P
PRmerger
Guest
Ralph,
What is your interpretation for how the apostles could “retain” sins?
What is your interpretation for how the apostles could “retain” sins?
- Status
R
ralphy
Guest
My mandate is to evangelize, throught the word of God, I also assist in baptizing. I could baptize,based on the word of God. Ralph
N
NotWorthy
Guest
R
ralphy
Guest
On the authority of Gods word, or is that not as good as the traditional teaching of the Roman catholic church? Ralph
G
guanophore
Guest
This command was given to the disciples, Berean. Of course it was literal, and of course we are expected to follow His commandments.
This commandment was not given to non-believers. The uninitiated have never been admitted to communion.
R
ralphy
Guest
In case you were not told , the apostles are now physicaly dead. Ralph
N
NotWorthy
Guest
You know, I’m beginning to think you don’t like us, Ralph. How many people have asked you to just refer to us as Catholic, especially those who are Catholic in communion with the Roman Catholic Church. You are hurting their feelings, Ralph. Do you do that on purpose?
But, in regards to your question, God gave authority to His Church. You’ve denied that authority. Its odd that you seem justified by God to deny the very authority that God gave His Church.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I’m sorry. I didn’t get the memo. It wasn’t written in Scripture, so by some christian’s logic, it never happened.
Just pickin’ with you, Ralphy.But, where in Scripture does it say that all authority given to the Apostled died with the Apostles?
Did the need for the authority that the Apostles wielded die out with them? The Church needed authority for the first 40 years, and then no more?
Again, I must have missed that memo.
C
cazayoux
Guest
Again … you are NOT relying on the authority of God’s word, but your wrong INTERPRETATION of God’s word.
Big difference.
Actually it isn’t your wrong interpretation, it’s the wrong interpretation you learned from someone else.
You have not spent late nights studying scripture for years on end.
Instead, you cut/paste references from tracts.
The Catholics here are DISCUSSING scripture, while you have yet to engage in the discussion, merely pasting and re-pasting the same.
If you REALLY feel like YOU have the truth, let’s discuss it, not skirt it.
michel
P
PRmerger
Guest
There is no need to be un-Christian in your response, Ralph. When you say post something like the above it’s unbecoming to you. Yes, I know the apostles are now physically dead.
What is your interpretation of what our Lord meant to his apostles when he told them that they could “retain” sins?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
For those of you who wish to get back on topic, I’d like to offer up today’s Gospel reading from Mass. You see Ralph and Russ, one of the GREAT things about being Catholic is that you can go to Mass every day of week!!! Praise God!
But, back to the Gospel reading, I’ll cover only a few verses of it: Luke 24: 30-31 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. It is the first day of our Lord’s Resurrection, and one of the first things he does is Celebrate the Mass with two disciples!!! He went over the Scriptures and talked of how they applied to Christ, and then he “took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to them”. (paraphrasing). Sounds like what the priest does every day!!! But here come the really cool part - “and their eyes were opened and they recognized him”!!! The Disciples recognized Jesus in the Eucharist!!!
Still not convinced? Look at the very last line of the Gospel reading! Verse 35 says: Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread.
The risen Christ comes to us - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity - in the Eucharist!
But, back to the Gospel reading, I’ll cover only a few verses of it: Luke 24: 30-31 And it happened that, while he was with them at table, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them. With that their eyes were opened and they recognized him, but he vanished from their sight. It is the first day of our Lord’s Resurrection, and one of the first things he does is Celebrate the Mass with two disciples!!! He went over the Scriptures and talked of how they applied to Christ, and then he “took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to them”. (paraphrasing). Sounds like what the priest does every day!!! But here come the really cool part - “and their eyes were opened and they recognized him”!!! The Disciples recognized Jesus in the Eucharist!!!
Still not convinced? Look at the very last line of the Gospel reading! Verse 35 says: Then the two recounted what had taken place on the way and how he was made known to them in the breaking of the bread.
The risen Christ comes to us - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity - in the Eucharist!
V
vinarabo
Guest
Catholic Traditional teaching = Authority of Gods Words
J
jlhargus
Guest
JL: [2Tm3:10 BUT THOU HAST FULLY KNOWN MY DOCTRINE, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, 11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But CONTINUE THOU IN THE THINGS WHICH THOU HAST LEARNED AND HAST BEEN ASSURED OF, KNOWING OF WHOM THOU HAST LEARNED THEM; 15 AND that from a child THOU HAST KNOW THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.] Paul is instructing Timothy to use BOTH oral Tradition LEARNED from Paul, as well as written Tradition=scripture. 2Thes2:14 Whereunto he called you by OUR GOSPEL, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and HOLD THE TRADITIONS which ye have been TAUGHT, whether BY WORD, OR our EPISTLE.
J
jmcrae
Guest
You keep on asserting this, but you have not given any evidence to support it.
Abraham was a priest, because he was making Covenantal sacrifices. The role of a priest is to make Covenantal sacrifices.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Yes I would. Just where do you think the word ‘priest’ comes from? Here’s a clue: The Greek is ‘presbuteros’, the Latin is ‘presbyter’, the Anglo Saxon is ‘proest’ and the modern word is ‘priest’. And if you don’t believe me then look it up in Merriam & Websters dictionary. So presbyters are indeed priests, at least in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
To support this, simply look at Melchizedek. He was not a priest because of any law, natural or ritual. Melchizedek was a priest because he offered up bread and wine.
A priest’s is a priest, first and foremost, to offer up a sacrifice. The NT priesthood was prophecied in Malachi 1:11 - For from the rising of the sun, even to its setting, my name is great among the nations; And everywhere they bring sacrifice to my name, and a pure offering; For great is my name among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
This ought to be interesting. BereanRuss has already used Webster’s dictionary to (vainly attempt to) dis-prove the “Do” in “do this in memory of me”. It will be interesting if he relies on the same dictionary for the word “priest”.
G
guanophore
Guest
Christians (anyone) is only saved by the shed blood of Christ on the cross. The church founded by Christ is His mystical Body on earth, through which everyone who is saved becomes a member of Him. It is the presence of the Eucharist that enables everyone to be saved. People are still saved through Him, even if they do not know Him, or do not know about Eucharist. Ignorance does not prevent salvation. Resistance, denial, and rebellion may.
I know you need to believe that there is no priesthood, because it is part and parcel of the Apostolic teaching. One cannot accept Apostolic succession without accepting the priesthood. These structural elements of the early church must be rejected in order to justify one’s disobedience to the authority appointed by Christ.
G
guanophore
Guest
Well, there is your error. Jesus affirmed all the Sacred Traditions, those that were from God.
He also committed the Sacred Traditions of the NT to the Apostles, and they to their successors.
These sacred traditions, the ones from God, are the ones that the Apostles commanded that we keep.
It is not a matter of boasting. It is a matter of history. The NT comes out of the sacred tradition of the Church. If you do not recognize that the teaching committed tot the Apostles is the inerrant Word of God, then it could not have produced an inerrant written form. If there is no Apostolic succession, and the Word of God could not be preserved without error, then no NT is possible.
I suggest you go back and read the story again,Berean. Live up to your handle, and search the scriptures to see if it is not true. Those who did not keep the Passover died with the Pagans.
Indeed, this is EXACTLY what Passover is about. It was a memorial meal that made the deliverance present over the generations.Those that did not participate were not considered part of the people of God.
It did not “re-present” their deliverance. It only remembers their deliverance. Their deliverance was a ONE TIME event that can never be duplicated. The Sacrifice if Christ is the same:
with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. [Heb 9:12]
The sacrifice if Jesus is a one time event. To add to His perfect sacrifice is to deny His work of salvation on the cross but this is exactly what the priest does. Every mass the priest prays, “may the Lord accept our sacrifice… the work of human hands…” – He will not. He will only accept the perfect offering of His Son.
THe angel of death came only once, and the Jews left Egypt only once, but the memorial was celebrated yearly so that the one time event would be fresh on the minds of the faithful. It was a ritual that brought the members of the community into the experience of deliverance from slavery.
Eucharist does not “add” anything to Jesus sacrifice except ourselves. Just as celebration of the Passover meal did not “add” to the deliverance, but those persons born later are added to this part of their faith, so does Eucharist make us present at the foot of His cross, to be part of His Once for all sacrifice.
I think you have mixed up the words of the Mass. We offer ourselves, and the work of our hands, Christ offers Himself. We are joined into His sacrifice during the Mass.
G
guanophore
Guest
Jesus chose to depend upon men, just as He has throughout history. God chose to make His infallible word present to the world through the Church. God chose to work through men. IT is He that makes their deeds infallible. If He did not do this, it would not be possible for them to preach the Word of God, being only human as they were.
Certainly there are weeds among the wheat. No one here is claiming that evil has not entered. What Jesus promised is that the Church would not teach evil. As long as we are here on this earth, there will be wolves among the sheep. But the Church is the flock of God, and He preserves His flock from error.
It is both. Jesus chose to build a visible Church. It is both a physical organization, and a spiritual. Otherwise, how could anyone “take it to the church”? If one could not find the actual physical church, then how could one take anything to them? How could Paul persecute a church, if it could not be found?
If you are brave enough to look at the writings of the early church fathers, it will be easy for you to see how the church was physically visible to the people.
- Status