M
maurin
Guest
Jesus created ONE Church not tens of thousands. The Spirit of Truth would only have led you to that Church, not a different church. Paul teaches the discernment of ‘spirits.’
- Status
J
JohnS72
Guest
I am truly at a crossroads on this one, because I am fully confident that Baptism is yardage equal to a great distance from hell towards heaven … in American football terms … and not necessarily the automatic touchdown. Yet, how arrogant it would be that the aborted human life, with no chance at Baptism, would be sent to hell. On the field, with hell being the poorly called “safety” of getting run backwards to the end and heaven at the long end of the field, everyone has a “state of grace” placing him or her somewhere on that field, with the Sacraments and our prayers greatly affecting our position on that field. What matters, obviously, is where we stand on the last second of our life, but more importantly, how willing the Lord will be to reach out towards those 99.9 yards to pull us into heaven - and our Lord is willing to go all the way back to the edge of hell in His Mercy.
The reason I say this is because I know a lot of good people in history were never Baptised. They include - among others, Abraham, John the Baptist, Joseph, Saint Mary the Mother of God, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and all the rest. Is Baptism a great thing? Yes. Is it absolutely necessary for heaven? No. It helps, but like all of the Sacraments, it is not the only answer. It is an important ingredient, but certainly not the entire recipe.
I am sick and tired of people who go to receive Communion in the English-speaking part of our American Church - many who are not intellectually honest enough to admit that they support abortion and only attend Mass at Christmas and Easter. Obviously, Mass is not a recruiting tool - it is not supposed to be. It is supposed to be the highest form of prayer, and it is. It was commanded into existence by Jesus Christ Himself, and for about 1,977 years, that commandment has been faithfully followed, in both the Eastern and Western Churches, both which are under His love and care. Yet we see Paul in 1st Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23) that even the early Church celebrated the Mass at His Command. Yet also, we see that many participated in receiving the Sacred Body of Christ without being worthy, and Paul told the Corinthians that by receiving the Eucharist in a state of sin, they were not healed of their woes … they were instead made sick. Paul rhetorically says that when they (the sinners) ate the bread and drank the cup (in their state of sin) they were in essence through their lack of faith declaring Jesus dead until he would dare to come in glory. Somehow, this got twisted, so exited were the Church Fathers at the fact that Paul mentioned the Eucharist in the early Church at all, that they made this admonition towards Corinth a memorial acclaimation, and it is shameful and sinful for this Church to ever state such blasphemy during our Mass. In that regard, it is not something to be proud of when the more correct “Christ has died, Christ has Risen, and Christ will come again.”
The Mass in a prisonyard is no greater than a High Mass at the Vatican. When the Body and Blood of Christ appear on Earth in modern form, connected to the past, a miracle happens to all of us. This miracle should be “breaking news” on CNN, but it’s not. This miracle of ordinary bread and wine being transformed into the Body and Blood of Jesus is the kind of miracle that converted many when Jesus caused multiplication of the loaves. So yes, as Jesus intended miracles to bring people out of the light into the darkness through recruitment, the Mass today does the same. Even in the times of Jesus there were cynics - some who admitted the miracles happened, but accused Jesus of being Satan for having such powers.
The greater point for you or I is exactly what is behind the Sacraments. Confirmation is the point where discernment is refined, and the Sacrament of Penance - which is connected to the ability to receive the Eucharist worthily - is also important, as each Confession places us at the “End Goal” territory of the field between heaven and hell, just short of the Pearly Gates.
The second type of Catholic that drives me crazy is the Catholic who is free of Mortal sin and who has just stepped out of the Confessional, but still refuses to receive the Eucharist at Communion. These are most common at Spanish, Italian, and other old-school Churches.
O
ONLY_SCRIPTURE
Guest
Since I am honest intellectually, I have checked sources and retract my original statement that the Mass is a tool for evangelization. While this might be the thoughts of some, I can see that Catholics were being honest that it is not a primary source.
I would also like to shift the focus to a singular point - a doctrinal statement that says “no grace is conferred except through mary”
You can check for yourself - P. 279 in Catholicsm and Fundamentalism, by Karl Keating. This docrtine typifies Roman hubris, this docrine is unable to be defended.
Btw - I converted when I was 19.
I would also like to shift the focus to a singular point - a doctrinal statement that says “no grace is conferred except through mary”
You can check for yourself - P. 279 in Catholicsm and Fundamentalism, by Karl Keating. This docrtine typifies Roman hubris, this docrine is unable to be defended.
Btw - I converted when I was 19.
D
dcdurel
Guest
Of course it can be defended. I came down implicitly from the apostles, who learned from Jesus. The Church simply makes it explicit. Since the apostles learned from Jesus, who is God, then the teaching is true.
Now, Jesus did say whoever believes the Gospel the apostles taught and preached would be saved. No where did He say that those who believed Gospels, or the four written Gospels would be saved. We cannot be saved by reading scripture alone. We must believe the entire Gospel the apostles taught and preached, and scripture does not claim anywhere to be a summary of this Gospel the apostles taught and preached.
A
asteroid
Guest
I thought you wanted to keep this thread to the topic of the Mass as useful for evangelisation. Why have you gone off topic to introduce the concept of the Church? (the Catholic Church does claim that Jesus started one church only and it has been catholic from day one, but it has not and does not claim to be perfect since it too is on a journey and is filled with millions of sinners) And why introduce the doctrines about Mary into this thread?
Might I invite you to start separate threads on these subjects so that we can keep this thread to the subject you asked it to be kept to? Then we could discuss the other subjects too without getting too confused. I’m easily confused.
A
asteroid
Guest
Focus shifted.
Your quotation from p279 is a misquotation. Keating actually says ‘no grace accrues to us without her intercession … through God’s will, grace is not conferred on anyone without Mary’s cooperation.’ Similar meaning, but let’s get our quotes right.
He goes on to say ‘From a practical matter, this kind of doctrine is one of the last accepted by someone approaching the Church, particularly someone coming to the Church from fundamentalism, and it is accepted, ultimately, on the authority of the Church rather than on the authority of clear scriptural references.’
That word ‘clear’ is important. There are references but they are not clear and explicitly unambiguous or anything like that. I can agree with Keating’s sentence from personal experience. The whole subject therefore brings in not only Mary but the nature of the church, the authority of the church as the pillar and ground of truth, the transmission of doctrine from the apostles onwards and probably lots of other issues.
The doctrine can certainly be defended though as Karl Keating says, it cannot be definitively proven through the Scriptures. I’m not going to do the defending. Others are far better qualified than me. I’ll just recommend some reading that helped me, as a protestant coming into the Catholic church, to begin to get to grips with Mary. The first is Scott Hahn’s book on Mary, though if you don’t want to buy it the audio series on Mary is available to download from the EWTN website or you could read this page which gives some of his very scriptural thoughts in brief. The second is Oscar Lukefahr’s book on Mary which is available for free from the Catholic Home Study Service. His books are as clear as anything. Hoorah, free books. Since you didn’t get any catechesis in the catholic church you might want to read these and learn why we believe what we believe even if you don’t believe it yourself.
Reading Keating’s book is a good start but it has a firm basis of apologetics to teach some essentials of apologetics to catholics. And of course he admits that his book, for length reasons, misses lots of things out and just gives principles. For learning the whys of catholic belief it may be better to read something that is not written for this purpose but written simply to help explain the faith and give solid catechesis in written form.
Focus shifted back. After all, the thread title isn’t shifted.
It’s interesting what you say about the ‘40 Days’ programs and people coming to Christ (I never got through Rick Warren’s first 40 days book though we still have it). The Mass is not designed as a tool for evangelization. And yet I know people who have come to mass as non-Catholics and the beauty of it - the liturgy itself, no one could be converted by the music in our parish or falsely converted in an emotional gospel rally high - the beauty of it and the presence of Christ in it has turned them round and set them firmly on the journey to Christ in the fulness of Catholicism.
I am one of those people in many ways - although there are many other things that brought me to Catholicism. And I was among other things a Baptist lay preacher and deacon and led worship in various pentecostal type churches.
I’ve known of Scripture experts (Hahn is one - read his conversion story, it’s entertaining) who came to mass for the first time and were totally bowled over by the amount of scripture in the mass and were amazed at the richness of the scriptural basis and sources. I have to say, there is more Scripture in the mass than in any other service I’ve been to in any other church - and that includes even 4 hour marathons in the Jesus Army and the preaching of the strict baptists.
One of the ways Christ is present in the Mass is in the reading of the Scriptures. The living Word present in the written Word. Since pretty much the whole mass (barring the homily) is drawn from Scripture he is present there too. Christ is also present in the prayers, in each of us who are part of the body of Christ, the family of Christ, called to be priests of Christ and like John the Baptist prophetic heralds of Christ. Christ is also present in the ministerial priest in a special way - but the whole subject of the ordained priesthood and its nature isn’t something I’ll go into here. And he is also present of course in the Eucharist, sacramentally present in what is at the centre of the mystery of the Eucharist, a mystery affirmed by the Church from the apostles through to the present day. In fact from the earliest days if you didn’t affirm this presence you weren’t allowed to receive the elements. Maybe there should be a thread about that too.
That’s too much waffling. And I need to get breakfast for myself and daughter.
Your quotation from p279 is a misquotation. Keating actually says ‘no grace accrues to us without her intercession … through God’s will, grace is not conferred on anyone without Mary’s cooperation.’ Similar meaning, but let’s get our quotes right.
He goes on to say ‘From a practical matter, this kind of doctrine is one of the last accepted by someone approaching the Church, particularly someone coming to the Church from fundamentalism, and it is accepted, ultimately, on the authority of the Church rather than on the authority of clear scriptural references.’
That word ‘clear’ is important. There are references but they are not clear and explicitly unambiguous or anything like that. I can agree with Keating’s sentence from personal experience. The whole subject therefore brings in not only Mary but the nature of the church, the authority of the church as the pillar and ground of truth, the transmission of doctrine from the apostles onwards and probably lots of other issues.
The doctrine can certainly be defended though as Karl Keating says, it cannot be definitively proven through the Scriptures. I’m not going to do the defending. Others are far better qualified than me. I’ll just recommend some reading that helped me, as a protestant coming into the Catholic church, to begin to get to grips with Mary. The first is Scott Hahn’s book on Mary, though if you don’t want to buy it the audio series on Mary is available to download from the EWTN website or you could read this page which gives some of his very scriptural thoughts in brief. The second is Oscar Lukefahr’s book on Mary which is available for free from the Catholic Home Study Service. His books are as clear as anything. Hoorah, free books. Since you didn’t get any catechesis in the catholic church you might want to read these and learn why we believe what we believe even if you don’t believe it yourself.
Reading Keating’s book is a good start but it has a firm basis of apologetics to teach some essentials of apologetics to catholics. And of course he admits that his book, for length reasons, misses lots of things out and just gives principles. For learning the whys of catholic belief it may be better to read something that is not written for this purpose but written simply to help explain the faith and give solid catechesis in written form.
Focus shifted back. After all, the thread title isn’t shifted.
It’s interesting what you say about the ‘40 Days’ programs and people coming to Christ (I never got through Rick Warren’s first 40 days book though we still have it). The Mass is not designed as a tool for evangelization. And yet I know people who have come to mass as non-Catholics and the beauty of it - the liturgy itself, no one could be converted by the music in our parish or falsely converted in an emotional gospel rally high - the beauty of it and the presence of Christ in it has turned them round and set them firmly on the journey to Christ in the fulness of Catholicism.
I am one of those people in many ways - although there are many other things that brought me to Catholicism. And I was among other things a Baptist lay preacher and deacon and led worship in various pentecostal type churches.
I’ve known of Scripture experts (Hahn is one - read his conversion story, it’s entertaining) who came to mass for the first time and were totally bowled over by the amount of scripture in the mass and were amazed at the richness of the scriptural basis and sources. I have to say, there is more Scripture in the mass than in any other service I’ve been to in any other church - and that includes even 4 hour marathons in the Jesus Army and the preaching of the strict baptists.
One of the ways Christ is present in the Mass is in the reading of the Scriptures. The living Word present in the written Word. Since pretty much the whole mass (barring the homily) is drawn from Scripture he is present there too. Christ is also present in the prayers, in each of us who are part of the body of Christ, the family of Christ, called to be priests of Christ and like John the Baptist prophetic heralds of Christ. Christ is also present in the ministerial priest in a special way - but the whole subject of the ordained priesthood and its nature isn’t something I’ll go into here. And he is also present of course in the Eucharist, sacramentally present in what is at the centre of the mystery of the Eucharist, a mystery affirmed by the Church from the apostles through to the present day. In fact from the earliest days if you didn’t affirm this presence you weren’t allowed to receive the elements. Maybe there should be a thread about that too.
That’s too much waffling. And I need to get breakfast for myself and daughter.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
More equine fertilizer…
Think logically here… All grace comes to us through Christ, correct?
The Blessed Virgin is His mother, correct?
That means that Christ came into the world through Mary, correct?
Then …in a very real sense all grace does indeed come to us through Mary.
Now…does she replace Christ? No! In fact, what was her message in the 2nd chapter of John’s Gospel? What specific message did she give to the servants at the wedding feast at Cana? Here…I’ll make it easy on you (Edited by Moderator) John 2:5 says, “His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye.” (emphasis mine so you don’t miss it…)
Now…if you were to check into all the approved apparitions of the Blessed Virgin, (the way I have) you would discover several things, but one that I feel is probably the most important of all is the consistent message she brings. It will always boil down to one very important and simple Gospel…Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye. But of course you didn’t know that did you?
BTW…It was bad enough when you were using this name and your other account on here (Kata_Loukan isn’t it?) both to post those ugly Jack Chick tract pictures in your posts, (What? You didn’t think that I noticed that and the fact that your join dates are within a week of each other and you “just happened” to have the very same Chick page in your posts! Sheesh! That’s not rocket science.
) but if you don’t knock off the a-C perjoratives in your posts (Like “Roman hubris”) I’m gonna report you to the moderators for violating the forum conduct rules which say, “Inappropriate or offensive graphics, links, or profile entries are not permitted” and then, “Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.”I and most all of the Catholics here at CAF could care less that you want to have issues with the Catholic faith, but abide by the rules and show some respect for our faith, or don’t post. It’s inflammatory and offensive and you know it is. [sign]So, knock it off!
[/sign]
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,
A
asteroid
Guest
Are you sure about your accusation? I’ve looked at the posts of Kata_Loukan and they seem to be quite dissimilar to the posts of ScriptureAlone, dissimilar both in content and subject.
Here’s a quote from Kata_Loukan in a thread about teenagers and birth control: “As for being agnostic, i can only say that the Catholic church is a great one (the best), and this is the best place to find out information. Just be sure that you are searching, because agnosticism quickly progresses to athiesm or self worship if it left alone.” Kata_Loukan has also linked to an excellent catholic site about contraception.
Kata_Loukan says that the Catholic church is the best church. Do you really think this is the same person as ScriptureAlone who says he/she was a slave in the Roman church and can’t stomach the thought of sitting through the Mass again?
It sounds very unlikely to me.
What do you mean about “ugly Jack Chick tract pictures”? ScriptureAlone has only posted in this thread and I haven’t seen any pictures at all in his/her posts, let alone ones from Chick. I’ve checked the majority of posts from Kata_Loukan too. No pictures in evidence. But there’s a chance I’ve missed something so if you want to point me towards these “ugly” pictures please do so. I have been known to miss things. Or maybe my settings are wrong and I can’t see these pictures. Please let me know if that’s the case.
If you want to drive ScriptureAlone (and Kata_Loukan if he reads this) away from Catholicism you are doing a fantastic job.
It’s probably best too not to make a blanket accusation against protestant preachers about whether or not they would preach on John2:5. I’ve heard excellent sermons on the passage in my protestant days and even ones that taught about doing as Jesus tells us. Such blanket accusations are blatantly unfair.
P
Psalm45_9
Guest
Which is the entire point of God Parents. As I always wonder, “why is it always the Catholics?” Lutherans, Anglicans, and Orthodox Christians also baptize infants and have the same teachings about Baptism that Catholics do.
M
mlchance
Guest
Subjectivism run rampant:
– Mark L. Chance.
See, now I’m confused. Why did God tell you one thing, and tell me something that contradicts what he told you? It’s like God told you “Z is true,” and then told me “Not-Z is true.” That doesn’t make any sense at. The Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion, after all.
– Mark L. Chance.
L
ltehs63
Guest
even though you have been proven to miss quoted this verse because obviously someone else has the same book.
I would like to ask you, couldnt a Morman ask where in the world we came up with the doctrine of the trinity? would your answer be the bible?
L
ltehs63
Guest
amen the catechism says they can also
we are not saying other denominations are bad either.
but how can there be more than THE ONLY TRUE CHURCH. you got true church A, and then true church B someting devides them it could be anything say baptism for example. which true church is telling the truth which one do we turn too? you cant say it does not matter Ive proven these things do matter from scripture in this thred. sorry but your logic does not make sense
T
Todd_Easton
Guest
It is my understanding that Mary, mediatrix of all graces, is not yet a dogma of the Catholic Church, though the doctrine has been around explicitly for at least 900 years (I’m thinking of St. Bernard). The following arguments might help show how this doctrine is consistent with Scripture.
Principle 1: God sometimes confers graces through his servants, as we are told in Acts 5:12 (“Now many signs and wonders were done among the people by the hands of the apostles”) and Acts 8:18 (“the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands”).
Principle 2: God rewards our faithfulness in small matters in this life with even greater responsibility in the next life, as we are told in Luke 19:11-17 (`Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’) and Matthew 19:28 ("Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of man shall sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.)
Applying Principle 1 and 2 to Mary, “the handmaid of the Lord,” it is seems quite fitting that God should reward Mary’s faithful obedience in this life in bringing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ into the world by giving her the responsibility in her afterlife of mediating all the graces won by her son, Jesus Christ, for mankind. Of course, Mary’s mediation of grace, as any other Christian’s mediation of grace, is always subordinate to and wholly dependent on the mediation of Jesus Christ, the one mediator between God and man.
The doctrine of Mary, mediatrix of all graces, can also be inferred from those Scripture verses that allude to Mary as the spiritual mother of Christians (John 19:26-27 and Revelation 12:1-17) . Since infants live wholly on their mothers’ milk and, if Mary is our spiritual mother, then we “babes in Christ” must live wholly on the spiritual milk (graces) that, by the will of God, comes to us from our spiritual mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
E
Elzee
Guest
Different ‘tools’ work for different people. An evengelical friend of mine was totally taken by the Mass his first time. What caught his eye and made him listen and open his heart during Mass? His words: “In the churches I’ve gone to all my life, I saw men standing in prayer, raising their arms or holding up their bibles. I walked into a Catholic Church and saw men on their knees before God.”
He starts RCIA this year. His belief in the Real Presence is so strong and inspiring. Please keep him in your prayers - he’s already evangelizing others about what he has been missing all his life!
He starts RCIA this year. His belief in the Real Presence is so strong and inspiring. Please keep him in your prayers - he’s already evangelizing others about what he has been missing all his life!
M
mercygate
Guest
Taking the highlighted statements: You are responding to what you see as the “face” of the Church. And it is sad, and it hurts, to know that what you say has a great deal of truth behind it. But the good news is that the “face” you see is not the “heart.” The heart of the Church goes to true doctrine, to deep sanctity, to a river of grace that does not stop flowing just because flawed, sinful people (inside the Church or outside it) happen to have personal problems with it. That is why we “believe in one, holy, catholic, and Apostolic Church.” It is the Church that transcends time, the Church that preaches the Gospel in season and out of season, convenient or inconvenient, the Church that never stops offering Christ to the world for her redemption.
M
Mickey
Guest
Amen, mercygate!
**Not only are we in this assembly (in the Church), but also the prophets and the apostles and all the saints; and what is most important of all - among us is Jesus Christ Himself, the Master of everything. **
St John Chrysostom
L
Lillith
Guest
Abraham was never Baptised…true, because he was of the old Covenent, as was the other OT prophets that you named. I am confident that the others on your list were most likely Baptised though (I am not sure about Joseph…as some scholars believe he was dead at the time of Jesus’ ministry, since he did not accompany Mary anywhere), but it was not recorded…why would it be? When Jesus instituted Baptism…John says It is you who should Baptise Me, but Jesus was fulfilling prophecy…and had John Baptise. I’d bet anything that Jesus did Baptise John at some point…because John requested it, and who of such great faith as John did Jesus ever turn down?
My point is…not every event was recorded in the Bible
**Passage John 21:25:
25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.**
R
RCCDefender
Guest
What you are talking about here is baptism of water, which is the normative baptism. However, the Church recognizes two other baptisms as well. These are baptism of blood and baptism of desire. All of the persons on your list likely fall into the third category. Well, you might say that John the Baptist’s was a baptism of blood since he was beheaded and therefore a martyr of the Faith. It is not just an important ingredient to be baptized, it is absolutely essential!
J
jimmy
Guest
There are one of two conclusions to draw from this; either you are a lier and you never attended mass, or you never listened. Those are the only two conclusions that are possible.
J
jimmy
Guest
Just as the Jews in John6 were not slaves you are not a slave right?
- Status