Do Catholics believe Protestants are going to hell?

[Cristian_B]

this is one very apocalyptic view of Protestantism. The first statement alone should be enough to give someone pause: “Salvation secured by believing you are saved!” That really, really brings home the emptiness of the promise

It does not say to believe that you are saved, but to believe in Jesus.

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Romans 10:9

It does not say: “if you believe that you are saved” but it says to believe in Christ. If you believe in Christ and love Him, then you are saved. And you know it; you believe it. But that does not mean that you are completely secured. Look what Paul says to the Corinthians: So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall! (1 Corinthians 10:12) If we believe we are saved, we still be careful not to fall. We must be careful. We know we are saved, but we also know that we must improve to keep being saved. If you believe you are saved, you also believe you must improve: become more like Christ. If you don’t go on (improve), you go back. Believing that you are saved is not a sin, but becoming too secure on yourself can make you fall. Knowing, seeing and believing that you stand firm isn’t wrong, but you mustn’t forget that you stand firm because of God, and that you must keep improving.

 

[poetryforjesus]

I think of Martin Luther a little differently, although to be sure I am not an expert on his life or his theology. What impressed me in my reading on him was that he was very concerned that he was a sinful man. His ultimate response was to create a theology where sin didn’t matter - the famous sola fide priniciple where faith is all that is required. In fact, he famously recommended in one of his letters to Sin boldly, trusting in the lord’s forgiveness. This to me is Satan’s most effective Lie: “Don’t worry about sin, just trust in the Lord.” It has all the markings of piety, while discounting the one thing that is required of us: to do God’s will.

How scary this is!!! It seems like trust in God, but in fact it is a servile fear of God and a running away from an intimate friendship with God. How ironic that protestants usually would boast they are the ones that have a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with God, but their sola fide theology completely ignores their actual friendship with God.

 

[CentralFLJames]

this is one very apocalyptic view of Protestantism. The first statement alone should be enough to give someone pause: “Salvation secured by believing you are saved!” That really, really brings home the emptiness of the promise

Indeed. But that first statement should be sufficient to make a humble and prudential man pause and not take a single step into the dark cavern of Protestantism.

If we apply Occam’s razor recursively to Tomster’s observation to further peel away the onion we arrive at an even more frightening thing. For a “Salvation secured by believing you are saved” must further reduce to a “Salvation in self confidence and self sufficiency”,

At its core its really a system of mental based works that must according to Protestant dogma (that are themselves held as a spontaneous faith that can’t be accounted for) rely on a totally depraved intellect. Ouch! Forget the obvious defects of reason & implicit injustice for: the mentally handicapped, the mentally ill, the mentally damaged; and the children too . These must be therefor doomed to a mediocre faith or some kind of Divine patchwork that God will correct to level the playing field - but not level-up for those “average” and above in IQ. We must conclude in the progression of thought that in a sola fide system, faith is therefor a matter of genetic predisposition for intelligence and mere fortuitous life circumstances. It is really a fatalistic sort of mindset that had Catholics said it would be called “superstitious” and “pagan” derived.

We can end the mental exercise here and say that Protestantism is really a “Salvation secured by a wishful thinking” – a power of mind over matter and spirit too. Strip away the “skin” of Christianity and it almost sounds like a “new age mysticism”. I won’t go that far though as I suppose there are some avenues for the virtue of hope mixed in there – which at least implies uncertainty and humility – things that conspire to de-divinize hubris. But hope is not the same thing as faith nor is faith in self the same thing as obedience to Christ. It is disobedience that will be the downfall of many who call themselves Christian,

In light of the forgoing it might be more sincere to greet our Protestant Brothers with a “Good Luck” rather than a “God’s Blessing!” since the faith they really embrace is more a faith that they are one of the lucky ones to be predestined with the smarts to not be Catholic and one of the smart ones who are the elect.

Under it all we Catholics could legitimately also say that they really do believe in a (mental) works based salvation that need only perspire to the point where they convince themselves they are predestined to the elect. I think its’ also fair to say that Luther just swapped out his own feelings of mistrust of God by putting himself in control to invent whatever theology would calm his mistrust and his scrupulosity. In essence Luther made himself the scapegoat and gave a method to any who had faith in him access to an “invincibly ignorant” mitigation. He played on the mass marketing appeal of a “happy go lucky” religion that could pacify the conscience from scrupulosity by infecting the intellect with an over-confidence in positive thinking (no doubt overcompensating for his lack of affirmation in his own early dysfunction parent-child relationship in his childhood). Luther simply became the self-affirming and pandering father to the many in need of any affirmation it could find (admittedly Catolics were very inwardly frightened of sin). All he really did was trade one infection for the other (scrupulosity vice presumption) and ironically in so doing may just have found a way to bottle “invincible ignorance”. Could the rascal by dulling the natural conscience with the opiate of presumed salvation have actually gamed salvation for some numbers known only to God? Perhaps but I personally doubt his self-sacrifice merited his own soul for even a well intentioned motive that must put himself on the cross to compete with Jesus for souls.

What would be most unsettling is if they were mostly right but it had nothing to do with intellect and it all came down to “dumb luck”. Now that’s totally trusting in God…

My two cents, :twocents:
James

 

[Cristian_B]

I think of Martin Luther a little differently, although to be sure I am not an expert on his life or his theology. What impressed me in my reading on him was that he was very concerned that he was a sinful man. His ultimate response was to create a theology where sin didn’t matter - the famous sola fide priniciple where faith is all that is required. In fact, he famously recommended in one of his letters to Sin boldly, trusting in the lord’s forgiveness. This to me is Satan’s most effective Lie: “Don’t worry about sin, just trust in the Lord.” It has all the markings of piety, while discounting the one thing that is required of us: to do God’s will.

There are many things that can be misunderstood. We are saved just by faith, but that faith in Christ will fill us with Holy Spirit. The fruits of the holy Spirit are: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. If you don’t see any of these fruits then you do not have the holy Spirit, thus you are not saved. So the works are required for discovering your true faith, but the works do not save you. You are not saved for making 100,000 good deeds, but the deeds are fruit of what saves you: faith in Jesus Christ.

You said that Luther told them to sin, so they will see God’s grace but Paul warns about that.

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? (Romans 6:1-2)

So, grace comes by faith, so faith is what saves you. But if you are born again, how can you sin or even worse… how can you encourage someone to sin?

Anyway, faith is what saves you. Remember the thief on the cross. He did not do many good deeds but he was saved because he believed in Him, and that is why He will be in Christ’s Kingdom. So faith saves, but if you are saved, you cannot live in sin anymore. Sin is still important, and that is why we must avoid it.

 

[CentralFLJames]

There are many things that can be misunderstood. We are saved just by faith, but that faith in Christ will fill us with Holy Spirit. The fruits of the holy Spirit are: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. If you don’t see any of these fruits then you do not have the holy Spirit, thus you are not saved. So the works are required for discovering your true faith, but the works do not save you. You are not saved for making 100,000 good deeds, but the deeds are fruit of what saves you: faith in Jesus Christ.

You said that Luther told them to sin, so they will see God’s grace but Paul warns about that.

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? (Romans 6:1-2)

So, grace comes by faith, so faith is what saves you. But if you are born again, how can you sin or even worse… how can you encourage someone to sin?

Anyway, faith is what saves you. Remember the thief on the cross. He did not do many good deeds but he was saved because he believed in Him, and that is why He will be in Christ’s Kingdom. So faith saves, but if you are saved, you cannot live in sin anymore. Sin is still important, and that is why we must avoid it.

Thanks Christian - those are good from the heart insights you shared here.

I might point out that the good thief did do good works. He did a work of Mercy in empathizing with Christ and defending Him. In essence he co-joined Himself to Christ through empathy and desire to be Christ-like. He was also man-to-man encouraging Christ in Christ’s humanity by expressing his confidence in Christ. We can assume that Christ took great comfort in hearing a new soul coming to Him as his first saint to offer his faith in Him even as He was dieing. No Angel could have strenghtened Christ more than to hear these good words from the good-thief. This is confirmed when He identifies with Christ and the goodness of His Divine attributes viz his Kingdom - “remember me when you come into your Kingdom”. Clearly the good thief wanted to be with Christ in a place that reflected Christ’s values. Even to speak from the cross was a tremendous labor of love and affirmation since he was literally in his last moments of life using his last breaths to speak a truth. The thief had to labor to suffer great pain to lift himself up on the cross to full his lungs to rebuke the evil theif - that was a worthy labor. Those last breaths of the good thief did not die there with him on the cross either. No, that labor carried into all of eternity as a supernatural work since his words are recorded in scripture for all time. The good thief’s labors out live his corporeal existence and carry him to heaven through his ratified faith in Jesus and his empathetic bonding to Jesus.

James

 

[paul_c]

It does not say to believe that you are saved, but to believe in Jesus.

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Romans 10:9

It does not say: “if you believe that you are saved” but it says to believe in Christ. If you believe in Christ and love Him, then you are saved. And you know it; you believe it. But that does not mean that you are completely secured. Look what Paul says to the Corinthians: So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall! (1 Corinthians 10:12) If we believe we are saved, we still be careful not to fall. We must be careful. We know we are saved, but we also know that we must improve to keep being saved. If you believe you are saved, you also believe you must improve: become more like Christ. If you don’t go on (improve), you go back. Believing that you are saved is not a sin, but becoming too secure on yourself can make you fall. Knowing, seeing and believing that you stand firm isn’t wrong, but you mustn’t forget that you stand firm because of God, and that you must keep improving.

Here you are denying Sola Fide and OSAS by pointing out that you need to do more than just believe but must act out your faith and become more like Jesus. and that you must persevere in your faith. We Catholics of course agree with you.

 

[paul_c]

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c
I think of Martin Luther a little differently, although to be sure I am not an expert on his life or his theology. What impressed me in my reading on him was that he was very concerned that he was a sinful man. His ultimate response was to create a theology where sin didn’t matter - the famous sola fide priniciple where faith is all that is required. In fact, he famously recommended in one of his letters to Sin boldly, trusting in the lord’s forgiveness. This to me is Satan’s most effective Lie: “Don’t worry about sin, just trust in the Lord.” It has all the markings of piety, while discounting the one thing that is required of us: to do God’s will.

You are very, very close to the Catholic position in this post. You recognize,as we do that we are saved initially by grace through faith and that after you are saved, you must avoid sin to gain heaven. We would also say that you must walk in the footsteps of the Lord, doing the work he calls us to do by his grace. If we cooperate with those graces and avoid sin, we will get to heaven. In fact, if we stumble and fall through sin, in God’s infinite mercy, we can be reconciled through the sacrament of reconciliation and regain the graces lost to sin. Works do have merit, but only if approached through faith and love. If we do them only to recieve acclaim or reward, there will be no spiritual benefit.

 

[Cristian_B]

Thanks Christian - those are good from the heart insights you shared here.

I might point out that the good thief did do good works. He did a work of Mercy in empathizing with Christ and defending Him. In essence he co-joined Himself to Christ through empathy and desire to be Christ-like. He was also man-to-man encouraging Christ in Christ’s humanity by expressing his confidence in Christ. We can assume that Christ took great comfort in hearing a new soul coming to Him as his first saint to offer his faith in Him even as He was dieing. No Angel could have strenghtened Christ more than to hear these good words from the good-thief. This is confirmed when He identifies with Christ and the goodness of His Divine attributes viz his Kingdom - “remember me when you come into your Kingdom”. Clearly the good thief wanted to be with Christ in a place that reflected Christ’s values. Even to speak from the cross was a tremendous labor of love and affirmation since he was literally in his last moments of life using his last breaths to speak a truth. The thief had to labor to suffer great pain to lift himself up on the cross to full his lungs to rebuke the evil theif - that was a worthy labor. Those last breaths of the good thief did not die there with him on the cross either. No, that labor carried into all of eternity as a supernatural work since his words are recorded in scripture for all time. The good thief’s labors out live his corporeal existence and carry him to heaven through his ratified faith in Jesus and his empathetic bonding to Jesus.

James

Thank you for sharing your opinion. A new thing I learned today. But I like to think of the Crucifixion as a miniature of humanity.

There is Jesus and two thieves. He is in the middle. All humanity is on the cross: condemned. Jesus became like us so we, those who love Him, to be saved. So, as I said, humanity is divided in two. A thief who does not repent and, even if he is out strength, he still wants to mock Jesus. And there is the other half, the other thief, which realizes his situation and say: “God, save me!” or, as it says in the Bible: “Remember me when your Kingdom shall come”. All humanity is condemned. You can do nothing on the cross to save yourself, except to realize your need and cry for help. This is why Jesus made himself sin, so who believes in Him, might be saved. There is a half that repents, and another that does not. All humanity dies, but the half that repented will be “remembered” when the Kingdom will come, while the others will be sent into the fire, or “forgotten”.

The Transfiguration is a miniature of the heaven and the world . There is Elijah, the “greatest of the prophets”; there is Moses, the law giver and there is God. There are the three apostles, that represent humanity and Jesus, the bridge between Heaven and Humanity. After the “heaven” (God, Moses, Elijah) disappeared, Jesus remained, so that is why He is the bridge. Then the three give testimony of Jesus: Moses which represents the law, Elijah who represents the prophets and God. So, since He has 3 witnesses (law, prophets and God), then His testimony is true. The transfiguration also represents the Kingdom of Heaven and it is true what He said: some will not die before seeing the kingdom of Heaven. There is Moses, which represents the ones that died but resurrected in the final days (it is written in Jude that God’s angel fought for the body of Moses with Satan, etc. you know the story…) and there is Elijah who represents the ones that did not die but were taken up in heaven. And there is Jesus. So this is also a miniature of the kingdom of heaven: Jesus with His brothers (the ones that did not die but went up in Heaven and those who died but resurrected) and His Father. So the Transfiguration is a miniature of the Kingdom of Heaven and the world.

 

[PJM]

=Malia Belen;4881015]I was reading other posts just seeing what I can learn about Catholicism and I found this in a post.

“The Catholic Church alone is keeping the true worship. This is the font of truth, this is the house of faith, this is the temple of God; if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation” - Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos

“Outside of the Church, nobody can hope for life or salvation unless he is excused through ignorance beyond his control.” - Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem

“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” - 11th Session of the Council of Florence, under Pope Eugene IV

*Informed AND fully Practicing Catholics ought to hold this as at least a real possibility. *

***I hold this position because God will judge all of us not simply by what we [claim to] KNOW, but BY WHAT HE HAS Providentially PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY to know.

Given this time in which we live, the opportunity to know the truth on all matters concerning all Faith Issues and all Moral Issues reside in the Teaching Authority of Christ Catholic Church. This statement is Biblically sound and proveable.***

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[Jermosh]

I didn’t ask you what was in their heart, and I did not ask you what God’s judgement was not did I. Please go back and read the question again.

If you cannot answer it or understand it, let me ask in a different way.

If a person turns to sin, and refuses to quit that sin is his soul in mortal danger?

I did answer it, as again I cannot state if someone is in a state of Mortal Sin or not, only they and God can. I can state that sin can lead to Mortal Sin, but not state it will since I do not know their heart or intent.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Thank you for sharing your opinion. A new thing I learned today. But I like to think of the Crucifixion as a miniature of humanity.

There is Jesus and two thieves. He is in the middle. All humanity is on the cross: condemned. Jesus became like us so we, those who love Him, to be saved. So, as I said, humanity is divided in two. A thief who does not repent and, even if he is out strength, he still wants to mock Jesus. And there is the other half, the other thief, which realizes his situation and say: “God, save me!” or, as it says in the Bible: “Remember me when your Kingdom shall come”. All humanity is condemned. You can do nothing on the cross to save yourself, except to realize your need and cry for help. This is why Jesus made himself sin, so who believes in Him, might be saved. There is a half that repents, and another that does not. All humanity dies, but the half that repented will be “remembered” when the Kingdom will come, while the others will be sent into the fire, or “forgotten”.

The Transfiguration is a miniature of the heaven and the world . There is Elijah, the “greatest of the prophets”; there is Moses, the law giver and there is God. There are the three apostles, that represent humanity and Jesus, the bridge between Heaven and Humanity. After the “heaven” (God, Moses, Elijah) disappeared, Jesus remained, so that is why He is the bridge. Then the three give testimony of Jesus: Moses which represents the law, Elijah who represents the prophets and God. So, since He has 3 witnesses (law, prophets and God), then His testimony is true. The transfiguration also represents the Kingdom of Heaven and it is true what He said: some will not die before seeing the kingdom of Heaven. There is Moses, which represents the ones that died but resurrected in the final days (it is written in Jude that God’s angel fought for the body of Moses with Satan, etc. you know the story…) and there is Elijah who represents the ones that did not die but were taken up in heaven. And there is Jesus. So this is also a miniature of the kingdom of heaven: Jesus with His brothers (the ones that did not die but went up in Heaven and those who died but resurrected) and His Father. So the Transfiguration is a miniature of the Kingdom of Heaven and the world.

You my friend need to convert to Catholicism since you see the integrative aspect of scripture with all of humanity. Bravo!

You are absolutely correct in seeing that all humans are thief’s (we are the descendants of those who stole the forbidden fruit afterall). There is NO escaping our punishment - we all will suffer - either side of Christ (no rapture away from suffering BTW either - good and eveil humans suffer the same fate in the here and now). The clear message to me here is that if we are all to suffer anyway either side of Christ then LET’s BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF CHRIST LITERALLY! Suffering and dieing we must all do - but to suffer on the wrong side of Christ is literally gauche (left side) and merits us no grace. Christ calls both to unite to Him in suffering but like the goats and the sheep those on the left of the divide will mock Christ and those on the right will praise Christ and acknowledge His Lordship (parallels here too to Cain and Abel and others too). Only a foolish thief would suffer his last breath of life to mock Christ when that same last breath can be spent on “the right side of Christ” productively for all eternity and rewarded with son-ship!

The Cross is the new Tree of Life from which hangs the new salvific fruit (Christ in the Eucharist). All we need do now is the same thing as before in the garden and stretch forth our hand to grasp the free invitation to the salvific and remedial fruit that cures us of the poison our fore-parents ingested in the forbidden fruit. Before Satan said “eat the fruit so you can be like God” . Now to the antidote he offers nothing but status quo (dead and suffering) and says “why take God’s saving fruit it can’t save you”. We should have learned our lesson this time around…

Pax,
James

 

[PJM]

Louemma:

According to the BIble, it takes more than merely professing that Jesus Christ is Lord to be saved.

Matthew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 7:20-22 (in Context) Matthew 7 (Whole Chapter)

Matthew 7:22
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Matthew 7:21-23 (in Context) Matthew 7 (Whole Chapter)

Matthew 25:11

Excellent response!

Thanks
Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
Matthew 25:10-12 (in Context) Matthew 25 (Whole Chapter)

Luke 6:46
And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
Luke 6:45-47 (in Context) Luke 6 (Whole Chapter)

Luke 13:25
When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
Luke 13:24-26 (in Context) Luke 13 (Whole Chapter)

 

[PJM]

It does not say to believe that you are saved, but to believe in Jesus.

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Romans 10:9

It does not say: “if you believe that you are saved” but it says to believe in Christ. If you believe in Christ and love Him, then you are saved. And you know it; you believe it. But that does not mean that you are completely secured. Look what Paul says to the Corinthians: So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall! (1 Corinthians 10:12) If we believe we are saved, we still be careful not to fall. We must be careful. We know we are saved, but we also know that we must improve to keep being saved. If you believe you are saved, you also believe you must improve: become more like Christ. If you don’t go on (improve), you go back. Believing that you are saved is not a sin, but becoming too secure on yourself can make you fall. Knowing, seeing and believing that you stand firm isn’t wrong, but you mustn’t forget that you stand firm because of God, and that you must keep improving.

**It can and very often becomes a sin of presumption.

Please READ:

1 John 1: 8-10
1 John 5: 16-18
John 20: 19-23
Mt. 16:19
Mt. 18:18**

Eph. 5: 23 Christ is the head of the church [singular] , his body, [singular]

**John 5: 37 “**And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life [Speaking of accepting the entire WORD of GOD]. I do not receive glory from men. [Meaning disobedience is rampant!] But I know that you have not the love of God within you. I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me” [Obey Me!]

**Eph. 2:19 So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [singular] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit."

***Please read the suggested short passages and then ask your self: “self am I sure?”

Love and prayers,***

 

[Brian_Culliton]

The prayers are made pleasing and become a sacrifice because they are offered up with and in the sacrifice of the Eucharist.

Hi Pete

You describe two sacrifices, one as prayer and one as Eucharist. Justin never makes that distinction. He says the prayers offered in conjunction with the bread and wine is the sacrifice, and all that together is the Eucharist.

And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion. And this food is called among us eukaristia [the eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” (First Apology, 65-66)

Justin calls the elements of the Eucharist bread and wine mixed with water. He says we are taught that the blessed food is, not becomes, the flesh and blood of Christ. That distinction and the importance of it is made clear in the context of his apology.

Earlier in his apology Justin defended against accusations that Christians partake of human flesh and blood. Here, in his description of the Eucharist, he is making it clear that Christians do not partake of flesh and blood in any carnal way, but rather bread and wine mixed with water. Justin then asserted that though Christians partake of bread and wine, it is not common bread or common wine, but that the bread and wine are connected to Christ who became incarnate and was sacrificed at Calvary for those who believe. This food, i.e. bread and wine mixed with water, which by transmutation nourishes the body, is what the Christians call the flesh and blood of Christ. Justin therefore, defends against the accusations that Christians partake of human flesh and blood.

The Eucharist is consecrated “by the prayer of His word,” and by this means becomes “the flesh and blood of that Jesus Who was made flesh.” When we offer the Eucharist, we pray and give thanks, just as Jesus did, and in this way our prayers and thanksgivings become pleasing sacrifices in the perfect sacrifice of Christ.

The Eucharist is indeed consecrated by the prayer of His word, but the word “becomes” is coming from you not Justin, and it does not represent what Justin said. Justin said, “Giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God.” (Trypho 117) I doubt you agree with this seeing how one of you apologist, John Martignoni, recently said this in one of his newsletters:

“And what is this “pure offering” referring to? What is the only “pure” offering that has ever been made to God? The offering of His Son, Jesus Christ, on the cross at Calvary.”

Do you agree with Martignoni that the offering of thanks to God in recognition of Christ’s sacrifice is not a pure offering?

And in Chapter 70, Justin quotes from Isaiah 33 and says that “it is evident, that in this prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch. 70).

Precisely! The bread we eat is in REMEBERANCE of His flesh and the cup in REMEBERANCE of His blood that was shed for us. This should help you to realize that Justin is not saying the bread and cup become the body and blood of Christ.

Continued…

 

[Brian_Culliton]

In Chapter 41 of his Dialogue with Trypho, he refers to Malachi again:
“God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: ‘I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering: for My name is great among the Gentiles, says the Lord: but you profane it’ (Malachi 1:10-12). [So] He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane [it]” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch. 41).

Here we see that the bread and cup of the Eucharist are themselves the sacrifices being offered. And these are the sacrifices that make us “worthy men,” able to offer “prayers and giving of thanks” as “perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God.” This is why “such alone Christians have undertaken to offer”; because “no one is allowed to partake [of the Eucharist] but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined.”

Your conclusion is unreasonable in light of what Justin said later in 117, “Giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God.” If the sacrifice were the element of bread and wine Justin would be contradicting himself. Did you notice in the quote that Justin ties the elements to the Eucharist rather than saying they are the Eucharist. This affirms what I already pointed out, and what Justin clearly taught:

“You [Trypho] assert that God does not accept the sacrifices of those who dwelt then in Jerusalem, and were called Israelites; but says that He is pleased with the prayers of the individuals of that nation then dispersed, and calls their prayers sacrifices. Now, that prayers and giving of thanks, when offered by worthy men, are the only perfect and well-pleasing sacrifices to God, I also admit. For such alone Christians have undertaken to offer, and in the remembrance effected by their solid and liquid food, whereby the suffering of the Son of God which He endured is brought to mind, whose name the high priests of your nation and your teachers have caused to be profaned and blasphemed over all the earth.” (117)

The sacrifice is the giving of thanks, and the remembrance of his suffering is “effected, i.e. produced” by the elements of bread and wine. That is the Eucharist.

You have probably also read this before too, but I thought it would be good to post what Justin described as a typical Sunday gathering in the second century church.

“On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president [Bishop] verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.” (First Apology, 67)

Pretty simple isn’t it? It is interesting how Justin refers to the Eucharistic elements as “that.” I can’t imagine any Christian that believes the elements to be Christ’s literal body and blood referring to them in such a casual way.

Brian

 

[aspirant]

we can and must say that we do not have the authority to claim who is and who is not. We can stand up for our faith though, and confront sin. But we cannot judge others.

Like to say living in sin is a sin. Well yes it is. We cannot deny that. And can living in sin separate you from God, Yes it can. Can we say to someone you are separted from God? No we cannot not. We can just say that it is a sin…

All we can do as Christians is point out what is accepted by God, and what is not. We are to help each other not judge. There is a big difference.

Yes.

 

[PJM]

Hi Pete

You describe two sacrifices, one as prayer and one as Eucharist. Justin never makes that distinction. He says the prayers offered in conjunction with the bread and wine is the sacrifice, and all that together is the Eucharist.

***Fom the Catechism # 1345… Re: Justin ***

"Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren.

He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks (in Greek: eucharistian) that we have been judged worthy of these gifts.

When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: ‘Amen.’ “I Beleive”]

When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the “eucharisted” bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent. PJM

Justin calls the elements of the Eucharist bread and wine mixed with water. He says we are taught that the blessed food is, not becomes, the flesh and blood of Christ.

 

[RunningMan]

The odds of anyone other than Catholics being saved can’t be that good based on their “gravely deficient” condition.

From “DOMINUS IESUS”:

“If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a **gravely deficient **situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.” vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html

If full means of salvation give Catholic a distinct advantage toward salvation- what can realistically be accomplished with little, if any, means?

 

[Brian_Culliton]

Why can’t a perosn read the Gospel, believe and be saved?

Because salvation is not a sole function of sola fide - or mere belief. This very question demonstrates in spades why you can’t separate Sacred Tradition from the Bible since if you read the bible and concluded that all one must do is “believe” then you are admitting to error. The bible says a lot more and one of those things is to partake of the bread of life so you may have life in you and only the Church has the ecclesial and spiritual authority to confect the Eucharist. It also says one must be baptised - again this is somthing that is normatively done by The Church (but admittedly can be done by anyone who has the right intention but the bible does tell you this aspect). The Bible also tells us to go to the Church for resolution of questions. The Bible also tells us to conform to the TEACHING TRADITIONS which are seperate from the bible.

So this is a mere canard - and is pre-assumptive on a sola fide false teaching which the bible also rejects. It’s a pretty straight-forward progression of logic to see if the bible points to the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth then the bible is calling to its mother as the higher co-joined authority and as the context for its voice.

All that said - a person can get inspiration for the faith by reading the bible. And the Church has told us even some of these can gain salvation by desire (but the bible does not tell us that) if they can’t become formal members due to circumstances.

The bottom line is the bible is inseparable from The Church and its teaching authority. The Bible is a mere instrument in service to the Church - not the other way around.

James

Hey, no one is forcing you to believe the Gospel. You choose to believe and follow your hierarchy and that is your business; let them take you where they will. As for me, I will follow Christ.

BTW, when and where was this “teaching authority” established? Who are they and how do you know they are teaching you the truth? I mean if the Bible isn’t that important, what do you have to go by?

 

[Brian_Culliton]

A salvation which is secured by believing that we are saved, and a Bible interpreted to suit its reader, has led Protestants to regard even Protestant churches as irrelevant to salvation, although they continue to be gathering places for hearing the Word, Sunday school classes, Bible study, and the all important fellowship

Why all important? The severance from and repudiation of the Church, tantamount to throwing the divine plan for our spiritual and social needs back in Christ’s face, breeds the terrifying, subterranean loneliness which characterizes the world of the Protestant. He inhabits a desolate terrain, resembling the site of some colossal explosion. Each soul is isolated from every other. Each believer holds a set of beliefs differing in particulars from every other set of beliefs held by every other believer even in the same sect, and often differing even from that which he believed only yesterday. Held, in the main, only by strong social ties, but dissatisfied inside, he may go to this “denomination” this week, and to that next week, or perhaps nowhere, until, maybe next year, when he hears of some new doctrine, some new preacher. He is unable to conceive of the unchanging nature of Catholicism, because it is outside his experience. He can never feel that he is part of something larger than himself, because inexorable Protestant imperatives ensure that there IS nothing larger than himself.

Maybe you aught to worry about the mess your own house is in before you point the finger at others.