Quick question about The Catechism of the Catholic Church

[fredystairs]

both churches teach the need, important and meaning of the Eucharist, both churches are correct because they are leading you to God’s will of taking in the body and blood of God.

Both churches cannot be correct. As I mentioned before, one or the other must be wrong, or they’re both wrong.

Let’s look at another example. The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is immoral. The ELCA teaches that it is acceptable. Which is correct?

My point is this: God is not a God of confusion. (1 Cor. 14:33) All these different teachings cannot be from God, because they are mutually exclusive. Because they cannot all be true, at least some of them cannot be from God, from the Holy Spirit.

Pax

 

[Gorgias]

Both churches cannot be correct. As I mentioned before, one or the other must be wrong, or they’re both wrong.

Welcome to my world.

I get what Anna is saying – that God is with us, and offers us grace – but have been unable to provide a convincing argument for her that refutes the question “but how do you know that what you are doing is in line with God and His grace?”

It’s all good. At the heart of it all, I believe that Anna loves God and is moving in a good direction. If we might ever be able to resolve the question “ok, then… why there and not here, if individuals themselves who believe themselves to be following God but have mutually exclusive beliefs, if there is one God and multiple divergent doctrines?”, then the goals of ecumenism will be achieved!

 

[annad347]

… then the goals of ecumenism will be achieved!

… gives @Gorgias a big hug*

I think you do understand me… I for one believe unity will happen some day.

 

[annad347]

My point is this: God is not a God of confusion. (1 Cor. 14:33) All these different teachings cannot be from God, because they are mutually exclusive. Because they cannot all be true, at least some of them cannot be from God, from the Holy Spirit.

I totally agree. Which is why we need the Holy Spirit to lead us to God’s Truth, so that when we come across something that is confusing or contradicting to God’s Truth or the Word of God, the Holy Spirit leads us to what is true.

We pray for understanding, God provides it every time…

One of the main reason’s I started this thread is I didn’t understand how the Catechism is used… thanks to God and everyone here… I learned a LOT

 

[fredystairs]

fredystairs:

My point is this: God is not a God of confusion. (1 Cor. 14:33) All these different teachings cannot be from God, because they are mutually exclusive. Because they cannot all be true, at least some of them cannot be from God, from the Holy Spirit.

I totally agree. Which is why we need the Holy Spirit to lead us to God’s Truth, so that when we come across something that is confusing or contradicting to God’s Truth or the Word of God, the Holy Spirit leads us to what is true.

We pray for understanding, God provides it every time…

One of the main reason’s I started this thread is I didn’t understand how the Catechism is used… thanks to God and everyone here… I learned a LOT

Then I wish you well on your journey. And I hope you find the church which is the pillar and foundation of the truth. 1 Timothy 3:15

Pax

 

[Montrose]

both churches teach the need, important and meaning of the Eucharist, both churches are correct because they are leading you to God’s will of taking in the body and blood of God.

Both Churches are not correct. Only the Catholic Church is correct about the Real Presence through transubstantiation. Christ gave the Catholic Church the authority to teach in matters of faith and morals. It did not give the Lutheran Church or any other churches this authority.

 

[annad347]

I know you’ve been following the thread. You’re not saying anything different from what @Gorgias and I have already discussed.

but if you want to continue the conversation, I don’t mind… but you have to answer the question @Gorgias and I have already answered… how do you know?

 

[Montrose]

I know you’ve been following the thread. You’re not saying anything different from what @Gorgias and I have already discussed.

but if you want to continue the conversation, I don’t mind… but you have to answer the question @Gorgias and I have already answered… how do you know?

How do I know. Because that authority was given by Christ to the Catholic Church only. The Lutheran Church did not exist then. Are you saying unless there is a video of this it’s not true.

 

[annad347]

Are you saying unless there is a video of this it’s not true.

that would help… but no that’s not what I’m asking. I thought you was following the thread.

 

[Montrose]

that would help… but no that’s not what I’m asking. I thought you was following the thread.

I just pop in now and then.

 

[annad347]

I just pop in now and then.

ah, I went back… I asked you this question before Post 329… that’s a lot of reading to catch up on. LOL.

But if you read a few post down you’ll understand what I’m asking, and how it’s more then just saying God gave the Catholic church authority. I’m not saying He didn’t I’m just asking how do you know… maybe start from post 334.

 

[Justin_Mary]

If we might ever be able to resolve the question “ok, then… why there and not here , if individuals themselves who believe themselves to be following God but have mutually exclusive beliefs, if there is one God and multiple divergent doctrines?”, then the goals of ecumenism will be achieved!

So why is it important to follow one & not the other?

 

[Gorgias]

So why is it important to follow one & not the other?

One denomination and its teachings and not another’s, you mean?

There’s really no answer in Protestantism, other than a bald assertion that one’s subjective opinion is not only correct, but also God-given. That’s quite an opinion of oneself to hold! But, Anna’s point is that she just knows she’s being led by the Holy Spirit, and that’s actually a representative position within Protestantism.

It’s the “because I said so” approach… without the authority that makes “I said so” valid.

 

[Justin_Mary]

Both Churches are not correct. Only the Catholic Church is correct about the Real Presence through transubstantiation.

One of my favorite lines in the whole Bible is when Adam first sets eyes on Eve & love inspires him to say, “Truly this is bone of my bone & flesh of my flesh.”

I remember one day it came to me if Jesus were to say these words (as the New Testament is hidden in the Old & the Old Testament is revealed in the New) there’s only one person he could be referring to.

Then just now, reading your post I understood Jesus could also be referring to you & me as often as we receive Holy Communion.

 

[annad347]

It’s the “because I said so” approach… without the authority that makes “I said so” valid.

WOW, that’s a disappointing comment. Here I thought we were starting to understand each other… then poof, we don’t.

You really don’t understand its not me who says so but God. It’s is not me following what I want, but God who is leading me through the Holy Spirit.

It’s not my say so, it’s God who says so…I thought you understood.

You keep saying I’m following what I want, following my own path, my own understanding. I keep telling you I’m not, not just telling you but giving you scripture to explain why, I not just believe, but know I’m following God’s will through the guidance of the Holy Spirit…but you believe I’m wrong… God is not answering my prayers… Oh wait, I just got it, (seriously just got it as I write this). It’s not that you don’t believe I’m following the Holy Spirit, that God isn’t answering my prayers… you just believe I’m ignoring Him…I get it.

 

[Gorgias]

WOW, that’s a disappointing comment. Here I thought we were starting to understand each other… then poof, we don’t.

I even edited it back somewhat!

Yet, that’s been what I’ve been saying all along, isn’t it?

You really don’t understand its not me who says so but God. It’s is not me following what I want, but God who is leading me through the Holy Spirit.

Except that it’s you who is subjectively making the determination that you think you’re following God, isn’t it? No one else says “Anna, you’re doing what God wants you to do”, right? ('cause, if so, then that would be an authority functioning as such).

I get it that you believe you’re following God’s will – but, you have to make that determination somehow.

It’s not my say so, it’s God who says so…I thought you understood.

I do understand what you’re saying! I’m just asking you to examine your statement to reveal whose authority makes that determination. Not whether it’s accurate, as such – just… who looks at it and determines “yep, Anna’s following God!” That would be you, wouldn’t it?

You keep saying I’m following what I want, following my own path, my own understanding. I keep telling you I’m not, not just telling you but giving you scripture to explain why, I not just believe, but know I’m following God’s will through the guidance of the Holy Spirit…but you believe I’m wrong…

No, I think you think you’re following the path God lays out, and not your own. I’m just pointing out that this decision / determination comes from you personally. So… it’s subjective.

It’s not that you don’t believe I’m following the Holy Spirit, that God isn’t answering my prayers… you just believe I’m ignoring Him

Nope, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m not judging your decisions. (That’s above my pay grade!). You may very well be following God! (I’m just asking you where that judgment comes from. It comes from you, looking at the Bible and saying to yourself “I’ve got it right!”… no?

 

[annad347]

(I’m just asking you where that judgment comes from. It comes from you, looking at the Bible and saying to yourself “I’ve got it right!”… no?

So you need someone, here on earth, to be exact someone with authority here on earth to say, ‘Yes, Anna this is what God wants you to do. You are truly listening the Holy Spirit and following God’s will. You are okay.’ In order for it to be true?

 

[Gorgias]

In order for it to be true?

No, not in order for it to be ‘true’, as such. But having that confirmation – that assurance! – that you’re on the right path is valuable (or maybe even essential!), isn’t it?

Sometimes, Protestants shake their heads at Catholics and say, “but… you can live without assurance of your salvation? After all, we have assurance!”. Essentially, that’s the whole argument, in reverse! We have assurance that we’re following Jesus’ commands! The “we have assurance of our salvation” folks have assurance that… well… they think they’re right. And that’s about it.

So, if it’s sufficient for you to say “on my own authority and by my own personal judgment, I’m saved”, then that’s one approach. Given that we’re talking about eternal salvation, though? I think I want more assurance than that…

 

[annad347]

I think I want more assurance than that…

It took me 2 years… and to be honest still counting, to realize no man on earth can ever give me that type of assurance, the type of assurance I think you are looking for… The type of guarantee only God can give. The assurance that tells us, we are with God.

How can any man, even a man with authority give that to us?

And the reason I say still counting is cause I still have many questions, but each day I pray, I get answers. I’m not interpreting scripture, leading myself… I pray, ask (people ) pray again.

 

[Gorgias]

It took me 2 years… and to be honest still counting, to realize no man on earth can ever give me that type of assurance, the type of assurance I think you are looking for… The type of guarantee only God can give. The assurance that tells us, we are with God.

There’s definite truth to that. In the final analysis, it is God who saves, not man.

How can any man, even a man with authority give that to us?

Because Jesus gave it to him:

Jesus said to him, "And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Jesus literally gave Peter the proxy of divine authority. When Peter decided that there should be apostolic succession (see Acts 1:15-26), boom – there it was! Decreed by Peter, bound on earth, and therefore, bound in heaven.

This notion of “binding and loosing” speaks – in a context that stretches back to the ancient Kingdom of David – to the power to proclaim authoritative teaching. So, again, “bound/loosed on earth” == “bound/loosed in heaven.” That’s why it’s so powerful! Jesus literally gave this kind of authority, so if the Church teaches it, then it is authoritatively true (and, if a matter of doctrine or morals taught as ‘infallible’, then it’s ‘infallible’, because Jesus promised that protection to the Church through His apostles. Not to other churches yet to be founded, and not to individuals.

I’m not interpreting scripture, leading myself… I pray, ask (people ) pray again.

Right. And by what authority do those people speak?

(To be fair, you should ask “Gorgias, why do you have authority to tell me this?”, right? And my answer would be, “I’m not the origin of this doctrine, the Church Jesus founded and its apostolic leadership teaches this, and teaches it authoritatively!”)