Does God want everyone to be Catholic?

[pocohombre]

Yes, it is a mortal sin to support abortion and no, a person should not receive the Eucharist when mortal sin has taken them out of the state of grace.

Then why does it happen? Why does the priest give the abortion congressman communion?

 

[JamesCaruso]

Water baptism does not make you born again.

pocohombre,

I used to hear this a lot back in the 1970’s and later, when I was associated with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, a movement akin to Pentecostalism. Many contended that the “Baptism in the Holy Spirit”, which went by a number of names, such as, the Pentecostal experience, the Baptism of Fire, or the “laying on of hands” experience (ala St. Paul), was the meaning of being born again. Now, I don’t know if this is your point or something else, but I would be happy to discuss “born again” with you.

There is also the fact that in the early Church Baptism (water) and Confirmation (laying on of hands for a greater fullness of the Spirit), were administered together as a double sacrament.

If you would clarify what you mean, we could discuss it, if you’d like.

Peace.

 

[pocohombre]

They most certainly re-invented the wheel and they are not shy about telling how they re-invented the wheel either. These founders are proud of their innovations. Have you ever read the writings of Martin Luther or John Calvin? How did Luther come upon the concept of salvation by faith alone which was clearly an innovation. Or sola scriptura? or the rest of the 5 solas. Or his reducing the bible canon form 73 to 66 books. And what of Calvin’s double predestination? or his famous " TULIP". All of these concepts originated with their founders, not with Christ.

As for the Apostasy of the Catholic Church, can you prove it? when did it happen? What was the sign? I can prove the opposite. Study the church fathers. You will see that they follow the same doctrine that continues today in the Catholic church.

Faith plus corporal "penance,flesh beating, wearing burlap,repetitious prayers to gain grace is also an invention that Luther tried as a Catholic and found to be quite vain and fruitless. I am not lutheran nor am I a Calvinist ,and for sure all their writings and words were not inspired .In fact Luther kept much from his upbringing. But as far as salvation apart from the Catholic church method ,which is what they really proposed,that is not new. The proper role of faith and scripture were set to be restored by the reformers. Faith alone, sola escriptura are limited definitions that must be taken in context of the perversion of practice of the time. The CC interpretation of “tradition” was not from the beginning either.
So sola fide and escriptura and CC tradition should not have been necesssary but they exist, in collision, in offset.

 

[pocohombre]

pocohombre,

I used to hear this a lot back in the 1970’s and later, when I was associated with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, a movement akin to Pentecostalism. Many contended that the “Baptism in the Holy Spirit”, which went by a number of names, such as, the Pentecostal experience, the Baptism of Fire, or the “laying on of hands” experience (ala St. Paul), was the meaning of being born again. Now, I don’t know if this is your point or something else, but I would be happy to discuss “born again” with you.

There is also the fact that in the early Church Baptism (water) and Confirmation (laying on of hands for a greater fullness of the Spirit), were administered together as a double sacrament.

If you would clarify what you mean, we could discuss it, if you’d like.

Peace.

Baptism in the holy ghost is not water baptism . Baptism is not regenerational.Nicodemus was circumcised,barhmitzvahed (something like today baptize and confirm),was religious learned in the one true ,patriarchal religion/( church today) yet he was not “born again”. When you are born again all things become new, you are a new creature, you cry out Abba Father, you “see” and understand spiritual things where before you did not, you can proclaim Him your Lord etc., you have assurance, you love the brethren, scripture, assembling where once you did not. Your spirit is alive unto God where before it was dead, in trespasses and sin .You cease from carnal attempts to please the Father .You rely totally on Calvary for justification for the first time.You no longer hope to be good to be saved. You no longer hope to fulfill the law and commandments to be saved, yet you have a fresh desire to be holy out of love for the received gift, not to be worthy of the gift .You realize what grace is .You have met Jesus Christ personally.

 

[brb3]

Baptism in the holy ghost is not water baptism . Baptism is not regenerational.Nicodemus was circumcised,barhmitzvahed (something like today baptize and confirm),was religious learned in the one true ,patriarchal religion/( church today) yet he was not “born again”. When you are born again all things become new, you are a new creature, you cry out Abba Father, you “see” and understand spiritual things where before you did not, you can proclaim Him your Lord etc., you have assurance, you love the brethren, scripture, assembling where once you did not. Your spirit is alive unto God where before it was dead, in trespasses and sin .You cease from carnal attempts to please the Father .You rely totally on Calvary for justification for the first time.You no longer hope to be good to be saved. You no longer hope to fulfill the law and commandments to be saved, yet you have a fresh desire to be holy out of love for the received gift, not to be worthy of the gift .You realize what grace is .You have met Jesus Christ personally.

You are referring to Catholic illumination by HS. — Sacrament of Confirmation, (Baptism by Fire), which completes Water Baptism of either infants or adults.

Recall Apollos lacked both type Baptisms …so Paul saw to it that he received both. And, Apollos and friends were illuminated by water & Fire !

 

[JamesCaruso]

Baptism in the holy ghost is not water baptism . Baptism is not regenerational.Nicodemus was circumcised,barhmitzvahed (something like today baptize and confirm),was religious learned in the one true ,patriarchal religion/( church today) yet he was not “born again”. When you are born again all things become new, you are a new creature, you cry out Abba Father, you “see” and understand spiritual things where before you did not, you can proclaim Him your Lord etc., you have assurance, you love the brethren, scripture, assembling where once you did not. Your spirit is alive unto God where before it was dead, in trespasses and sin .You cease from carnal attempts to please the Father .You rely totally on Calvary for justification for the first time.You no longer hope to be good to be saved. You no longer hope to fulfill the law and commandments to be saved, yet you have a fresh desire to be holy out of love for the received gift, not to be worthy of the gift .You realize what grace is .You have met Jesus Christ personally.

I can attest to the greater fullness of the Spirit in my life after the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, but I cannot say that it was different operationally than the sacrament of Confirmation, except that I was better prepared and yearned more for the fullness of the Spirit than I had previously when as a child I was confirmed. I believe it was a refreshing of my Confirmation with more earnest, ardent seeking, as the Apostles in prayer after the Ascension, and all the Spirit filled people who prayed for me, which resulted in the greater manifestation of the Holy Spirit in my life. It is a dimension of life in the Spirit that so many in the Church have missed, but I do not believe that they, too, have the Holy Spirit, just not the same fullness in their lives. I also believe that this “baptism” can come about through ardent prayer without specifically seeking it as evidenced in the lives of the saints. Does any of this ring true to you?

 

[peace2u2]

I also believe that this “baptism” can come about through ardent prayer without specifically seeking it as evidenced in the lives of the saints. Does any of this ring true to you?

Do you mean “Baptism of Desire” or “Baptism of Blood”?

CCC #1257:
[1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament.62 The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments. (1129, 161, 846)]

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm#

If you are brought to the main page, type in the search #1257 and you will come up will the longer version of the necessity of Baptism - remember that Sacraments convey what they mean - their effects do not change regardless of our state. For instance, when you receive the Sacrament of Confirmation (the completion of Baptism), you still receive the fullness of the Holy Spirit and all the gifts of the Holy Spirit even if you are in a state of sin. The Sacraments do what they say they do.

 

[Aaron_Creagh]

pocohombre,

I used to hear this a lot back in the 1970’s and later, when I was associated with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, a movement akin to Pentecostalism. Many contended that the “Baptism in the Holy Spirit”, which went by a number of names, such as, the Pentecostal experience, the Baptism of Fire, or the “laying on of hands” experience (ala St. Paul), was the meaning of being born again. Now, I don’t know if this is your point or something else, but I would be happy to discuss “born again” with you.

There is also the fact that in the early Church Baptism (water) and Confirmation (laying on of hands for a greater fullness of the Spirit), were administered together as a double sacrament.

If you would clarify what you mean, we could discuss it, if you’d like.

Peace.

Not to barge in but…

Go back to the book of Genesis, and pay attention to the holy spirit and the waters…

Genesis 1:2-4

1. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
2. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
3. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Okay.

And where does the Church of God, come in?

 

[Aaron_Creagh]

Where does the Church of God, come it?

 

[peace2u2]

And where does the Church of God, come in?

In the Old Testament, that would be in Exodus, when God commanded Moses to build the Ark of the Covenant and the Tabernacle where God dwelt among His people.

God’s Church is fulfilled in the New Testament in Acts Jesus ascends into Heaven and sends His Holy Spirit to guide and guard His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church:

scripturecatholic.com/the_church.html

 

[berk60]

You are using Sacred Scripture the way Jesus didn’t intend it to be used.

Just because the Gospel of Jesus doesn’t use the exact word “Catholic” does not mean the early Church was something other than Catholic. It was Catholic. The word Catholic was used in a letter by St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110. If the word “catholic” was used in the year 110, it was certainly used earlier. The year 110 and the use of the word “catholic” is a lot closer to the time Jesus was physically present on earth than the year 1559 and the word “protestant”.

You note that your religion is “protestant”. What prevents you from converting?

A church is not required to be saved. A repentive and contrite heart is. Nothing is preventing me from converting to Catholism. I was brought up in the Catholic faith by my mom and when I read the Bible and gave my life to Jesus I left the Catholic church and now belong to a Bible church. I felt God leading me in this dicision as I prayed about it. I believe that Christ plus anything else for my salvation equals nothing. So I accept Christ alone for my salvation.

 

[Brendan_64]

I believe that Christ plus anything else for my salvation equals nothing. So I accept Christ alone for my salvation.

So why do you need your Bible Church then? Why not just you alone with your Bible?

And as for your Bible, have you removed the Old Testament, the Acts, St Paul’s letters and everything other than the 4 Gospels?

 

[Piwowar]

Well you’re wrong.

Unbelievable!

 

[paul_c]

Faith plus corporal "penance,flesh beating, wearing burlap,repetitious prayers to gain grace is also an invention that Luther tried as a Catholic and found to be quite vain and fruitless.

corporal penance, flesh beating, wearing burlap and repetitious prayers were never part of Catholic doctrine. Grace is transmitted through the sacraments. To be sure, some saints practiced severe penance as a way of containing their desires including St. Francis of Assisi and St. Catherine of Sienna, but lets not take our eye off the ball. Doing or not doing these acts of penance are purely matters of personal devotion and had nothing to do with Luther’s heresy.

I am not lutheran nor am I a Calvinist ,and for sure all their writings and words were not inspired .In fact Luther kept much from his upbringing. But as far as salvation apart from the Catholic church method ,which is what they really proposed,that is not new.

Of course its new. (at least was new 500 years ago). It goes all the way back to the apostles. Did not Paul describe the Church as the Body of Christ. How can you gain salvation without being part of his body?

The proper role of faith and scripture were set to be restored by the reformers.

Faith alone was a heresy in Apostolic tiimes, leading James to refute it in James 2. As for sola scripture, the new testament didn’t even exist in its current form until 382AD, when Pope ST. Damasus formalized the canon and set St. Jerome on the task of compiling the latin vulgate, so you can’t say sola scriptura is apostolic in any way.

Faith alone, sola escriptura are limited definitions that must be taken in context of the perversion of practice of the time. The CC interpretation of “tradition” was not from the beginning either.

Are you kidding, for the first 382 years of the church, all there was was Catholic tradition. And the new testament sprung forth from that tradition.

So sola fide and escriptura and CC tradition should not have been necesssary but they exist, in collision, in offset.

sola fide and sola scriptura are not only unnecessary, they are heresies that we show over and over again are self inconsistent.

 

[Aaron_Creagh]

Unbelievable!

What was the heresy of Martin Luther?

Was it breaking from the Catholic Church?

 

[Brendan_64]

What was the heresy of Martin Luther?

Well a Catholic priest declaring that the papacy was the seat of the anti-christ, would reasonably be considered by the Church to be heresy, wouldn’t you agree? Or do you think the Catholic Church acted a bit unfairly towards him and ought to have said, “fair point there Brother Martin”?

 

[JamesCaruso]

Do you mean “Baptism of Desire” or “Baptism of Blood”?

I am not talking about Baptism, the sacrament, but the Baptism of fire and the Holy Spirit, the sacrament of Confirmation, which is early days of the Church was in conjunction with water baptism.

And he said: In what then were you baptized? Who said: In John’s baptism. 4Then Paul said: John baptized the people with the baptism of penance, saying: That they should believe in him who was to come after him, that is to say, in Jesus. 5Having heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus [water baptism]. 6And when Paul had imposed his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon them [confirmation, also called by Pentecostals, baptism in the Holy Spirit and in fire], and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Acts 19

I indeed baptize you in the water unto penance, but he that shall come after me, is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire. Matt 3:11

 

[StillCatholic]

yes but is it not a mortal sin to support abortion? Should such a Catholic continue to receive your Eucharist in front of all parisioners who know of their abortion support?

No, they should NOT be receiving the Eucharist. It is a mortal sin. I’ve heard it said they should be denied reception. And I have heard rare cases of priests doing that.

However, as for their being denied communion by those serving, I’m an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. We are taught that it is not our place or anyone’s place to withhold communion from anyone, ever. We are not called to be judges and this includes the ordinary ministers, priests and deacons. My brother is a priest and he repeats the same policy. We have an admonition in the letter to the Corinthians that we are to examine our own consciences and to be sure that we properly discern the true body and blood of Christ and the consequences of not doing so. There is only the public announcement to all who can and who should not, receive Holy Communion. It is also written into the materials in the missals and various other places. I could go on but I think this is already to wordy.

 

[paul_c]

A church is not required to be saved.

Then why did Jesus bother to establish a church? The fact is, He did. And he said why as well. To spread the truth about salvation and to administer the sacraments. (see Matthew 28: 18-20) If it wasn’t for the Catholic Church, you would know nothing about Jesus. That bible you are using was created by the Catholic church (although subsequently abridged by Luther’s Protestant Printers)

A repentent and contrite heart is.

Sure, but is that all? search your bible. Doesn’t it also say you need to be baptized (acts 2), partake of the Eucharist (John 6, the last supper narratives and 1corinthians 11), that you need to follow the commandments (Luke 18:18-23), that you need to do the Father’s will (Matthew 7:21-23). That you need to follow Jesus in loving one another and living the christian life. Indeed, you need the church to administer the sacraments and to clarify for you what is truly needed to get to heaven.

Nothing is preventing me from converting to Catholism.

In fact, its easier than you think. If you have been confirmed, all that is required to return to the Catholic church in good standing is to go to confession

I was brought up in the Catholic faith by my mom and when I read the Bible and gave my life to Jesus I left the Catholic church and now belong to a Bible church.

I can’t understand this. Why would reading the bible drive you from the Catholic church that created the bible? The Catholic church is THE bible church. So what was it really? Was there something you thought was lacking in the Catholic Church or did it teach things that made you uncomfortable?

I felt God leading me in this decision as I prayed about it. I believe that Christ plus anything else for my salvation equals nothing. So I accept Christ alone for my salvation.

What exactly does this mean? In the Catholic Church you can RECEIVE Jesus bodily in the Eucharist. No other faith can give you that level of intimacy with Jesus (with the exception of the Orthodox, who also have the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, since they maintained apostolic succession and valid holy orders). When you turn your back on the Eucharist, aren’t you in fact turning your back on Jesus? You know, many people leave the Catholic church for a time, only to be called back by the Holy Spirit. I hope you will listen to it and follow it where it takes you.

 

[pablope]

A church is not required to be saved.

Where is this in the Bible, chapter and verse please?

Are you the authority to make such a declaration?

A repentive and contrite heart is.