Original Sin

[Fr_Ambrose]

Matt16_18:

Yes, he did say this. It is yet one more belief that contradicts scriptures.

How can a person have new life in Christ without also having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? The scriptures clearly teach that Baptism brings to us rebirth in the Spirit.

In the Orthodox world we can say that this is so because the two Mysteries-Sacraments of Baptism (rebirth in Christ) and Chrismation (reception of the Holy Spirit) are inseparable. Chrismation occurs minutes after Baptism for children and adults alike.

But this is not so in the Catholic Church where Chrismation-Confirmation will be delayed for anything from 7 to 15 years after Baptism!!

That Catholic Baptism does not confer the Holy Spirit seems to be clear?

“Confirmation bestows upon Christians in substance what the Holy Ghost bestowed upon the Apostles at Pentecost, and enables them to defend the faith against whatever assails it in every age.”

And to quite Therese of Liseaux:

“A short time after my First Communion, I went again into retreat for my Confirmation. I had very carefully prepared myself for the coming of the Holy Spirit. I could not understand why so little attention was often paid to this Sacrament of love… How happy my soul was! Like the Apostles I happily awaited the promised Comforter. I rejoiced that soon I should be a perfect Christian, and have eternally marked upon my forehead the mysterious cross of his ineffable Sacrament. On that day I received the strength to suffer, a strength which I much needed, for the martyrdom of my soul was soon to begin”

Notice what she says — 1) she is waiting for the coming of the Holy Spirit in her Confirmation. (She does not seem to believe she received Him at Baptism?)

And 2) she says that it is only with Confirmation that she will become a perfect Christian.

What the Little Flower writes is, as the oldsters among us will remember, the pre-Vatican II teaching of the Catholic Church.

What is being taught today is, as Myrrh says, a curious change which incorporates part of Orthodox theology and makes use of Orthodox terminology but it is overlaid rather awkwardly on an older Catholic theology of Confirmation.

 

[prodromos]

HagiaSophia:

Trying to understand here - I follow you up to this point, but then I ask what does Pentecost (which is what Latin rite bases “Confirmation” on) mean or signify to the Orthodox?

Can you present Early Church Fathers that demonstrate this?

 

[Myhrr]

Myhrr

You have said that the only way to understand grace is that it is the uncreated Gift of the Holy Spirit indwelling in the soul.

Matt, I haven’t said that, I can only put this down to our mutual problems in communicating with each other. The Holy Spirit is God, chrismation for the Orthodox is the gift of God the person of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost; uncreated grace is already a given. You’ll find a lot in Orthodox writings on the stress put on acquiring the Holy Spirit - that doesn’t deny that the Holy Spirit is already a given at chrismation, but, and let Father Ambrose correct me here if I’m wrong, likened to the time between baptism and the receiving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, one has to work to understand this, to acquire it for oneself, to grasp what one has been given at chrismation.

Father Ambose’s definition was a little more subtle, but basically it is the same definition of yours, i.e. that the Catholics are all screwed up, and that grace can only be conceived as the uncreated grace of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

I can understand your confusion, this conversation has really made me think about the differences. As I keep trying to remind you’re using words the RCC has never used before the last century, we’re living in interesting times…, but it hasn’t given up its core dogmas about anything, so its use of uncreated grace can only be to amalgamate in some way that makes it fit core doctrines already in place which by RCC definition aren’t Orthodox.

Grace is an uncreated energy of God, as is uncreated light etc., creation of man is of the uncreated energies of God, in image and likeness, while the RCC has always denied this, ‘not of God’, and seen grace as a commodity, sanctifying grace, as a different creation, a something God created for man, and angels, a supernatural power given to man that separates him from lesser creation, puts him over and above creation. God and creation for the RCC are entirely separate, sanctifying grace can be seen as a bridge to God.

The grace of the indwelling Holy Spirit you’re talking about is still from the perspective of creation separate from God.

You have also stated that you believe that everyone is born in grace, and Fr Ambrose has not said this. Thus the contradiction in your beliefs. If people are born in grace and possess the indwelling of the Holy Spirit at birth, they cannot also receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit through the Sacraments of the Orthodox.

I can’t try answering for Father Ambrose here because I don’t know which exchanges with him you’re referring to, but possession of the Holy Spirit isn’t the same thing, the Holy Spirit is God, as God descended on Christ at his baptism and at Pentecost, and can’t immediately recall chapter and verse, on those who hadn’t yet been baptised. God is not a commodity that can be controlled… which touches on the differences in understanding priesthood, but I haven’t explored that area fully, but it is un-Orthodox to think a priest creates Christ by his words, Father Ambrose might be able to tell you more about this, the liturgy of the Orthodox is different from the RCC mass - again this is confused at the moment because of these new additions.

You either need to redefine your definition of grace, or you need to say that you do not believe that people are born in grace. You can’t have it both ways.

I hope what I’ve said above clarifies, we’re talking about two very different understandings of grace, so the misunderstanding then and now of Pelagius. We really need to keep the base differences in mind or we lose track of the differences.

Yes, he did say this. It is yet one more belief that contradicts scriptures.

Explanation as above, the Holy Ghost isn’t a commodity in the control of men. It cannot be given or withheld even by the most saintly of priests…

continued

 

[Fr_Ambrose]

Originally Posted by Matt16_18
. It is yet one more belief that contradicts scriptures.

How can a person have new life in Christ without also having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? The scriptures clearly teach that Baptism brings to us rebirth in the Spirit.

"But Satan, who entered and dwelt in him for a long time, became the occasion of his believing. Being delivered by the exorcists, he fell into a severe sickness; and as he seemed about to die, he received baptism by affusion, on the bed where he lay; if indeed we can say that such a one did receive it. And when he was healed of his sickness he did not receive the other things which it is necessary to have according to the canon of the Church, even the being sealed by the bishop. And as he did not receive this, how could he receive the Holy Spirit?’ "
Pope Cornelius
[regn. A.D. 251-253],To Fabius

“That this power of a bishop,however,is due to the bishops alone,so that they either sign or give the Paraclete the Spirit…For to presbyters it is permitted to anoint the baptized with chrism whenever they baptize…but (with chrism) that has been consecrated by a bishop;nevertheless (it is) not (allowed) to sign the forehead with the same oil; that is due to the bishops alone when they bestow the Spirit,the Paraclete.”
Pope Innocent
[regn. A.D. 401-417],To Decentius

 

[Myhrr]

Continued to Matt16_18

How can a person have new life in Christ without also having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? The scriptures clearly teach that Baptism brings to us rebirth in the Spirit.

ORTHODOX CATECHISM

Basic Teachings of the Orthodox Faith
by Metropolitan Archbishop Sotirios

Baptism

The first of the seven sacraments of our Church is Baptism. … He who is baptized is cleansed from original sin and from all other sins that he has committed up to the time of his baptism. His immersion in water symbolizes death. The sinful man dies. The baptized person is reborn and becomes a member of the Church, the mystical body of Christ. He puts on Christ. “Those who are baptized in Christ, put on Christ.” After baptism, or rather with baptism, he enters the Kingdom of God.

I think Father Ambrose is trying to do for the Orthodox what you’re doing with RCC doctrine, I think he’s explaining un-Orthodox understanding by saying that the words here mean as they do in Orthodoxy, I’m not. I’m saying that the above is not Orthodox. The seven sacraments idea is a limitation of term brought in from the RCC, this too has its own history which goes back further than the last century. Father Ambrose has explained, somewhere, that the whole Church is sacramental in Orthodox understanding. The above reference to cleansing from original sin is part of the recent additions which changes Orthodoxy. I can only say that this is emphasis is not Orthodox teaching, cleansing from original sin is RCC, the Orthodox do not have this doctrine. This is seen clearly in the differences of infant baptism. Orthodoxy does not see the infant guilty of sin, inherited from Adam or its own, there is nothing to cleanse, it is entry into a new life in Christ.

Orthodox Catechism

NEW BIRTH is receipt of new life. It is how we gain entrance into God’s kingdom and His Church. Jesus said, “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). From its beginning, the Church has taught that the “water” is the baptismal water and the “Spirit” is the Holy Spirit. **The new birth occurs in baptism where we die with Christ, are buried with Him, and are raised with Him in the newness of His resurrection, being joined into union with Him in His glorified humanity **(Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3, 4).

The Orthodox Christian Foundation

Father Ambrose has explained that the “Spirit”, as its put above, is the gift at chrismation. The above, taken together with the previous quote, is so exactly what you say that I think it comes out of the recent additions from the Orthodox side, those who have entered into the Athenagoras/Paul VI agreement.

It’s an elision of ideas that confuses Orthodoxy in which baptism and chrismation are separate but one whole.

 

[GrzeszDeL]

Dear Fr. Ambrose,

I contend that you misunderstand what is meant by Trent. I am still waiting for the library to get my books to me before I go any further with this line of argument, because it seems silly to try to conduct a proper discussion until we know what words we are discussing. As soon as the books come, however, I would be happy to explain how Trent means nothing other than that which Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II, Matt and I have been saying all along.

 

[Myhrr]

Myhrr:

Matt, I haven’t said that, I can only put this down to our mutual problems in communicating with each other. The Holy Spirit is God, chrismation for the Orthodox is the gift of God the person of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost; uncreated grace is already a given. You’ll find a lot in Orthodox writings on the stress put on acquiring the Holy Spirit - that doesn’t deny that the Holy Spirit is already a given at chrismation, but, and let Father Ambrose correct me here if I’m wrong, likened to the time between baptism and the receiving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, one has to work to understand this, to acquire it for oneself, to grasp what one has been given at chrismation.

Eeeeek, that of course presupposes, as Father Ambrose has already mentioned, that one understands that chrismation is the giving of the Holy Spirit as at Christ’s baptism, so it’s the above in retrospect, simpler to think of it as a period likened to Christ’s being led into the wilderness to be tempted by the adversary. (Have I wiggled out of that Father A?)

 

[Myhrr]

Myhrr:

Matt, I haven’t said that, I can only put this down to our mutual problems in communicating with each other. The Holy Spirit is God, chrismation for the Orthodox is the gift of God the person of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost; uncreated grace is already a given. You’ll find a lot in Orthodox writings on the stress put on acquiring the Holy Spirit - that doesn’t deny that the Holy Spirit is already a given at chrismation, but, and let Father Ambrose correct me here if I’m wrong, likened to the time between baptism and the receiving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, one has to work to understand this, to acquire it for oneself, to grasp what one has been given at chrismation.

Eeeeek, that of course presupposes, as Father Ambrose has already mentioned, that one understands that chrismation is the giving of the Holy Spirit as at Christ’s baptism, so it’s the above in retrospect, maybe simpler to think of it as a period likened to Christ’s being led into the wilderness to be tempted by the adversary. (Have I wriggled out of that Father A?) Whatever, when the saints talk about this it’s in conjunction with making the acquisition ‘one’s own’, and each of us has gifts particular to the individual as well as gifts in common. …I’m beginning to wish I hadn’t brought in this line of thought…

 

[Matt16_18]

Myhrr

I’m saying that the above is not Orthodox.

That is no surprise. You have been claiming all along that you have the authority to correct the teachings of Archbishop Sotirios. My question is why should anyone believe that you have that authority?

The Holy Spirit is God, chrismation for the Orthodox is the gift of God the person of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost; uncreated grace is already a given.

&

This is seen clearly in the differences of infant baptism. Orthodoxy does not see the infant guilty of sin, inherited from Adam or its own, there is nothing to cleanse, it is entry into a new life in Christ.

You are still contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you claim that it is “already a given” that an infant possesses the uncreated grace of the Holy Spirit before baptism and chrismation, and on the other hand, that chrismation is a bestowing of the gift of uncreated grace, i.e. the gift of the Holy Spirit.

You can’t have it both ways. You either need to redefine your definition of grace, or you need to acknowledge that an infant needs to receive grace through baptism and chrismation.

 

[Myhrr]

GrzeszDeL:

Dear Fr. Ambrose,

I contend that you misunderstand what is meant by Trent. I am still waiting for the library to get my books to me before I go any further with this line of argument, because it seems silly to try to conduct a proper discussion until we know what words we are discussing. As soon as the books come, however, I would be happy to explain how Trent means nothing other than that which Pope Pius XII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II, Matt and I have been saying all along.

I’ve just re-read our original exchanges on this, first 15 or so posts here and previous posts in Zoe Theodora’s Immaculate Conception thread. You’re still trying to dismiss Orange as a local council not binding on you so how can seeing Trent in the original Latin make any difference here? Pope Pius XII etc. plus the CCC concur that these councils are intrinsic to Trent’s understanding so Trent’s pronouncements can’t be isolated from them.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=10930

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=11290&page=1&pp=100

 

[GrzeszDeL]

Fr Ambrose:

And to quote Therese of Liseaux:

“A short time after my First Communion, I went again into retreat for my Confirmation. I had very carefully prepared myself for the coming of the Holy Spirit. I could not understand why so little attention was often paid to this Sacrament of love… How happy my soul was! Like the Apostles I happily awaited the promised Comforter. I rejoiced that soon I should be a perfect Christian, and have eternally marked upon my forehead the mysterious cross of his ineffable Sacrament. On that day I received the strength to suffer, a strength which I much needed, for the martyrdom of my soul was soon to begin”

Notice what she says — 1) she is waiting for the coming of the Holy Spirit in her Confirmation. (She does not seem to believe she received Him at Baptism?)

And 2) she says that it is only with Confirmation that she will become a perfect Christian.

What the Little Flower writes is, as the oldsters among us will remember, the pre-Vatican II teaching of the Catholic Church.

What is being taught today is, as Myrrh says, a curious change which incorporates part of Orthodox theology and makes use of Orthodox terminology but it is overlaid rather awkwardly on an older Catholic theology of Confirmation.

Methinks you read too much into the Little Flower’s notes here, Father. After all, St. Therése’s diaries are full of giddy little snippets to the effect that she cannot wait to “receive Jesus tomorrow,” but one would not conclude from these words that she had never received Jesus before. In any case, the Tridentine rite of Baptism makes plain that we receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism (even if we also receive the Spirit years later at confirmation). If your worry is that somehow we Catholics do not think that a Christian comes anywhere near the Spirit until 8th grade, you can ease your troubled mind now. We have never believed any such thing.

 

[Matt16_18]

Myhrr & Fr Ambrose

The scriptures do not say that the Apostles received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. The scriptures say that the Apostles (except Thomas) received the Holy Spirit forty days before Pentecost, when they met the resurrected Lord in the upper room on the third day after Christ’s crucifixion (the apostle Thomas wasn’t not with the Apostles on that day).On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
John 20:19-22
Nine days before the Feast of Pentecost, and shortly before Jesus ascended into Heaven, Jesus gave these instructions to the Apostles:To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God. And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”
Acts 1:3-5
The Apostles had already received the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit when they were instructed to wait for the baptism of the Holy Spirit. They were charged by Jesus to pray for nine days, and to wait until the uncreated Energy of God began to be manifested at Pentecost. The Apostles were waiting for the Holy Spirit to give them the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit so that they could begin their task of evangelizing the world.

What is the first thing that Peter does once he is anointed with the power of the Holy Spirit? He exercises a charism of the Holy Spirit (teaching) and he begins to preach the Gospel of salvation to the Jews.

Peter: “Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."

Now when they [the Jews who were in Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost] heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?”

And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The Catholic Church understands and accepts this teaching of Peter: the Sacrament of Baptism forgives all sin (including original sin) and bestows the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

The Sacrament of Confirmation is exactly that – confirmation of what has already been received by the Sacrament of Baptism.

 

[Matt16_18]

**Catechism of the Catholic Church

THE GRACE OF BAPTISM

1262** The different effects of Baptism are signified by the perceptible elements of the sacramental rite. Immersion in water symbolizes not only death and purification, but also regeneration and renewal. Thus the two principal effects are purification from sins and new birth in the Holy Spirit.

**For the forgiveness of sins . . .

1263** By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin. In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam’s sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God.

**“A new creature” **

1265 Baptism not only purifies from all sins, but also makes the neophyte “a new creature,” an adopted son of God, who has become a "partaker of the divine nature, "member of Christ and co-heir with him, and a temple of the Holy Spirit.

1242 In the liturgy of the Eastern Churches, the post-baptismal anointing is the sacrament of Chrismation (Confirmation). In the Roman liturgy the post- baptismal anointing announces a second anointing with sacred chrism to be conferred later by the bishop Confirmation, which will as it were “confirm” and complete the baptismal anointing.

 

[Matt16_18]

Myhrr:

Eeeeek, that of course presupposes, as Father Ambrose has already mentioned, that one understands that chrismation is the giving of the Holy Spirit as at Christ’s baptism, so it’s the above in retrospect, maybe simpler to think of it as a period likened to Christ’s being led into the wilderness to be tempted by the adversary. (Have I wriggled out of that Father A?)

No, you haven’t wiggled out of your contradictory beliefs.

… when the saints talk about this it’s in conjunction with making the acquisition ‘one’s own’, and each of us has gifts particular to the individual as well as gifts in common.

We can agree that the baptised infant has to be instructed in the faith, and one needs make the faith ‘one’s own’.

**Catechism of the Catholic Church

1231** Where infant Baptism has become the form in which this sacrament is usually celebrated, it has become a single act encapsulating the preparatory stages of Christian initiation in a very abridged way. By its very nature infant Baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate. Not only is there a need for instruction after Baptism, but also for the necessary flowering of baptismal grace in personal growth.

1270 “Reborn as sons of God, [the baptized] must profess before men the faith they have received from God through the Church” and participate in the apostolic and missionary activity of the People of God.

 

[Myhrr]

Myhrr & Fr Ambrose

The scriptures do not say that the Apostles received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. The scriptures say that the Apostles (except Thomas) received the Holy Spirit forty days before Pentecost, when they met the resurrected Lord in the upper room on the third day after Christ’s crucifixion (the apostle Thomas wasn’t not with the Apostles on that day). On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

John 20:19-22

Ah, the ol’ filioque question…

Christ couldn’t give the gift of the Holy Spirit until His Ascension. HE said so Himself.

As you note in the following:

Nine days before the Feast of Pentecost, and shortly before Jesus ascended into Heaven, Jesus gave these instructions to the Apostles: To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God. And while staying with them he charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, "you heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit."

Acts 1:3-5

The Apostles had already received the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit when they were instructed to wait for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

What Christ gave to them with his breath was temporary a temporary ‘indwelling’ for understanding, to keep them together, He did not give them the ‘indwelling’ of the Holy Spirit which He could only send from the Father. This is critical, he explains that their baptism with water was not the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is given at chrismation. That temporary breathing of the Holy Spirit into the Apostles was just that, temporary, for a time until Pentecost. Where, to remind us again, it was given equally to all and it was given to all, not just the “12”.

They were charged by Jesus to pray for nine days, and to wait until the uncreated Energy of God began to be manifested at Pentecost. The Apostles were waiting for the Holy Spirit to give them the charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit so that they could begin their task of evangelizing the world.

This makes no sense as it contradicts what actually happened, it is an explanation out of the un-Orthodox filioque addition.

continued

 

[Matt16_18]

"But Satan, who entered and dwelt in him for a long time, became the occasion of his believing. Being delivered by the exorcists, he fell into a severe sickness; and as he seemed about to die, he received baptism by affusion, on the bed where he lay; if indeed we can say that such a one did receive it. And when he was healed of his sickness he did not receive the other things which it is necessary to have according to the canon of the Church, even the being sealed by the bishop. And as he did not receive this, how could he receive the Holy Spirit?’ "
Pope Cornelius
[regn. A.D. 251-253],To Fabius

You can read that quote in its context thanks to the St. Pachomius Orthodox Library:

Eusebius Pamphilus, Bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine: CHURCH HISTORY

*Novatus, His Manner of Life and His Heresy, [with Fragments from the Writings of Cornelius Bishop of Rome]. *

Novatus, a presbyter of the church at Rome, being lifted up with arrogance against these persons [those who had been weak in the time of persecution], as if there was no longer for them a hope of salvation, not even if they should do all things pertaining to a genuine and pure conversion, became leader of the heresy of those who, in the pride of their imagination, call themselves Cathari …

There have reached us epistles of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, to Fabius, of the church at Antioch, which show what was done at the synod at Rome, and what seemed best to all those in Italy and Africa and the regions thereabout. Also other epistles, written in the Latin language, of Cyprian and those with him in Africa, which show that they agreed as to the necessity of succoring those who had been tempted, and of cutting off from the Catholic Church the leader of the heresy and all that joined with him.

 

[Myhrr]

continued to Matt16_18

What is the first thing that Peter does once he is anointed with the power of the Holy Spirit? He exercises a charism of the Holy Spirit (teaching) and he begins to preach the Gospel of salvation to the Jews.

After Pentecost.

Peter: “Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."

Now when they [the Jews who were in Jerusalem for the feast of **Pentecost]

heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?”

And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Which he himself had only just received, equally with all the others.

The Catholic Church understands and accepts this teaching of Peter: the Sacrament of Baptism forgives all sin (including original sin) and bestows the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

The Church doesn’t ‘understand and accept the teachings of Peter’ , the only head of the Church is Christ and he is not absent, wherever two or three, always with you etc. The Holy Ghost is given at chrismation as at Pentecost by the Church which is the body of Christ and he has his head still, he didn’t give it to any other…

The Church forever remembers St John the Forerunner.

The Sacrament of Confirmation is exactly that – confirmation of what has already been received by the Sacrament of Baptism.

Confirmation is not an Orthodox term, but one thing’s clear, the RCC do have a completely different view of baptism from the Orthodox as Father Ambrose tells you.

 

[Matt16_18]

Myhrr:

Christ couldn’t give the gift of the Holy Spirit until His Ascension. HE said so Himself.

Jesus did NOT say that the Apostles could not receive the Holy Spirit until Pentecost. Jesus said that the Apostles were to wait in Jerusalem and pray for the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Peter had already received the gift of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit fifty days before he received the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

What Christ gave to them with his breath was temporary a temporary ‘indwelling’ for understanding, to keep them together, He did not give them the ‘indwelling’ of the Holy Spirit which He could only send from the Father. This is critical, he explains that their baptism with water was not the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is given at chrismation. That temporary breathing of the Holy Spirit into the Apostles was just that, temporary, for a time until Pentecost.

Where do the scriptures back up this belief that the Apostles only “temporarily” received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit on Easter Sunday? Even if that were true, it shows that you contradict yourself. Now we have a “temporary” graces of the Holy Spirit - but that means that this grace has a beginning in time and an end in time - which would mean that you believe in the Catholic understanding of created grace.

 

[GAssisi]

Dear Myrrh,

I wish you were more consistent with your rhetoric. Then it would be more pleasant to have discussions with you. It is strange that you try to come off as competent enough to discuss Catholic/Orthodox issues, when you don’t even have an understanding of incarnational theology. Matt16 speaks of following the teachings of Peter, and you respond by saying that Jesus is the only head of the Church? If you truly understood Catholic/Orthodox teachings, you would not have responded as you would have. Incarnational theology asserts that God works through his creation. If Matt16 says we follow the teachings of Peter, it is inherently assumed that those teachings are followed BECAUSE they come from Jesus originally, and because it is Jesus who speaks THROUGH Peter primarily and the Apostles collectively as well.

The Papacy is a natural outcome of this incarnational theology as it perfectly reflects the monarchy of the heavenly reality - a point against Orthodox ecclesiology. But that is a topic for another thread.

God bless,
Greg

 

[GrzeszDeL]

GAssisi:

It is strange that you try to come off as competent enough to discuss Catholic/Orthodox issues, when you don’t even have an understanding of incarnational theology. Matt16 speaks of following the teachings of Peter, and you respond by saying that Jesus is the only head of the Church? If you truly understood Catholic/Orthodox teachings, you would not have responded as you would have. Incarnational theology asserts that God works through his creation. If Matt16 says we follow the teachings of Peter, it is inherently assumed that those teachings are followed BECAUSE they come from Jesus originally, and because it is Jesus who speaks THROUGH Peter primarily and the Apostles collectively as well.

I predict the imminent arrival of a veritable snowstorm of Abbé Guettée quotes.