What dear friend, do you find strange about Catholicism?

[rcwitness]

Patrick - What I find strange is most of what is posted above. From a lover of Christ outside the confines of these rituals, I must say how people see these are quite bizzar

Ya know Tony, I believe religion is kinda like a wife… and Baptism is like marriage… and Communion like consumation. It’s good to see the good in all religions, but there is Truth which cannot be contradicted. I see that you state that you love Jesus. Is this true? Do you believe He is the Truth?

 

[eazyduzit]

Ya know Tony, I believe religion is kinda like a wife… and Baptism is like marriage… and Communion like consumation. It’s good to see the good in all religions, but there is Truth which cannot be contradicted. I see that you state that you love Jesus. Is this true? Do you believe He is the Truth?

Good observation. The bible does not state that loving Jesus is the requirement of salvation. One can love Jesus in different ways. You might love Him for his wisdom or His healing etc.
Biblical salvation has to do with repentance and placing trust in Christ and believing that He has accomplished everything for salvation and life. The proof of this would be that one would then cease from his own works as God did from His and actually trust in Christ alone.

 

[TonyBS]

I will second that question.

But that aside, Tony, I would by no means tell your hypothetical person “No, you can’t do that”; but he/she isn’t a Christian – or, at least, a Trinitarian Christian (which is generally what we mean by Christian).

Did Christ have other names for Christians, I thought it was through Him?

Luke 9:23: “And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.”

Romans 12:9-21English Standard Version (ESV) - Marks of the True Christian

9 Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11 Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. 12 Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. 13 Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. 17 Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. 18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” 20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Regards Tony

 

[rcwitness]

Did Christ have other names for Christians, I thought it was through Him?

Luke 9:23: “And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.”

Romans 12:9-21English Standard Version (ESV) - Marks of the True Christian

9 Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11 Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. 12 Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. 13 Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.

14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. 17 Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. 18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” 20 To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Regards Tony

these are the good Scriptures, yes!

And you are right to stir us to love it’s message. Are you trying to say that you are more Christian because you do these things, even though you reject Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Communion?

 

[TonyBS]

these are the good Scriptures, yes!

And you are right to stir us to love it’s message. Are you trying to say that you are more Christian because you do these things, even though you reject Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Communion?

The intent is lost if you think there is any I in this

It is also not about rejection as it is Christ that set the Standard, His Covenant with Man and it is up to man to submit to this Covenant.

It can be compared by asking the question as to which Old Testament Jewish rituals and dogmas would a Christian now deem as a spiritual reality and not now practiced in a material form.

Like a Messianic Jew who do it in reverse - christianity.about.com/od/messianicjewishmovement/a/Messianic-Jews-Beliefs-And-Practices.htm They practice the Old and take of the new adapted to the old.

A Christian has taken on the material practices of the new message and made spiritual of many of the Old material practices.

Thus as a Baha’i I hold them all True and Dear, but as a spiritual connection and have taken on the new form of what can now be called the older practices.

Regards Tony

 

[clem456]

It’s a theological question Adrift. I’m just trying to show you that everything is not as easy as you make it out to be.

In your very own post you put no. 488 of the CCC

488 “God sent forth his Son”, but to prepare a body for him,125 he wanted the free co-operation of a creature. For this, from all eternity God chose for the mother of his Son a daughter of Israel, a young Jewish woman of Nazareth in Galilee, “a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary”:126

So God wanted the free cooperation of a creature.
But from all eternity God CHOSE for the mother of His son…

Now if it said that He chose in a general way it would be okay. But it specifically points to a young Jewish woman of Nazareth in Galilee betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph of the house of David, and even gives her name as Mary.

So if God chose her, how did she freely cooperate??

Look at the title of 488:

“Mary’s Predestination”

So she was predestined?

Then go down to 490:

God enriched Mary with gifts appropriate to such a role.

More proof that He chose her and prepared her.
And what about Luke 1: 31. Is that a request? You never answered.

This whole discussion brings up the point of reconciling man’s free will with God’s Providence. Not an easy task, and one which I don’t understand.

So you’re asking me to prove something I’m not interested in proving because I don’t even understand it!

Do you??

Fran

The answer to this confusion over predestination is that God is outside of time.
Think about it…

 

[rcwitness]

The intent is lost if you think there is any I in this

Are you that transparent!?

It is also not about rejection as it is Christ that set the Standard, His Covenant with Man and it is up to man to submit to this Covenant.

Do you, and all religions, submit to Christmas and His Covenant?

It can be compared by asking the question as to which Old Testament Jewish rituals and dogmas would a Christian now deem as a spiritual reality and not now practiced in a material form.

Sure, and we all have the freedom to pick and choose/accept or reject. As a Catholic Christian, I choose to accept her Teachings as authoritive concerning Christ’s Covenant.

Like a Messianic Jew who do it in reverse - christianity.about.com/od/messianicjewishmovement/a/Messianic-Jews-Beliefs-And-Practices.htm They practice the Old and take of the new adapted to the old.

Good for them. They seem to be another denomination to me.

A Christian has taken on the material practices of the new message and made spiritual of many of the Old material practices.

The two are separated by Christ’s revelation. They are the same religion, in a sense. But the New Covenant was opened to the Person of God and in His friendship.

Thus as a Baha’i I hold them all True and Dear, but as a spiritual connection and have taken on the new form of what can now be called the older practices.

All? You’ve mentioned Jews and Christians… Old Covenant and New. They aren’t really so different as on either side of Jesus Christ.

 

[blanchardman]

I will second that question.

But that aside, Tony, I would by no means tell your hypothetical person “No, you can’t do that”; but he/she isn’t a Christian – or, at least, a Trinitarian Christian (which is generally what we mean by Christian).

Who appointed you judge over who is or is not a Christian?
Is salvation not open to all? I will question your religious practices but never your faith.

 

[guanophore]

Good observation. The bible does not state that loving Jesus is the requirement of salvation. One can love Jesus in different ways. You might love Him for his wisdom or His healing etc.

Saving faith has a certain quality to it. It is a faith that works, a faith that obeys.

"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him. If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.…John 14:22

Biblical salvation has to do with repentance and placing trust in Christ and believing that He has accomplished everything for salvation and life. The proof of this would be that one would then cease from his own works as God did from His and actually trust in Christ alone.

This is a very Calvanistic position, Eazy. It is a rather modern innovation on the concept of salvation that developed during the Reformation in the 1500’s. It is not the same as the concept of salvation that was passed down to us from the Apostles. It constitutes “a different gospel”.

" 4For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted…2 Cor. 11

" 8But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! Gal. 1:8

During the Reformation, some Christians separated themselves from the Apostolic Succession, and lost part of the Divine Deposit of Faith that was passed down the ages through it.

You speak of “biblical salvation”, which is also a modern innovation. Our faith is not extracted from the pages of the Book, but handed down to us from the Apsotles. It was from that faith handed down that the Bible was produced. What is written in it’s pages reflects the Catholic faith - the faith that produced it.

 

[blanchardman]

No, Tony, God does not “symbolically” draw people to Himself. He does this actually. He founded One Church, and through His Holy Bride, He saves all those who choose Him.

I don’t see how you can “prove” who is saved and who his not. That is up to God, and only he knows the heart.

Moses and Elijah.
They were not Catholic yet are “saved”.

 

[JonNC]

Who appointed you judge over who is or is not a Christian?
Is salvation not open to all? I will question your religious practices but never your faith.

Not PeterJ He is not the judge, nor is he here claiming to be. He is simply stating the centuries long truth that Christianity is Trinitarian. The Trinity is a central understanding of the faith, as expressed in the early councils and confessed in the Creeds.
One can claim to whatever they wish, and I don’t believe Peter questions others’ faith, but the term Christian has a meaning, and that is faith in the Triune God.

Jon

 

[guanophore]

Moses and Elijah.
They were not Catholic yet are “saved”.

Are you suggesting that Jesus has not made these people members of His One Body, the Church?

 

[Peter_J]

Who appointed you judge over who is or is not a Christian?

So then, to your way of thinking could I call myself Jewish?

 

[benhur]

I hope that I am misreading your intent here. The Eucharist is not cannibalism which this comment would lead you to believe it was. Jesus is present Body, Blood Soul and Divinity and just like He was intact as He went through a locked door He remains intact as we consume Him.
Jesus either misled the disciples when He said that For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed or they understood correctly.

Hi a,

Correct.Was not addressing that issue, only that the Lord’s words (This is my body…") are not “simple”, as was posted. In simplest terms at the Last Supper one sees the elements and one sees the Lord’s body, as separate entities still, requiring some explanation. I feel figurative, symbolic language is the the simplest explanation, and transubstantiation, not as simple, the other. That is all I was saying.

Blessings

 

[blanchardman]

The post I quoted said “I don’t see how you can “prove” who is saved…” I gave an example of two I can “prove” are saved.
Then I added a supporting statement for my other post about salvation is available to all.

 

[benhur]

I think there was something more than just the denial that Christ died in the flesh, because the Last Supper, where Jesus demonstrated for them what He wanted them to do, he had not yet died. Taking that as an event by itself, one would have to deny what He is saying. The bread was really not His body…etc.

Can there be anything more significant than to say Christ did not die in the flesh ? That is what Gnostics denied, Of course they then have to back pedal and deny words at the Last Supper, if not the whole supper itself. Never the less, I would still say the more significant aspect is denial of a fleshly Calvary, which then subsequently and implicitly denies any form of eucharisting.

It is the same as saying that, when God made the universe, he said “let there be light” but it was only “figurative”.

Don’t follow. Unless you meant that “God is light” as being a figurative attribute. That God is Truth, or Wisdom, or Love, or a Vine, or a Door, or a Shepherd, seem to be attributes, even names, perhaps using a type of figurative speech. For sure God has emotions but He is more than ‘emotion/love’. For sure God has perfect knowledge but He is more than such ‘knowledge’, etc…

I think I am beginning to realize that this is all just a subjective exercise on your part…

Well objective truth is is meant to be subjective also , in the regard that it is to be personally perceived, and should be made "essential’ to our being also. Another words truth is independent from us but should become part of us (to have the Mind of Christ for example).

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Hi Ben, please help me out here.

Are you suggesting God is NOT thee prerequisite for grace? What am I not understanding you to say here?

God Bless,

Just saying don’t think that is what the Father (priest) meant by “Truth is the prerequisite for grace”. Of course God is the prerequisite for anything good, even bad, for without Him nothing came into being, or remains in existence.I think “Truth” in the quote is an attribute of God , not necessarily God Himself. Otherwise seems like saying , “the heroine was a female”.

Blessings

 

[PJM]

Not sure, for this again is figurative speech. Of course God is the giver of grace, but it seems strange to then say “God” is then a prerequisite of grace. I think the priest quote is using “truth” in the more understood use of the term, as in that the church, for example, is the pillar of truth.
Can you read that as relationship between ‘God and grace’ and God must come first ? I see the truth that grace allows any church to see God and His truth. But yes, in the end churches are graced differently, and have varying degrees of light, and power, and Christ likeness .
Ok ."Faith cometh by hearing and that by the word of God (truth), and yes it is a gift, and by grace.
Yes, as per your singular issue.

Blessings

Thanks for sharing

 

[PJM]

.

Haven’t had my 2nd cup of coffee yet, so it’s likely JUST me:blush:

Would you please offer a more detailed explanation of this thought:shrug:

God Bless you,

Patrick

Originally Posted by rcwitness View Post

You MUST believe in the Spirit giving life in His Eucharist to believe a change from ordinary food to becomes Spiritually beneficial, because there is nothing which gives evidence to the carnal senses that any change has occurred.

 

[PJM]

oh… Just realized you did specify which thought of mine you wanted me to explain.

i said this in light of two factors. One being that jesus alludes us to his eucharist by raising the point of his father first drawing us. Secondly we, who commune in him are already believers who have received the initial forgiveness of sin through baptism.

So, it is believing christians, who have been baptized in the full ministry of the gospel who eat at this table. No one who was at the discourse in john 6 had yet received the full ministry or been baptized with water or his holy spirit.

Jesus was primarily speaking of after pentecost when we would eat his body and blood and the present belief which was necessary to keep them until it’s manifestation. The 12 were given the supper and priestly commission on the night he was delivered to his passion.

thanks