M
MichaelTDoyle
Guest
Thanks, Maccabees, for this summation.
- Status
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
I have not red the new posts, but I will.
This is what I think: The New Covenant and the new Church did begin with the Pascal Mystery. But not with the Last Supper, no, it all began when Jesus died on the cross; at the culmination of the Pascal Mystery. Jesus died on the cross and the temple curtain was torn in two; and the Holy of Holies was revealed to the whole world; Jesus Christ on the Cross. That was the beginning of the Church. It began under the foot of the cross. It will also end at the foot of the cross. But that is another topic. Now getting back to the good thief next to Jesus. At the time Jesus made the promise to him, they were still within the old law in terms of time line. That is why it was a promise. But what in fact happened: as Jesus died before the good thief, the new law had come into existence, and then it is true, the good thief did die under the new law, because he died after Jesus.
This is what I think: The New Covenant and the new Church did begin with the Pascal Mystery. But not with the Last Supper, no, it all began when Jesus died on the cross; at the culmination of the Pascal Mystery. Jesus died on the cross and the temple curtain was torn in two; and the Holy of Holies was revealed to the whole world; Jesus Christ on the Cross. That was the beginning of the Church. It began under the foot of the cross. It will also end at the foot of the cross. But that is another topic. Now getting back to the good thief next to Jesus. At the time Jesus made the promise to him, they were still within the old law in terms of time line. That is why it was a promise. But what in fact happened: as Jesus died before the good thief, the new law had come into existence, and then it is true, the good thief did die under the new law, because he died after Jesus.
K
Kecharitomene
Guest
Tru-Devotion:
My intention is not to offend you, but are you Roman Catholic?
It is accepted and not a debatable issue that the birth of the Church occured on Penecost Sunday. I never have heard anyone produce a argument that it occured at any other time.
In Matt. 16 we learn that Simon Peter was the rock upon which Christ would found His Church, and that Jesus prayed for Peter, because, as He told Peter “The devil has requested to sift you like flour”. Jesus prayed for Peter’s deliverance from evil and after the ressurection, He ask Peter if He loved Him, three times. And all three replies to Peter’s affirmations was “Feed my sheep”, “Tend my Lambs”, “Feed my Sheep”.
Could the Church have began at the foot of the cross when Peter, her first pope, was not in place? I would think this would not be the case. Nor do I think that the Church would have been functioning prior to the Ascention, while Christ was still with His diciples. It only seems reasonable that the Church was born when the promised Comforter (Holy Spirit) decended upon them. Thus is why the Church can “do all things through Christ who strengthens me”.
I will continue to try to find a better explanation of why Penecost is the birthday of the Church.
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Dave152,
***The condign merit of Christ ALONE is that which justifies a sinner and makes him righteous in God’s eyes. I think all Protestants agree with this. ***
Yet, Protestants (at least some) deny the very notion of congrous merit. Catholic soteriology does not. Congruous merit does not, and cannot make an unjust man, just. Instead, it is the gratuitous reward God gives to those already justified who act faithfully (good works, which is our willing cooperation with God’s grace working within us). In fact, God can and does reward some for the faithfulness of others. It is not owed (as in Christ’s condign merit). Instead, it is given gratuitously, not because of our deservedness, as with the condign merit of Christ, but due to the loving kindness of God.
Condign merit is like a paycheck for work completed. It is obligatory. Congrous merit is more like a gratuity, or using a military example, a medal awarded for meritorious service. As a member of the USAF, the military owes me a paycheck for my efforts, but they never owe me a medal. Yet, it is a matter of distributive justice to give medals to those who perform meritoriously. If they did not, they would not be very nice, but they are not strictly obliged to award medals.
The lack of congrous merit on the part of the just neither adds to our subtracts from the merit of Christ (which is infinite), which ALONE makes a sinner just. Consequently, congruous merit neither adds to or subtracts from the state of justification for those made righteous by Christ. Christ’s work was infinite. His merit is infinite.
So what good is congruous merit? It does not make us just. However, It is still a supernatural gift from God. It adds to our sanctification. It helps us to grow in our faith. That’s good. That’s necessary for salvation, especially in times of tribulation.
The repentent thief on the cross may have indeed lacked congruous merit (although that’s debatable), but this has nothing to do with his state of justification. The lack of congrous merit is not the same as demerit.
A word about “demerit” … those given the obligation to do good works and do not do so, may be committing a grave sin of omission, which does cause us to lose our justification. In other words, failure to do that which is obligatory in the eyes of God can be a serious evil, and may cause us to fall from a state of grace (become unjustified). In this sense too, good works are necessary for salvation. One who is just, but fails to do an obligatory deed may be committing a damnable sin.
What about the repentent thief? Does his example prove that good works have no bearing upon soteriology? Not at all. He was confined to a cross. If a person was not freely able to perform salutary acts, he cannot be punished for the lack of such acts. Nor are such acts necessary to make a sinner justified, as that is solely due to the condign merit of Christ.
Catholics describe good works as necessary because God rewards acts of faithfulness (good works) of those already justified with sanctifying grace. Not because of deservedness, but due to God’s loving kindness. In Catholic soteriology, such gifts are not understood to have been given frivolously or needlessly by God, as all of his gifts are for the ultimate purpose of attaining eternal life. We believe that God rewards the faithful with necessary gifts to further enlighten the intellect and strengthen the will in such a way as they contribute to stedfast in faith. If we do not remain stedfast in faith, we fall from grace and are no longer justified. Consequently, in this sense, faith and works are necessary for eternal life.
***The condign merit of Christ ALONE is that which justifies a sinner and makes him righteous in God’s eyes. I think all Protestants agree with this. ***
Yet, Protestants (at least some) deny the very notion of congrous merit. Catholic soteriology does not. Congruous merit does not, and cannot make an unjust man, just. Instead, it is the gratuitous reward God gives to those already justified who act faithfully (good works, which is our willing cooperation with God’s grace working within us). In fact, God can and does reward some for the faithfulness of others. It is not owed (as in Christ’s condign merit). Instead, it is given gratuitously, not because of our deservedness, as with the condign merit of Christ, but due to the loving kindness of God.
Condign merit is like a paycheck for work completed. It is obligatory. Congrous merit is more like a gratuity, or using a military example, a medal awarded for meritorious service. As a member of the USAF, the military owes me a paycheck for my efforts, but they never owe me a medal. Yet, it is a matter of distributive justice to give medals to those who perform meritoriously. If they did not, they would not be very nice, but they are not strictly obliged to award medals.
The lack of congrous merit on the part of the just neither adds to our subtracts from the merit of Christ (which is infinite), which ALONE makes a sinner just. Consequently, congruous merit neither adds to or subtracts from the state of justification for those made righteous by Christ. Christ’s work was infinite. His merit is infinite.
So what good is congruous merit? It does not make us just. However, It is still a supernatural gift from God. It adds to our sanctification. It helps us to grow in our faith. That’s good. That’s necessary for salvation, especially in times of tribulation.
The repentent thief on the cross may have indeed lacked congruous merit (although that’s debatable), but this has nothing to do with his state of justification. The lack of congrous merit is not the same as demerit.
A word about “demerit” … those given the obligation to do good works and do not do so, may be committing a grave sin of omission, which does cause us to lose our justification. In other words, failure to do that which is obligatory in the eyes of God can be a serious evil, and may cause us to fall from a state of grace (become unjustified). In this sense too, good works are necessary for salvation. One who is just, but fails to do an obligatory deed may be committing a damnable sin.
What about the repentent thief? Does his example prove that good works have no bearing upon soteriology? Not at all. He was confined to a cross. If a person was not freely able to perform salutary acts, he cannot be punished for the lack of such acts. Nor are such acts necessary to make a sinner justified, as that is solely due to the condign merit of Christ.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
What I’ve stated above is to assert the salvific importance of a “holy walk” or “faith working obedience” which Protestant scholar, C.H. Spurgeon seems to also assert in one of his sermons:
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
mercygate said:
I’ll research for any Patristics on this. What we definitely see in this event is Christ giving his Apostles a share in his authority to forgive/retain sins. That fact that Jesus breathed on them (the only other time God breathed on man was in Genesis 2) is significant; he is giving them another share in his own life.
As to the Holy Spirit on Easter, Pope John Paul II in his April 2, 1989 Regina Coeli address, calls Easter and the “Receive the Holy Spirit” command a fiat Pentecost: expect the Holy Spirit to come upon them soon (fiat means “let it be done”–implying anticipation rather than immediate action). In this light, I would say that the breathing imparts Christ’s power on the Apostles, the Holy Spirit comes upon them and moves them on Pentecost.
Tru, no Catholic disputes these truths you put forth, and even those who place the birthday of the Church at Pentecost. Those who mark Pentecost as the birthday of the Church do so because (1) the Holy Spirit came upon all the believers, both apostles and laity (clergy and laity, the hierarchical constitution you mentioned); (2) the Kerygma was first proclaimed on that day; (3) the Holy Spirit was sent by Jesus himself to empower the believers (4) The Church was first manifested to the general public on that day. Pentecost as the birth of the Church denies none of these dogmas and teachings you cite. All of these events on Pentecost came at the initiative of Christ himself, and it was on Pentecost that the Church began to function as the Church functions today.
"When the work which the Father gave the Son to do on earth was accomplished, the Holy Spirit was sent on the day of Pentecost in order that he might continually sanctify the Church."Then “the Church was openly displayed to the crowds and the spread of the Gospel among the nations, through preaching, was begun.” As the “convocation” of all men for salvation, the Church in her very nature is missionary, sent by Christ to all the nations to make disciples of them (Catechism 767).
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
Thank you porthos for responding. I was hoping someone would.
The Church was born at the moment of Christ’s death on the cross, when the Old Testament was succeeded by the New Testament. It was made manifest to the world on the first Pentecost, when the Apostles, inspired by the Holy Spirit, went forth to obey Christ’s command to teach all nations. Prior to Pentecost the Church was already functioning with prayer and supplications and with Peter at the helm . To place the birth of the Church on the day of Pentecost, in my opinion, is a sloppy explanation at best, and it places too much emphasis on the charismas at the expense of the Sacraments.
There has to be something more convincing to change my mind. Is there no dogma? Is there no doctrine? Is there nothing besides some homilies and such?
I disagree porthos, because “the Holy Spirit was sent on the day of Pentecost in order that he might continually sanctify the Church." does not automatically imply that was the day the Church began. Only that it was sanctified or that it is was empowered on that day. You cannot empower or sanctify something which does not exist. It is not logical. To bring about a change or to make something grow, you have to have something to start with.
That is all true; still it does not state that the Church began on the day of Pentecost.
The Church was born at the moment of Christ’s death on the cross, when the Old Testament was succeeded by the New Testament. It was made manifest to the world on the first Pentecost, when the Apostles, inspired by the Holy Spirit, went forth to obey Christ’s command to teach all nations. Prior to Pentecost the Church was already functioning with prayer and supplications and with Peter at the helm . To place the birth of the Church on the day of Pentecost, in my opinion, is a sloppy explanation at best, and it places too much emphasis on the charismas at the expense of the Sacraments.
There has to be something more convincing to change my mind. Is there no dogma? Is there no doctrine? Is there nothing besides some homilies and such?
K
Kecharitomene
Guest
TRU-D:
Here’s what I have thus far. I will have to make a couple of posts to exhibit all of this. I think that the most substantial is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church which is at the last of my postings. Please remember that doctrines develop and aren’t formally defined until they are challenged, thus may be why it is difficult to find a definitive statement about the Pentecost question. I mean, in the early 19th century there would have been the same difficulty regarding the infallibility of the Pope and some of the Marian doctrines, yet we still held them as truth in the absence of a formal declaration.
I have included links to the websites from which I excerpted my information.
Pax Christi
Church History - Saint Peter: First Vicar of Christ, by Joseph A. Dunney [1945]
The Early Church
The Christ of Glory ascended to Heaven, having promised to prepare a place there for His faithful disciples. Ten days pass during which the bereaved ones dwell on their loss, ever mindful of the Passion and Crucifixion. Ten long days, then the Holy Spirit mysteriously enters their hearts there in that upper room in Jerusalem. Lo! a world-changing thing happens, the fulfillment of a promise given by Jesus at the Last Supper, “I will ask the Father and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever. I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you. In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.”[23] That was Pentecost, the birthday of the Catholic Church. Militant, the Apostles marched onward towards eternal conquests, conquests for eternity; they were all of them saints now, full of the Fire, the Love, the Light from above. They were confronted by the world, the flesh and the devil; they contended with a jangle of pagan philosophies, a jungle of lascivious literature, spirits of evil in high places. It mattered naught that they were arrested, imprisoned, scourged, forbidden to preach: “With great power did they bear witness to the Resurrection of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, and grace was mighty among all the faithful.”[24] Behold St. Peter, the dauntless herald of Christ, first in their ranks as on their lists.[25] He stands up in the midst of one hundred and twenty disciples all of whom recognize his leadership.[26] He moves fearlessly about the streets of Jerusalem; not only does he work astounding miracles, more than ever is he aware of the divine authority entrusted to him. As converts multi ply, he is opposed, arrested, cast into a dungeon, but an angel frees him.[27] Nothing daunted, he sets out to preach and baptize along the old familiar roads of Judea, across the sands of Samaria. An ancient tradition discovers him at length in Antioch, the first bishop of that great city; and later he labors in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Bitbynia…
Here’s what I have thus far. I will have to make a couple of posts to exhibit all of this. I think that the most substantial is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church which is at the last of my postings. Please remember that doctrines develop and aren’t formally defined until they are challenged, thus may be why it is difficult to find a definitive statement about the Pentecost question. I mean, in the early 19th century there would have been the same difficulty regarding the infallibility of the Pope and some of the Marian doctrines, yet we still held them as truth in the absence of a formal declaration.
I have included links to the websites from which I excerpted my information.
Pax Christi
Church History - Saint Peter: First Vicar of Christ, by Joseph A. Dunney [1945]
The Early Church
The Christ of Glory ascended to Heaven, having promised to prepare a place there for His faithful disciples. Ten days pass during which the bereaved ones dwell on their loss, ever mindful of the Passion and Crucifixion. Ten long days, then the Holy Spirit mysteriously enters their hearts there in that upper room in Jerusalem. Lo! a world-changing thing happens, the fulfillment of a promise given by Jesus at the Last Supper, “I will ask the Father and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever. I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you. In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.”[23] That was Pentecost, the birthday of the Catholic Church. Militant, the Apostles marched onward towards eternal conquests, conquests for eternity; they were all of them saints now, full of the Fire, the Love, the Light from above. They were confronted by the world, the flesh and the devil; they contended with a jangle of pagan philosophies, a jungle of lascivious literature, spirits of evil in high places. It mattered naught that they were arrested, imprisoned, scourged, forbidden to preach: “With great power did they bear witness to the Resurrection of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, and grace was mighty among all the faithful.”[24] Behold St. Peter, the dauntless herald of Christ, first in their ranks as on their lists.[25] He stands up in the midst of one hundred and twenty disciples all of whom recognize his leadership.[26] He moves fearlessly about the streets of Jerusalem; not only does he work astounding miracles, more than ever is he aware of the divine authority entrusted to him. As converts multi ply, he is opposed, arrested, cast into a dungeon, but an angel frees him.[27] Nothing daunted, he sets out to preach and baptize along the old familiar roads of Judea, across the sands of Samaria. An ancient tradition discovers him at length in Antioch, the first bishop of that great city; and later he labors in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Bitbynia…
K
Kecharitomene
Guest
http://www.truecatholic.org/rosary.htm
Third Glorious Mystery - The Descent of the Holy Ghost
Christ had promised the Apostles, “I will send you the Holy Spirit. He will be your Comforter.” After Jesus left them, the Apostles were afraid. So they hid themselves in the little apartment of Mary. They prayed and waited for nine days. This was the first Novena. Then on Pentacost, over their heads, the Apostles saw parted tongues of fire. A tongue settled on each of their heads. The Holy Spirit had come. At once, they went out and began to tell everyone about Jesus. They spoke so strongly that thousands believed and were baptized. This was the birthday of the Catholic Church
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories2/052002_law_shanley.htm
During his Mass commemorating Pentecost yesterday, widely regarded as the birthday of the Catholic Church, Law urged Catholics around the city and world to unite for peace and forgiveness, ‘‘to profess our faith in the Lord.’’
Pentecost is the celebration of the birth of the Catholic Church. It is on this day that the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, as they prayerfully waited in the Upper Room.
http://www.goccn.org/diocese/spcl/RefArcC/PentecostC.asp
.
Third Glorious Mystery - The Descent of the Holy Ghost
Christ had promised the Apostles, “I will send you the Holy Spirit. He will be your Comforter.” After Jesus left them, the Apostles were afraid. So they hid themselves in the little apartment of Mary. They prayed and waited for nine days. This was the first Novena. Then on Pentacost, over their heads, the Apostles saw parted tongues of fire. A tongue settled on each of their heads. The Holy Spirit had come. At once, they went out and began to tell everyone about Jesus. They spoke so strongly that thousands believed and were baptized. This was the birthday of the Catholic Church
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories2/052002_law_shanley.htm
During his Mass commemorating Pentecost yesterday, widely regarded as the birthday of the Catholic Church, Law urged Catholics around the city and world to unite for peace and forgiveness, ‘‘to profess our faith in the Lord.’’
Pentecost is the celebration of the birth of the Catholic Church. It is on this day that the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, as they prayerfully waited in the Upper Room.
http://www.goccn.org/diocese/spcl/RefArcC/PentecostC.asp
Code:
*“When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance”* (Acts 2: 1-4).
K
Kecharitomene
Guest
catholic-forum.com/from_parishes/from_parishes_990523.html
PENTECOST SUNDAY
Pentecost Sunday, which culminates the Easter Season, is a glorious day in which we commemorate the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and Mary in the Upper Room where they gathered in fear. They were transformed into courageous witnesses to the Faith, and from that upper room eventually went out to all parts of the earth to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ. It is for this reason that Pentecost Sunday is called the Birthday of the Church. The Church, as the Body of Christ, on this day, became the visible presence of the Risen Lord in the world. Each of us, as members of that Body of Christ, participates in that role of witnessing to, and building up the Kingdom of God. The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes that The Church was made manifest to the world on the day of Pentecost by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The gift of the Spirit ushers in a new era in the ‘dispensation of the mystery’ - the age of the Church, during which Christ manifests, makes present, and communicates his work of salvation through the liturgy of his Church, ‘until he comes again.’ In this age of the Church, Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this new age. He acts through the Sacraments in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls ‘the sacramental economy’; this is the communication (or ‘dispensation’) of the fruits of Christ’s Paschal Mystery in the celebration of the Church’s ‘sacramental’ liturgy.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
**1076 **The Church was made manifest to the world on the day of Pentecost by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The gift of the Spirit ushers in a new era in the “dispensation of the mystery” the age of the Church, during which Christ manifests, makes present, and communicates his work of salvation through the liturgy of his Church, “until he comes.” In this age of the Church Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this new age. He acts through the sacraments in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls “the sacramental economy”; this is the communication (or “dispensation”) of the fruits of Christ’s Paschal mystery in the celebration of the Church’s “sacramental” liturgy.
It is therefore important first to explain this “sacramental dispensation” (chapter one). The nature and essential features of liturgical celebration will then appear more clearly (chapter two).
PENTECOST SUNDAY
Pentecost Sunday, which culminates the Easter Season, is a glorious day in which we commemorate the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and Mary in the Upper Room where they gathered in fear. They were transformed into courageous witnesses to the Faith, and from that upper room eventually went out to all parts of the earth to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ. It is for this reason that Pentecost Sunday is called the Birthday of the Church. The Church, as the Body of Christ, on this day, became the visible presence of the Risen Lord in the world. Each of us, as members of that Body of Christ, participates in that role of witnessing to, and building up the Kingdom of God. The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes that The Church was made manifest to the world on the day of Pentecost by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The gift of the Spirit ushers in a new era in the ‘dispensation of the mystery’ - the age of the Church, during which Christ manifests, makes present, and communicates his work of salvation through the liturgy of his Church, ‘until he comes again.’ In this age of the Church, Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this new age. He acts through the Sacraments in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls ‘the sacramental economy’; this is the communication (or ‘dispensation’) of the fruits of Christ’s Paschal Mystery in the celebration of the Church’s ‘sacramental’ liturgy.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
**1076 **The Church was made manifest to the world on the day of Pentecost by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The gift of the Spirit ushers in a new era in the “dispensation of the mystery” the age of the Church, during which Christ manifests, makes present, and communicates his work of salvation through the liturgy of his Church, “until he comes.” In this age of the Church Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this new age. He acts through the sacraments in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls “the sacramental economy”; this is the communication (or “dispensation”) of the fruits of Christ’s Paschal mystery in the celebration of the Church’s “sacramental” liturgy.
It is therefore important first to explain this “sacramental dispensation” (chapter one). The nature and essential features of liturgical celebration will then appear more clearly (chapter two).
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
Hello Kerharitomene,
** **You wrote:
Please remember that doctrines develop and aren’t formally defined until they are challenged, thus may be why it is difficult to find a definitive statement about the Pentecost question.
….yet we still held them as truth in the absence of a formal declaration.
This is very true. In a way the truth is still unfolding. Thank you SO MUCH for the effort you made Kecharitomene! But I am afraid, I have not been convinced. Here is why:
** **Lo! a world-changing thing happens, the fulfillment of a promise given by Jesus at the Last Supper, “I will ask the Father and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever. I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you. In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.”
**The *fulfillment of the promise *does not indicate the beginning of the Church. All it tells me, that Jesus made a promise and he fulfilled it. **
That was Pentecost, the birthday of the Catholic Church. Militant,
***Church Militant *****did begin at Pentecost. But Church the Sanctifier, the dispenser of graces began long before Pentecost. Pentecost brought an added dimension, (power of witness) to the Church. I was not its beginning. **
Quoting Law:
During his Mass commemorating Pentecost yesterday, widely regarded as the birthday of the Catholic Church,
Pentecost is the celebration of the birth of the Catholic Church. It is on this day that the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, as they prayerfully waited in the Upper Room.*** *********
**You know what…. I do not wish to sound disrespectful, but I would rather not analyze what former cardinal Law has said and I do hope I am not offending anyone.
**
continued
**
** **You wrote:
Please remember that doctrines develop and aren’t formally defined until they are challenged, thus may be why it is difficult to find a definitive statement about the Pentecost question.
….yet we still held them as truth in the absence of a formal declaration.
This is very true. In a way the truth is still unfolding. Thank you SO MUCH for the effort you made Kecharitomene! But I am afraid, I have not been convinced. Here is why:
** **Lo! a world-changing thing happens, the fulfillment of a promise given by Jesus at the Last Supper, “I will ask the Father and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever. I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you. In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.”
**The *fulfillment of the promise *does not indicate the beginning of the Church. All it tells me, that Jesus made a promise and he fulfilled it. **
That was Pentecost, the birthday of the Catholic Church. Militant,
***Church Militant *****did begin at Pentecost. But Church the Sanctifier, the dispenser of graces began long before Pentecost. Pentecost brought an added dimension, (power of witness) to the Church. I was not its beginning. **
Quoting Law:
During his Mass commemorating Pentecost yesterday, widely regarded as the birthday of the Catholic Church,
Pentecost is the celebration of the birth of the Catholic Church. It is on this day that the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and Mary, the Mother of Jesus, as they prayerfully waited in the Upper Room.*** *********
**You know what…. I do not wish to sound disrespectful, but I would rather not analyze what former cardinal Law has said and I do hope I am not offending anyone.
**
continued
**
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
Pentecost Sunday, which culminates the Easter Season
Culmination does not mean beginning. It means just what it says, culmination. It was completed by the arrival of the Holy Spirit.
They were transformed into courageous witnesses to the Faith, and from that upper room eventually went out to all parts of the earth to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ.
Transformation** does not suggest a beginning either. It suggests something becomes better (usually, hopefully) but it does not suggest the creation of something.**
The Church was made manifest to the world on the day of Pentecost by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Made manifest** means something that was hidden was brought out to the light for everyone to see. **
I realize this appears hair slitting and unimportant. But words have creative power and all our Catholic Dogma was arrived by such hair slitting. Please do not misunderstand I am not proposing a new dogma. All I am saying is this may have been an erroneously thought doctorine, it has no basis other than a habitual use in the Church, in fact it may have been brought into the Church from foreign sources, because quite frankly, I have yet to see it in Catholic Tradition. It is simply not there and the fact it had been openly used from the pulpit for the past twenty years means absolutely nothing, nor does it give any credibility whatsoever.
Is there any proof out there?
Culmination does not mean beginning. It means just what it says, culmination. It was completed by the arrival of the Holy Spirit.
They were transformed into courageous witnesses to the Faith, and from that upper room eventually went out to all parts of the earth to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ.
Transformation** does not suggest a beginning either. It suggests something becomes better (usually, hopefully) but it does not suggest the creation of something.**
The Church was made manifest to the world on the day of Pentecost by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Made manifest** means something that was hidden was brought out to the light for everyone to see. **
I realize this appears hair slitting and unimportant. But words have creative power and all our Catholic Dogma was arrived by such hair slitting. Please do not misunderstand I am not proposing a new dogma. All I am saying is this may have been an erroneously thought doctorine, it has no basis other than a habitual use in the Church, in fact it may have been brought into the Church from foreign sources, because quite frankly, I have yet to see it in Catholic Tradition. It is simply not there and the fact it had been openly used from the pulpit for the past twenty years means absolutely nothing, nor does it give any credibility whatsoever.
Is there any proof out there?
K
Kecharitomene
Guest
Ok Tru-D:
You have graciously addressed my support of the issue, and now I would like to hear your propostion against the matter. On what day are you thinking that the Church began? Nisan 14? Nisan 15? Nisan 16?
Since the Roman Catholic Church celebrates Pentecost as “the Birthday of the Church” from the Bishop of Rome to all the Bishops and clergy in communion with the Holy See, I must ask you to tangibly disprove that Pentecost is the stated day of birth of the Catholic Church.
In as much as I may not be able to convince you, can you make a compelling controversy that indicates otherwise?
I am looking forward to your case and your defense.
Pax Christi.
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
K
Kecharitomene
Guest
**So to answer your question Kecharitomene, I have a strong suspicion the Church was born on Calvary when Jesus died on the cross and the temple curtain was torn in half, because the Holy of Holies was no longer within the Temple, it hung on the cross.
**
I fail to see any substance to your suspicion, especially in light of the 2000 years that the Church has celebrated its beginning on Pentecost Sunday. Can you show me that the early Church did otherwise or that there was ever a dialogue that contradicted the Pentecost birth time? As you know, there are an abundance of Catholic scholars, Bishops, and Popes who embrace the traditional time of birth of the Church. Have you any credible sources that challenge this?
I had some responses to these words and I already answered them, so go back and check it out to see if you may ask the same questions as others have done before. I appreciate you taking your time with this.
You are most welcome, I think this conversation is intriguing, unfortunately, I don’t really like to read so I will decline your offer to review your previous composures, but thanks anyway.
My focus on this is if you choose not to accept the Pentecost B-Day, what else might you opt out of because it cannot be explained to your satisfaction? I think its these microfissures that ultimately lead to the brittle fracture of one’s faith and the subesequent departure from the Church. Yeah…I know the difference between dogma and dicipline…bear in mind, dicipline isn’t what the Protestants are best at. They broke because their lack of dicipline culminated in the great Protestant Rebellion…oops, …meant reformationFreaudian slip.
Is this notion of Pentecost a difficulty for you or someone you know? I ask because, gosh, I believe it because my parish priest told me so and he is in communion with Bishop Gerald Gettlefinger who is the Bishop of the Evansville Diocese, who is in commuion with the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, who is the Vicar of Christ, so if the credentials of these clergy persons are insubstantial, then I suppose I just accept it on fiduciary faith that they are telling the truth.
Talk to ya soon.
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
I fail to see any substance to your suspicion, especially in light of the 2000 years that the Church has celebrated its beginning on Pentecost Sunday. Can you show me that the early Church did otherwise or that there was ever a dialogue that contradicted the Pentecost birth time?
Precisely! I have the same question? Has it always been so? It could have been for the past thirty years or so… and depending on one’s age, it may appear that it has always been done that way. Same as with the Latin mass. For people of my age or older, the Norvus Ordo Mass remains the new mass. For you, it has always been done that way. So the big question is this: has Pentecost been declared the birthday of the Church consistently for the past 2000 years or so, or has it made its way into the bloodstream of the Church in the past thirty years? I am not saying everything that appears new or different is wrong, far from it. There is an evolution of sorts when we look at how with each new age the Holy Spirit has led the Church to deeper understanding of Catholic Dogma. But this evolution is not a continuous and straight path, there are obstacles along the way and from time to time the wrong turn is taken, but eventually the Church gets back on the right path. I wonder if the birth of the Church is such a thing. To determine if it is a mare innovation or the truth, one would have to look to earlier sources. I mean my priest believes it is so, my bishop believes it is so, perhaps my pope believe it is so… still, in truth it may not be so. At a later day it may become clear it is not so, but for now most people believe it is so.
You are correct to ask this, I am asking exactly the same question myself. I do not know where to begin though.
Yes that is true, and I must tell you… a person could find plenty of reasons to be disillusioned and to question the wisdom some of the things that go on in the Church these days, some issues are truly disconcerting, yet I am not running off with the Traditionalist, nor would I join any Protestant sect to pursue what I may believe to be the right course to follow. In reality, the birthday of the Church is small potato compared to other issues. The right course for me is to stay obedient to my superiors; I could not do it any other way, since I follow the True Devotion. Yet I do seek and search a deeper understanding of my faith, and the one thing that I have found consistent is this: truth always fits and never deviates, it illuminates and never confuses. But placing the birth of the Church at Pentecost does not do those things for me; I find contradictions in it. The answer that it has always been thus… is irrelevant; it has nothing to do with truth. My grandmother used to smear butter on my burns when I was a child, because she truly believed that is how it was always done and refused to listen to me that the cold running water eased the pain.
continued
T
tru_dvotion
Guest
Good question and a very astute observation and you deserve a straight answer. I was caught up in the Charismatic renewal for a long time and it was a hard and complicated road out of it, and I am not sure, but I have a nagging suspicion that placing the birth of the Church at Pentecost is a relatively new idea, in fact it has not been thought that way over the ages. Of course it is easy to dismiss my desire to prove it, as I appear to have an axe to grind. And maybe so, maybe it is just wishful thinking on my part, but than I could also be right. There are so many false teachings and practices attributed to the charismatics, and for the time being, the Church seem to embraced these with such enthusiasm, is it any wonder I am suspicious? So my question remains, was the birth of the Church always thought this way or is this a relatively new idea? I would have a far easier time to come to terms with it if this has always been thought this way than if it was introduced… say thirty years ago. So in reality, I would prefer to find it has always been thought and not the other way around. And this is the answer I am looking for. That is why I was looking to the Dogmas, to the Catechism and to the binding documents for confirmation. But I have yet to find such proof. Perhaps I could find someone well red in the early church fathers who knows more about this. Thanks for your time. God bless.
- Status