Calvin or Luther or someone else?

[grandfather]

I’m assuming that what you mean by ‘visible church’ above is the Catholic Church. If this is what you are referring to, then I disagree that the Church went into error. There was a misuse of indulgences by some at that time, which was later corrected (clarified) at the council (Trent, I believe).

I believe it was Calvin who said, was the first to come up with the idea, that the Church is invisible. It is made up of the saved known only to God. The Catholic position is that the Church is made up of all the baptized.

Jesus said of His Church that we are a beacon set up on a hill. That is hardly a visage of something invisible. If the Church is invisible the Church can not be found. A beacon is a light source that allows you to see in the dark and find your way.

If one believes the Church is invisible known only to God as Calvin proposed, then there is no visible Church that can be known by us. There can only be some people who claim to be of the Church, be they Catholic or Reformed .

 

[Denise1957]

I believe it was Calvin who said, was the first to come up with the idea, that the Church is invisible. It is made up of the saved known only to God. The Catholic position is that the Church is made up of all the baptized.

Jesus said of His Church that we are a beacon set up on a hill. That is hardly a visage of something invisible. If the Church is invisible the Church can not be found. A beacon is a light source that allows you to see in the dark and find your way.

If one believes the Church is invisible known only to God as Calvin proposed, then there is no visible Church that can be known by us. There can only be some people who claim to be of the Church, be they Catholic or Reformed .

I was focusing more on the idea that the visible Church can go into error, but you raise good points here. I didn’t know that it was Calvin who originally came up with the idea of an invisible church. And yes, there have even been Catholics (certain traditional Catholics, especially) who fall into the error of believing that there is an invisible church to which one can adhere, or rather the idea of an ‘Eternal Rome.’

 

[JRKH]

The problem with the whole “invisible”/“visible” church argument is that it runs afoul of Mt 18:15-18 where we are clearly told to “Tell it to the Church” and that the Church (ekklesia) have the authority to “Bind and loose”…“whatever”.

First, one cannot “tell it to” something that is “invisible” and “known only to God”.
Second an “invisible church” cannot effectively “Bind and Loose”.

The term “Church” (Ekklesia) is used only twice in the Gospels. Both times by Jesus himself and both times associated with the authority to bind and loose whatever.

The Holy Spirit, through Paul uses the term to declare what is the “…Pillar and bulwark” of Truth" (1 Tim 3:15) and also to declare, “that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.” (Eph 3:10)

Then of course we have the wonderful example of the Church coming together in council at Jerusalem to settle the matter of Judaic law requirements.
The protestant solution would have simply been to set up two churches in Antioch…
One requiring adherence to Jewish Law and the other not requiring it.

Peace
James

 

[qui_est_ce]

Well I did it, Just got home from Mass and wow I loved it. The unity and flow just seemed so in one accordance. When I walked into the Church there is a Huge Jesus on the Cross and I couldn’t help but feel a reverence to him in that moment when I looked upon him. Then as I took in the whole experience from the readings to prayer intentions to the homily which was very interesting and I felt that the reading from Matthew 25 today about the 10 maidens really struck me and made me feel that I was in the right place. I want to be one of the Wise Maidens trust me. Plus on another note when they were petitioning for the prayer intentions of the dead and sick and our military and leaders, The Priest who was a guest priest this week which was kinda cool, jumped in and asked for a special Intention for those who struggle with Alcoholism, you see my walk with the Lord began when I had enough of my struggle with the addiction. I still struggle and fall back occasionally but with the lord at my side It is getting better. So i really felt like God had lined this day and moment up for me and I was at the right place at the right time. Anyways keep the comments coming. I am really enjoying this helpful and though provoking discussions. Stay bless oh and Go Buccaneers beat the Saints…ouch that really doesn’t seem like it fits after I did just go to a Catholic church and even prayed to St. Jude after wards…Be blessed and have a great day my friends.

 

[Mighty_Pawn]

Hey, Jmoney!

When I boil it down, the fundamental differences between Roman Catholics and orthodox Protestants are their views of scripture and the institution of the church. Both groups consider the scriptures to be the infallible revelation of God to man. The rub comes when we examine their views on the role of the church. Roman Catholics would say that the history and traditions of the church are also part of God’s infallible revelation and that the church is in a position of authority over scripture, faith and practice. If the church says marriage is a sacrament, even though it is not described as such in the Bible, it is a sacrament. Orthodox Protestants, on the other hand, recognize the importance of the history and traditions of the church and does not reject them, but it would teach that the Bible is the authority in matters of faith and practice. For them, the Bible holds authority over history and tradition. Therefore, much of the schism between the two groups is borne of their different views on the authority of the church.

This is the point at which you need to decide which best aligns with Jesus and history. Basing a decision on a man standing in a pulpit is shaky at best.

I love how you put this!

As a life long protestant it is very hard to accept that any institution could have authority over the Bible. Even the thought sparks something in me that wants to defend the sole authority of the Bible.

However, if the Bible could interperate itself, than why all thes denominations? Is the Holy Spirit speaking different parts of the same truth to different people or are we just believing what feels most comfortable to us?

This statement you made struck a chord with me because it’s exactly what I’m going through now. It could be I’ve always had problems with authority but having someone say (especially when it comes to religion) that this is infallibly correct, makes my blood boil.

But then who am I to say what’s correct? Do I just pick and choose what I like in all denominations and choose to believe that, or do I look to an institution that’s been interpreting the Bible for over 2000 years?

What you posted above simplifies all I’ve been racking my brain about into a simple question. Do I interperate, belivieving that the Holy Spirit will guide me, or do I look at the tons of different denominations and take that as evidence the there need to be an authority that interprets? A VERY difficult issue a searching Protestant has to deal with.

 

[jwright82]

I agree with this.

I even agree that (at least) much of what Calvin and others were saying was Scriptural.

However the thing that has always troubled me about the reformation is how adversarial it was even with itself…
Our best Bible evidence shows that when something really disturbing came up the early church met in council to resolve the matter. This of course did not preclude disagreements among personalities, but doctrinally the Church sought to speak with one voice.
This did not seem to be the case with Luther, Calvin, Zwingli et-al.
Each seemed to go their own way.

Now I will ready admit that my knowledge on this is very limited. I understand that Luther and Zwingli communicated but wound up separating over theological matters. I do not know of other issues, but I do know that there was never any early council(s) to hammer out the doctrinal differences so as to present a true and unified vision of what the “Reformed” Church should look like…

As I said, this is one of the factors that has always troubled me about the protestant reformation.

Peace
James

You raise a good point. It can be the case that we divide over trivial matters but sometimes we rightly divide over doctrine. That is the problem we must face up to is when to disagree and when to agree to disagree.

 

[jwright82]

I’m assuming that what you mean by ‘visible church’ above is the Catholic Church. If this is what you are referring to, then I disagree that the Church went into error. There was a misuse of indulgences by some at that time, which was later corrected (clarified) at the council (Trent, I believe).

No just as in the old testament there was a visible aspect to the people of God and an invisible aspect to the people of God.

 

[Denise1957]

No just as in the old testament there was a visible aspect to the people of God and an invisible aspect to the people of God.

Then you don’t make a distinction between the Church and individuals?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I love how you put this!

As a life long protestant it is very hard to accept that any institution could have authority over the Bible. Even the thought sparks something in me that wants to defend the sole authority of the Bible.

However, if the Bible could interperate itself, than why all thes denominations? Is the Holy Spirit speaking different parts of the same truth to different people or are we just believing what feels most comfortable to us?

This statement you made struck a chord with me because it’s exactly what I’m going through now. It could be I’ve always had problems with authority but having someone say (especially when it comes to religion) that this is infallibly correct, makes my blood boil.

But then who am I to say what’s correct? Do I just pick and choose what I like in all denominations and choose to believe that, or do I look to an institution that’s been interpreting the Bible for over 2000 years?

What you posted above simplifies all I’ve been racking my brain about into a simple question. Do I interperate, belivieving that the Holy Spirit will guide me, or do I look at the tons of different denominations and take that as evidence the there need to be an authority that interprets? A VERY difficult issue a searching Protestant has to deal with.

Thank you for sharing your reflections. I think authority is difficult for many Catholics as well.

The problem “Bible believing” Christians need to address is how we got the Bible in the first place. Who compiled it? There were many writings in the Early Church. Who decided which were inspired? It was the Holy Spirit working through his Church!

Then along came Martin Luther who took authority upon himself and change the wording in Romans to “faith alone” and threw out several OT books. He wanted to throw out James and Revelations too, because he decided they didn’t fit his new religion of Sola Fides and Sola Scriptura.

 

[JRKH]

I love how you put this!

As a life long protestant it is very hard to accept that any institution could have authority over the Bible. Even the thought sparks something in me that wants to defend the sole authority of the Bible.

I think that this is one of the problems in understanding. The Church does not exercise authority over the Bible. Rather the authority stands along side the Bible, which is part of the deposit of Faith.
The Catechism states:
86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”

However, if the Bible could interperate itself, than why all thes denominations? Is the Holy Spirit speaking different parts of the same truth to different people or are we just believing what feels most comfortable to us?

To, this is the fundamental issue. I can applaud the Reformers for the theory and experiment that they put forth - That any Spirit guided person can understand Scripture. But after 500 years it seems that the idea has bee proven to be false and unworkable.

This statement you made struck a chord with me because it’s exactly what I’m going through now. It could be I’ve always had problems with authority but having someone say (especially when it comes to religion) that this is infallibly correct, makes my blood boil.

But then who am I to say what’s correct? Do I just pick and choose what I like in all denominations and choose to believe that, or do I look to an institution that’s been interpreting the Bible for over 2000 years?

What you posted above simplifies all I’ve been racking my brain about into a simple question. Do I interperate, belivieving that the Holy Spirit will guide me, or do I look at the tons of different denominations and take that as evidence the there need to be an authority that interprets? A VERY difficult issue a searching Protestant has to deal with.

Indeed these things can be difficult to overcome. I went through something similar but in reverse…I had to let go of the idea that the Catholic Church WAS infallible, so that I could examine things. But I have to say that, from the time I found out that the Protestant bible had been changed (and by those professing Sola Scriptura) from the one used for a thousand years, Protestantism had a strike against it…
Eventually the contradictions led me back home to the Catholic Church…

Peace
James

 

[Denise1957]

Another thing to consider is that Our Lord did not write anything down, nor did he instruct His Apostles to commend anything to writing. The first generations of Christians were taught by the verbal transmission. This is part of what is meant by tradition - the verbal handing down of truths. The bible also says (I’ve forgetten where, exactly) that truth is not to found only in the written word, but also in tradition. The idea of sola scriptura was a foreign concept that the Apostles would not have recognised. And Our Lord never said anthing about only depending only on the written word of revealed truth.

 

[JRKH]

You raise a good point. It can be the case that we divide over trivial matters but sometimes we rightly divide over doctrine. That is the problem we must face up to is when to disagree and when to agree to disagree.

But the problem with this is that there is an underlying principle in Protestantism the rejection of a visible, authoritative Church. Without this Protestants cannot effectively enforce the command in Mt 18 to treat those who refuse to listen to the Church as heathens and tax collectors. Instead those who split off just form new “bible believing” “bible based” communities branching from that same protestant stem.

Peace
James

 

[grandfather]

Dear Mighty,

]I love how you put this!

As a life long protestant it is very hard to accept that any institution could have authority over the Bible. Even the thought sparks something in me that wants to defend the sole authority of the Bible.

Please consider what the Bible says about the Church, the authority Jeswus gives to His apostles to teach the nations. The Bible, scripture, does not claim itself as the sole supreme authority in matters of truth. It says Jesus gives this authority to men.

However, if the Bible could interperate itself, than why all thes denominations?

The reason for all the denominations is Luther’s doctrine that claims the Bible is the sole authority in matters of faith.

Is the Holy Spirit speaking different parts of the same truth to different people or are we just believing what feels most comfortable to us?

It is impossible that God would lead people to confusion and disunity. It is possible that some people believe what is convenient or expedient, but also possible they can be sincere and under the power of their own intellects come to the wrong conclusions, or be misled.

This statement you made struck a chord with me because it’s exactly what I’m going through now. It could be I’ve always had problems with authority but having someone say (especially when it comes to religion) that this is infallibly correct, makes my blood boil.

What if the person who said this was Jesus? What would you have done if you lived in the year 50 and met the Apostle Paul, or Peter, or John? Would you ask them to prove to you in the New Testament that would not be canonized for four centuries, that their teaching was of God?

But then who am I to say what’s correct? Do I just pick and choose what I like in all denominations and choose to believe that, or do I look to an institution that’s been interpreting the Bible for over 2000 years?

That is really up to you. As a side note, the word heretic comes from the Greek root heren, a word that means pick and choose.

What you posted above simplifies all I’ve been racking my brain about into a simple question. Do I interperate, belivieving that the Holy Spirit will guide me, or do I look at the tons of different denominations and take that as evidence the there need to be an authority that interprets? A VERY difficult issue a searching Protestant has to deal with.

You are being intellectually honest with yourself. If the Holy Spirit guided or led individuals into truth we would not have any denominations. The Bible says Jesus promised to lead His Church He founded the apostles He ordained to go to all nations.

Ultimately the question for every Protestant comes down to authority. Am I the authority, me and my Bible? Am I alone with my Bible to fend for myself? Does the Bible authorize me, or Luther to teach what is contrary to what the Church of all ages believed?

Is truth revealed to us individually or through public revelation to all? Am I responsible to determine the truth of every doctrine by the power of my intellect with help from scripture? Am I supposed to follow any religious leader, preacher who has set himself up as an authority?

If the Bible says God placed people in authority over His Church and you reject them what does the Bible say will happen?

There is one other irony in this discussion about the Bible being the sole authority and the notion that the Holy Spirit leads individuals. If the Holy Spirit leads individuals in a private revelation then the Holy Spirit is the authority, not the Bible. If the Bible is the sole source we go to in matters of faith, then we can not go to God. This is nonsense of course. We seek God both within our own souls privately and also collectively as God’s people.

 

[grandfather]

You raise a good point. It can be the case that we divide over trivial matters but sometimes we rightly divide over doctrine. That is the problem we must face up to is when to disagree and when to agree to disagree.

Think about both of your claims. In the former Protestant Christians can say they agree on all the improtant stuff, they have unity on all the essentials. In that case they created division over trivial things.

In the latter case you say there are times when causing division is the right thing to do. But Jesus COMMANDS unity of His followers. There is no case in scripture where He instructs His followers when to “rightly divide” themselves, His Church. He does not give instructions on how to divide the right way or wrong way. There is nothing of the sort in the Bible. You made it up. But the Bible does tell us how to handle disputes and the Church has been doing that from the beginning. Division is not given as an option. Anyone who divides the Church and claims the Bible as His teacher is mistaken.

 

[AmateurPianist]

Why not? Do you think Jesus started a church, promised the gates of hell would not prevail against it, promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth, and then let it slip away? If you are merely meaning that all denominations do have some truth in them, then we Catholics agree with you.

False choice. Believing that the church of Jesus Christ can exist in multiple organization does not equal belief that it “slipped away”.

But I’ve been around once already on this and lack desire to go around again.

 

[PJM]

=AmateurPianist;8542908]Hi:
Congratulations on the start of your journey with Jesus Christ. Some random comments,

• God will guide you to where he would have you. I have no interest either way. He could lead you back to Catholicism maybe onle because that was how you were raised. But then again maybe not.
• There are Pentecostal churches/groups that are not antiCatholic. I attend one of them
• The study of history is subjective and open to interpretation. Just as much if not more so than the study of the Bible. People more smart and educated than either you or I disagree on church history and its interpretation.
• Can’t answer about the reformers. More of a John Wesley man myself.
• The big issue with Catholicism you have to answer (IMHO) is whether God today sees His church existing in one organization or whether God today sees His church in multiple organizations. This is a separate issue than whether the church existing in multiple organizations is a part of God’s design. I suggest praying over this one question.

Hi,

***I must admit to never thinking of “history as being subjective?” Either it did or it did not happen. That seems “Objective to me.”

NOT one place in the entire Bible:* first to last word can you, or anyone point to where God: either Yahweh or Christ even onetime permiited belief in more than ONLY One God [Triune] or ONLY one set of faith beliefs GREATLY distoted by Wesley, Luther, Calvin, Smith and others [all by the way mortla men; tampering with God’s OWN Words and teachings], those that God proclaims as HIS TRUTH. And never once more than One single faith-body: “Church.” Which is why the CC dates back directly to the Apostles, and Jesus Himself; our founder.

Jesus permits the follies and errors of humanity because each of us is OFFERED the grace to discover the [singular] truth. We then decide to accept it ir deny it; and there by decide for ourselves where we will spend eternity. God ONLY affirms the choices we have made.:**thumbsup:

God Bless,
Pat

 

[PJM]

=qui est ce;8546938]Thank you for sharing your reflections. I think authority is difficult for many Catholics as well.

The problem “Bible believing” Christians need to address is how we got the Bible in the first place. Who compiled it? There were many writings in the Early Church. Who decided which were inspired? It was the Holy Spirit working through his Church!

Then along came Martin Luther who took authority upon himself and change the wording in Romans to “faith alone” and threw out several OT books. He wanted to throw out James and Revelations too, because he decided they didn’t fit his new religion of Sola Fides and Sola Scriptura.

***Anyone with just a bit of Church history [Before 1.000 A.D.] knows that nothing happens without debate and discussion on all important issues within the Magesterium of the RCC. What is in the Bible would naturally have been MUCH debated before inclusion was approved.

Either God is real and God is Present or he is not. We affirm in our CREED: “I beleive in God.” So if you hold to this truth; then one MUST also understand and accept that God does not leave us without access to the singular truths of Faith absolutely necessary for our POSSIBLE salvation. Thus Jesus appointment of Peter to head the ONLY Faith and ONLY Church ever founded by God Himself.***

And as 2nd. Tim. 3:16-17 TEACH: " All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

***EITHER THIS IS ENTIRELY TRUE AND FURTHER EVIDENCE OF HOW MUCH WE ARE LOVED BY GOD; OR GOD IN NOT REAL, IS NOT GOOD AND DOES NOT LOVE US AT ALL. we can’t have it both ways.

The Bible is a literal sense says exactly what God wants and desires us to know; without having dictated it or personally writting it. God does this both because; God is love and DOES love us AND because God can. The Bible does not necessarly use the verbage of God; but it doesl must be what God himself desires for us to know, practice and live. Other wise the bible would have ZERO merit and even less worth for learing how and what we must do to attain Eternal life with Him. Amen!***

Faith in GREAT part is based on not only God’s evident love; but also His concealed Love, God can no more abandon us, than we can [should] Him. It is what God does through the Bible and those He chooses [not those who usurp the rights unto themselves] and that we are largely unaware of that leads us to salvation.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Telestia]

Neither Calvin, nor Luther, nor Augustine or the Borja Popes are authorities in my Christianity. The authority I yield to is the indwelling Holy Spirit and the Bible.

I am in a relationship with God, and I believe God. God is the ultimate authority in my life.

 

[PJM]

=Telestia;8548125]Neither Calvin, nor Luther, nor Augustine or the Borja Popes are authorities in my Christianity. The authority I yield to is the indwelling Holy Spirit and the Bible.

I am in a relationship with God, and I believe God. God is the ultimate authority in my life.

Good for you:thumbsup:
So you can explain then [with the help of the Holy Spirit] why God never once permitted more than one set of faith believes and always just one Church organization?

**Rom.10: 17 **“So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ”

**Eph.3: 9 to 12 ** “And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church ][SINGULAR: meaning THE CATHOLIC Church] the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and confidence of access through our faith in him

And of course you know that when these words were spoke and written the ONLY church in existence was todays Catholic Church:shrug:

2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 ** “we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word made more sure*. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. ***First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

**Matt.13:9-12 **“He who has ears, let him hear." Then the disciples came and said to him, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” And he [JESUS] answered them, "**To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” ** For to him who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. “

If you check you’ll see Jesus was speaking here to Peter and the Apostles

** 2nd. Tim. 3:16** All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work"

***So brother, I look forward to leaning new insights and understandings from you. There is OH so much more I could share, but I want to go slowly so as not to miss any of your teachings.

GOD BLESS YOU!***

PJM: PAT

 

[Telestia]

Good for you:thumbsup:
So you can explain then [with the help of the Holy Spirit] why God never once permitted more than one set of faith believes and always just one Church organization?

That is correct. there is only one Church, one Body, Of Jesus Christ. This Church has Jesus as the Chief Cornerstone, and He is the head of His church, and regardless of which Christian club we associate with (e.g. Baptists, Park Free Church, Grace Pointe, Catholic, Presbyterian, Anglican, Baptist, etc.) we Christians are all filled with the Holy Spirit, and we are all one in Christ, and we are all part of the Body of Christ.

**Ps 118:22-26

The stone which the builders rejected has become the [chief corner stone.
This is the LORD’S doing; It is marvelous in our eyes.
This is the day which the LORD has made; Let us rejoice and be glad in it.
O LORD, do save, we beseech You;
O LORD, we beseech You, do send prosperity!
Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the LORD;

Then Jesus says Mt 16:19
“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven is clear to us Christians; it is Jesus’s life, death and ressurection. We are saved through the faith of Jesus and the finished work of Jesus and our sins are washed away by the blood HE shedon the cross. On Jesus our cornerstone we are built. He is the groom, we are the bride.** NASU

Our Salvation is a gift from God given freely by all who sincerely accept the Blood Covering of the Blood of our Paschal Lamb that washed away all our sins for all time, and thereby we have entered into the presence of God and into the Fellowship of The KING

**Rom.10: 17 **

“So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ”

YES! And we Christians have the NT that contains all the great preaching of the true Gospel of our early Church leaders. And we have the OT which bears witness to the NT.

**Eph.3: 9 to 12 **

“And to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things; that through the church ][SINGULAR: meaning THE CATHOLIC Church] the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and confidence of access through our faith in him And of course you know that when these words were spoke and written the ONLY church in existence was todays Catholic Church:shrug:**

**OK, I see your reducing the scripture word ‘church’ to special pleading that only your club, But I embrace the Singular Church, as I wrote above. For we who believe Jesus and accepted His blood covering as washing away all our sins for all time, and have received the Holy Spirit by accepting the blood of the Lamb. our Saviour. **

2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 ** “we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word made more sure*. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. ***

YES!

First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

Precisely.

***So brother, I look forward to leaning new insights and understandings from you. There is OH so much more I could share, but I want to go slowly so as not to miss any of your teachings.

GOD BLESS YOU!***

PJM: PAT

Thanks for your reply, and thanks be to our God for what He has done for us through the finished work of Jesus on the cross, by whom we enter the body of Christ, in whom we are sealed.