challenge question, who can answer this

[inchrist101]

We actually agree on the bolded bits above!

Excellent. Let’s shoot for more.

You simply fail to accept that one can be more distant than others from being in full communion with her based on doctrinal differences.

No I actually do accept it. I know exactly what you are saying. But here’s the problem. You’re assuming that Rome is always right and no one can correct her. Many believers think the Roman Catholic church skewed when creating doctrines. Some would say that GOD HIMSELF sent the reformers and caused the Great Schism to try and course correct Rome. We will never really know will we?? My assumption is that I’m going to Heaven based on my beliefs. You feel the same about yourself but would question my fate because I’m not in communion with Rome.

Now let’s think about this. 1 day we end up in Heaven and you say to me wow you made it. Then you look around and say hey why didn’t the other people who were in communion with Rome end up here? GOD would tell us that although on the outside they were in communion with Rome you forget I know what’s on the inside and that counts more than anything. Remember how Jesus was criticical of the Pharisees:

8 ‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 Their worship is a farce,
for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God.

Maybe Rome is slightly guilty there too. I know you can’t wait to hit the quote button and refute that.

Your self-described denominations, and non-demoninations, are contained within the Church, while we Catholics are simply not self-described as being in a container within that Church.

You consider each PERSON to be utterly responsible for their “distance from full communion” to the Universal (Catholic) Church which no “denomination” (which you see the so-called “RCC” to be) can “help” you with, while we see that being in the so-called “RCC” as a “help” (a HUGE help and necessity if known to be a help) to be in most full communion with the Body of Christ the Church (Catholic).

My Brother I love you, I really do But please slow down when typing and be just a little more deliberate. It’s obvious your typing as quick as your thinking and you end up losing me. Not trying to be rude in anyway. It just makes it difficult to see your point sometimes that’s all.

What I think you’re saying is that the Roman Catholic church is not a denomination it’s just the original church Jesus built. Anyone who breaks away from her is then a denomination. Like saying I like chocolate. Someone says which one?? I say chocolate just plain chocolate. Someone says, well there’s milk chocolate, dark chocolate, white chocolate etc. etc. No just give me chocolate. You say we ARE the Catholic church. Someone says which one, Methodist, Lutheran, Roman Catholic?? You say no the Roman Catholic church is the Catholic church. I would say I’m Catholic. Someone says oh Roman Catholic, I say no just Catholic. I believe in Jesus so I’m part of that universal church we call Catholic.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Quote:
Give a bible in the Fnooboo language to a Fnooboo native, where the Fnooboo people are a very isolated group of Ngano-glitlan people on the island of Wau in the far southeastern Pacific who have never had any contact with “Westerners” (Christian or elsewise) [or “Easterners” for that matter].

They can read the bible, as they can read their own language, but what does it MEAN to them?

Such a great question. If they read the Bible and had no one to explain it to them what would happen?? Would they find Jesus or not? This is like saying nobody can ever read the works of William Shakespeare without a teaching authority and that if a Fnooboo native read Shapkespeare is his native language he/she couldn’t possibly understand.

They will DEFINATELY derive SOME meaning from what they read, in both the biblical and Shakespeare cases, but concluding **A **meaning is concluding **THE **(intended) meaning.

Discounting the differences in purpose of Shakespeare and the bible, it astounds me that you would consider that someone from an utterly alien culture would come to THE PROPER conclusion as to the meaning of the bible.

Give humanity a little more respect for their intelligence than that. Maybe a less educated person couldn’t begin to understand the Bible but that doesn’t mean everyone.

My point was that an “educated” person, someone educated IN a bible-conscious TRADITION would be able to make any INTENDED meaning out of the bible. That a tradition IS REQUIRED to make any meant meaning out of the book!

We ALL use our tradition to draw meaning from the bible. The SELF-CONTRADICTORY statement that “tradition is not a part of making heads-or-tails of the bible” is an oft stated protestant truism. Why would people do that?

 

[inchrist101]

Im back for a few minutes, but i promise by this evening I will be done. I just have to go back to work in a second.
inchrist101 I promise it all tie in. Jesus promised he would not leave us orphans John14:18 he would send the Holy Spirit to guide and proect john15:26 he gave us the sacraments.

7 now here is why to feed and strenghten us

baptsim, Eucharis penance confirmation holy orders matrimony and the anoining of the sick. Now they are not just symbols. they are signs hat actually convey Gods Grace. and love. The sacraments were foreshadowed in the ot. by things that did not actually convey grace but merely symbolized it (see what i mean about bible only) circumsision , for example prefigured baptism and the passover prefigured the Eucharist. When Christ came he did not do away with the symbols of Gods grace he supernaturalized them energizing them with grace. He made them more than symbols. He constantly uses material things to show his Love and Power. after all matter is not evil when he created the physical universe everything he created was good gen1:31he takes delight in matter that he even dignified it thourgh his own incarnation john 1:14 whe n he was here he healed fed stregthened people thru humble elements likemud bread oil an dwine. He didnt have to but preferred to use material things to betow his grace. Remember the wed(john 2:-11) im sorry i know you know all this then the blind man with mud. then the loaves of fish into thousands then the biggie here it is Matt26:26-28 He changed bread and wine into his own body and blood. Again people will fight and argue over this because they dont understand it. Thorugh the sacraments he continues to heal feed and strengthen us. thats why we need them do you see. what i mean.

Now in baptism because of original sin we are born without grace in our souls. so there is no way for us to have followship with God. Jesus became man to bring us into union with the Father. He said no man can enter (john 9:5) this refers to baptism . THats how we are yes the Portestant faith got this one down pat BORN AGAIN. BUT SEE THIS TIME ON A SPIRITUAL LEVEL. INSTEAD OF A PHYSICAL LEVEL (Titus 3:5 we are baptised into his death and therefore share in his resurrection rom6:3-7

Baptism clenses us of sins and brings the Holy Spirit and frace in our souls i know you agree with this. Peter says it bluntly 1pet 3:21 its the gateway into the Church.

Now be back gotta get back to work its will be awhile. I swear these next ones personal goal in life is to make my life a living hell.Just kidding. be back pray for me

Rinnie you’re always in my prayers. But show me in John 15:26 where Jesus talks about the sacraments.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Quote:
The reason that we have the illusion that the bible is “easily understandable” is that our culture is BASED on it, and even then, one needs specialized experts, even if they are “part-time”, to more fully understand what is going on in the bible and what it means.

This is your opinion and not a statement of fact. Perhaps you may need more help than someone else does.

Do you think that the bible is easy to understand?

Is our culture “based on the bible” in that it has been a fixture of our culture for quite some time?

Do you find it “helpful” to consult experts to more fully understand the bible, as opposed to “simply” letting private revelation inform you of them?

I need all the help that I can get in understanding the bible!

Are you arguing AGAINST experts being allowed to help other people to understand the bible? Why do you object to the Magisterium, then, as they are the MOST expert in doing that?

Is it SIMPLY because they claim “infallibility”?

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Quote:
If ANY set of doctrines that are self-proclaimed as “Christian” makes one a Christian, then on what grounds can anyone claim another person is not a Christian?

Ooohhhh GOOD question. Look in the mirror my Brother because it appears that Roman Catholics do just that in these forums. If you claim that adhering to all Roman Catholic doctrines makes you a Christian, then how can you tell me I’m not a Christian??

No Catholic who knows what they are talking about claims that anyone who is not a Catholic is not a Christian. Period.

As we’ve stated INTERMINABLY, all Christians (baptised trinitarians this MAY be too minimal but I think this covers it) are a part of the Body of Christ, but they are distanced from being in full communon with the Church (Catholic, not your “RCC denomination”) the Body of Christ by their acceptance of true doctrine as infallibly claimed by the Teaching Authority of the Teaching Church of Christ.

Not adhering to Catholic doctrine simply takes you farther from full communion. It does not make you “less Christian”.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

Quote:
Truly, there aren’t in fact 30,000 “Christian denominations”, but rather several hundreds of millions of “Christian denominations” because each individual is fully authorized to be his own “Pope” and “decision maker a to doctrine” of his “church”.

I think you stretched this just a little too far. You obviously have some bad feelings about something. What I don’t know. But it’s almost like you can’t stand the fact that there is life with Jesus outside the roman Catholic church and you want so badly to tell people that they absolutely can’t have a relationship with Jesus or even begin to undertand the Bible unless they are a member of the Roman Catholic church.

You can and do have any relationship with Jesus you choose to have. I don’t claim that you DON’T have a relationship with Jesus!

I merely claim that you don’t have the fulest possible relationship with Jesus you can because of your insistence on doing only what you WANT to do of which He tells you to do.

All that you do (which is licit) in your “protestant way” is possible to do within a more full communion with the Church! That which isn’t licit to do, shouldn’t be done, as it’s not “of God” to begin with.

You can CERTAINLY begin to understand, and in fact can understand quite a lot, about the faith which Christ has given us by being where you are. You simply MUST be limited to only a portion of what you COULD understand and accept of the truth by being where you are.

My “enthusiasm” for wanting others to have more of the truth than is possible where they are, by being in full (or in greater) communion with the Church, is probably why you see me as having “bad feelings” for the resistance people have for what is best for them.

I ALWAYS have bad feelings for the tactics of Satan!

Let me just say this to you. I never was a real student of the Bible. Since making Bible reading a priority I can tell you that my appreciation for Jesus has never been greater. Now that just may be the effect it had on me. But I know plenty others that feel the same way.

Alleluia! That is very Catholic of you, as we are all to be as knowledgable of the bible as possible as per the Magisterium!

I never had a teacher. I’ve taken Bible study classes but I don’t think I ever learned something that I was clueless on. The only exception may have been Revelations.

The reason that you can “boast” of being “self-sufficient” in your bible study is because of the culture you live in. It’s very easy to dismiss what is “normal” as not being there at all.

Do I think I can go out and start my own Church?? Heck no.

Sure you can! You just have more integrity than to try to do that when you feel inadequate in your ability to help others in their “religious matters”.

You are your own church now! That you are your only congregant just makes it SEEM like your church is not yours. You are not bound by ANY constraints as to what you can believe, what you can choose from among the doctrines that you are presented with by your “community”, your local-denominational-assembly.

But YOU alone are your “church”, because only YOU are in the position of DEMANDING that you hold to your “single doctrine set”.

Do I think I can preach the Gospels?? Sure why not. I wouldn’t proclaim myself to be an expert but I can certainly handle myself in a conversation and if that means someone may be saved then how could I go wrong. I think we just disagree on who the ultimate teaching authority is.

We don’t disagree on that. The single teaching authority is God.

The single instrument through which the actual teaching comes, though, is the Magisterium.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

CalmDownWisWins;3278984:

Once again your idea of “a church” is causing you difficulties. The Catholic Mass is several in actual practice, but must contain certain specific elements. If those elements aren’t there, then it’s not a Mass.

By definition the mass is the sacrifice of Christ. The elements of bread and wine becoming the body and blood of Jesus and then being offered as a sacrifice. Which of course makes no sense because the sacrifice is over.

The Mass is a re-presentation of the eternal sacrifice which Jesus made for us. It is not “re-sacrificing” Jesus.

My point was that without an actual priest in persona Christi there is no Mass, and there is no consecrated host.

I have no difficulties with the idea of “the church”. But perhaps you should research how the concept of the mass and idea behind the sacrifice actually stems from Mithraism. Then take a look at how all the clothing the Priests and the Pope himself wears and compare that to what the Mithraists wore in their worship. Then show me in the Bible where the early Christians had a mass.

Oh boy. Check Justin Martyr for the Mass.

As to the other rubbish. Grow up.

I believe we will find that they (Christians) dedicated themselves to the prayers of the Apostles, their teachings about Jesus, and the breaking of Bread). No sacrifice is even mentioned.

Your credibility is now utterly shot. Best to you.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

…

Some folks I choose not to converse with.

Some dust is better shaken off our shoes.

 

[Margarite]

Rinnie,
:clapping:
:clapping:
:clapping:
:clapping:
:clapping:
:clapping:
:clapping:
:clapping:

 

[inchrist101]

They will DEFINATELY derive SOME meaning from what they read, in both the biblical and Shakespeare cases, but concluding **A **meaning is concluding **THE **(intended) meaning.

Discounting the differences in purpose of Shakespeare and the bible, it astounds me that you would consider that someone from an utterly alien culture would come to THE PROPER conclusion as to the meaning of the bible.

Right, I threw the Shakspeare in to make a crude point. But let’s think about this. You’re saying proper. We’d have to agree on proper first. But for arguments sake let’s just say that in the deep dark jungles of IDONTKNOWHERE, someone discovers a Bible in their native language. They don’t know anything about GOD or Jesus, but they are an expert in their own language. They read it cover to cover not once but maybe 100 times. You argue that they wouldn’t get one thing out of it, or they wouldn’t get the proper meaning out of it, unless someone told them what it was they were supposed to get. I just disagree with that.

My point was that an “educated” person, someone educated IN a bible-conscious TRADITION would be able to make any INTENDED meaning out of the bible. That a tradition IS REQUIRED to make any meant meaning out of the book!

You lost me again Brother sorry. But it sounds like you’re saying someone educated in Biblical tradition would be able to recognize the intended meaning of the Bible. That a tradition is required in order to draw the right meaning. I hope I got that right. I would say the average educated person reading the Bible can draw the big picture intended meaning out of it. The things that are required for salvation. But when it comes to the parables, the symbolism, and allegory that Jesus uses, yes I can see where a good Bible teacher can help. I don’t think any protestant would ever disagree with you on that. The difference again comes down to who we think has ultimate authority. I just believe you are discounting Protestant teachers because they may disagree with Rome on some interpretations.

We ALL use our tradition to draw meaning from the bible. The SELF-CONTRADICTORY statement that “tradition is not a part of making heads-or-tails of the bible” is an oft stated protestant truism. Why would people do that?

Well, I don’t think Protestants discount tradition as much as you think. But let’s define what you mean by tradition. I see it as what was traditionally taught by Jesus to the Apostles and then from the Apostles forward. But I believe those traditional teachings are captured in the Bible. It’s not taught because it’s in the Bible, it’s in the Bible because it was taught. Something I maintain is this: the christian religion was spreading like wildfire after Penetecost. Churches were sprouting up everywhere and I’ve always contended that the Apostles could never have visited each one to teach. If you read Acts 15 when the big debate over circumcision was raging, we find Paul and Barnabus at the church in Antioch. On their way back to Jerusalem they stopped at the churches in Phoenicia and Samaria to check to see what the Gentiles were doing there. Here’s the quote:

Acts 15:3 The church sent the delegates to Jerusalem, and they stopped along the way in Phoenicia and Samaria to visit the believers. They told them—much to everyone’s joy—that the Gentiles, too, were being converted.

Now who headed up the churches in those 2 areas?? I know you may not believe this, but did you know that it’s believed the church in Rome was founded by Roman Jews returning from Pentecost who heard Peter’s sermon and formed the church upon their return. It was absolutely impossible for the Apostles to get to every church to teach. Many of them stayed central in Jerusalem for a long while. Some Christians were using their homes for church and we have writings that state they broke bread in their houses. Now if the Apostles weren’t present, who was consecrating the bread and wine? It would have to have been a regular guy like you and me. So sometimes I think Roman Catholics get so stuck on tradition that they eliminate the possibility of ever being wrong.

 

[rinnie]

Rinnie you’re always in my prayers. But show me in John 15:26 where Jesus talks about the sacraments.

Easy one my love. First of all we have to know what a Sacrament is. Now im probally gonna get it on this one but as far as i can remember now we are talking 3r grade.

Sister asked me (and she was a strict one too) What is a Sacrament? A sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace. And i know this is right too because i didnt study and i had to write it 100 times. (in the same handwriting)

 

[climer97007]

The Mass is a re-presentation of the eternal sacrifice which Jesus made for us. It is not “re-sacrificing” Jesus. My point was that without an actual priest in persona Christi there is no Mass, and there is no consecrated host.

People who fail to believe often pretend to. InCrist101 has been taught that Christ is where your faith is. In this limited faith view, Christ is Himself constrained by the believer. And InChrist101 may indeed be happy to be constraining Christ, as it puts him in control of Christ. This is the pervasive world (self centered humanistic) view of our post deformation times. It is the rotten fruit of the temptation in the garden which can only come from one source.

He has been lead to believe that this faith of his means freedom, while at the same time fails to see the self imposed chains of his own certitude.

The Gospel of Jesus is the only reason for the existance of the Roman Catholic Church, or the Greek Orthodox Church, or even the Russian Orthodox Church. That the Orthodox Churches have saved the meaning and reality of the Eucharist even while living apart from the Church of Rome is a HUGE testimony worth more than any merely human interpretation of scripture. All other non-catholic or catholic Christian churches offer something of a pretense by comparison.

Countless millions of Christians like InChrist101 are still slaves to their own human and limited notions about who God is and what the Body of Christ truly is in the world. I can do nothing about that, except to Glory in all that Christ has given to us in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Pretense or Glory?

Let us all be open to the choice Christ is making in Himself for us, and through Himself in us.

Amen!

Gene

 

[inchrist101]

The last paragraph first: There is no teaching of the Church which has no “scriptural support”!

BUT, one could, through “private revelation”, come to the conclusion that the Holy Trinity is NOT scriptural because the word “Trinity” is not to be found there.

SOME traditions hold that opinion! They claim we “trinitarians” are non-scriptural.

Oh I love the example of the Trinity. Why is it that the Trinity is the only example Roman Catholics can come up with??? The fact is the word Trinity is not in the Bible but the elements certainly are. GOD HIMSELF, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit are mentioned plenty of times as having an association with GOD. Jesus says he IS the Son of GOD hence GOD HIMSELF, then tells us he will leave a “helper”: the Holy Spirit. What else can we deduct from that?? This has been my beef with JWs who flat out deny the Trinity saying “Well the word Trinity is not in the Bible”. I’ve also heard it referred to as the GODHEAD.

But really you need to give me something else.

This is why there needs to be a single decision maker, a “Pontifex Maximus”, as you so nicely brought up. We need a “bridge”, a SINGLE bridge, a single conduit, through which to have truths which are SINGULAR in their meaning as all truths MUST BE SINGULAR in their meanings.

You would have truth be a matter “concensus”. I would most certainly not.

Jesus spoke against this very concept:

24 When the ten other disciples heard what James and John had asked, they were indignant. 25 But Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. 26 But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave.

Doesn’t sound like Jesus wants anyone to be a single decision-maker. By the way Pontifex Maximus was the same title used by Caesar. The pagans used to say “Caesar is Lord”.

On the first two paragraphs above: The churches had the apostles present, though time delayed, to answer their specific problems. The apostles responded with “living words” which were tailored to the needs of those who had problems.

The bible, for all it’s wonders, is a set piece. It is not in itself in any way “responsive” such that it will change itself to suit those asking it questions.

The Apostles were not present in every church. I can guarantee you that. The churches in Crete had no Apostolic oversight. The church in Rome had no initial Apostolic oversight.

Am I saying that all answers to all matters of faith and morals can’t be found within the bible? No. But to FIND THEM there is an interpretation of the FIXED WORDS of scripture necesssary, which is what tradition is!

So you admit then that everything is in the Bible?? Now you’re trying to double-talk your way out.

Having a bible without a tradition to give it meaning is to possess a doorstop and nothing more. A tree has no use for a bible. An feral illiterate child has no use of a bible. There must be some means of transfering the wisdom of the bible to the mind of a man to make it in any way meaningful (useful), and that is done ONLY by way of a tradition that can make sense of it.

You certainly are stuck on this word tradition. As far as a child is concerned my daughter is nine years old and reads a childrens Bible. You’d be amazed at what she comprehends. You’re so stuck on tradition and the Roman Catholic way that it almost seems you’re afraid to think for yourself.

The apostles WERE the tradition which interpreted scripture correctly for those who wanted a correct interpretation. When the apostles died out, they left those taught by them to continue the tradition of correctness of interpretation of scripture. That tradition is not re-invented wholesale when an isolated person simply picks up a bible and begins reading it.

It is a lovely thought that the bible is an easy thing to draw wisdom from, but that is not reality. To deny the most experienced and SINGLE God-assured infallible tradition due to an inherent sociologically distaste for “authority figures” is to trade one’s comfort for truth. Who would make that trade?

Again I think you take it way too far my friend. And again I will re-assert Jesus distaste for authority figures.

It is simply impossible to state that: if no one source of truth is more infallible than any other then I (the speaker) can INFALLIBLY say that your (the Catholic) source is NOT infallible!

You MUST grant that possibility! We claim that that possibility is in fact the truth, and await any and all attempts at proving it untrue to our “infallible” satisfaction.

I think Protestants have been arguing where Roman Catholicism makes mistakes for hundreds of years. The problem is nothing will ever satisfy Rome that she is wrong or that she could ever be wrong. Problem number 1 with infallibility. If the Pope declares something infallible, then even if the next Pope disagrees guess what?? He can’t do anything about it. Your stuck with the belief. The minute Rome admits she could wrong the whole thing becomes a house of cards. I think that’s why you have so many Catholics leaving the church or the ones that stay don’t completely disagree but stay silent. I can introduce you to hundreds of Roman Catholics that don’t believe in going to a Priest for confession, the perpetual virginity of Mary, and the infallibility of the Pope. You can’t tell me that 100% of Roman Catholics believe 100% in Roman Catholic doctrines. The Protestants face the same issues. So does that mean they all go to hell???

Boy this post is getting long.

 

[rinnie]

inchrist101 Now Penance

ooh another big one. ccc1422-1498

sometimes on our journey to the promise land we stumble and fall into sin. God is ready to lift us up and restore us to frace filled fellowship with him. Penance, this is the sacrament my kids seem to alway forget about. But thru the Grace of GOd he put me here to remind them. And i take my job seriously. Ok more on the serious note. Jesus gave his apostles power and authority to reconcile us to the Father. this is when he breathed on them john 20:22-23 now that is what is says. Paul notes that all this is from God who has reconciled us to himself thru Christ and given us the ministry of reconcilitaion. We are ambassadors for Christ as if God were appealing through us.(2 cor 5 18-20) through confession to a priest Gods Minister we have our sins forgiven and we receive grace to help us resist future temptations.

the eucharist
(ccc1322-1419)
once we become members of Christ family he does not let us go hungry. but feeds us with his own blood and body thru the Eucharist. In the old test remember God commanded his people to sacrifice the lamb, blood on the doors. i know you know this. then remember they ate the lamb to seal their covenant with God. This lamb prefigured Jesus He is the real Lamb of God. John 1:29. through Jesus we enter into the New Covenant with God luke22:20 who protects us from eernal death. Gods old test people ae the passover Lamb. Now we must eat the Lamb that is the Eucharist. Jesus said John6:53 Now see buddy this is where my Dad told me is the real difference from other churches. See my husband was Protestant. He told me i could go to church with him but i still had to go to the Catholic Church for the Eucharist. This is the only church where i can receive the Eucharist. now this is his words. okay. Now mind you this is 26 years ago im 19. I am not going to church twice. It wasnt untill 26 years later that i saw what my Dad was telling me. I never understood it. BUt i never tried. ok back to business.

In this wayJesus insituted the sacrament of the Eucharist what we consume at every mass. The cc teaches that the sacrifice of Christ occourred once and for all. It cannot be repeated heb 9:28. Christ does not die again during Mass but the same sacrifice that occurred on calvary is made present on the altar. Thats why mass is not another sacrifice. but a participation in the same oncefor all on the cross. Now this is big it took me years to understand this. PAUL REMINDS US THAT THE BREAD AND THE WINE REALLY BECOME BY A MIRACLE OF GODS GRACE THE ACTUAL BODY AND BLOOD OF JESUS. anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgement on himself (1 cor 11:27-29) After the consecration of the bread and wine no bread and wine remains on the altar. Only Jesus himself, under the Apppearance of bread and wine remains. My dad told me this for years i just didnt know what he was talking about. I just knew i wasnt going to church twice. I would say but they are going by the bible, It took all this time to figure out why the old man would get so upset. Now hes 82 and i finally got it… Lets say it clicked. (he is happy to hear that when i told him by the way) Now to my Dad thats the biggie.

Now confirmation ccc1281321

(i bet you are ready to kill me but please there is a method to my madness i swear. you will understand it all.)

 

[inchrist101]

People who fail to believe often pretend to. InCrist101 has been taught that Christ is where your faith is. In this limited faith view, Christ is Himself constrained by the believer. And InChrist101 may indeed be happy to be constraining Christ, as it puts him in control of Christ. This is the pervasive world (self centered humanistic) view of our post deformation times. It is the rotten fruit of the temptation in the garden which can only come from one source.

He has been lead to believe that this faith of his means freedom, while at the same time fails to see the self imposed chains of his own certitude.

The Gospel of Jesus is the only reason for the existance of the Roman Catholic Church, or the Greek Orthodox Church, or even the Russian Orthodox Church. That the Orthodox Churches have saved the meaning and reality of the Eucharist even while living apart from the Church of Rome is a HUGE testimony worth more than any merely human interpretation of scripture. All other non-catholic or catholic Christian churches offer something of a pretense by comparison.

Countless millions of Christians like InChrist101 are still slaves to their own human and limited notions about who God is and what the Body of Christ truly is in the world. I can do nothing about that, except to Glory in all that Christ has given to us in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Pretense or Glory?

Let us all be open to the choice Christ is making in Himself for us, and through Himself in us.

Amen!

Gene

I don’t see how I’m constraining Christ. To the contrary I’m glorifying HIM. All Glory and Praise go to GOD. Maybe you should discontinue issuing judgemental statements since that is something Jesus preaches against. If the Gospel has been preached to you then you must not understand it nor decide to practice it.

 

[fbl9]

this will save a lot of trees everbody together now rip everything out of the NT except John 3:16. to all bible printers out there print nothing else but John 3:16 now we have the whole truth,what else do we need.

 

[inchrist101]

inchrist101 Now Penance

ooh another big one. ccc1422-1498

sometimes on our journey to the promise land we stumble and fall into sin. God is ready to lift us up and restore us to frace filled fellowship with him. Penance, this is the sacrament my kids seem to alway forget about. But thru the Grace of GOd he put me here to remind them. And i take my job seriously. Ok more on the serious note. Jesus gave his apostles power and authority to reconcile us to the Father. this is when he breathed on them john 20:22-23 now that is what is says. Paul notes that all this is from God who has reconciled us to himself thru Christ and given us the ministry of reconcilitaion. We are ambassadors for Christ as if God were appealing through us.(2 cor 5 18-20) through confession to a priest Gods Minister we have our sins forgiven and we receive grace to help us resist future temptations.

the eucharist
(ccc1322-1419)
once we become members of Christ family he does not let us go hungry. but feeds us with his own blood and body thru the Eucharist. In the old test remember God commanded his people to sacrifice the lamb, blood on the doors. i know you know this. then remember they ate the lamb to seal their covenant with God. This lamb prefigured Jesus He is the real Lamb of God. John 1:29. through Jesus we enter into the New Covenant with God luke22:20 who protects us from eernal death. Gods old test people ae the passover Lamb. Now we must eat the Lamb that is the Eucharist. Jesus said John6:53 Now see buddy this is where my Dad told me is the real difference from other churches. See my husband was Protestant. He told me i could go to church with him but i still had to go to the Catholic Church for the Eucharist. This is the only church where i can receive the Eucharist. now this is his words. okay. Now mind you this is 26 years ago im 19. I am not going to church twice. It wasnt untill 26 years later that i saw what my Dad was telling me. I never understood it. BUt i never tried. ok back to business.

In this wayJesus insituted the sacrament of the Eucharist what we consume at every mass. The cc teaches that the sacrifice of Christ occourred once and for all. It cannot be repeated heb 9:28. Christ does not die again during Mass but the same sacrifice that occurred on calvary is made present on the altar. Thats why mass is not another sacrifice. but a participation in the same oncefor all on the cross. Now this is big it took me years to understand this. PAUL REMINDS US THAT THE BREAD AND THE WINE REALLY BECOME BY A MIRACLE OF GODS GRACE THE ACTUAL BODY AND BLOOD OF JESUS. anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgement on himself (1 cor 11:27-29) After the consecration of the bread and wine no bread and wine remains on the altar. Only Jesus himself, under the Apppearance of bread and wine remains. My dad told me this for years i just didnt know what he was talking about. I just knew i wasnt going to church twice. I would say but they are going by the bible, It took all this time to figure out why the old man would get so upset. Now hes 82 and i finally got it… Lets say it clicked. (he is happy to hear that when i told him by the way) Now to my Dad thats the biggie.

Now confirmation ccc1281321

(i bet you are ready to kill me but please there is a method to my madness i swear. you will understand it all.)

Do you still want me to wait to reply??

 

[inchrist101]

Easy one my love. First of all we have to know what a Sacrament is. Now im probally gonna get it on this one but as far as i can remember now we are talking 3r grade.

Sister asked me (and she was a strict one too) What is a Sacrament? A sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace. And i know this is right too because i didnt study and i had to write it 100 times. (in the same handwriting)

3rd grade wow. I think that’s when I learned it as well. From Sister Agnelia. Rinnie how do the floors look? Keep him working hard. By the way you didn’t bet on the Patriots did you??

 

[inchrist101]

Some folks I choose not to converse with.

Some dust is better shaken off our shoes.

If that’s how you feel that’s Ok. I’ll never turn you down

 

[rinnie]

inchrist101
confirmation, God stregthens our souls in another way thruough the sacrament of confirmation. Even though Jesus disciples received grace before his Resurrection on Pentecost the Holy Spirit came to strengthen them. with new grace for the difficult work ahead. then they carried out their mission. Later they laid hands on others acts 8:14-17. thru this you too are strenghtened to meet the spiritual challenges in your life.

Matrimony ccc 1601-1666
most are called to this one. always involves 3 people. bride groom God. For Catholics its the priest or deacon. a consummated sacramental marriage is permanentt only death can break it we all know this one mark10:1-12 rom72-3 1cor7:10-11 This holy union is a living symbol of the unbreakable relationship between Christ and his Church eph 5:21-33. ]]

Holy Orders ccc 1536-1600 another big one. be back