“The faithful ministers of Christ ought to be very cautious and tender in giving their advice, or laying down rules about the ordering of the circumstances of family worship, and conform themselves to that excellent pattern which the apostle has laid before them in 1 Corinthians 7:35: “This I speak for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but that which is comely, that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction”(George Hamond, The Case for Family Worship, 16-17).”

“Discipline without direction is drudgery” (Donald Whitney, Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life, 15).

“A holy violence, a conflict, a warfare, a fight, a soldier’s life, a wrestling, are spoken of as characteristics of the true Christian” (J. C. Ryle, Holiness, xvi).
…
“[T]he plain truth is, that men will persist in confounding two things that differ — that is, justification and sanctification. In justification the word to be addressed to man is believe — only believe; in sanctification the word must be “watch, pray, and fight.” What God has divided let us not mingle and confuse” (xvii).

I am reading through Gerald O’Collins and Edward G. Farrugia’s original edition (1991) of A Concise Dictionary of Theology, so this post will be a work in progress–as I encounter theological words, central meanings, etc., that are of interest to me, I will append to this post.

Anakephalaiosis (Gr. [Greek] “recapitulation” or “summing up”). A term which in its verbal form refers to Christ bringing into unity everything in the universe (Eph. 1:10). Along these lines, such church fathers as St. Irenaeus (ca. 130-ca. 200) presented Christ as the head of the Church who fulfills God’s design in creation and redemptive history (CDT, 9).

Ars Moriendi (Lat. “art of dying”). Late medieval teaching on the way Christians ought to face death. Books on this topic, e.g., the work of Jean Gerson (1363-1429), enjoyed great popularity and influenced the portrayal of death in art (CDT, 19). 

This dictionary was designed particularly for Roman Catholics. I knew that when I began reading it.

Reading a Romish theological dictionary, however, has been illuminating. For one thing, it has further solidified my conviction that Roman Catholicism has institutionalized the theological inventions of man, that is, they have theologized at points a worldly and secular spirit. All one needs to do, in order to be convinced of the legalistic and ecclesiastical-fanaticism of Roman Catholicism, is read a few pages from a Romish dictionary. The best critiques of these inventions, that I have read, are John Calvin’s The Necessity of Reforming the Church (A.D. 1544), John Knox’s A Vindication of the Doctrine that the Sacrifice of the Mass is Idolatry (A.D. 1550), and William Cunningham’s Historical Theology (A.D. 1862).

The great distinguishing fact of the Reformation was the revival and restoration of sound doctrine, of true principles taught in the sacred Scriptures in regard to the worship of God and the way of a sinner’s salvation…. 

Protestants have usually received, as scriptural and orthodox the doctrinal decisions of the first four general councils, and even of the fifth and sixth; though in all of them increasingly, — and especially in the last two, — many deviations from scriptural primitive practice with respect to the government and worship of the church were countenanced, and too much evidence was given of the growing influence of a worldly and secular spirit in the administration of ecclesiastical affairs (Historical Theology, pp. 461, 465). 

 All of that having been said, personally I am very optimistic about the Roman Catholic Church. Why? Because Jesus is Lord and Scripture is true. Peter J. Leithart wrote an article a number of years ago titled “Why Protestants Still Protest,” and his concluding words have provided great comfort (and optimistic anticipation). He said,

If the Reformers were wrong about sola Scriptura, they were wrong too about the source of errors in the Catholic Church. For myself, I stand with Calvin, who, I am certain, would be as heartened as I to hear the recent calls from Roman Catholic leaders to reaffirm the centrality of the gospel, Jesus Christ, and Scripture. Given even a modest open door, the Word of God can take care of itself; it never, Scripture says, returns void. Though Protestants believe that Roman Catholic teaching continues to veil the Christ of the gospel, we know that God has a habit of rending veils.

“The Word of God always speaks of two great divisions of mankind, and two only. It speaks of the living and the dead in sin — the believer and the unbeliever — the converted and the unconverted — the travelers in the narrow way and the travelers in the broad — the wise and the foolish — the children of God and the children of the devil” (J. C. Ryle, Holiness, xv).

That “Christ dwells in our hearts by faith,” and carries on His inward work by His Spirit, is clear and plain. But if we mean to say that beside, and over, and above this there is some mysterious indwelling of Christ in a believer, we must be careful what we are about. Unless we take care, we shall find ourselves ignoring the work of the Holy Ghost. We shall be forgetting that in the Divine economy of man’s salvation election is the special work of God the Father–atonement, mediation, and intercession, the special work of God the Son–and sanctification, the special work of God the Holy Ghost. We shall be forgetting that our Lord said, when He went away, that He would send us another Comforter, who should “abide with us” for ever, and, as it were, take His place. (John xiv. 16.) In short, under the idea that we are honouring [sic] Christ, we shall find that we are dishonouring [sic] His special and peculiar gift–the Holy Ghost (J. C. Ryle, Holiness, xiii).