the other 
way and see nothing blessed and good and foundational, we can 
even use that word, in the apostolic ministry. Just a couple of texts, 
Ephesians chapter 2. Ephesians chapter 2, verses 20 
and 21. Well, picking up in verse 19, now therefore you are no 
longer strangers and foreigners but fellow citizens with the 
saints and members of the household of God. Having been built on 
the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself 
being the chief cornerstone. So we've got the foundation of 
the apostles and the prophets. We don't shrink back from declaring 
that. That doesn't teach papal succession. That doesn't teach 
the primacy of Peter as the Bishop of Rome. In my Catholic edition 
of the Bible, it gives the official title of the Pope. You couldn't 
fit it on a business card. This guy's got power over everything 
and everyone. He can pull that business card 
out of his wallet because it's so weighed down with authority. But at the same time, we are 
not just like the Apostles. These were the men whom God used 
to call sinners out of darkness into marvelous light, to plant 
churches. And as the authorized interpreters 
and inscripturators of the Word of God, they penned the Bible 
for us. We do differ from them. in very 
prominent ways. Revelation 21 verse 14, when 
we see those pearly gates, it's an interesting thing that we 
see are the foundations rather of the city, the New Jerusalem. 
It says in 21 14, now the wall of the city had twelve foundations 
and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. You see, in our polemic against 
Rome, we ought not to swing the other way and take from Peter 
the legitimate authority that Christ actually invested in him. Verse 19, he gives him the keys 
to the kingdom and he gives him this power to bind and to loose, 
not just Peter, the apostles and then by extension the church 
through all ages to be sure. The church has authority. It's 
not all tied up in that one Pope that sits in Saint Peter's Cathedral. Brethren, when you go back to 
Matthew chapter 16, I want us to notice something and then 
we move on. I've taken some time to explain this because in our 
theological climate, in our theological context, there is an earnest 
desire to have rapprochement with Rome. That means Protestants 
and Roman Catholics coming together. I say, by all means, if you destroy 
the Roman Catholic Church and all of them get saved by the 
grace of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Welcome 
to Zion. Praise the Lord. That would be 
the most happy occasion. But drop down for just a moment 
to see what's actually going on in Matthew 16. Verse 18, I 
also say to you that you are Peter and on this rock I will 
build my church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against 
it. Look down at verse 22, then Peter took him aside and began 
to rebuke him saying, far be it from you Lord this shall not 
happen to you. But he turned and said to Peter, 
get behind me Satan. That's an interesting turn of 
events, isn't it? What's happening? Insofar as 
Peter confesses the truth concerning Christ, he is rock! Insofar as Peter denies the truth 
concerning Christ, he is Satan! Does this mean that we now know 
who Satan is? No! It's not an affirmation concerning 
Peter's person. It's not about him. It's not 
about the man. It's about what he confesses. It's about what he states. It's 
about what he affirms. So that when we go back to those 
three interpretations, that Peter is the Rock, is without biblical 
warrant. that Christ himself, the one 
whom Peter confessed is the rock, has biblical warrant. The confession 
itself being the rock that fellow confessors make throughout the 
history of the church, that has valid warrant. That has merit. We are to understand it in this 
way. When Peter confesses truth, rock. When Peter denies truth, Satan. We don't hang on Peter, the identifier 
of Satan, on to this day, so why would we hang on the identifier 
of Pope? makes no sense. There is really 
nothing wrong in referring to Peter as rock. I mean, that's 
the text, the way the text most naturally reads and the way people 
would understand it. You are Peter and on this rock 
I will build my church. In light of Ephesians 2, in light 
of Revelation 21, in light of 1 Corinthians 3, 10 and 11, we 
shouldn't have a problem with that. Peter can be a rock, Peter 
is confessor, Peter is one who owns Jesus Christ as Lord and 
Savior. This is foundational, not the foundation because Jesus 
is the chief cornerstone, but then with this we see that what 
we find in 1618 is not the papacy. Now let's move thirdly to its 
triumph. I will build my church, Jesus says, and the gates of 
Hades shall not prevail against it." It's a great text, isn't 
it? This is a fantastic text. What 
are the gates of Hades? Hades is the place where the 
dead, before the final judgment comes, go. Hades is the place 
where the dead, before the final judgment comes, go. In other 
words, if I drop dead, I go off into Hades. Now as I understand 
it, Hades has two compartments. A place for the blessed, a place 
for the cursed. You see this in the book of Revelation 
20. After the Great White Throne Judgment, what is thrown into 
the Lake of Fire, which is Hell? Hades. It's not a place that 
continues into the Eschaton. It's a place in the intermediate 
state. Now, modern commentators pretty 
much relate Hades to death. And they say the idea in this 
passage is that death will not annul, death will not destroy, 
and death will not prevail against the Church. In other words, when 
people are alive, they, by God's grace, will come to know Jesus 
Christ as Lord and Savior. Death itself will not destroy 
the Church. In Revelation, however, in chapter 
1 verse 18 and then again in chapter 20 verse 14, death and 
Hades are seen. So there seems to be a distinction, 
at least in the mind of John, that death is one thing and Hades 
is another. In this passage, probably both 
concepts are there. Death will not annul. Death will 
not stop. Death will not destroy the church. 
If every believer in Iraq gets wiped out, do we fear that there'll 
be no more church there? No. Jesus has promised to build 
it. But Hades, in terms of that place 
of wickedness, that place over which the devil presides, those 
enemies of Christ, those powers that wage warfare against his 
people, this also ought to be appreciated in the text. So that 
when Jesus says, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build 
my church, the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it, 
I think John Gill captures something of this as well. He says that 
all the infernal principalities and powers with all their united 
cunning and strength will never be able to extirpate, that means 
to destroy completely, extirpate his gospel, to destroy his interest, 
to demolish his church in general, or ruin any one particular soul 
that is built upon him. That's good. the gates of Hades 
shall not prevail against it." Does that make you happy? Do you ever agonize over the 
state of the church? Do you ever see the reality that 
guys go up and preach for 15 minutes, they tell a story, they 
tell a joke, they put their hands in their pockets, they sip their 
latte, they put their finger out, they say, praise God, let's 
pray, and then people trot out saying, what a wonderful sermon. 
What do you mean a wonderful sermon? You just had a little 
bite of a Twinkie. Do you know there's steak out 
there? Do you know there's prime rib out there? Do you know there's 
shrimp and lobster to be had? You're a sheep of the living 
God most high. Demand your food! Don't settle 
for that drivel. Do you ever look at the church 
and lament like that? Do you ever look at Zion and 
say, sound the alarm because things just don't look good? 
Well, here's a text that ought to ground us. Here's a text that 
ought to bring us back. The gates of Haiti shall not 
prevail against it. And notice the terminology that 
is employed. It's the gates of Haiti. What's 
the vision here? We take this passage and we say, 
hell is on the march, seeking to devour all of God's people. Now 1 Peter tells us that the 
devil roams about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. 
But we take that and we universalize it, we put it on the church. 
It is the devil and his kingdom that are seeking after us. That's 
not the vision that Christ gives. I will build my church in the 
gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." I'm sure I've used 
this illustration. You're probably going, yes, you 
use the same illustration all the time. We could probably give 
your illustrations. We could do the Jim Butler book 
of illustrations and there'd be ten entries. Because that's 
the ones you use. I put gates around my house to 
keep people out. What's the image? The image isn't 
the church withdrawn and retreated. sucking her collective thumb 
with her collective knees shaking and aching and quaking. The image 
is that the devil and his kingdom are doing that. The Church of 
Christ is on the march. The Church of Christ through 
all ages goes forward. The Church of Christ goes against 
the gates of Hades and it shall not prevail against it. I come 
from Southern California and a bright image that is always 
in my head is when on the 5 o'clock or the 9 o'clock or the 10 o'clock 
news they would show us something about L.A. SWAT going after some 
thug or some crack dealer, some person of ill repute. How did 
they enter into that house? Outside at the gates they'd take 
their bolt cutters and they'd snip that lock like it was nothing. 
And then they'd walk up to the door and they'd say, can we please 
come in? We'd like to arrest you. We would 
like to plunder you. We would like to stop you from 
doing foul and vile and vicious things. Now, I see it blazing 
in my mind. They got this big, steady pole. It's about that round. It's probably 
hefty because there's a couple of guys swinging it and it says 
SWAT right on it. They take that thing and they 
knock the door in and they go in and they arrest the bad guy. 
Doesn't Jesus use this image in Matthew 12? The strong man is bound so that 
his kingdom is plundered. Doesn't Paul use this imagery 
in Colossians 1 verse 13? He says that God has delivered 
us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom 
of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His 
blood, the forgiveness of sins. So all the world today, when 
anybody gets converted, when any sinner calls upon Jesus and 
makes that confession, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living 
God, that battering ram has bashed the gates of Hades, and souls 
have been plundered out of it by our sovereign King in Christ, 
and He has placed them in Zion. He has placed them in the church. 
He has placed them in His blessed fold. Do you see what Jesus says 
here, brethren? He says the church on earth will 
triumph. It will be victorious. It will 
succeed. We're not a part of a losing 
team. But we ought to appreciate something 
else about this statement. She will not be without persecution. She will not be without the gates 
of Hades trying to prevail. She will not be without pain 
and suffering and trial and difficulty. On the one hand, we ought not 
to read into this passage a triumphalism that neglects or negates the 
reality of suffering in this world. We don't do our Iraqi 
brothers any good. to say, well, you know what, 
the church is going to prevail and triumph. Yeah, it's easy 
for you to say when you're sitting in Chilliwack in the 21st century 
having your lattes, having your nice cars, having your air conditioning, 
having all that stuff and they put an N on our houses and they 
dispossessed us. They told us to convert to Islam 
or die. You know, those aren't very blessed options. Brethren, 
there is triumph in the passage, but not triumphalism. There is 
a theology that tells us that all will only ever be good for 
the Christian. That's not true. Tell that to 
the brethren at the end of Hebrews chapter 11. Tell that to Peter 
the Apostle. Tell that to the Apostle Paul, 
who recounts his sufferings for the cause of Christ in the letter 
to the Corinthians. Well, Paul, don't you know it's 
only triumph from here on out? No! Tell this to Jesus, who will 
tell these same disciples later on, in this world you will have 
tribulation. None of them scratched their 
collective melons and said, wait a minute, Lord, you said the 
gates of hell shall not prevail against it. They understood the 
gates of hell are not going down without a fight. They will rise 
up. There are principalities and 
powers. There is a real struggle. There 
is a real devil. And we need to take that seriously 
as well. We cannot be imbalanced on this 
particular thing. It's all doom and all gloom and 
no hope for the church. No, that's not right. But it's 
all hope and all positive and all blessed for the church. No, 
that's not right either. The balance is found in the language 
of the apostles and of our blessed Lord. You will have tribulation, 
but be of good cheer for I've overcome the world. It's not 
always going to be like this. There is going to be an eschaton. 
There is a day coming when there will be no more pain, no more 
sorrow, no more tears, no more hunger, no more thirst. You will 
enter into the new Jerusalem. You will enter into Zion's palace. 
You will enter into the very presence of God Most High and 
the Lamb who sits upon the throne. But that ain't now. You will 
have tribulation in this world. And then notice finally, with 
reference to its builder, we've already given this away, I will 
build my church, Jesus says. The Lord Jesus builds his church, 
not man. Not man in his ingenuity, not 
man in his cunning, not man in his wisdom, not man with all 
of his secular leadership books. It's Christ who builds the church. 
It's Christ who builds the church. This has been a trend and a shift 
in evangelicalism for a long time. We've taken the world's 
cue on how to build businesses and we've prostituted it, brought 
it into the church. This isn't a Fortune 500 club 
or business. It's the sheep of the Lord God 
Most High and they need to eat and they need to worship. And 
they need to be encouraged. That's what the church is about. 
Not, you know, these five easy steps to add, you know, 200 more 
digits to your church roll. This stuff is shameful. Anymore, 
it's not the pastor as minister of the word, it's pastor as CEO. It's pastor as visionary guy. 
It's pastor as mover and shaker. It's pastor as stimulator and 
rah-rah. They come out with their pom-poms 
blazing and just get the people to do what you want them to do. 
That's just bad on like every level. Notice what Paul told Timothy, 
give attention to reading. That didn't mean in his study, 
that meant public reading of the scriptures. Do you realize 
that before the 1400s no one had their own Bibles at home? 
Where do you think they came to hear the Bible? They came 
to the church. Give attention to exhortation. Preach to them, encourage them, 
seek to strengthen them. Give attention to doctrine, not 
entertainment, not fun, not fiasco, but to doctrine. Jesus builds His church. The significance of this ought 
to be seen in light of what we saw last week in terms of some 
background. Remember in that promise given 
to David that God from David would raise up a son and that 
son would be a son to God Most High. That son would build a 
house for God. He would establish it, and it 
would have no end. The same things are going on 
in this passage, as was promised to David in 2 Samuel 7, ratified 
in Psalm 89 and Psalm 132. God made a covenant with David 
that from David's line, Jesus would come. This is what the 
book of Ruth is all about. We are studying Ruth on our Wednesday 
night Bible studies. If you've ever been interested 
in this lovely romantic tale about a woman from Moab who meets 
her beloved Boaz and they settle down and have children, all that's 
present but it pales in significance to the reality of the meaning 
of the book. It's in the end, Boaz and Ruth 
had Obed. Obed had Jesse, and Jesse had 
David. The Book of Ruth is about the 
glory of Jesus Christ. The Book of Ruth is about the 
person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. That's what the Bible's 
about. He is the focus. He is the sum. He is the substance. He is the 
altogether lovely. So back to the original question 
in Caesarea Philippi, who do men say that I, the Son of Man, 
am? Is he altogether lovely to you? Is he chief among ten thousand 
to you? Can you, by God's grace, confess 
him the way that Peter did? Thou art the Christ, the Son 
of the living God. Anything less than that, anything 
other than that, anything different from that, does not end well. Terms of implications. Jesus 
owns the church, not men. Again, common parlance. We speak 
of my church. I typically don't walk around 
as the, you know, theology police. You said my church and it belongs 
to Jesus. I try not to be that guy. But that guy's out there, 
right? Don't be that guy. You said my 
church and it's not... Sometimes pastors do this. We 
slip up. We might say my church. We don't 
mean I own it and I'm the cult leader and I'm mixing up the 
Kool-Aid as we speak. That's not what it is. It's a 
common parlance. It's a way to refer to my church. 
I call Free Grace Baptist Church my church. I don't call, you 
know, Carmen United my church, you see. But when we come to 
this text, it's Jesus' church. He owns it. You know what else 
is encouraging? It's Jesus churches. He builds 
it. He uses means. He uses earthenware 
vessels. He puts gospel treasure in earthenware 
vessels so that when people actually get saved and converted, the 
power is obviously of God and not man. In other words, it ought 
not to be the case, wow, that preacher, he spoke things in 
such a way. No, that God used that preacher to speak things 
in such a way that I got saved. But he builds it. What's our 
calling? To do what he says. Right? He 
not only is the owner, he's not only the builder, but he's also 
the commander. We don't have a right to do whatever 
we want in Jesus' church. You come to my home with certain 
rules you just have to respect. I'm not gonna let you just run 
around my house and tear things apart. I mean, I probably would, 
because I don't like to engage in anything confrontational and 
let you go and then complain to my wife. I can't believe they 
did that. But I shouldn't. I should say, 
no, no, no, no, you can't do that. This isn't a play place. This isn't McDonald's. These 
aren't little balls that you hide in. This is my house. And yet we come to the church. 
And it's McDonald's Play Place, and we can do whatever we want. 
As long as Jesus hasn't commanded that we can't. No, we need to 
do what Jesus commands that we must. That's where we find ourselves. The church is to be faithful 
with what He has committed to them. Remember in our study in 
1 Timothy 6.20, O Timothy, O Timothy, guard what was committed to your 
trust. Keep safe the deposit that has been made to you. Timothy 
would know that the deposit does not now belong to him. The deposit 
has been committed to his trust and his care. But the deposit 
belongs to God himself. The same with the truth. This 
is what the church is supposed to do. We're to keep that. We're 
to guard that which has been committed to us. We're not to 
be innovative. We're not to be creative. We're 
not to change it. We're not to try to dance it out. We're to 
preach it and teach it and pray and sing and do the things that 
Christ has commanded in the Holy Scripture. A lot of implications 
there. We could probably extend this 
message for a couple of weeks, but I do not want to presume 
upon the kindness of the people in my church. Let's get that, 
my church. He just did it. In conclusion, 
The identity of the Son of Man is the controlling thought in 
13 to 20. Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am? Who do 
you say that I am? You are the Christ, the Son of 
the living God. It's interesting. Jesus as the 
second person of the triune God is or was involved in the creation 
of the world. John 1. Jesus as the second person 
of the blessed Trinity is involved in the providence. Our God, Jesus, 
is in the heavens. He does whatever he pleases. 
Jesus as the second person of the blessed Trinity, as God, 
is the one over the civil government, by me. King's reign, says wisdom 
in Proverbs 8. Paul in Romans 13, let everyone 
be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except 
from God. We've got the family, we've got 
the state, we have these social institutions, but when Jesus 
hears this confession made by Peter, where does he turn his 
attention to? The church. You see why I say, 
if you esteem Christ, you'll esteem His bride. If you speak 
well of Christ, you'll speak well of His bride. If you speak 
confession of faith to Him, you will happily, joyfully embrace 
the people of God. Secondly, this needs to be said 
based on what we've seen in 1618 in terms of the Roman Catholic 
claim. This is probably the place where 
you will be offended if you're sympathetic to Roman Catholicism. 
I'm going to hide behind two men, Timothy George and Martin 
Luther. Timothy George is a man who wrote 
a book called The Theology of the Reformers. As I remember, 
it's a very helpful book. He deals with Zwingli, he deals 
with Calvin, he even has Menno Simons in there, and of course 
he deals with Luther. And on page 88 he's referring 
to Luther, as a man, as a theologian, as he's growing, as he's aging. And he makes this comment concerning 
Martin Luther, and I suppose and suspect that the colorful 
language that is employed is not Timothy George's, it's Martin 
Luther's. As he grew older, this is Timothy 
George, his polemic, that means his arguments against the Church 
of Rome, as he grew older his polemic against Rome became sharper. He referred to Pope Paul III 
as his hellishness. When asked, were not the Pope 
and his associates at least members of the church? Here's Luther's 
response. Yes, as much as spit, snot, pus, 
feces, urine, stench, scab, smallpox, ulcers, and syphilis are members 
of the body. Now I know it's in us to recoil 
and say, we just don't talk that way anymore. Rather, nothing's 
changed in terms of the claims of the Roman papacy. Nothing 
has changed in terms of this idea that he is the supreme ruler 
over all Christians on the earth. We may not adopt that sort of 
colorful language, but as Protestants, as Baptists, as those who affirm 
the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith, we cannot be soft on 
the papacy. We cannot mess up on this area. Perhaps the language of our own 
confession will be even more helpful. The Lord Jesus Christ 
is the head of the church in whom, by the appointment of the 
Father, all power for the calling, institution, order, or government 
of the church is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner. 
Neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, 
but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, 
that exalts him in the church against Christ and all that is 
called God, whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of 
his coming." Again, in our day, you can't say anything that remotely 
sounds any kind of offensive toward any people group whatsoever. 
This is not against persons. This isn't against people, our 
mothers, our sisters, our brothers, our friends, our relatives, our 
whoever that happen to be Roman Catholics. We do not go out and 
shout them down and call them vicious and vile names. The Roman 
Catholic Church, the teaching and the dogma of the Church, 
the claims of the Pope himself, He's the one person certainly 
we can make some things against. He should know better. He should 
understand. When you claim the right to be 
the supreme commander, the supreme leader, the supreme ruler over 
other human beings, that's hugely arrogant. Hugely and offensively 
arrogant. It denigrates ultimately the 
Christ who is at the right hand of God Most High. And then a 
final thought concerning the triumph and suffering of the 
church. So I said verse 18 implies triumph, 
not implies, explicitly records the church, I will build my church 
and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. But implicit 
is that the gates of Hades are going to try and prevail. They're 
going to try and stop. They're going to try and protect 
themselves. Calvin hits the nail right on 
the head. He says all who are united to 
Christ and acknowledge him to be Christ and mediator, will 
remain to the end safe from all danger. For what is said of the 
body of the church belongs to each of its members, since they 
are one in Christ. Yet this passage also instructs 
us that so long as the church shall continue to be a pilgrim 
on the earth, she will be exposed to many attacks. For when it 
is declared that Satan will not conquer, this implies that he 
will be her constant enemy. Never forget this. And never 
forget the triumph. Never forget the promise to Abraham. In you all the families of the 
earth will be blessed. Never forget the Psalter. Ask 
of me, the Father says to the Son, and I will give you the 
nations of the earth for your inheritance, the uttermost parts 
of the earth for your possession. What did we sing at the outset? 
We sang Psalm 110. Jehovah said to my Lord Jesus, 
sit at my right hand till I make all of your enemies your footstool. 
Does the church have a hope-filled future? Absolutely. Psalm 72, 
the same thing, the triumph of Messiah. You go to the prophet 
Isaiah 42.6, 49.6, speaks about the servant of the 
Lord. who will save not only Israel, but he will come and 
be a light unto the Gentiles. Daniel chapter 2, when Daniel 
is interpreting that dream, he sees this small stone, and that 
small stone grows to be this massive mountain that shatters 
all the kingdoms under it. So I thought through this. I 
remembered John Jasper. You say, who's John Jasper? John 
Jasper was a black slave in America. He lived from 1812 to 1901. He was a slave. He was standing 
at a tobacco place. He's ripping up leaves. I think 
he was in Virginia, one of the southern states. He had heard 
the gospel many times. It was at that tobacco stand 
that God saved him. He went and told the Master, 
and the Master said, welcome brother to the family of faith, 
or something like that. And Jasper said, I just have 
a desire to go preach my Savior. That's what it was. He got converted, 
he started preaching to other people in the tobacco place, 
telling them to get converted. And there was a ruckus, so he 
got reported to the Master. That's when he said to the Master, 
I got converted, all I want to do is tell people about Jesus. 
So the Master says, then go out, and all you ever do is tell people 
about Jesus. He went out and preached, and 
he had a long, fruitful ministry. Interesting, his claim to fame 
was as a philosopher, because he preached a famous sermon called, 
The Sun Do Move. He believed in geocentricity. I'm getting way off the path 
here, but he believed the earth was stationary, and that the 
sun moved. His biographer said, I totally disagree with everything 
he said, until I went and heard him preach. He had me convinced. But Hatcher, his biographer, 
gives us a glimpse of his preaching. And when it came to Daniel 2, 
and it's an interesting book, Sprinkle publishes it. If you 
get the book, it's written as a black man would have spoken. So if I read it that way, I'm 
not putting on an affectation. This is the way the book reads. 
With reference to Daniel 2 and probably in the thought of John 
Jasper, Matthew 16, he says, glory to God in the highest. That stone cut out of the mountain 
is a mighty roller. Love that. It's a mighty roller. There's a sense, brethren, where 
we are holy rollers. We affirm the Holy One of Israel 
and His kingdom rolls forth. He says, nothing can stay its 
terrible progress. They that fight against Jehovah 
had better look out. That stone is still rolling and 
the first thing they know it will crush down upon them and 
they will sink to rise no more. Our God is a consuming fire and 
He will overturn and overturn till the foundations of sin is 
broken up. I will build my church, Jesus 
says, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. There is hope in this. There 
is joy in this. There is encouragement in this. 
There is everything for us to press on, to be faithful. to make much of Christ and His 
gospel, to maintain that good confession, and to continue in 
the way that He has commanded us until He comes again in glory 
to judge the living and the dead. We need to stay the course, we 
need to be steadfast, we need to persevere, we need to guard 
that which was committed to our trust. Not tampering with it, 
not messing with it, not seeking to reinvent it or make it better. 
but rather be obedient and faithful to our God most high. And if 
you are not a believer this morning, Jasper is right. This kingdom 
rolls. This kingdom progresses. This 
kingdom is going forth. Christ is at the right hand of 
the Father where he rules and reigns over all things for the 
good of his church and he must reign till all of his enemies 
are made his footstool. If you do not believe, if you 
do not confess, if you do not own Jesus Christ as the Christ, 
the Son of the Living God, you will be smashed underfoot. You 
will be dashed as a potter's vessel. You will be destroyed, 
the scripture says. It is clear, it is crystal clear 
in the teaching of our Savior and in his apostles. It is clear 
in the scriptures as a whole. Whether men deny it, whether 
men don't welcome it, whether men want to reject it or refute 
it or whatever they want to do, you cannot deny the reality that 
this is going to happen. Christ's foot will lower upon 
all of his enemies. Don't be his enemy. confess him, 
believe, turn from your sins and know the joy of being found 
in him. Well let us pray. Father we thank 
you for your word and we thank you for this time that we can 
spend together and I ask God in heaven that you would help 
us to think clearly concerning these issues, help us to see 
the triumph of the church That God keep us from a triumphalism 
that sees no suffering, no persecution, no trial or difficulty. We know 
you've ordained those things for the good of your people and 
the good of your church. We ask as well, Father, that 
you would help us to think clearly on the papacy, help us to think 
clearly on these issues that have divided for so many years. And God, unless there is recantation, 
unless there is radical change, should continue to divide. And 
we ask that you would just help us to be genuinely ecumenical, 
to be genuinely loving of those who name the name of Christ. 
But as well, God, help us to draw the lines in the sand that 
we will not compromise. And to go with us now, we pray 
in Jesus' holy name, amen.