Do Catholics believe John 6:53?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BereanRuss
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BereanRuss said:
If I mis-quoting then post the section of the CCC that teaches otherwise. I have even requested the portions of the CCC that pertain to the sacrament of reconciliation to be posted so we can all examine them, but I have seen none.
Click to expand...
If I may suggest NotWorthy, that you examine the teaching of your church with the word of God and see where the truth is. Ralph
 
guanophore said:
Yes, and this is also true. However, this is not how those terms were used figuratively in the first century. At the time He spoke them, the figurative meaning of the words was calumny.

If it had meant what you interpret it to mean, then the disciples would not have found it a “hard saying” and stopped following Him.

Yes, he made this general statement about eating his body and blood to all the disciples. But it was only to the Apostles that He gave the authority to “do this in rememberance of me”. this happened privately, in the upper room.

The early church understood that the only valid communion was that which occured with the bishop, or his appointee (presbyter).

God grants graces to some that he does not to others. The priestly access is different than mine, because he is ordained to certain duties, and I am not. Some have more access as a result of personal piety:

1 Peter 3:7

7 Likewise you husbands, live considerately with your wives, bestowing honor on the woman as the weaker sex, since you are joint heirs of the grace of life, in order that your prayers may not be hindered.

For example, a man living a graced sacramental marriage will not have his prayers hindered,where one who is living inappropriately in marriage may.

Those who are in a state of grace before God (righteous) have more powerful prayers:

James 5:16
16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.

Some God does not hear their prayers.

Yes, we do receive forgiveness when we come boldly. One of the ways in which this coming is accomplised is through the sacrament of reconciliation. You might consider it, Russ. There is a great spout of glory!

I think that Jesus emphasized both,and did not separate them from one another. Do you feel that you need to choose between them? Are you not able to have both? Do you think, if you returned to the Catholic Church, you would no longer have Jesus in your heart?

Well, I disagree with this. However, I am not sure that it is germaine to this thread. In either case, we receive Jesus from the hand of the priest. We also receive Him into our heart.

Are you still suffering under the misunderstanding that sacraments are “works of man”?

Indeed! 👍

I agree! I think that it was corruption among the clergy that largely precipitated the Reformation. What is not clear to me is why those who felt reform was needed did not remain with the authority that Jesus appointed. Maybe they thought there was no holy remnant left?

You did not answer my question, though. We are in agreement that Jesus has kept His promise to guide the Church into all truth. Why, then are those such as yourself who are of fervent heart,not united to those whom Jesus placed in authority over the Church?

I agree, but the Spirit does not lead the flock into 30,000 directions. He also does not lead away from what He has already established. He established Apostles, presbyters, and deacons. He preserved this structure through two millenia. Now, it seems to be your contention that this structure, established by God, is invalid. 🤷

Did you quote something from the CCC? I thought you were just making baseless assertions.

I did not post anything on this because it is off topic in this thread. It is a good point to discuss, but it needs a new thread. This one is going to be closed anyhow, as soon as the mods realize how far we are over the 1000 post limit.

Since it is about to close, I want to commend you for your tenacity. Except for one other “bible christian” you have had to take on the lot of us fervent Catholics all by your lonesome. Pretty overwhelming!

It has been a good learning experience for everyone, I trust. I encourage you to post your issue about confession over in the Apologetics section.
Click to expand...
BereanRuss did not take all you catholics on by his lonesome, God through the Holy Spirit was with him all the way and still is. Ralph
 
BereanRuss said:
You cannot be forgiven in the CC without the mediation of the priest. If can be completely forgiven there is no need for the sacrament of reconciliation.
Click to expand...
First of all, it is not the “mediation” of the priest per se that obtains forgiveness, it’s the mediation of Christ. Christ’s mediation, Russ, is based on His Sacrifice on the Cross. This is why He is the unique mediator because only by His blood is one reconciled to God. There can be no forgiveness of sins apart from His atoning sacrifice. Through the sacraments of baptism and confession, that which Christ accomplished on the Cross is subjectively applied to the individual. Secondly, once again you make a false claim. The Catholic Church has never taught that you cannot be forgiven without a priest. Confession is the normative means of be restored to a state of grace - if the person has faith and is repentant - but God does not exclusively work through the sacraments. 🙂

God Bless,
Michael
 
ralphy said:
BereanRuss did not take all you catholics on by his lonesome, God through the Holy Spirit was with him all the way and still is. Ralph
Click to expand...
So when an Arminian Protestant and a Calvinist are debating, who is the Holy Spirit with?

God Bless,
Michael
 
ralphy said:
Water refered to here is the “washing of water by the word”. Ralph
Click to expand...
The baptism is never separated from the reading of the word, and the prayer of repentance and faith. Baptism washes away all sins because we are calling upon the name of the Lord.

Water is the means by which the cleaning blood of Jesus is applied to the person, and the manner in which His Spirit enters and cleanses the soul:

Ezek 36:24-28
25 I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26 A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances.
 
40.png
NotWorthy:
Where does your church have “ordained leaders”? Where did your church receive the authority to “ordain leaders”. It would seem its a tradition of men in your church.

You bring up a new subject without a verse.
 
NotWorthy said:
What do you mean by this? Are you viewing the thread in linear form? I find it easier to follow this thread if I view in Linear form…
Click to expand...
Linear form. When you do a quote, there is a link to the previous post. Joe is knowingly or unknowingly defeating this feature in at least one post - and more I believe.
 
Randy_Carson said:
Most people who hold dispensational beliefs assume they are based in the Bible and have ancient roots. But dispensationalism has been around less than 200 years. The father of dispensationalism is John Nelson Darby, a Protestant Irish lawyer who left his successful practice to become an Anglican priest. Born in 1800, Darby was a contemporary of John Henry Newman, the famous leader of the Anglican Oxford movement in the 1830s. But while Newman would later become a Catholic priest and eventually a cardinal, Darby’s studies of Scripture-coupled with a disenchantment with mainstream Christian churches-led him to develop the idea of a “true church” and the apostasy of the established churches, especially the Catholic Church. He believed this true church was spiritual in character and should have no involvement in earthly affairs. He wrote that “the church is properly heavenly, in its calling and relationship with Christ, forming no part of the course of events on earth. . . . Our calling is on high. Events are on earth” (quoted by Harold Bloom in The American Religion, 22).

In 1827 Darby left the Anglican priesthood and by 1831 was among the leaders of the Plymouth Brethren, a non-denominational movement which denounced mainline Christianity. He began to teach that the true church would need to be removed from the earth in order to make way for the completion of God’s dealings with the Jews. He named this secret removal of the church the Rapture. This belief was something completely new in Christianity. No previous Christian, neither Catholic nor Protestant, had ever proposed or taught such a thing.

taken from:

Waiting to Be Raptured - Dispensationalist Thought in America
By Carl El. Olson
catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9904fea1.asp**
Click to expand...
My brother in the Lord, BereanRuss has answered this situation in post # 1086. Thanks Russ. Ralph
 
Randy_Carson said:
Your premise is flawed.

The Evangelical starts with the assumption that scripture existed first and that tradition was slowly and incrementally added to it as time progressed. However, the original deposit of faith was given to the Apostles years before Scripture was ever penned.
Click to expand...
You are accusing God that His word incomplete.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

How can the Bible make the believer complete if it is not complete itself?
 
BereanRuss said:
I could not find a better example of a mediator then you just described for us!

When you are with the priest you hear Jesus but when you are not with him you do not hear Jesus. The priest is necessary for you to hear the Lord therefore the priest IS a mediator in EVRY sense.
Click to expand...
The priest is not a mediator in the same sense that Christ is, because the priest does not die for my sins on the Cross. Rather, he facilitates my relationship with Jesus Christ, by means of his ministry in the priesthood.

As for hearing the Lord, it was the Lord who told me to go to the priest. Click on my Conversion story, linked in my signature, to find out more about that. 👍

I can certainly hear the Lord speaking to me in my heart, and I even asked Him one time, why do I need the priest, since I can hear You speaking to me in my heart? He answered me, “So that you may love one another, as I have loved you.” 🙂

And also because not every voice I hear in my heart is the Lord, and sometimes I can’t tell the difference. So the priest helps me to stay grounded, and to know what is from the Lord, and what is not from the Lord.
The problem is that the roll that the priest is playing in your relationship with God is reserved only for CHRIST himself. He alone is the mediator between God and man.
Click to expand...
The role reserved to Christ is the role of dying on the Cross for our sins. But Christ Himself appointed the Apostles to hear confessions and forgive sins, as well as to say Mass and give us the Eucharist.
 
BereanRuss said:
You are accusing God that His word incomplete.
Click to expand...
Not at all. Only that not all of God’s word was written down. We hear God’s word at Mass and in the Sacraments, we read God’s word in the Scriptures, and we experience God’s word in our obedience to the Commandments.
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Click to expand...
How can the Bible make the believer complete if it is not complete itself?
Click to expand...
Because the believer is also going to Church, participating in the spiritual life, praying, and living out his Christian witness in the world. The Scriptures “complete” him because he is also doing all of these other things - he is not relying on Scripture alone to save him - he is relying on God (Jesus) as He has been made known in all of these different ways.
 
PRmerger said:
Did you know that the CC teaches that through the Sacrament of Baptism* all *sins are forgiven?
Click to expand...
Which is not scriptural. Baptism is meaningless until there is first a profession of faith.

Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized? Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Until there is faith, there is no reason to baptize.
 
BereanRuss said:
You cannot be forgiven in the CC without the mediation of the priest. If can be completely forgiven there is no need for the sacrament of reconciliation.
Click to expand...
Mortal sins (those that cut us off from the Throne of Grace) need to be confessed to the priest (because, how can we approach the Throne of Grace, if we have cut ourselves off from it by the seriousness of our sins?) but other sins can be forgiven in prayer and good deeds.
 
NotWorthy said:
I’m curious.

How do you see Malachi 1:11 - 11For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.

The Church teaches that this is fulfilled in the Mass. As a matter of fact, its repeated at most Masses while the bread and wine are being consecration (the Eucharistic Prayers). I don’t know if you remember the priests’ words, “So that from east to west, a perfect offerering may be made…”
Click to expand...
Befor you talk about the “offering at the mass”, you should read Heb 10:11-18. Ralph
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top