P
pocohombre
Guest
But when you are reborn do you not have the life of God in you ? See a lot of scriptural admonitons to be filled and refilled with the Spirit and walking in the Spirit, and most are non-sacramental.
- Status
P
PRmerger
Guest
Sure, we have the life of God in us through being re-born in baptism.
But we leak, poco. :sad_yes:
P
pocohombre
Guest
It all depends if the council got it right. Is there a time when you part ways in anathema ? Probably. Is there a time when you part ways, but still as brothers in Christ ? Hopefully more often than the former.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Broken cisterns, I know. Hence as we both suggest though by different methods, daily renewal, cleansing, refilling - Halleluia.
G
guanophore
Guest
Poco, you are referring to post numbers, not “threads”. There is one thread, and all these posts are members of it.
PR has some very wise, pointed, and effective methods of pointing out discrepancies and bringing out the truth. She was bringing to the fore the point that Trent dogmatized the concept of the Real Presence because it was being disputed.
In fact, it has been disputed since the Church was founded by Christ in 33 AD. Those that disputed it were called heretics, and were not admitted to the Sacrament because they did not have Holy and Catholic faith.
).
G
guanophore
Guest
Yes, and the Apostles taught their successors how to identify those holders also. They belong to the Apostolic Succession. These (bishops) are entrusted with the sacred deposit of faith.
1 Tim 6:20 “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you.”
“Through countryside and city [the apostles] preached, and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the Spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers. Nor was this a novelty, for bishops and deacons had been written about a long time earlier… Our Apostles knew through Our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they **appointed **those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added further provision that, if they should die, other **approved **men should succeed to their ministry.” (Pope St. Clement of Rome, Epistle to the Corinthians, 42:4-5, 44:1-3 [80 A.D.])
“Be subject to the bishop and to one another, as Jesus Christ was subject to the Father, and the Apostles were subject to Christ and to the Father; so that there may be unity in both body and spirit” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, A.D.110, [13,1])
“Take care to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishops presiding in the place of God and with the presbyters in the place of the council of the Apostles.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians, A.D. 110, [6,1])
**“Those, indeed, who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic; he will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians, A.D. 110, [3,2]) **
“You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the Apostles. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, A.D. 110, [8,1])
“Indeed, when you submit to the bishop as you would to Jesus Christ, it is clear to me that you are living in the manner not in the manner of men but as Jesus Christ, who died for us, that through faith in His death you might escape dying. It is necessary, therefore, - and such is your practice, that you do nothing without the bishop, and that you be subject also to the presbytery, as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Traillians, A.D. 110, [2,1])
P
pocohombre
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
Trent was addressing those who denied the RP in the Eucharist.
Indeed it is. And by what standard do we determine what is “right”?
Our own perceptions of what the Scripture means?
I think we can clearly in Ignatius and the other early fathers what our conduct is to be with regard to heterodoxy.
There is One Faith. We are not at liberty to tear out the threads of the seamless garment. We cannot pick and choose which parts of the Deposit of Faith we want to accept, and which we don’t.
Yes, and all useful. But the best ones are those instituted by Christ sacramentally.
John 6:53-58
53 So Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.”
P
pocohombre
Guest
Lord willing sometime this week I’ll have more time to view.
P
pablope
Guest
P
pablope
Guest
Well…let us assume the council got it right…so what would your reply be:
Originally Posted by pablope
So Poco…when a doctrine is dogmatized and clarified…what should those who disputed the teaching do after the Church clarified the teaching?
Should they continue disputing it or stop disputing it?
And if they continued to dispute it…what should happen to those who continue to dispute it?
P
PRmerger
Guest
G
guanophore
Guest
No problem. I knew what you didn’t say!
You might also want to consider removing the name references you don’t wish to include in your replies. It seems that my post reference consistently shows up unattached to anything, not sure why. I always have to delete my username from my replies to you.
There is an extra bracket in the “quote” word here, which is why it does not post correctly.
You are right, there were many things disputed, including the nature of Christ. These disputes were resolved using the Sacred Tradition, along with the Scriptures. Those ideas that were not consistent with what the Apostles believed and taught were rejected. It has been this way from the beginning.
2 Tim 1:13-14
“Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; 14 guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.”
Sacred Tradition is a pattern of sound words that comes to us from the Apostles.
1 Cor 11:2
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you.
The Apostolic faith is to be maintained, not altered.
2 Thess 2:15
15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.
Sacred Tradition is expressed in the Holy Scriptures and the teaching of the Apostles preserved infallibly in the Church by the Holy Spirit.
G
guanophore
Guest
I would like to hear more about how Augustine is disputing the RP.
Augustine
“Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands” (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).
“I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ” (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).
…
“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction” (ibid., 272).
Yes, there were. However, the Truth is not a matter of majority opinion. If it were, we would all be Arian, as 80% of Christendom fell into the Arian heresy before Athanasisu was able to drag them back from the brink. Jesus promised His Spirit to lead the Church into all Truth. The Church is organized around the Bishops,a nd the bishops in council determine how best to respond to heresies.
There is One Faith.
Eph 4:4-6
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.
It is valid for all. If one does not embrace the doctrines of the One Faith, then one is not in communion.
I am sure that, if you ask the Lord to lead you, He will answer this question for you.
P
pocohombre
Guest
CANON lI.-If any one saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood-the species Only of the bread and wine remaining-which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation; let him be anathema.
CANON VIII.-lf any one saith, that Christ, given in the Eucharist, is eaten spiritually only, and not also sacramentally and really; let him be anathema.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Yes, if you are a Catholic and you deny the RP of Christ in the Eucharist, you are anathema.
Remember, during the Council of Trent there were only Catholics, pagans and Jews.
The tens of thousands of Christian denominations that were the fruit of the rejection of the authority of the CC were not yet in existence.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Incidentally, poco: Are you saying that there were those from the earliest days of Christianity who held the position that the bread and wine were the Body and Blood of Christ?
It would appear to be “yes”, as you profess that the Council of Trent was needed because the teaching on the RP was being disputed.
It would appear to be “yes”, as you profess that the Council of Trent was needed because the teaching on the RP was being disputed.
B
brb3
Guest
Yes !! Trent minced no words on this reality ! Basically telling Catholics, who were tempted by Luther & Lutheran teaching – that he and they were/would be cutting themselves off from the Apostolic teachings …which the Catholic Church would always defend and preserve, Sacramentally.
Luckily, some Lutherans today …have reformed their understandings, and now accept the reality of Transmutation/Transubstantiation.
P
pocohombre
Guest
P
PRmerger
Guest
- Status