Abuses, the centrality of Christ and Man

[scylla]

It seems that the abuses and the response to them all have a central theme and I wanted to see your responses to this and thoughts…

There are two different understandings of the Christ\Church that seem to be common these days that are in competition with each other and these lead to certain points of view and results…

One it the belief that God had revealed His truth to us in the Church and we submit to it. Since we are human and God is the source of all we die to ourselves and seek to do what God wants us to do as truth doesn’t change and demands submission. Since we are made for His truth our fullfillment is found in this truth.

On the other hand there is God who is found by Man, people find their fullfillment by being happy in God, whom they really wont know until they are united in Him. Since humans happiness is the most important then everything else is related to human happiness. Our happiness is what we submit to and that leads to God as He is found in our happiness.

The first demands conformity, tradition, doctrine and a dying to oneself, this means that it is a bad thing to even deviate from what the liturgy is supposed to be as we do things for God and then we find fullfillment. God is the center so we must conform to Him even if we are not happy as we will be doing right and be fullfilled. God doesn’t change according to style or desire.

The second doesn’t need conformity except to self as happiness is more important as there is where fullfillment is to be found. God wants us to be happy as that is the center deviation doesn’t effect or bother God at all, as our happiness is more important.
We make God to our image as He changes according to style or desire.

Being happy and nice is more important these days so the second view is very inviting and desirable as opposed to changing what God wants which could lead us to some unhappy times and even require us to offend others with the truth.

Your comments would be appreciated…
God Bless
Scylla

 

[Matas]

I followed what you wrote through the “first kind,” but you sort of lost me on “the second kind.” I was pondering what I perceive as competiting doctrines in the Church this morning. The one concept that is often taught to me is: “Jesus Christ exists in all of us.” Christ is in me…Christ is in you…and the way we worship is profoundly affected by this realization.

The “Christ is in you and me” teaching looks like it might fit into your “second kind” of worship. I am having great difficulty with reconciling this idea with my understanding of sin. I believe that sin separates us from God, and being sinners, how can Christ be in you and me without reconciliation?

 

[scylla]

I have heard he same thing, “Christ is in all of us”, this is indeed part of the second type of understanding of God that is taught. The second type of understanding is very common these days and it is the reason why we have so much abuse as it is a misrepresentation of what God is and His relation to us.

This leads eventually to a loss of devotion to the Eucharist and a devotion to self\others. You will see thinking like this…
Don’t be overly pious as it is showing off. If it is right to me then it is all right, who are you to judge me? Everyone is the people of God and the Body of Christ. It all inter-relates as it is a different understanding of God using the same words, as the first understanding of God, but in a different order\meaning.

Now I should explain that the first understanding of God that puts Him first does not exclude, the presence of God in all of us, as God is everywhere. When we do good in Christ’s name that is God working through us. We are made in the image of God, yet the image is always less than the real presence.

Just because my wife’s sister is visiting and I respect her and care for her because of her relation to my wife, she is subordinate to my wife in a real way. She is a kind of image of my wife, yet there is a big difference in how I treat her and my wife. I can see my wife in her and treat her with love, but how I show that love better be different than how I show my love for my wife.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Matas]

I have heard he same thing, “Christ is in all of us”, this is indeed part of the second type of understanding of God that is taught. The second type of understanding is very common these days and it is the reason why we have so much abuse as it is a misrepresentation of what God is and His relation to us.

This leads eventually to a loss of devotion to the Eucharist and a devotion to self\others. You will see thinking like this…
Don’t be overly pious as it is showing off. If it is right to me then it is all right, who are you to judge me? Everyone is the people of God and the Body of Christ. It all inter-relates as it is a different understanding of God using the same words, as the first understanding of God, but in a different order\meaning.

Well…where do you believe did the “Christ is in all of us” devotion come from? Is this a central truth and am I merely poorly catechized? I wonder…and I pray…and I still end up scratching my head over this one. I have not been able to reconcile the “Christ is in all of us” devotion with most of what the Church teaches us.

In my parish, I discerned two broad classes of devotional types. One group takes advantage of Eucharistic Adoration, Divine Mercy novenas, public rosary prayers, confession, and other “old school” Catholic devotions. The other group cruises along with the “Christ is in all of us” dogma, and is never present whenever “old school” devotional practices are available. They have a firm grip on our PSR, RCIA, and bible study groups. I make these observations objectively, and mostly reserved judgement of any kind. I say mostly, because I have encountered blatantly anti-Catholic statements from a few members of this second group, and I find these statements hard to take without some form of rebuke.

 

[scylla]

Well…where do you believe did the “Christ is in all of us” devotion come from? Is this a central truth and am I merely poorly catechized? I wonder…and I pray…and I still end up scratching my head over this one. I have not been able to reconcile the “Christ is in all of us” devotion with most of what the Church teaches us.

That is because that is not what the Church teaches, it is the second meaning, which is a rejection of the Catholic understanding of God and a replacement with a human centered belief. If we see Christ in all of us instead of the image of Christ we elevate man above Christ. This is why you cannot reconcile it with Catholic belief. (it is wrong)

If man is central, then you don’t need Eucharistic devotion,(we already have Christ within us), you don’t need the devotion to holiness (we already have Christ within us, we are all holy), confession is unecessary, (why confess we are already holy) etc…

This is why kneeling is frowned upon as it insults the dignity of man who is now on par with God.

The second meaning ignores the Church as the Kingdom of Christ, with Christ as King. Instead of us as the People of God obeying Christ the King, we are the People of God empowered to promote an inclusion of all laity to our desires.
Instead of a submission to power, it is an assertion of power.

(if I am not expressing this clearly, feel free to help me out, in correction or comments)

God Bless
Scylla

 

[JimR-OCDS]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church;

2781 When we pray to the Father, we are in communion with him and with his Son, Jesus Christ.33 Then we know and recognize him with an ever new sense of wonder. the first phrase of the Our Father is a blessing of adoration before it is a supplication. For it is the glory of God that we should recognize him as “Father,” the true God. We give him thanks for having revealed his name to us, for the gift of believing in it, and for the indwelling of his Presence in us.

and

Jesus answered and said to him, "Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him. John 14:23

Being Christ dwells within us, we must also realise that Christ dwells in everyone who believes.

Hope this helps

Jim

 

[scylla]

I agree that we are the temple of God, Christ does make a dwelling place within us.
It makes more sense in context
Catechism 2781

This is profoundly different than the second scenario in which some people misrepresent this to mean that we become Christ to others. We are the dwelling place of Christ and the image of Christ to others, this is perfectly in accord with the Catholic understanding of God.
This is described in the Catechism.
here

The other understanding takes this further to mean that we become Christ, in a distorted way that elevates us to the level of God, as part of Him not merely a subject to Him, but on the level of Him.

We must remember His kingship in relation to us as well as our inheritance into His Body. Not just our incorporation into His Body, without the proper place of man below God.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Matas]

Hope this helps

Jim

Thanks for your reply, Jim. I gave it some thought and discernment, and to be blunt, it doesn’t help.

Take the scripture quote that you provided:

Jesus answered and said to him, "Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him. John 14:23

and you added:

Being Christ dwells within us, we must also realise that Christ dwells in everyone who believes.

There is a big difference between “…make our dwelling with…” and “…dwells within…” It’s a subtle shift in meaning when one word is replaced by another. If one believes that Christ “dwells in” everyone, rather that “dwells with,” it could lead to the type of error that was referred to in previous posts as “the second meaning” or the “other understanding.” And I am beginning to understand, even believe, that this “Christ in all of us” devotion is disordered. As far as I beleive, there is only the Trinity. If we start revering each other as little Christs, basically, bad things happen.

 

[japhy]

One is the belief that God had revealed His truth to us in the Church and we submit to it. Since we are human and God is the source of all we die to ourselves and seek to do what God wants us to do as truth doesn’t change and demands submission. Since we are made for His truth our fullfillment is found in this truth.

On the other hand there is God who is found by Man, people find their fullfillment by being happy in God, whom they really wont know until they are united in Him. Since humans happiness is the most important then everything else is related to human happiness. Our happiness is what we submit to and that leads to God as He is found in our happiness.

Therein lies the problem. “God who is found by Man”. Abraham did not find God, God sought out Abraham in the midst of his idols and false gods:
And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Your fathers lived of old beyond the Euphrates, Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from beyond the River and led him through all the land of Canaan, and made his offspring many. I gave him Isaac…’” (Joshua 24:2-3)

God always makes the first move: “God takes the initiative. He alone can arouse man to start out towards love. … The initiative of God has a name: Jesus Christ, the God Who Himself became man and gives Himself to us.” (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Theology of the Liturgy)

It is not “happiness” that God desires for us. At least, not happiness as man understands it. It is holiness, it is love: that is heavenly happiness, which comes often at the price of renouncing earthly happiness.

 

[feargalmac]

I think you hit the nail on the head here.

The first understanding is rooted in humility and awe, that childlike faith we are called to. Our church is built on the Rock that is Peter and his successors. Two thousand years of prayer and teaching.

The second is rooted in the self, built on the “spirit of Vatican II”. Those that subscribe to this view will skip those parts of the readings or Gospels that don’t suit. Last Sunday our priest practically ignored the feast and just said it marked the end of the Church year. Yes he’s one of those who consistently tells us that God (Father, Mother, whatever) just wants us to do our best and be happy, because no matter what we do He loves us so much he’ll welcome us into heaven.

I subscribe to the first understanding, not very well at times. But hey, I do my best.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Matas

Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 1 Corinthians 3:16.

If God did not dwell in each and everyone of us, we would cease to exist.

Jim

 

[japhy]

If God did not dwell in each and everyone of us, we would cease to exist.

What do you mean by “we would cease to exist”?

I ask, because I’m curious if God dwells in the souls in Hell. If so, I don’t see how Hell can be absolute separation from God; if not, does that mean souls in Hell don’t even exist?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I ask, because I’m curious if God dwells in the souls in Hell. If so, I don’t see how Hell can be absolute separation from God; if not, does that mean souls in Hell don’t even exist?

I guess its one of those mysteries that we won’t know until we’re with God in heaven.

Jim

 

[Matas]

Matas

If God did not dwell in each and everyone of us, we would cease to exist.

So when we separate ourselves from God by sinning, do we cease to exist?

 

[TMC]

So when we separate ourselves from God by sinning, do we cease to exist?

We separate ourselves from God, He does not separate Himself from us. He does not abandon us, but when we turn away we can no longer feel His presence. He is not gone, we are.

 

[Matas]

We separate ourselves from God, He does not separate Himself from us. He does not abandon us, but when we turn away we can no longer feel His presence. He is not gone, we are.

This is getting off the subject. Of course He doesn’t abandon us like He did with Adam and Eve when He banished them from the Garden. He banished them, but did not abandon them. He was still with them. Christ is with us, and has remained with us since His resurrection and assumption - just as He promised. That is not the same as Christ being within us. We are not gods. About the closest we get to having Christ Jesus within us is right after Communion, and that is temporary.

With…

Within…

Big difference. One concept is supported in Scripture, and the other is not.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

So when we separate ourselves from God by sinning, do we cease to exist?

He does not separate himself from us, but yes, the consequences of rejecting God is death.

In the final judgment, will that mean the soul too will cease to exist? I’m not sure, but the consequences warned about it are such, that I would rather not try for it.

Jim

 

[scylla]

This is getting off the subject. Of course He doesn’t abandon us like He did with Adam and Eve when He banished them from the Garden. He banished them, but did not abandon them. He was still with them. Christ is with us, and has remained with us since His resurrection and assumption - just as He promised. That is not the same as Christ being within us. We are not gods. About the closest we get to having Christ Jesus within us is right after Communion, and that is temporary.

With…

Within…

Big difference. One concept is supported in Scripture, and the other is not.

This really explains it well and helps since this a point of confusion for many, as the importance of man and the temple of God is misrepresented and abused.

God Bless and thanks
Scylla