Commandments should not be followed ...

[guanophore]

(Edited)

"My will and freedom is greater than, and more important than, and able to thwart the will of the Creator of all things who says the sheep ’will never perish.’ "

I can see this perspective, but it seems small, self centered, and heedless of the nature of God. God created man in His own image and likeness. He gave man free will, so that he could choose to fellowship with HIm, or not. He gave the same to the angels. He gives humans the same gift He gave to angels - that power to rebel and reject HIm. For reasons known only to HImself, He wanted His creatures to choose HIm, not be compulsed to be with Him.

Romans 8:38-39

38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,

39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.Are you any "other created thing," Teflon, or does that description not apply to you?

God loves everyone he creates. He desires all men to come to the knowledge of the Truth. It is His love of His creatures that grieves His heart when they reject Him. He never stops loving them, even after they spurn His grace.

I agree, nothing can separate us from His love, just as the Prodigal father went on loving his son all the time he was gone.

 

[guanophore]

Am I your brother, Sandusky? Do you love me?

Why do you keep asking this? It has been asked and answered. He was clear in the most “loving” way that he could be in explaining that the answer to both of these is “no”. Is this so hard to accept?

 

[Teflon93]

I’ve maintained for the entire thread that eternal life is a free gift (cf Rom 6:23).

Well, in that case, there’s no point in discussion as Catholics all have this free gift of eternal life, don’t we?

In Jn 9:40, Jesus is talking to a group of Pharisses. At the beginning of chapter 10, He tells them the parable of the Good Shepherd; the Good Shepherd is Jesus, and the sheep are Israel. In 10:6, we’re told that the Pharisees didn’t understand Jesus, and so He tells them again. In v16, He tells of “other sheep which are not of this [original] fold,” and that He must bring them in, and they will hear Him, and that they will become one flock with one Shepherd. Those other sheep are the Gentiles. Again, His words cause a division among the Jews (v19). In v25, Jesus continues with this extended metaphor of the sheep:

** John 10:25-30**

25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these testify of Me.

26 “But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.

27 “My sheep hear My voice, AND I know them, AND they follow Me;

28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.

29 “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

30 “I and the Father are one.”So there are two different sheep folds—the one you mentioned from Mt 10 is Israel. In John 10, the sheep fold of the Gentiles is introduced, and the sheep fold described subsequent to Jn 10:25, is the one of which Christ says, ”they will not perish.”

Note the Boolean expression in verse 27 which has hitherto eluded you. Following Christ is a necessary condition of that expression; those who hear his voice and whom he knows but who do not follow him do not get eternal life.

You still haven’t answered my question:

So why did Jesus order the apostles to go to the lost sheep of Israel if a) they would never perish or b) they would never be saved?

You mayn’t; I wasn’t quoting scripture.

No, you were quoting your false, manmade tradition which you cannot admit you have.

According to your Tradition.

According to Christ—see John 6.

I’ve told you before, Teflon, go find fundamentalists who adhere to those things, and ask them.

And I’ve told you before, Sandusky, if you want specific apologetic arguments addressing what you believe in The Atomic Church of Sandusky, then you will have to clearly articulate your denomination and theology.

 

[moondweller]

It is God who is the one who is able to keep us until that Day.

And on what basis is He able to keep?

I agree that they can’t get snatched, but they can sure jump out, and run off. Such was the case with some of those to whom the letters are written in Revelation.

So then He is not “able to keep.”

Just reflecting on this thread:

It’s a gift.
Oh, so then it’s not a gift.

It’s by grace.
Oh, so then it’s not by grace.

It’s based on promise.
Oh, so then it’s not based on promise.

It’s not based on law.
Oh. so then it is based on law.

The Law was fulfilled.
Oh. so then it was not fulfilled.

We’re not under law.
Oh, so then we are under law.

I’m saved.
Oh, so then you’re not saved.

I have eternal life.
Oh, so then you don’t have eternal life.

True to Catholic theology it’s never either/or, it’s always BOTH.

But such wishy-washy theology is not Apostolic teaching, as you keep claiming:2 Cor 1:18-19 “But as God is faithful, our word to you is not yes and no. For the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by us–by me and Silvanus and Timothy–was not yes and no, but is yes in Him.”

 

[Teflon93]

Why do you keep asking this? It has been asked and answered. He was clear in the most “loving” way that he could be in explaining that the answer to both of these is “no”. Is this so hard to accept?

Moondweller answered no; I do not recall Sandusky doing so.

I have presented the Scripture which defines who are brothers in Christ, we have discussed at length Christ’s command to love one another, and it is enlightening to see the obstacles under which Moondweller and Sandusky labor in this regard.

I keep asking because I remain a Christian, as you do, and Moondweller and (apparently) Sandusky refuse to obey the command of Christ.

We are called upon to correct our brothers, are we not?

 

[Teflon93]

Guanophore brings up Martin Luther; here’s what he had to say in his anti-Semitic tract “On the Jews and Their Lies” about this subject:

But when they [the Jews] declare that even if they are not holy because of the Ten Commandments (since all Gentiles and devils are also duty-bound to keep these, or else are polluted and condemned on account of them) they still have the other laws of Moses, besides the Ten Commandments, which were given exclusively to them and not also to the Gentiles, and by which they are sanctified amd singled out from all other nations----O Lord God, what a lame, loose, and vain excuse and pretext this is! ** If the Ten Commandments are not obeyed, what does the keeping of other laws amount to other than mere jugglery and mummery, indeed, a veritable mockery which treats God as a fool**. It is just as if an evil, devilish fellow among us were to parade about in the garb of a pope, cardinal, bishop, or pastor and observe all the precepts and ways of these persons, but underneath this spiritual dress would be a genuine devil, a wolf, an enemy of the church, a blasphemer who trampled both the gospel and the Ten Commandments under foot and cursed and damned them. What a fine saint he would be in God’s sight!

Now, I’m not saying that Moondweller and Sandusky are given to distorting whole passages by misinterpreting any verse within which might lend them aid, but lest the last line be taken for anything but sarcasm, Luther continues:

Or let us suppose that somewhere a pretty girl came along, adorned with a wreath, and observed all the manners, the duties, the deportment, and discipline of a chaste virgin, but underneath was a vile, shameful whore, violating the Ten Commandments. What good would her fine obedience in observing outwardly all the duties and customs of a virgin’s station do her? It would help her this much----that one would be seven times more hostile to her than to an impudent, public whore. Thus God constantly chided the children of Israel through the prophets, calling them a vile whore because, under the guise and decor of external laws and sanctity, they practiced all sorts of idolatry and villainy, as especially Hosea laments in chapter 2.

Now, Luther clearly hated the Jews, and yet even he recognized the distinction between the moral law of The Ten Commandments—which even the Gentiles were bound to keep—and the Levitical laws condemned by St Paul.

Isn’t it remarkable how much further Moondweller goes than Martin Luther was willing to?

 

[sandusky]

Teflon93:

Well, in that case, there’s no point in discussion as Catholics all have this free gift of eternal life, don’t we?

You sound unsure, Teflon.

Teflon93:

Note the Boolean expression in verse 27 which has hitherto eluded you. Following Christ is a necessary condition of that expression; those who hear his voice and whom he knows but who do not follow him do not get eternal life.

Nothing about that verse has eluded me Teflon93, however, the same is not true for you, as your twisting of that verse, shown above in the blue, demonstrates.

Everything in v27 states positively what Christ’s sheep will do—they will hear His voice, and follow Him.

Why is what Jesus says so difficult for you to apprehend?

You’re assuming that the converse of what’s said with regard to Christ’s sheep is that some of them will hear His voice, but not follow Him. That’s your man-made Tradition being imposed on the verse, because that’s not what Jesus is saying.

Christ’s sheep will hear His voice, and they will follow Him; that’s why He confidently states in v29 that "they will never perish,” because it is He who is the savior of them.

Teflon93:

No, you were quoting your false, manmade tradition which you cannot admit you have.

No Teflon, I’m telling you what’s being said in the verse. Those on the broad way are not roudy, hard-drinking partygoers, but “religious church-goers.”

They’re identified twice in the subsequent verses; here’s the first identification:**Matthew 7:21-23

21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’

23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’**They call Him “Lord, Lord” Teflon, “Lord, Lord.” They’re religious folk.

In fact, many of them will have done many of the things spoken of in Mt 25, your favorite passage, and Christ’s response to them will be the same as His response to the folks above.

Those spoken of in v23 are not Jesus’ sheep, and we know this because He says, "I never knew you," but Jesus does know His sheep, and they will never perish (Jn 10:25ff).

Teflon93:

According to Christ—see John 6.

John 6 is not about the mass, and has nothing to do with the mass, but you’ll believe what you want.

Teflon93:

You still haven’t answered my question:

So why did Jesus order the apostles to go to the lost sheep of Israel if a) they would never perish or b) they would never be saved?

.

Romans 11:1-11

1 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

2 God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel?

3 “Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.”

4 But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”

5 In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice.

6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.

7 What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened;

8 just as it is written, "GOD GAVE THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR, EYES TO SEE NOT AND EARS TO HEAR NOT, DOWN TO THIS VERY DAY."

9 And David says, "LET THEIR TABLE BECOME A SNARE AND A TRAP, AND A STUMBLING BLOCK AND A RETRIBUTION TO THEM."

10 "LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED TO SEE NOT, AND BEND THEIR BACKS FOREVER."

11 I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous.

 

[Teflon93]

You sound unsure, Teflon.

Not at all. But then, I remain within the fold.

Nothing about that verse has eluded me Teflon93, however, the same is not true for you, as your twisting of that verse, shown above in the blue, demonstrates.

Everything in v27 states positively what Christ’s sheep will do—they will hear His voice, and follow Him.

It’s simple English, Sandusky—no need to twist anything. Christ’s reference to the lost sheep of Israel contradict your claim—as is typical of you, you simply ignore Scripture which doesn’t confirm your false, manmade tradition.

Why is what Jesus says so difficult for you to apprehend?

Who says it’s difficult to comprehend? I believe Christ. You rely upon misinterpreting Paul even when your misinterpretation is at odds with what Christ says.

Luke 6:46 says it all.

You’re assuming that the converse of what’s said with regard to Christ’s sheep is that some of them will hear His voice, but not follow Him. That’s your man-made Tradition being imposed on the verse, because that’s not what Jesus is saying.

But that is precisely what Christ says throughout Scripture.

How tiresome you are in your theology by subtraction, all the better to justify your disobedience:

Matthew 15:

“21”: Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.

“22”: And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.

“23”: But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.

“24”: But he answered and said,** I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel**.

Matthew 10:

“5”: These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

“6”: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

“7”: And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

John 10:

“16”: And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Matthew 9:

“35”: And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.

“36”: But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd.

John 21:

“15”: So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him,** Feed my lambs**.

“16”: He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

“17”: He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Matthew 18:

10": Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

“11”: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

“12”: How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

“13”: And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.

“14”: Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

No Teflon, I’m telling you what’s being said in the verse. Those on the broad way are not roudy, hard-drinking partygoers, but “religious church-goers.”

The gate is narrow, Sandusky. Many will be called, few will be chosen.

They’re identified twice in the subsequent verses; here’s the first identification:Matthew 7:21-23

21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven,** but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven **will enter.

Yes, now try reading John 6 and you’ll spot where you left the fold, Sandusky.

22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord,

did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’

23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’They call Him “Lord, Lord” Teflon, “Lord, Lord.” They’re religious folk.

In fact, many of them will have done many of the things spoken of in Mt 25, your favorite passage, and Christ’s response to them will be the same as His response to the folks above.

According to Christ in Matthew 25, all will have done good works with the grace granted them or be cast into the outer darkness. Take heed, Sandusky—this includes loving your brothers.

Those spoken of in v23 are not Jesus’ sheep, and we know this because He says, "I never knew you," but Jesus does know His sheep, and they will never perish (Jn 10:25ff).

Provided they persevere until the end, as we have seen. The sheep must return to the fold. You need to think on this.

 

[Teflon93]

John 6 is not about the mass, and has nothing to do with the mass, but you’ll believe what you want.

No, I’ll believe Scripture, which is quite clear on the point.

From the Scripture which you’ve turned your back upon so pridefully:

John 6:

47: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48: I am that bread of life.
49: Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50: This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51: I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
52: The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53: Then Jesus said unto them, **Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. **
54: **Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55: For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. **
57: As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58: This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: **he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. **

Luke 6:46 reveals your plight:

**46: And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? **

Romans 11:1-11

1 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

2 God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel?

3 “Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.”

4 But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”

5 In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice.

6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.

7 What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened;

8 just as it is written, "GOD GAVE THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR, EYES TO SEE NOT AND EARS TO HEAR NOT, DOWN TO THIS VERY DAY."

9 And David says, "LET THEIR TABLE BECOME A SNARE AND A TRAP, AND A STUMBLING BLOCK AND A RETRIBUTION TO THEM."

10 "LET THEIR EYES BE DARKENED TO SEE NOT, AND BEND THEIR BACKS FOREVER."

11 I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous.

Why not quote the rest?

12: Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness?
13: For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
15: For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
16: For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17: And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18: Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19: Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20: Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. **
22: Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23: And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24: For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
25: For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in**.
26: And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28: **As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. **
29: For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
**30: For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32: For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. **33: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
34: For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counseller?
35: Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
36: For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

So take care in how you inveigh against the tree to which Christianity was grafted, even as you yourself have left the grafted branch for a twig through the rude pruning or your theology of subtraction.

Of course, you simply tried to imply that St Paul was speaking prophetically of the Mass and the altar upon which it is performed. There is simply nothing you will not twist in the Scripture you claim to love, is there?

Reflect on Luther’s words, Sandusky. If even an arch-schismatic can get this, there’s hope for you yet.

 

[Teflon93]

For the benefit of the poorly-catechized:

1382 The Mass is at the same time, and inseparably, the sacrificial memorial in which the sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated and the sacred banquet of communion with the Lord’s body and blood. But the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice is wholly directed toward the intimate union of the faithful with Christ through communion. To receive communion is to receive Christ himself who has offered himself for us.

1383 The altar, around which the Church is gathered in the celebration of the Eucharist, represents the two aspects of the same mystery: the altar of the sacrifice and the table of the Lord. This is all the more so since the Christian altar is the symbol of Christ himself, present in the midst of the assembly of his faithful, both as the victim offered for our reconciliation and as food from heaven who is giving himself to us. "For what is the altar of Christ if not the image of the Body of Christ?"214 asks St. Ambrose. He says elsewhere, "The altar represents the body [of Christ] and the Body of Christ is on the altar."215 The liturgy expresses this unity of sacrifice and communion in many prayers. Thus the Roman Church prays in its anaphora:

We entreat you, almighty God,
that by the hands of your holy Angel
this offering may be borne to your altar in heaven
in the sight of your divine majesty,
so that as we receive in communion at this altar
the most holy Body and Blood of your Son,
we may be filled with every heavenly blessing and grace.216
“Take this and eat it, all of you”: communion

1384 The Lord addresses an invitation to us, urging us to receive him in the sacrament of the Eucharist: **“Truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.”**217

1385 To respond to this invitation we must prepare ourselves for so great and so holy a moment. **St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.”**218 Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion.

1386 Before so great a sacrament, the faithful can only echo humbly and with ardent faith the words of the Centurion: “Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum, sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea” (“Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul will be healed.”).219 And in the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom the faithful pray in the same spirit:

O Son of God, bring me into communion today with your mystical supper. I shall not tell your enemies the secret, nor kiss you with Judas’ kiss. But like the good thief I cry, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”

1387 To prepare for worthy reception of this sacrament, the faithful should observe the fast required in their Church.220 Bodily demeanor (gestures, clothing) ought to convey the respect, solemnity, and joy of this moment when Christ becomes our guest.

1388 It is in keeping with the very meaning of the Eucharist that the faithful, if they have the required dispositions,221 receive communion when they participate in the Mass.222 As the Second Vatican Council says: "That more perfect form of participation in the Mass whereby the faithful, after the priest’s communion, receive the Lord’s Body from the same sacrifice, is warmly recommended."223

1389 The Church obliges the faithful to take part in the Divine Liturgy on Sundays and feast days and, prepared by the sacrament of Reconciliation, to receive the Eucharist at least once a year, if possible during the Easter season.224 But the Church strongly encourages the faithful to receive the holy Eucharist on Sundays and feast days, or more often still, even daily.

1390 Since Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species, communion under the species of bread alone makes it possible to receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace. For pastoral reasons this manner of receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common form in the Latin rite. But "the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly."225 This is the usual form of receiving communion in the Eastern rites.

The fruits of Holy Communion

1391 Holy Communion augments our union with Christ. The principal fruit of receiving the Eucharist in Holy Communion is an intimate union with Christ Jesus. **Indeed, the Lord said: “He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.”**226 Life in Christ has its foundation in the Eucharistic banquet: **“As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.”**227

On the feasts of the Lord, when the faithful receive the Body of the Son, they proclaim to one another the Good News that the first fruits of life have been given, as when the angel said to Mary Magdalene, “Christ is risen!” Now too are life and resurrection conferred on whoever receives Christ.228

1392 What material food produces in our bodily life, Holy Communion wonderfully achieves in our spiritual life. Communion with the flesh of the risen Christ, a flesh "given life and giving life through the Holy Spirit,"229 preserves, increases, and renews the life of grace received at Baptism. This growth in Christian life needs the nourishment of Eucharistic Communion, the bread for our pilgrimage until the moment of death, when it will be given to us as viaticum.

1393 Holy Communion separates us from sin. The body of Christ we receive in Holy Communion is “given up for us,” and the blood we drink “shed for the many for the forgiveness of sins.” For this reason the Eucharist cannot unite us to Christ without at the same time cleansing us from past sins and preserving us from future sins:

For as often as we eat this bread and drink the cup, we proclaim the death of the Lord. If we proclaim the Lord’s death, we proclaim the forgiveness of sins. If, as often as his blood is poured out, it is poured for the forgiveness of sins, I should always receive it, so that it may always forgive my sins. Because I always sin, I should always have a remedy.230

1394 As bodily nourishment restores lost strength, so the Eucharist strengthens our charity, which tends to be weakened in daily life; and this living charity wipes away venial sins.231 By giving himself to us Christ revives our love and enables us to break our disordered attachments to creatures and root ourselves in him:

Since Christ died for us out of love, when we celebrate the memorial of his death at the moment of sacrifice we ask that love may be granted to us by the coming of the Holy Spirit. We humbly pray that in the strength of this love by which Christ willed to die for us, we, by receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, may be able to consider the world as crucified for us, and to be ourselves as crucified to the world. . . . Having received the gift of love, let us die to sin and live for God.232

1395 By the same charity that it enkindles in us, the Eucharist preserves us from future mortal sins. The more we share the life of Christ and progress in his friendship, the more difficult it is to break away from him by mortal sin. The Eucharist is not ordered to the forgiveness of mortal sins - that is proper to the sacrament of Reconciliation. The Eucharist is properly the sacrament of those who are in full communion with the Church.

1396 The unity of the Mystical Body: the Eucharist makes the Church. Those who receive the Eucharist are united more closely to Christ. Through it Christ unites them to all the faithful in one body - the Church. Communion renews, strengthens, and deepens this incorporation into the Church, already achieved by Baptism. **In Baptism we have been called to form but one body.233 The Eucharist fulfills this call: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread:”**234

If you are the body and members of Christ, then it is your sacrament that is placed on the table of the Lord; it is your sacrament that you receive. To that which you are you respond “Amen” (“yes, it is true!”) and by responding to it you assent to it. For you hear the words, “the Body of Christ” and respond “Amen.” Be then a member of the Body of Christ that your Amen may be true.235

1397 The Eucharist commits us to the poor. To receive in truth the Body and Blood of Christ given up for us, we must recognize Christ in the poorest, his brethren:

You have tasted the Blood of the Lord, yet you do not recognize your brother,. . . . You dishonor this table when you do not judge worthy of sharing your food someone judged worthy to take part in this meal. . . . God freed you from all your sins and invited you here, but you have not become more merciful.236

 

[Teflon93]

And a short bit more:

1398 The Eucharist and the unity of Christians. Before the greatness of this mystery **St. Augustine exclaims, “O sacrament of devotion! O sign of unity! O bond of charity!”**237 The more painful the experience of the divisions in the Church which break the common participation in the table of the Lord, the more urgent are our prayers to the Lord that the time of complete unity among all who believe in him may return.

1399 The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. “**These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all - by apostolic succession - the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy.” **A certain communion in sacris, and so in the Eucharist, "given suitable circumstances and the approval of Church authority, is not merely possible but is encouraged."238

1400 **Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, “have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders.”**239 It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, "when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory."240

1401 When, in the Ordinary’s judgment, a grave necessity arises, Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who ask for them of their own will, provided they give evidence of holding the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments and possess the required dispositions.241

 

[ellammcg]

Our sermon this morning was about forgiveness, specifically:
Matthew 6:14-15 "For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."
and James 5:9 “Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door”.
Our pastor specifically stated that Jesus meant the words of Matthew just as much as he meant John 3:16 and that all saved people must forgive. He then went on about Isaiah 44:22 “I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and, as a cloud, thy sins: return unto me; for I have redeemed thee.”

Here’s the thing- I gave myself a headache trying to reconcile these 2 points. How can Matthew 6:14-15 be true and it also be true that a saved person is unconditionally forgiven all forever? Just what am I not understanding?

 

[BRB]

The problem lies with the Catholic idea that one is “born again” through water baptism - not necessarily through faith in Christ: “baptismal regeneration.” There’s some Protestant churches that have retained this Catholic notion.No! You must jettison that cargo. What do you base your eternal security on, BRB?

Here’s my take on Catholic beliefs with regards to ‘born again’ rebirth.

They seem to believe that infant baptism is sufficent to remove original sins and impart graces to protect infants during their early formative years. Now the ‘faith’ in this event is by the parents, priest, and godparents. We have many cradle Catholics who don’t recall their baptisms, having experienced as infant.

Justin Martyr would appear to be the earliest Church father to write on baptism history. He discusses the matter in his Apologies Vol. 1. He describes adult baptism — and says that belief comes first, followed by confession, then profession of faith, and finally by Trinitarian Baptism.

An ‘Illumination’ comes upon the new convert. It’s a new knowledge & awakening in one’s Lord. Although Justin doesn’t specifically say it … it is clear he is referring to this Illumination as the new Christian’s spiritual rebirth in H.S. It’s the spiritual ‘sealing’ ALL early converts experienced.

Christ was asked what we must do to see the Kingdom. He described the mystical ‘rebirth’ that was required. Firstly, birth of water, and secondly by the spirit. Catholic will say that water baptism and rebirth baptism by H.S. can happen to newborn infants also.

For a child of say 4 y.o., who has some concept of God / Jesus, I can see Justin’s depiction of early Christian baptism being applicable. But, for a newborn infant … the Illumination step would perhaps await that child’s Confirmation.

But, in the final analysis …the mystical Illumination Event was key for the early Christians. As long as cradle Catholics at some point in their lives experiences Illumination … I would think that their ‘mandatory’ Spiritual Rebirths occur.

Perhaps many Catholics leave the church because they never get Confirmed, or for other reasons never experience the Illumination epiphany event.

Regarding ‘eternal security’ question you raise. For the early Christians it was faith, confession, rebirths in Christ via baptism by water followed by baptism by H.S. They received ‘gift’ of salvation … as evidenced by the H.S. they received. As long as they remained faithful disciples to the end … their eternity was assurred and historical accounts of martyrdom events leave little doubt as to their certitude.

It is no different for modern day Christians. The Christian formula has not changed. Justin called it Illumination. Others may call it something else [predestination, election, etc]… but, it is what it is. A certitude that Christ will not forsake his sheep … unless we draw back from faith & discipleship and desire to be goats.

 

[BRB]

Correct - we simply do not know the future choices which we will make with PERFECT CERTAINTY. That is why the notion of absolute certainty that “when I die I am going to heaven” is erroneous unless you have recieved a personal, divine revelation from God. End of discussion.

Since God is Omnipotent, sees the future, and works his will in history … ones final outcome/destiny is a known quantity.

That is why Jesus could predict with certainty what Judas had planned. To believe that Jesus doesn’t see our outcomes is not credible.

Christ clearly teaches he will never forsake his sheep. That’s an Oath.

Some will say its our Oath to Christ that is the problem. We are promise breakers by nature. Thats why the 3rd person of Trinity was sent to the believers. W/O that divine intervention Illumination ] , we would be w/o assurance.

For us to think that only those who have seen angels, walked with Christ, or had conversions like Pauls have salvation certitude is misguided thinking.

Christ, being the miracle worker, personally illumimates all post-Pentecost disciples via H.S. of Trinity. As he taught in Gospels … that is better proof than if you had been one of original 12 and walk with him. Afterall, Judas was lost … but, Judas would appear not to have experieced H.S. [pre-Pentecost period].

 

[Pax]

Please examine the following verses.

Romans 7:4-6
Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. While we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive,** so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit**.

Eph 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God–not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Romans 6:16-18
Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

As members of the New Covenant family of God we:

1. serve in the new life of the Spirit.
2. we are God’s workmanship.
3. we are created in Christ Jesus for good works that the Father prepared in advance of our justification so that we should walk in them.
4. we are no longer slaves to sin which leads to death and condemnation.
5. we have become obedient from the heart which leads to righteousness.
6. we are freed from sin.
7. we have become slaves to righteousness.

Now please explain to me how it is that living in the life of the Spirit as described above in scripture is legalistic.

Please explain to me how this is not living by grace and faith, but is instead subjecting ourselves to the Old Law which Paul says cannot justify us.

Please explain to me how all of this pits grace against works in salvation.

Please explain to me how this pits faith against works in salvation.

Please explain to me how faith alone conforms to these scriptures.

 

[BRB]

Perhaps tomorrow I will not resist the sins St Paul warned us about and thus violate the Commandments given us by God, thus refusing the gift of eternal life. In which case, I can only hope I will repent and return to full communion with the Body of Christ, and thus return to having eternal life. It is the life which is eternal, not our possession of it.

.

Clearly then you would take the Prodigal Son parable as being addressed to a ‘believer’ who falls away from faith.

Do you Moondweller & Sandusky ?

If not … who is Christ talking to in that parable ?

 

[Teflon93]

Christ clearly teaches he will never forsake his sheep. That’s an Oath.

Some will say its our Oath to Christ that is the problem. We are promise breakers by nature. Thats why the 3rd person of Trinity was sent to the believers. W/O that divine intervention Illumination ] , we would be w/o assurance.

Indeed, the lost sheep of Israel became so not because God forsook them, but because they forsook him.

The eternal existence of the Son confirms that God always knew this would be the case. It would be an error to presume that because of this the Jews did not have free will; they freely chose to disobey the Law, just as we freely choose to sin.

For the Catholic, we are restored to the fold through the sacrament of penance and reconciliation, whereby we turn from our own path and back to the Shepherd’s and are reunited with the flock.

For those who believe OSAS, they resolve this by claiming that our sins simply no longer matter to God, and/or that we cannot commit sins at all.

The etymology of such terms is often useful:

reconcile
c.1300, of persons, from L. reconcilare “to bring together again,” from re- “again” + concilare “make friendly” (see conciliate). Reflexive sense is recorded from 1535. Meaning “to make (discordant facts or statements) consistent” is from 1565.

penance
c.1290, “religious discipline or self-mortification as a token of repentance and as atonement for some sin,” from Anglo-Fr. penaunce, O.Fr. penance, from L. pænitentia (see penitence). Transf. sense is recorded from c.1305.

repent
c.1290, “to feel regret for sins or crimes,” from O.Fr. repentir (11c.), from re-, intensive prefix, + V.L. *penitire “to regret,” from L. poenitire “make sorry,” from poena (see pain). The distinction between regret (q.v.) and repent is made in many modern languages, but the differentiation is not present in older periods. Repentance is recorded from c.1300, from O.Fr. repentance (12c.).

sin (n.)
O.E. synn “moral wrongdoing, offense against God, misdeed,” from P.Gmc. *sundjo (cf. O.S. sundia, O.Fris. sende, M.Du. sonde, Ger. Sünde “sin, transgression, trespass, offense”), probably ult. “true” (cf. Goth. sonjis, O.N. sannr “true”), from PIE *es-ont-, prp. of base *es- “to be” (see is). The semantic development is via notion of “to be truly the one (who is guilty),” as in O.N. phrase verð sannr at “be found guilty of,” and the use of the phrase “it is being” in Hittite confessional formula. The same process probably yielded the L. word sons (gen. sontis) “guilty, criminal” from prp. of sum, esse “to be, that which is.” Some etymologists believe the Gmc. word was an early borrowing directly from the L. genitive. Sin-eater is attested from 1686. To live in sin “cohabit without marriage” is from 1838. Ice hockey slang sin bin “penalty box” is attested from 1950.

 

[BRB]

What do you make of the verse that says the lampstand will be taken away?

.

Christ is the light. Perhaps the lampstand signifies H.S.

If we don’t let the light shine forth … the H.S. will be removed from us.

 

[Pax]

Since God is Omnipotent, sees the future, and works his will in history … ones final outcome/destiny is a known quantity.

This is a known quantity to God, but nothing is known as a metaphysical certainty by us.

Christ, being the miracle worker, personally illumimates all post-Pentecost disciples via H.S. of Trinity. As he taught in Gospels … that is better proof than if you had been one of original 12 and walk with him. Afterall, Judas was lost … but, Judas would appear not to have experieced H.S. [pre-Pentecost period].

You are making a haphazard guess about Judas. It is true that he was not around at Pentecost, but he believed and was given great grace while one of the twelve. The following should be helpful in regards to Judas.

Judas is an example of a believer that perished. Judas is never referred to as a non-believer. Judas is, instead, described as a traitor. This is very important. He believed in Jesus and he betrayed his Lord and Savior. Please note that at the marriage feast of Cana Jesus worked his first miracle and scripture tells us that His disciples believed in Him[John 2:11]. Clearly, Judas had faith. Jesus picked the twelve apostles and in Matthew 10:1 it says Jesus, “….called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity.” Even Judas was given the authority over unclean spirits and the power of healing. This is power by way of the Spirit.

I hope this helps.

 

[BRB]

None of the Apostles taught that we should go on our “feelings”. But they did teach criteria by which we can know that we are in a state of grace.

H.S. is much more than ‘feelings’. Feeling are usually earthly and don’t last. Everyone knows about ‘first loves’ … which are many and usually disappoint.

H.S. is that ‘blessed assurance’ – surpasses all understanding. Its obtained by grace … as apostles taught.