Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

[Nicene]

We are in the church age however St. Paul makes no such reference in Romans to it “being the time of the gentiles” The remnant he speaks of:

1 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Eli’jah, how he pleads with God against Israel?
3 “Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have demolished thy altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.”
4 But what is God’s reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Ba’al.”
5 So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.

are not some future remnant but as he says “at the present time” chosen by grace. That would be the church. It was started by Jews, the first thousands were Jews and later the gentiles. However Paul makes a distinct change of pace from earlier when he spoke just of Jews and now he speaks of Israelite’s, of which he is one. Israelite’s comprise both northern and southern tribes, However the “church age” began at Pentecost. However replacement theology is something wholly from the restoration church. Christ fulfills he doesn’t replace. And in the Davidic Kingdom that comprises Both tribes and gentiles, and as stated earlier, which it appears you disagree with, the apostles in fact set out to fulfill that kingdom now. St. Paul in Romans 15:7-12 strings together passages from the OT where Israelite’s and gentiles come together to worship God.
How is it you think the church is the church of the gentiles? That theology is contrary to Romans and especially the branches section where some branches have been cut off to graft you in, not all the branches cut off. To be honest I don’t know what to tell you if you think differently than Luke and Acts where they not only use those OT passages to support their belief that the kingdom of David is being rebuilt under them. Dispensationalist and multiple comings of Christ are, to be frank, a made up theology. He says he is coming one more time, the end.St Paul says the same in Thessalonians. You have to dismiss a substantial part of the NT to believe otherwise.

However can you give me St. Pau’ls quote where he states “we are in the time of the gentiles” Ive never read that in Romans, about the closest you can come to something like that is:

Rom 11:25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part (not in full, a remnant of believers by grace begins the church starting with the apostles, then they continue to build that ecclesial kingdom of David. St Paul also includes himself in that) until the full number of the Gentiles has come in,

I don;t mean to be flippant but are you ignorant of the mystery, are you conceited?

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

I’ll say this. The first part of the gentile court is correct. However, just to give a synopsis of your overall theme, which guanophore has generously answered. I can say without a doubt that you truly don’t know what liturgy comprises when you call it rituals and rites. I can say also faithfully you really don’t understand what Jesus does in the liturgy as High priest (Hebrews) However I can also say that We have thousands and thousands of former evangelicals who say the same about not knowing christ until they came into the church, so that argument is kind of a wash. I might suggest you watch the Journey home with Marcus Grodi where he interviews former protestants.

Secondly honestly it is still true, there really is no salvation outside the catholic church, it is his body, not as evangelicals envision it, a metaphor, but one with Christ. . However it is also implicit from evangelicals when they ask if you are saved (especially as a catholic, cant tell you how many times I’ve been told I’m going to hell by evangelicals) However with regard to who is catholic you might want to read the catechism. A short way of saying it is this, like Ezekiel teaches, the sins of the father are not held against the son: hence, “through no fault of their own” catechism *846-847.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

Not too mention turning the mass into a sacrifice on top of of a remembrance and thanksgiving…and a separate priesthood , just as in Jesus time, instead finally righteousness fulfilled and a body , a nation (church) of priests , as promised to Israelite s before their sin in the desert (the CC priesthood tiers is OT, and a secondary setup By God, not His first preference, just like having a king was “secondary” preference to God for Israel)…

Several points with regard to this I don’t know where you think it isn’t a sacrifice:

14 Therefore, my beloved, shun the worship of idols.
15 I speak as to sensible men; judge for yourselves what I say.
16 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?
17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.
18 Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar?
19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?
20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons.
21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.
22 Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

To be honest Evangelicals are the only ones who think it isn’t a sacrifice. Mainline protestants also consider it a sacrifice. As regards the second part, again you dismiss the prophesy of Isaiah which earlier you stated you believed in i.e. Apostles, bishop, Priests and deacons. Now you say the opposite and go back to Korah and not needing priests. Which is it? For what it’s worth you just proved that Jesus is not the Moses they were looking for (Hey Xavier in one of my other debates went back to Enoch: he’s the guy I wrote the Rebellion of Korah for 15 years ago) .

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[mcq72]

These are not “intermediaries”. Jesus is the one who is active both in the Church, and the Sacraments.

mcq72:

That is the very definition of intermediary…it is always Christ who bestows, whether in OT or NT…still thru prophets priests,rituals etc…intermediary

 

[Nicene]

I am so grateful for your posts- it brings such clarity that the American Evangelical gospel is, indeed, the 'different gospel" that we have been told to avoid!

Amen to that

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[guanophore]

That is the very definition of intermediary…it is always Christ who bestows, whether in OT or NT…still thru prophets priests,rituals etc…intermediary

Your statement makes it sound like this is some sort of requirement. God does not need an intermediary. He has transformed us in baptism:

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. 28 You shall dwell in the land which I gave to your fathers; and you shall be my people, and I will be your God. 29 And I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses; Exek 36

He has made His Church the nation of priests, prophets and kings that He desires.

 

[mcq72]

He has made His Church the nation of priests, prophets and kings that He desires.

But they can not all forgive their own sins or offer up eucharist in person of Christ.

 

[GKMotley]

You might want to re-word the opening.

 

[guanophore]

But they can not all forgive their own sins or offer up eucharist in person of Christ.

The universal priesthood does not negate the presence of the ministerial. There are certain tasks that Jesus gave to the ordained.

 

[mcq72]

The universal priesthood does not negate the presence of the ministerial. There are certain tasks that Jesus gave to the ordained.

Understand…of course there are offices and giftings in NT…yet seems like redundant terms,“universal priesthood” and “ministerial priesthood” and seems a bit like unfulfilled OT setup

 

[mcq72]

Several points with regard to this I don’t know where you think it isn’t a sacrifice:

Just think Paul is not equating pagan sacrifice or Israel after the flesh to Christian "cup of blessing’’ as the also a sacrifice…unless one would consider a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving…eucharist. How could we still sacrifice as pagans or old Israel ? It is finished, save the thanking for that end, forever. Furthermore I believe his context is one of demeanor, which all have, pagan, or Jewish or christian , and that our demeanor should be Christlike,with whom we commune with, not worldly, demonic, or unbelieveing Jewish.

 

[mcq72]

However can you give me St. Pau’ls quote where he states “we are in the time of the gentiles” Ive never read that in Romans, about the closest you can come to something like that is:

Well, Jesus said it in Luke 21;24…sorry not Paul, who had “fullness of gentiles”…similar but different.

"And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”

 

[Ken94]

If I may ask, what led you back to the catholic church? I’m currently someone who after coming to know Christ attended non denominational churches. And after backsliding for quite a while I’m at the moment I’m looking into the catholic church, as I feel it may be the way I can get back on track with The Lord and truly serve him.

 

[rcwitness]

guanophore:

He has made His Church the nation of priests, prophets and kings that He desires.

But they can not all forgive their own sins or offer up eucharist in person of Christ.

I don’t believe anyone can forgive their own sins…

 

[GKMotley]

There you go.

 

[mcq72]

In person of Christ…God forgiving us…or at least/most confess one to another?

 

[mcq72]

We would not make a separation between the two.

Not sepration but emphasis, preoccupation.

 

[guanophore]

If I may ask, what led you back to the catholic church?

There were a variety of factors. One was becoming involved in the Charismatic Renewal. This fanned the flame I never had for the Sacramental life of the Church. Another was reading the Fathers of the Church. I realized that the Church founded by Christ was Catholic.

 

[mcq72]

Protestants tend to pick and choose our of his writings things that seem to support Reformation theology. The violence done to Augustine is to exclude the rest of his writings on all these subjects (because they are too “catholic”.

I beg to differ. So if we have different view of Augustine on this it must be because we cherry pick? That is violence against our integrity of method of study. I mean Jesus said, “This is my blood”…why wouldn’t others say it also…and mean something different than CC transubstantiation? I mean then we must also do violence against Holy Spirit and His writ (scriptures).

Yes, at times folks can be guilty of cherry picking, or not be fully knowledgable of all writings, on both sides. But the accusation can also be flung as a way of denying the obvious or not allowing a variance of another plausible, sincere understanding.

 

[guanophore]

So if we have different view of Augustine on this it must be because we cherry pick?

Yes.

The same is done with the Scriptures. Single verses are strung together, to the exclusion of others, to support doctrines formulated at the Reformation.

That is violence against our integrity of method of study.

Perhaps yours is different. I spent 3 years in a Protestant Seminary, so I may have a different experience.

I mean then we must also do violence against Holy Spirit and His writ (scriptures).

Yes, so it would seem.

Yes, at times folks can be guilty of cherry picking, or not be fully knowledgable of all writings, on both sides.

I think that the vast majority of it is done in ignorance.

But the accusation can also be flung as a way of denying the obvious or not allowing a variance of another plausible sincere understanding.

What is "obvious’ is what was handed down to us from the Apostles in the Paradosis. “Variance of understanding” is strictly forbidden by the Apostles.

I have no doubt about the sincerity of those who espouse positions contrary to Apostolic teaching.