Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[rcwitness]

goout:

Scripture can’t be used as proof texts to make points.

So said the Pharisees to Jesus…well maybe they didn’t say that

Ironically, He said to them:

John 5
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.

… next chapter…

John 6

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day…
… This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

OSAS, that Billy preached, is what’s being challenged by Fr Longenecker. Yes, one won’t find that in scripture.

Actually, this is EXACTLY what Calvin “found in Scripture”.

here’s a good place to show WHERE

 

[guanophore]

Paul implies it to be a good habit to assemble, for he is explicit that forsaking it (more than occasional absence) , “as some were in the habit of doing”, was bad.

Jesus never said how often we should commune, but did say as oft as you do, do it this way.

It seems like you are trying to have it both ways…the letter of the law rubbing against the spirit of the law

Not at all!

1 John 5:2-4 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. 4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world.

Gathering for the sacrifice of the Mass is not burdensome, but an occasion to delight in our communion with our saviour, and those who are members of His One Body, the Church.

Seems like the church’s rules , defines tthe attitude…

It may seem that way. I would not dispute that Jesus authorized the Apostles to discern whose sins should be retained, and which should be forgiven.

Of course, only God can know the heart, but we know them by their fruits. If a person refuses to obey those whom God has appointed over them, then the attitude of their heart is one of concern.

that is one unexcused miss , one “skipped meal”, is wrong…therfore the heart must be wrong…therein lies the “legalism”

I won’t deny that one can have an attitude of legalism about it, and I have met Catholics here on this very forum that seem to have it. But, Jesus’ commandments are not burdensome. If a person is unwilling to follow His commandments, there is grave reason for concern.

Jesus never said how often we should commune, but did say as oft as you do, do it this way.

Jesus never said a great many things. He did not ever instruct the Apostles or disciples to write the NT, either, but we accept it still as the Word of God.

He never said we should celebrate Sunday rather than the Sabbath, but we do. He gave the Apostles the power to bind and loose (legislate), and so they have done. They passed this authority on to their successors, and the writings instruct us to obey those that God has placed over us to shepherd us.

 

[mcq72]

Sacred Tradition, preserved infallibly by the Holy Spirit in the Church, came from the Jews. Passover was preserved in the same way the Eucharistic celebration is preserved. The structure was given to the faithful, who followed what was received, then later written.

23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for[c] you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. I Cor:11

This is the paradosis - the process of receiving the divine revelation, and passing it on to the next believer.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

These sacred traditions, passed down to us from the Apostles, are revered on the same level as Scripture, and are the substance of what produced the NT.

Interesting that the Passover lamb pointed to a Lamb that would end all sacrifices. Perhaps that is why the Lord chose not a "lamb’ anymore for a symbol of the Lamb, but a non sacrificial symbol bread to symbolize the Lamb(sacrificial) but the Bread of Life (the sabbath for sacrifices, where we no longer offer to God but where He offers, gives to us).

No where do you see in vs 23 any sacrifice that we offer up to God, but the contrary, of what He offers us…and consequently no sacrificial consecratory words over the elements, save repeating the Lord’s
words. This is what should be passed down, what is apostolic and true tradition.

The Church, known as Catholic, exercising its free will, has added to the words of vs 23, making the remembrance now a sacrifice (beyond thanksgiving and praise):

“Pray brothers and sisters, that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God the almighty Father…May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands”

i believe the CC has the full truth on the matter, been guided perfectly to the truth, much as you outline, but the guidance ends, the protection ends, when she later interpretively adds to the matter, adds to the words of the remembrance, changing its flavor, even the direction of the gift giving.

 

[guanophore]

Paul implies it to be a good habit to assemble, for he is explicit that forsaking it (more than occasional absence) , “as some were in the habit of doing”, was bad.

If, indeed, Paul did write Hebrews, yes. The Church has decided that the Lord’s Day (Sunday) would be the day that should most be honored for the assembly.

There is a difference between a command and an exhortation.

Is there? For those to whom His commandments are not burdensome, why should any distinction be made? Should not our hearts be eager to follow all the apostolic exhortations, as if they are commands?

Does not seem to be apostolic to regulate attendance and call one unexcused abscence a sin. By all means a church has the free will to do it, even with good intention, just wouldn’t call it apostolic.

We agree that it is Apostolic to exhort the believers 'not to forsake the assembly". We agree that the church can further define what this means, with good intention.

 

[mcq72]

If you believed that His Eucharist is actually Himself, then you would see the connection that His body and blood both brought the Spirit and suffered loss which atoned for sin against God.

I think the Eucharist can do that, offer thanksgiving and praise for the Incarnation atoning on the cross, with just the elements of such remembrance as He chose. The “connection”, the remembrance is not lost to any of the several convictions on just how we eat the Lord.

 

[mcq72]

Is there? For those to whom His commandments are not burdensome, why should any distinction be made? Should not our hearts be eager to follow all the apostolic exhortations, as if they are commands

double edged sword…then why regulate, postulate, decree such exactness of performance (attendance) , with judgmental penalties (sin…needing confession)?

 

[guanophore]

here’s a good place to show WHERE

I think not. Anyone who wants to read Calvin’s Institutes to learn what he “found in scripture” should do so. I don’t think it is germaine to this thread.

 

[mcq72]

We agree that it is Apostolic to exhort the believers 'not to forsake the assembly". We agree that the church can further define what this means, with good intention.

Amen to the first. The second then leaves the shelter of apostolic unity, and is at risk of going beyond the protection of full truth. And you know what they say about “good intentions”.

 

[guanophore]

Interesting that the Passover lamb pointed to a Lamb that would end all sacrifices.

Jesus became that Lamb, and it is His eternal sacrifice in which we participate in Eucharist. He came not to “end” the Law, but to fulfill it.

Perhaps that is why the Lord chose not a "lamb’ anymore for a symbol of the Lamb, but a non sacrificial symbol bread to symbolize the Lamb(sacrificial) but the Bread of Life (the sabbath for sacrifices, where we no longer offer to God but where He offers, gives to us).

IF the Lord no longer thought the symbol of the Lamb was relevant, I do not think we would see this in Revelation.

The Children of the Reformation must reject the historical teaching of the Church that Eucharist is an unbloody sacrifice that unites us to Him at the foot of His cross through the same anamnesis that the Passover Lamb did. In this sacrifice, He is both High priest and Victim.

No where do you see in vs 23 any sacrifice that we offer up to God, but the contrary, of what He offers us…and consequently no sacrificial consecratory words over the elements, save repeating the Lord’s

words. This is what should be passed down, what is apostolic and true tradition.

I accept that you are unable to “see” these things in Scripture. I accept that you cannot receive the Apostolic Tradition, as you have received your faith from those who rejected the Apostolic commandment to preserve it.

adds to the words of the remembrance, changing its flavor, even the direction of the gift giving.

Catholics do not have an “either/or” attitude like this. For us, participating in the sacrifice of Jesus does not “change the direction”. He has given His flesh for the life of the world, and bore in His Body the penalty for our sins. He is the Lamb that was slain for our deliverance. When we practice anamnesis, we become present to these Truths, just as the Jews became present at the Exodus when they participated in the anamnesis of the Passover.

 

[steve-b]

guanophore:

Actually, this is EXACTLY what Calvin “found in Scripture”.

steve-b:

here’s a good place to show WHERE

I think not. Anyone who wants to read Calvin’s Institutes to learn what he “found in scripture” should do so. I don’t think it is germaine to this thread.

You brought him up the way you did. You seem to know where in scripture, he found…OSAS. Where did he find it?

 

[Benadam]

It is one thing to say that the truth of Jesus’ Gospel belongs to any institutional church and quite another to say that any one church owns it like maybe they “own” John the Baptists front teeth.

There is a community that surrounded Jesus in the beginning. To this community Jesus gave the keys to His Kingdom and the promises required to stay a visible material reality in the world. It’s a house established on rock not sand nor mist. This community received eternal gifts because she is the bride of an eternal Person the Bridegroom. That characterizes how the Truth belongs to her. What must be believed for her not to be a material eternal reality on earth are denials of the written Word. Jesus made it very plain that His Church would be a recognizable visible people that could be pointed to and have said ‘there it is’.

. In my mind the Truth certainly belongs in any church who claims to be a Christian Church.

of course I agree. But that isn’t what we are discussing is it?

If anyone is placing their hope and trust in their institutional church rather than in Jesus alone, they do not have the truth.

Indeed that is the subtle difference between your thinking and the Church’s.
That is a mindset that is natural to someone separated from the Church that the Truth belongs to. In fact there is no such thing as a relationship with Christ alone. He chose to be conceived in a womb and born into a family. He gave Himself to a living breathing community. Our trust and hope have already been served and will continue to be served by the community that Jesus gave Himself to. It’s an illusion to think that a relationship with Jesus can happen apart from the community that Jesus belongs to. Without them no one would even know that Jesus is Our Savior.

 

[Benadam]

You brought him up the way you did. You seem to know where in scripture, he found…OSAS. Where did he find it?

Don’t mean to butt in but aren’t these classic OSAS scriptures?

Galatiians 3:3
“Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?”.

Philippians 1:6…
“Being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ”.

John 2:9 “Salvation is of the Lord”.

 

[lilypadrees]

It is one thing to judge the actions. That, we can do.
It’s another to judge the heart and soul of a person. We can’t do that. For that is God’s domain.

 

[lilypadrees]

steve-b:

You brought him up the way you did. You seem to know where in scripture, he found…OSAS. Where did he find it?

Don’t mean to butt in but aren’t these classic OSAS scriptures?

Galatiians 3:3
“Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?”.

Philippians 1:6…
“Being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ”.

John 2:9 “Salvation is of the Lord”.

No, this is not proof of OSAS. What you show in posting these Scriptures is that salvation is a lifelong process.

I have been saved. I am being saved. And, I hope to be saved.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

You brought him up the way you did. You seem to know where in scripture, he found…OSAS. Where did he find it?

Don’t mean to butt in but aren’t these classic OSAS scriptures?

Galatiians 3:3
“Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?”.

Philippians 1:6…
“Being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ”.

John 2:9 “Salvation is of the Lord”.

Re: Gal 3:3 ? I don’t see your point
3 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? 2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit[a] by works of the law, or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? 4 Did you experience so many things in vain?—if it really is in vain. 5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?

Re: Phil 1: 6…That looks to me like Paul is praying for that to happen. Not that it is a forgone conclusion
1 Paul and Timothy, servants[a] of Christ Jesus,
To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:
2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul’s Prayer for the Philippians
3 I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, 4 always in every prayer of mine for you all making my prayer with joy, 5 thankful for your partnership in the gospel from the first day until now. 6 And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. 7 It is right for me to feel thus about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel. 8 For God is my witness, how I yearn for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus. 9 And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment,"

Re: Jn 2:9 I’m not catching your point
2 On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; 2 Jesus also was invited to the marriage, with his disciples. 3 When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me?[a] My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” 6 Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to them, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. 8 He said to them, “Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast.” So they took it. 9 When the steward of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward of the feast called the bridegroom

 

[Benadam]

No, this is not proof of OSAS. What you show in posting these Scriptures is that salvation is a lifelong process.

I have been saved. I am being saved. And, I hope to be saved.

Hold on there lady lilypadrees! I didn’t say I think they mean what OSAS folks think they mean. I just meant they are scriptures they commonly use to support their claim.

 

[Benadam]

Steve. Great defense! You are preaching to the choir though.

 

[lilypadrees]

None of the Protestants on Amazon used those verses. And they were the most virulent anti-Catholics I’ve ever known online.

 

[Benadam]

I got them from osas defenders. They aren’t openly anti-Catholic. They call it eternal security. A kind of upgraded term for the same thing.