What's a clear, charitable "come-back" for protestants?

[moondweller]

I believe that many Protestants are absolutely starved for the “tangibles,” which not only include the seven sacraments (especially Eucharist), but also tangibles like human touch, blessings, the Sign of the Cross, Rosaries, Holy Water, candles, art work, etc.

Not if they’re men and women who have grown in faith and in the grace and knowledge of Christ.2 Cor 5:7 “for we walk by faith, not by sight–”

I and my husband were starved for all these tangibles, and when we started attending the Catholic Church, we felt like we had stumbled into a castle full of rich treasures.

This reminds me of the conversation between Jesus and doubting Thomas:John 20:29 "Jesus *said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed {are} they who did not see, and {yet} believed."I don’t think you should impose your own “starvation for tangibles” on to all Protestants. Many of us who “walk by faith, not by sight,” and free of many “tangibles,” find it extremely satisfying and actually consider ourselves “blessed.” That’s why you’ll often see us greeting each other with a hug. It’s His Word that fills our hearts.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

Not if they’re men and women who have grown in faith and in the grace and knowledge of Christ.2 Cor 5:7 "for we walk by faith, not by sight–"This reminds me of the conversation between Jesus and doubting Thomas:John 20:29 "Jesus *said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed {are} they who did not see, and {yet} believed."I don’t think you should impose your own “starvation for tangibles” on to all Protestants. Many of us who “walk by faith, not by sight,” and free of many “tangibles,” find it extremely satisfying and actually consider ourselves “blessed.” That’s why you’ll often see us greeting each other with a hug. It’s His Word that fills our hearts.

Saying that you are “free of … tangibles” and then saying you greet one another with a hug is rather paradoxical, IMO. Even with the tangibles, the spiritual work that God does in the sacraments remains unseen - we don’t actually see sins washed away in baptism, but we believe that God does it. We don’t see Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist, but we believe He is there. We don’t actually see two people becoming one flesh in a nuptial ceremony, but we believe they do. It IS by faith and not by sight.

As a protestant, I didn’t see the need for sacramentals, either. You can’t miss what you’ve never had. I think when Cat says that (and please note that she said “some” not “all”) protestants are starving for tangibles, it’s something they might not realize until they encounter them.

 

[MonFrere]

I don’t think you should impose your own “starvation for tangibles” on to all Protestants. Many of us who “walk by faith, not by sight,” and free of many “tangibles,” find it extremely satisfying and actually consider ourselves “blessed.” That’s why you’ll often see us greeting each other with a hug. It’s His Word that fills our hearts.

MoonDweller,

I would think that a hug is a “tangible sign of love”. Catholics are certainly not opposed to hugging. But what if that natural inclination was forbidden? There would be no expression of that inner love. Love needs physical means of expression so grow and thrive. These tangibles work because we are human and that is the way humans work. Even the Old Testament Jews had tangibles to help them imagine the heavenly world the never seen. There were candles and carved gold images of angels, incense. All these helped the people evoke the heavenly.

This is why Catholics view the Incarnation as such an paradigm altering event. Because the Heavenly became one of us – Emmanuel - God with Us.

No longer do we have to imagine. God made Himself tangible. Remember the woman who longed just to touch in hem of his garment? Before the Incarnation God forbid graven images. All who loved Christ wanted to see Him, hear Him, touch Him. The Incarnation brings us in tangible form - the image of God. So, images of Christ are simply us humans giving tangible form to the love we have within for a God who loved us so much He condescended to OUR world where we could see Him - hear Him - and, yes, touch (hug) Him.

So the images Catholics feel so comfortable with are because of the same love you have of Him – only we, being human, express that great event - the Incarnation - and keep it ever present in our sight and the images are the way we “hug” our Lord – just as you love and desire to hug the brothers and sisters you have in your Church.

MonFrere

 

[qui_est_ce]

2 Cor 5:7 "for we walk by faith, not by sight–"This reminds me of the conversation between Jesus and doubting Thomas:John 20:29 "Jesus *said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed {are} they who did not see, and {yet} believed.”

Yes, this is very true for all Christians, we walk by faith and not by sight.

don’t think you should impose your own “starvation for tangibles” on to all Protestants.

Everyone has a right to their opinion.

Many of us who “walk by faith, not by sight,” and free of many “tangibles,” find it extremely satisfying and actually consider ourselves “blessed.” That’s why you’ll often see us greeting each other with a hug. It’s His Word that fills our hearts.

And that’s why you see Catholics hugging too.:hug3:

pixie:

As a protestant, I didn’t see the need for sacramentals, either. You can’t miss what you’ve never had. I think when Cat says that (and please note that she said “some” not “all”) protestants are starving for tangibles, it’s something they might not realize until they encounter them.

That’s what the converts I know say. The “Bells and Smells” emphasize the sacredness of the space and the Faith.

 

[moondweller]

Saying that you are “free of … tangibles” and then saying you greet one another with a hug is rather paradoxical, IMO.

Not at all. Greeting one another with a hug is neither a religious ritual, symbol or icon. It’s a personal expression of love toward the brethren.

Even with the tangibles, the spiritual work that God does in the sacraments remains unseen - we don’t actually see sins washed away in baptism, but we believe that God does it.

True, that is what you believe. But “cat” saw baptisms in Protestant churches as well, so I don’t think she was referring to baptisms.

We don’t see Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist, but we believe He is there.

Protestants physically participate in communion services as well. Of course the difference is what we believe concerning the wafer. But nonetheless, what you believe cannot be seen, felt or tasted. So that couldn’t be the “tangible” she was starving for.

We don’t actually see two people becoming one flesh in a nuptial ceremony, but we believe they do.

Protestants marry too. So that can’t be the “tangible,” either.

As a protestant, I didn’t see the need for sacramentals, either. You can’t miss what you’ve never had. I think when Cat says that (and please note that she said “some” not “all”) protestants are starving for tangibles, it’s something they might not realize until they encounter them.

I think one would be fully aware of one’s own “starving” condition if it was real. Which gets us back to my original point: Not to impose one’s own “starvation for tangibles” on to others. It would be like me stating (asserting) that many Catholics are “starving” for a more faith-based religious experience, but don’t know it. Would you concur with that statement?

 

[moondweller]

MoonDweller,

I would think that a hug is a “tangible sign of love”. Catholics are certainly not opposed to hugging.

Never suggested that you are.

But what if that natural inclination was forbidden? There would be no expression of that inner love. Love needs physical means of expression so grow and thrive. These tangibles work because we are human and that is the way humans work. Even the Old Testament Jews had tangibles to help them imagine the heavenly world the never seen. There were candles and carved gold images of angels, incense. All these helped the people evoke the heavenly. This is why Catholics view the Incarnation as such an paradigm altering event. Because the Heavenly became one of us – Emmanuel - God with Us. No longer do we have to imagine. God made Himself tangible.

The objects prescribed in the Law prefigured the redemptive work Christ would accomplish on the cross. And the majority of the Jews never entered the Holy Place or the Holy of Holies. Those objects were sanctified (set apart) for His purpose.

As for the incarnation of the Son, the vast majority of humanity never saw Him, never touched Him, never heard Him speak. And an even smaller minority saw Him after His bodily resurrection. And still, only a very few saw Him after His bodily ascension back into heaven.

So no, God did not make Himself “tangible” to the vast majority of humanity. We are still asked to believe the Apostolic message of the Son’s incarnation, His sacrificial work on our behalf for our salvation, His burial and subsequent bodily resurrection and ascension back into heaven where He now sits at the right hand of the Majesty on High with all power, functioning as the believer’s Intercessor and Advocate before the Father. He is not “tangible” to us as He was the Apostles whom He sent out as His eyewitnesses with the gospel message to be believed on for salvation:1 Cor 1:21 “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not {come to} know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.”

 

[qui_est_ce]

I think one would be fully aware of one’s own “starving” condition if it was real.

. Moon, your profile says you are bac. What denomination is that?

 

[scott1228]

Christine:

I am going to guess, born again Christian.

What I can’t guess is what he is talking about. I thought faith was part of my religious experience!

Scott

 

[qui_est_ce]

Christine:

I am going to guess, born again Christian.

What I can’t guess is what he is talking about. I thought faith was part of my religious experience!

Scott

Scott,
Well, he was talking about how fulfilled hey are in their church, but I wondered if he how many different congregations he’s attended in his lifetime, searching for the perfect one, as many CC converts did in their Protestant days.

Many of us who “walk by faith, not by sight,” and free of many “tangibles,” find it extremely satisfying and actually consider ourselves “blessed.” That’s why you’ll often see us greeting each other with a hug. It’s His Word that fills our hearts.

I going to guess Moon thinks of Tangibles as confining legalism. I personally find the Rules (Teachings) quite freeing. I don’t have to reinvent the wheel on what the Bible teaches. It’s already been figured out by minds greater than mine and people who walked with Jesus.

 

[MonFrere]

And the majority of the Jews never entered the Holy Place or the Holy of Holies. Those objects were sanctified (set apart) for His purpose.

MoonDweller,

Certainly these objects were sanctified. And so are our sacred objects sanctified and blessed by a priest. We are certainly not using them to worship Baal!

AND - you are correct about only the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies. But, this is what Jesus was talking about in His discussion with the woman at the well.

John 4:20-24 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

God’s Presence was confined to the Holy of Holies in the OT. Salvation was from the Jews and God only make His Presence available to the Jews in this manner. Even though God is omnipresent - there was a special Presence given to the OT Jews. Now - in the Church today, we have a much greater covenant than in the OT, God’s Presence is now available in a much greater reality in the tabernacle in every Catholic Church. We adore that Presence and worship before that Presence. We also know that God is omnipresent just as He has always been - but in the NT times, through a much greater covenant, God’s has made His Presence available to all that seeks to worship Him, not just the Jewish High Priest. Many Catholic Churches have an adoration of God’s Presence in the Most Holy Eucharist on the first Friday of the month. Catholics also have a tradition of a Holy Hour - in memory of Jesus’ request to his disciples in Gethsemane to spend an hour with Him in prayer. Many Catholics across this great nation to that in perpetual adoration (24 hours a day) in special chapels sanctified to expose the Blessed Sacrament - the Presence of God.

As for the incarnation of the Son, the vast majority of humanity never saw Him, never touched Him, never heard Him speak. And an even smaller minority saw Him after His bodily resurrection. And still, only a very few saw Him after His bodily ascension back into heaven. So no, God did not make Himself “tangible” to the vast majority of humanity.

MoonDweller, you just underscored the value of apostolic tradition!! It was those apostles and their witness to these great events of our salvation that got the ball rolling. Tradition has it that the Apostle Thomas went as far east as India. I know of American citizens of Indian ancestry that tell me of this apostolic tradition. It still lives in the memories of Indian Christians. In fact, one of their children was given the name Thomas.

I think you are putting yourself in an inopportune position to downplay the Incarnation. The Church CONSTANTLY brings us in remembrance of the awesome significance of the Incarnation. The Church, as the Body of Christ, is an Incarnational Body. God continues His Work, His gospel through us. No Incarnation - No Church. The WHOLE POINT of the Incarnation was for God to make Himself known in the world of men. No Incarnation - No Passion - No Salvation. It is up to all believers to make that Incarnation “tangible” to men. So, that salvation is brought to men through physical means. God knew the man He created and He knows how those created in His image would respond to touch, to sight, to smell. Before the fall God said that everything He made was VERY GOOD. Jesus, in Revelation, states of His salvific work on earth – Behold, I MAKE ALL THINGS NEW. The sacraments of the Church demonstrate the goodness of the things of this earth and of what they can do once sanctified. Water washes us of our sins. Oil annoints us with the Holy Spirit. Bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ. This is all part of the greatness of the New Covenant - much greater than the Old - all made real to us because of the Incarnation.

The richness of the faith all because of the goodness of God and the direction of the Church that has profoundly meditated on the significance of Christ’s coming in the flesh. Without that profound meditation and the guidance of the Holy Spirit the Church would have never been able to solve all the controversies that came about about that great event we call the Incarnation. All the early controversies (heresies) of the early Church was in regard to the proper understanding of the Incarnation of God.

MonFrere

 

[moondweller]

The WHOLE POINT of the Incarnation was for God to make Himself known in the world of men.

No, that was not the reason (“whole point”) for the incarnation of the Son. Nor did the incarnation make God “tangible” to the world of men. Men are still required to hear and believe the gospel message concerning the now resurrected, glorified and ascended, incarnate Son.

“Starvation for tangibles” is hardly an indicator of great faith. So getting back to my original post, one should not accuse others of his or her own spiritual deficiencies.

But I think we’re hijacking the thread here. So I won’t continue the discussion. I was merely refuting the false notion presented by “cat” that many Protestants are in a state of starvation for tangibles in regards to their faith. When in truth, many Protestants know that seeking after tangibles causes an elusive effect in respect to true faith. So I disagreed with her reasoning behind her advice to the Seminarian.

 

[moondweller]

. Moon, your profile says you are bac. What denomination is that?

No denomination. Scott was right: “born again Christian.” Baptized “Lutheran” at the age of eight - but personally believed and born again and baptized by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ at the age of 23. :extrahappy: Then publicly, water baptized as a true believer at the age of 24.

 

[qui_est_ce]

No denomination. Scott was right: “born again Christian.” Baptized “Lutheran” at the age of eight - but personally believed and born again and baptized by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ at the age of 23. :extrahappy: Then publicly, water baptized as a true believer at the age of 24.

So a born again Christian does not accept the validity of a Lutheran Baptism as being Baptized into the Body of Christ in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit? CC accepts all Baptisms in the name of the Trinity as being baptized into the Body of Christ, not into a domination.

 

[moondweller]

So a born again Christian does not accept the validity of a Lutheran Baptism as being Baptized into the Body of Christ in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit? CC accepts all Baptisms in the name of the Trinity as being baptized into the Body of Christ, not into a domination.

I can only give you a Biblical answer to that question. One is not baptized into the body of Christ by water but by the Spirit Himself - and this at the time of personal belief in Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). It is this believer’s baptism of the Holy Spirit that fulfills the words of Christ in John 14:16-20; 17:15-26. Our unity is being now “in Christ” (which transcends all denominational affiliation, Protestant or Catholic; see 2 Tim. 2:19).

Water has no power to accomplish this baptismal reality, since it requires (1) personal faith in Christ, (2) spiritual regeneration and (3) a new creation (2Cor. 5:17). I did not believe at the age of eight, and although water baptized in the name of the Trinity, I remained spiritually dead until I personally believed in Christ at the age of 23. My subsequent water baptism only publicly testified to my inward personal faith in Christ a year prior.

CC accepts all Baptisms in the name of the Trinity as being baptized into the Body of Christ, not into a domination.

I know. That’s because (like many Lutherans) it assigns spiritual power to water baptism, embracing the doctrine of baptismal (water) regeneration. But unlike Lutherans, it claims itself as “the” body of Christ.

 

[bpbasilphx]

No Father, we belong a non-denominational church…

There’s no such thing as a non-denominational church.

It may be a denomination of just one congregation, but more likely it will be seen to be able to fit into one of the already existing denominations, even if it’s not officially affiliated with any.

 

[Al_Masetti]

“I guess you have to ask yourself, 'Christianity worked for 1500 years without those reformations … why the sudden need to make such huge ‘modifications’?”

 

[Al_Masetti]

No Father, we belong a non-denominational church…

There’s no such thing as a non-denominational church.

It may be a denomination of just one congregation, but more likely it will be seen to be able to fit into one of the already existing denominations, even if it’s not officially affiliated with any.

Someone once said they were “nonpartisan”. That was a new one for me … “nonpartisan”.

I guess some folks just put cleverness ahead of knowledge.

If it doesn’t fit on a bumpersticker, they don’t want to get involved.