The Catholic Church is just another denomination

[guanophore]

Correction: the Chruch of Rome was one of the local churches founded by the apostles. Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria were others. The universal Church was founded by Christ on the foundation of the twelve apostles. Joe

Thanks, Joe. Sometimes I get my head where the sun isn’t shining.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Grace Seeker, you have revealed here your ignorance with regard to “another denomination” as the thread states. The Catholic Church teaches this very truth. The fact that you are not aware of it, or misunderstand that we know righteousness comes from God through faith to all who believe only betrays your ignorance. Of course no one is saved by their “label”! What did anyone say that gave you that impression?!

There are those here, who may not put it as bluntly as I did, but that is in essence what they are saying, when they find all those outside the teaching ministry of Catholic Church to be questionable with respect to their salvation, and all those within its teaching ministry to be assured of salvation. That makes salvation about who their teachers are more than anything else.

And as for ! Corinthians 13:12. That was what I cited as evidence that I (and all of us) do know in part, not that I know fully. Yet, there are some in the Catholic Church that seem to claim that they can know Christ fully in this present world. Why do you then say to me:

The Sola Scriptura doctrine places the bible above the true Word, which is Jesus. Solas believe that “the perfect has come” in the form of the closed Canon. Therefore, they believe that they can see fully face to face the Divine One, though he remains at the right hand of the Father. They believe that, since the Bible is the fullness of Him, that they can understand fully, and are no longer imperfect in knowledge.

I never said anything to which would lead one believe I claimed any sort of fully knowledge. Also, if you are critiquing my posts, you will see that I have specified that I am anything by Sola Scriptura. Please, do not create a strawman and then put my name on it.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Originally Posted by jco2004
Correction: the Chruch of Rome was one of the local churches founded by the apostles. Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria were others. The universal Church was founded by Christ on the foundation of the twelve apostles. Joe

That’s a BIG distinction. You seem quite willing to accept it.

How does that differ from my statement that Christ did not found the Catholic Church, but rather that Christ founded the catholic Church? A statement that routinely gets attacked.

And, as yet, this question remains unaddressed:
If the Catholic Church were to cease to exist, would that also mean that the Church of Jesus Christ had ceased to exist?

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

That’s a BIG distinction. You seem quite willing to accept it.

How does that differ from my statement that Christ did not found the Catholic Church, but rather that Christ founded the catholic Church? A statement that routinely gets attacked.

And, as yet, this question remains unaddressed:
If the Catholic Church were to cease to exist, would that also mean that the Church of Jesus Christ had ceased to exist?

That’s a rhetorical question. The Catholic Church will never cease to exist. I have no problem with you saying that Jesus founded the catholic Church, because the Catholic Church and the catholic Church are one in the same.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

That’s a rhetorical question. The Catholic Church will never cease to exist. I have no problem with you saying that Jesus founded the catholic Church, because the Catholic Church and the catholic Church are one in the same.

It’s not rhetorical; it’s hypothetical. And I recognize that. A hypothetical can sometimes help us look closer at our assumptions.

I take it from your answer that you would then say, yes. On the assumption that they are one in the same, if the Catholic Church ever ceased to exist, then the catholic Church would also cease to exist.

 

[nerfherder]

That’s a rhetorical question. The Catholic Church will never cease to exist. I have no problem with you saying that Jesus founded the catholic Church, because the Catholic Church and the catholic Church are one in the same.

They are absolutely NOT the same, and this is another example of where ignorance comes into this discussion.

In the current version of the Nicene Creed, we all say We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. Small c catholic (check your missal) is like small c communism: a concept, an idea. In this case small c catholic refers to the universal church, the body of Christ.

Big C Catholic is the Church of Rome. Big C Communism was the Communist Party of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) or the People’s Republic of China. They are/were organisations.

The Nicene Creed, when it says we believe in one catholic church clearly says that we believe in the universal church of Christ - and that is the body of all those redeemed by Christ.

The distinction between catholicism and Catholicism is absolutely clear.

Blessings to Grace Seeker.

 

[MrS]

In the current version of the Nicene Creed, we all say We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. Small c catholic (check your missal) is like small c communism: a concept, an idea. In this case small c catholic refers to the universal church, the body of Christ.

Big C Catholic is the Church of Rome. Big C Communism was the Communist Party of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) or the People’s Republic of China. They are/were organisations.

The distinction between catholicism and Catholicism is absolutely clear.

Blessings to Grace Seeker.

Nice job of selective versing…

The Nicene Creed says C(c)atholic, and Apostolic.

Now, you can deny what 2000 years of history says concerning C(c)atholic… but do you also deny the belief that the C(c)atholic Church comes from the Apostles… and it is the only C(c)hurch that does.

 

[MrS]

There are those here, who may not put it as bluntly as I did, but that is in essence what they are saying, when they find all those outside the teaching ministry of Catholic Church to be questionable with respect to their salvation, and all those within its teaching ministry to be assured of salvation. That makes salvation about who their teachers are more than anything else.

And as for ! Corinthians 13:12. That was what I cited as evidence that I (and all of us) do know in part, not that I know fully. Yet, there are some in the Catholic Church that seem to claim that they can know Christ fully in this present world. Why do you then say to me: I never said anything to which would lead one believe I claimed any sort of fully knowledge. Also, if you are critiquing my posts, you will see that I have specified that I am anything by Sola Scriptura. Please, do not create a strawman and then put my name on it.

That is a weak and unexpected argument from you sir… I have read your posts… I respect your beliefs, and I feel you are committed to them for the sake of your position as Pastor, and for the teaching background and bias that is natural to your position in life.

Catholics have no assurance of salvation if they understand it correctly.

Catholics have all their assurance in the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ. He Who is the first of the Church’s teaching ministry is the only way to the Father.

And He, Jesus Christ, set the plan in motion by founding only ONE Church. Not an invisible entity, the candle under a basket, but the living, breathing, growing, Church which is developing over time as the Holy Spirit leads it to the fullness of the Truth.

Anyone, Catholic or not, who claims they are able to know Christ fully…fully… in this life, is simply wrong, mistaught, arrogant, or satanic.

And those who are subject to teaching …
which is not founded on the Apostles.
which is not blessed with the laying of hands by a Catholic bishop…
which is not part of the source of the Fullness of the Faith…

may still be saved… The Lord judges.

But I ask… why choose the wide easy road when then narrow road has all the Graces we really need… the Sacraments, the prayers, the Saints, the Petrine Authority… and the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

As we approach Easter and enjoy Christ’s Resurrection, I ask you to ask yourself:

Our sins need to be forgiven… and Jesus, on Sunday night, first declared that all He has all the Power from the Father, and then confirs Power on the 12…"…whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven… whose sins you shall retain, they are retained…"

How could anyone stay in another faith formation/community when the two key Graces to help us in our salvation… Forgiveness of Sins, and The Eucharist are catholic(universal) gifts to all those who enter the Catholic Church.

Counseling, and a Lord’s Supper just don’t match up.

Private Interpretation (even that of groups of learned men) just don’t match up.

Using/abusing OUR book, The Holy Scriptures, for personal “satisfaction”, just doesn’t match up.

Fellowship in the liturgy in favor of direct Worship and inner-active participation of the heart in the Liturgy, begun in the Catecombs, just won’t ever match up.

Join the hundreds of Protestant Pastors in the past 10 years who love the Word of God so much… who were troubled by the selective and often erroneous use of Scripture,… who became steeped in History… and came home to Rome.

I see in you and what you write a very kind man. And in kindness and charity, I feel compelled to remember you especially as we approach the Triduum… Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday.

May the Patience of Jesus in His Passion overwhelm you.

.

 

[guanophore]

There are those here, who may not put it as bluntly as I did, but that is in essence what they are saying, when they find all those outside the teaching ministry of Catholic Church to be questionable with respect to their salvation, and all those within its teaching ministry to be assured of salvation. That makes salvation about who their teachers are more than anything else.

I am not sure I understand this. Are you saying that Catholics don’t know they are saved by grace, through faith?

Most Catholics on this board realize that it is not up to us to determine who is saved, and who is not, that it is up to God, only. That is why there is so much vigorous opposition to the OSAS, predestination, and assurance positions. They all come across as presumptuous of God’s grace.

If Catholics believe that their church has the full deposit of faith, then I do not see how they could fail to have concern for those outside of that deposit. I agree with you, there is sometimes a lack of recognition that there are members of the body that are outside the correction of the magesterium. We have only one teacher, who is Christ, do we not? If we do not receive His teachings, how will we remain with Him? To that extent, it is about who the teacher is.

And as for ! Corinthians 13:12. That was what I cited as evidence that I (and all of us) do know in part, not that I know fully. Yet, there are some in the Catholic Church that seem to claim that they can know Christ fully in this present world.

When I wrote above about arrogant presumption, it never entered my mind that this condition is limited to non-Catholics!

Why do you then say to me: I never said anything to which would lead one believe I claimed any sort of fully knowledge. Also, if you are critiquing my posts, you will see that I have specified that I am anything by Sola Scriptura. Please, do not create a strawman and then put my name on it.

In my last post I was speaking about the meaning of “the perfect has come”. Perhaps I failed to take your comments as they were intended. It certainly seemed to me that you were pointing out that Catholics don’t read the scripture properly, and don’ t know they are saved by grace. I wrote that as much for anyone else who is reading the thread as I did for you.

" Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 2"5)

“those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.” (Romans 8:5)

If this is how Catholics interpret scripture, it is no wonder you read it, even quote it and yet do not understand its teachings.

I thought you were saying that you have the mind of Christ, and that Catholics don’t, since they don’t understand what it says. If I misunderstood, then I apologize. You said you were being blunt, I am not sure why, so I was blunt in return. Perhaps I should not have taken this as though it were intended as an insult?

 

[Grace_Seeker]

That is a weak and unexpected argument from you sir… I have read your posts… I respect your beliefs, and I feel you are committed to them for the sake of your position as Pastor, and for the teaching background and bias that is natural to your position in life.

Catholics have no assurance of salvation if they understand it correctly.

Catholics have all their assurance in the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ. He Who is the first of the Church’s teaching ministry is the only way to the Father.

.

I know that this is true, and that this is what the Catholic Church actually teaches. But what I am referring to is that there are some Catholics who have posted in this thread that I believe are saying something different than what you have just articulated. I believe that there are some who have articulated the position that you have criticized. As I believe said persons are in error, I was trying to show that said beliefs were not tenable, not only from my particular point of view (which admittedly might be biased, but that they also are in conflict with orthodox Catholic teachings.

I am not sure I understand this. Are you saying that Catholics don’t know they are saved by grace, through faith?

I am saying that there are some Catholics who think that only Catholics will be saved. And who think that all Catholics will be saved. (There are some other groupss like this too, but that does not excuse it in anyone.) Read this thread carefully, I don’t even know if they realize that this is the essence of what they have said, but it is what some of their posts boild down to.

Is anyone other than Semper Fi going to address my hypothetical?

 

[guanophore]

How does that differ from my statement that Christ did not found the Catholic Church, but rather that Christ founded the catholic Church? A statement that routinely gets attacked.

And, as yet, this question remains unaddressed:
If the Catholic Church were to cease to exist, would that also mean that the Church of Jesus Christ had ceased to exist?

Yes, because there is only One Church, One Lord, One faith, One baptism. There is no other Church except the one Christ founded. If any have established what they believe is such a thing, then it is counterfeit, and is not, in truth, part of the Body of Christ.

 

[jmcrae]

Yes, because there is only One Church, One Lord, One faith, One baptism. There is no other Church except the one Christ founded. If any have established what they believe is such a thing, then it is counterfeit, and is not, in truth, part of the Body of Christ.

AMEN!!

If the Catholic Church that Christ established were to fail, then the Gates of Hell will have prevailed, and Christ will be a liar - Jesus the Nazarene will be “outed” as a mere man - an arrogant and insane man - not the Son of God, and not worthy of having a religion named after him, let alone to be worshipped as God - and our duty as seekers and followers of Truth will be to submit to the Jewish authorities and to rebuild the Temple, so as to revive the Covenant of the Old Testament, since, if the Church is false, then there is no New Covenant.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

II thought you were saying that you have the mind of Christ, and that Catholics don’t, since they don’t understand what it says. If I misunderstood, then I apologize.

I was challenged by a post which (sarcastically I believe) commented on one of my posts saying, “No arguement from me you evidently know the mind of God.” That is why I commented that indeed I do, at least in part. The same poster came back quoting scripture so as to imply that no one can know the mind of God. But, in my opinion was quoting scripture out of context, so I provided a few other passages of scripture that I believed showed that every believer had at least some knowledge from God, even though the best we can hope for in this life would be imperfect knowledge.

Now, based on my posts, do you think I understand Catholics to be believers or unbelievers?

You said you were being blunt, I am not sure why, so I was blunt in return. Perhaps I should not have taken this as though it were intended as an insult?

I just did a search of all my posts for the word “blunt” and couldn’t find it, so I am at a loss as to what I might have been referring to. But, I did make an apology in post 215 with regard to something I regretted saying in post 213. You and a couple of others have subsequently taken exception to that #213 post, but beyond the apology which I had already posted I don’t know what to do. I can’t go back and editted it out, which I would have already done if I could. What I said there was uncalled for and is not the way I wish to present myself or relate to people. Anyway, that’s a long way of saying that it is not my style (at least not usually nor intentionally) to be insulting. I might be blunt in saying something I believe to be true that I suspect others will strongly disagree with, but I don’t do so with the goal of putting another person down. If you find that I have, please, call me on it so that I can correct my behavior.

 

[guanophore]

I was challenged by a post which (sarcastically I believe) commented on one of my posts saying, “No arguement from me you evidently know the mind of God.”

Sorry, I must have missed that one. It does sound sarcastic.

That is why I commented that indeed I do, at least in part. The same poster came back quoting scripture so as to imply that no one can no the mind of God. But, in my opinion was quoting scripture out of context, so I provided a few other passages of scripture that I believed showed that every believer had at least some knowledge from God, even though the best we can hope for in this life would be imperfect knowledge.

I am in agreement with you on this point.

Now, based on my posts, do you think I understand Catholics to be believers or unbelievers?

What does it matter what I think? It seems to me that you consider the Catholic church to be another denomination. Just like the rest, there are some believers in it, and others who have a form of godliness without the power thereof. (nominal)

I just did a search of all my posts for the word “blunt” and couldn’t find it, so I am at a loss as to what I might have been referring to. But, I did make an apology in post 215 with regard to something I regretted saying in post 213

It seems that we all have the capacity to get heated about issues.

You can a couple of other have subsequently taken exception to that #213 post, but beyond the apology which I had already posted and don’t know what to do.

No need to do anything. People that don’t like your opinion can just skip your posts, or avoid the thread.

I can’t go back and editted it out, which I would have already done if I could.

I know, sometimes I don’t come to my senses within that 20 minute time limit! I have taken to writing in notepad instead.

What I said there was uncalled for and is not the way I wish to present myself or relate to people. Anyway, that’s a long way of saying that it is not my style (at least not usually nor intentionally) to be insulting.

Clearly I took your comments out of context.

I might be blunt in saying something I believe to be true that I suspect others will strongly disagree with, but I don’t do so with the goal of putting another person down. If you find that I have, please, call me on it so that I can correct my behavior.

Let us take up our crosses, during this most Holy Week, and bear one another’s burdens, thus fulfilling the law of Christ.

Peace,

Guan

 

[Grace_Seeker]

If the Catholic Church were to cease to exist, would that also mean that the Church of Jesus Christ had ceased to exist?

That’s a rhetorical question. The Catholic Church will never cease to exist. I have no problem with you saying that Jesus founded the catholic Church, because the Catholic Church and the catholic Church are one in the same.

Yes, because there is only One Church, One Lord, One faith, One baptism. There is no other Church except the one Christ founded. If any have established what they believe is such a thing, then it is counterfeit, and is not, in truth, part of the Body of Christ.

AMEN!!

If the Catholic Church that Christ established were to fail, then the Gates of Hell will have prevailed, and Christ will be a liar - Jesus the Nazarene will be “outed” as a mere man - an arrogant and insane man - not the Son of God, and not worthy of having a religion named after him, let alone to be worshipped as God - and our duty as seekers and followers of Truth will be to submit to the Jewish authorities and to rebuild the Temple, so as to revive the Covenant of the Old Testament, since, if the Church is false, then there is no New Covenant.

Thank-you all for answering. So that is three Yes, and zero No.

So, as Semper Fi said, it seems that the Catholic Church and the universal Church of Jesus Christ are synonymous. Or as Guanophore seems to have put it – to be a part of the Body of Christ, is to at the same time be a part of the Catholic Church.

To follow up on that, are there persons who believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior but who yet are not a part of the Catholic Church? Could these persons be classified as Christians?

 

[guanophore]

So, as Semper Fi said, it seems that the Catholic Church and the universal Church of Jesus Christ are synonymous.

Yes and no. There is a lot of separation among the brethren, and this is not Jesus vision for His body.

To follow up on that, are there persons who believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior but who yet are not a part of the Catholic Church? Could these persons be classified as Christians?

I am not really sure. I was thinking about Mormons, who seem to believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior, but I don’t personally consider them Christians, though they themselves do. I think there are also persons being saved who may never have been exposed to Christianity, who Jesus considers part of His body. I don’t think that it is up to us to figure out who is who. “Let the wheat and the tares grow together until the harvest”.

 

[MrS]

Thank-you all for answering. So that is three Yes, and zero No.

So, as Semper Fi said, it seems that the Catholic Church and the universal Church of Jesus Christ are synonymous. Or as Guanophore seems to have put it – to be a part of the Body of Christ, is to at the same time be a part of the Catholic Church.

To follow up on that, are there persons who believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior but who yet are not a part of the Catholic Church? Could these persons be classified as Christians?

wow… where is St Thomas when we need him??

It is my understanding:

[1] The Catholic Church has members who profess (with full knowledge or perhaps with no knowledge) all that the Catholic Church teaches. They are baptized into Christ by water and the Holy Spirit in the Triune medhod.

[2] Some Catholics are very knowledgable about their faith. They understand much, and believe, in Faith, what they cannot understand because Holy Mother Church has taught it to be True.

[3] Many Catholics are not properly catechised in their faith and thus are not passing on the faith to their children. They are guilible to the non-Catholic or anti-Catholic who comes knocking, and too often fall for an “easy-believism” of another faith community.

[4] There is a world of difference between a conscience and a well formed conscience. Just following one’s conscience is not good enough…Hitler had a conscience.

[5] The Triune baptism of water and the Holy Spirit brings one into the Body of Christ… the unifying aspect of all believers … a body of many parts with but one Head, Jesus Christ.

[6] All Catholics are members of the Body of Christ. All non-Catholics are members of the Body of Christ. Anyone who has perhaps never heard the Gospel, never heard iof Christ, never heard of the Redemption of sin etc… is still born with that inate desire in their heart to know a Higher Power. Catholics acknowledge that baptism of desire … and that baptism of desire will make that one a member of the Body of Christ.

[7] Many members of the Body of Christ will sin and fall away, no matter how strong their desire is to believe. (Even St Paul asked others to pray for him, lest he fall away. If he feared losing his way, I should too… so pray for me too!!!)

[8] Justification is by Grace alone, through Faith alone, working in Love.

[9] God can give us all the Graces we need to attain heaven - the only reason we are here in the first place.

[10] The tremendous graces in the sacraments are found only in the Catholic Church… especially Reconciliation and the Eucharist.

If one is truly seeking God, and wants to follow Jesus Christ completely… that person must listen to Christ’s words… and listen means to obey.

If one denys Christ’s words, say in John 6, and instead believes the very clear and “hard sayings” are just symbolism… I would contend that they are not listening… not obeying… and the Catholic Church would consider them separated brethren, but brethren just the same. This implies ignorance, not defiance.

If a Christian is one who truly follows Christ… and then chooses to deny His very directive, I would say that person is not a Christian.

If a person is trying to follow Christ as best a they are able (even they who will never hear the Good News), I would say that person is more a Christian than the above example.

Not all Catholics are good Christians… but they can be with instructions, and love, and their acceptance of the Truth.

Not all non-Catholics are good Christians… but they are making it harder on themselves by living with less than the Fullness of the Truth .

 

[MrS]

Patrick Madrid was asked one time if he thought that everyone in Heaven was Catholic.

He said yes… because at the end of our lives, we will see the Beatific Vision, and come into the Fullness of Truth… the One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism mentioned in Scripture. Each will know the One True God, and will belong to Him for eternity…

The communion of saints will no longer be the Church Militant (us on earth, fighting our way to heaven). Nor will it be the Church Suffering (those in purgatory being purified of any remaining attachment to earthly things) All will belong to the Church Truimphant - the Catholic Church in Heaven/

however…

Everyone is hell will also be catholic.

They too will see the Beatific Vision… and come into a knowledge of the Whole Truth. They too will understand the meaning and reality of One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism.
But for whatever reason they chose to condemn themselve in their early lives, they will spend their “catholic” eternity in hell.

 

[jmcrae]

Grace;

Here is a true story for you. I know the man; he is a Deacon, and he was at the Chrism Mass that I attended last night, renewing his vows of obedience to the Catholic Bishop of Calgary.

He probably also tells this story better than I do, but here’s my shot at it:

When he was a little boy, he lived in a primitive little village in Africa that had not yet been encountered by Western civilization (at least, not in many centuries) - he knew nothing about radios, cars, TV sets, or modern medicine, and of course, nobody in his village had yet heard the name “Jesus.”

However, in his village, the elders taught them that there was a Man/God, and that this God had once come down from Heaven to become a human being, and that He had died for sins, and risen again to open up the gates of Heaven and the afterlife to human beings.

Some say that this belief was a variation of the Osiris myth; others say that, at some point in their distant history, they had heard the Gospel, and that, over time, they had forgotten a great many details of the story (and of course, over time, other details got added, although these details were known by the elders to be purely speculative.)

Anyhow, when he was about seven years old, some Catholic missionaries discovered this village, learned their language, and began to teach them the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They gave them four months of what we call in the Catholic Church the “Inquiry” level of teachings - that is, the basics of the Gospel, and the fact that Jesus founded a Church, and wants everyone to be members of this Church.

At the end of the Inquiry period, the elders consulted among themselves (since, as is customary, they had been asked whether they would want to become part of this Church, and enter into a period of intense Catechesis), and when they returned to the missionaries to say what their response to the Gospel would be, they said to the missionaries, “We know this God already. We thank you for telling us His name, and for inviting us to be part of His Church. We accept.”

Of course the missionaries were astonished to hear that they already knew Jesus, but when the elders showed them the various rituals and artifacts with which they worshipped their god, they were soon convinced that these primitive villagers had, in fact, been worshipping Jesus.

Subsequently, after a period of Catechesis, everyone in the village was gladly baptized at the next Easter Vigil, and those who were of age were Confirmed and received First Holy Communion.

All of the members of the village also joined this particular missionary order, which is how it comes that they are now scattered all over the world, sharing the Gospel, and their story, with whoever will listen.

Now, in answer to your question, I will (like the Jesuit missionaries) pose another question.

Would members of that village who died before the missionaries came have been considered Catholics by God when they died, or not? Since they believed as much as they understood about Catholic teaching already.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Now, in answer to your question, I will (like the Jesuit missionaries) pose another question.

Would members of that village who died before the missionaries came have been considered Catholics by God when they died, or not? Since they believed as much as they understood about Catholic teaching already.

In the light of what you express as “being Catholic” in this post, I would say that those from that village who indeed believed and practiced the faith which later would be termed Catholic though they did not know it by that name were just as Catholic as those from that same village who were later officially baptized into the Catholic Church.

I think that, because even though they were not under the teaching magistrum of the Catholic Church, yet according to the story they worshipped the one true God in Spirit and and Truth. This, not some pronouncement of “belonging” is what makes a person truly belong to Christ, and all who truly belong to Christ are members of his one true Church, which you have identified as being by definition Catholic.

Now, how would you answer that same question? Please answer not just how you would identify those departed individuals, but the reason for that identification or lack thereof.