Sacraments and other stuff (for alex)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Hello, Alex, as promised...

your question: Greetings: No where in Gods word does it say anything about sacraments, pennance why disobey Jesus and do them?

My answer: Okay, unlike many, I'm not going to suggest you buy a book. However, nobody can explain what is believed about the Sacrements or *why* it is believed better than the Church herself, and so I suggest that for at least that much, check out the online Catechism (there's WAY too much info to print here) that someone posted a link to somewhere else (whoever you were, if you could post it here again I'd much appreciate it). I'm not suggesting you turn to the Catechism for justification, just explanation (after all, you can't argue against our beliefs until you've heard the truth about what we believe in our own words).

Now...scripture for some things (Sacraments and not)

Saints intercession (not a Sacrament) Rv5:8 When He took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders felldown before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, WHICH ARE THE PRAYERS OF THE HOLY ONES.

Sacred Tradition The current belief in this is contemporary with the apostles. Nowhere did they argue against it. It is as old as Christianity. To say this is wrong is to imply the apostles were derelict in their teaching, in which case Christians can rely on NONE of what we "know" about the faith.

Confession Mt18:18 Amen I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Mt16:19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Jn20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. WHOSE SINS YOU FORGIVE ARE FORGIVEN THEM AND WHOSE SINS YOU RETAIN ARE RETAINED."

2Cor5:18-20 And all this is from God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ AND GIVEN US THE MINISTRY OF RECONCILIATION, namely, God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting their trespasses against them and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. SO WE ARE AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST, AS IF GOD WERE APPEALING THROUGH US We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

Sacred Tradition The current belief in this is contemporary with the apostles. Nowhere did they argue against it. It is as old as Christianity. To say this is wrong is to imply the apostles were derelict in their teaching, in which case Christians can rely on NONE of what we "know" about the faith.

Eucharist prophesied Mal1:11 For from the rising of the sun, even to its setting, my name is great among the nations; AND EVERYWHERE THEY BRING SACRIFICE TO MY NAME, AND A PURE OFFERING; For great is my name among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.

instituted, Mt26:26-28 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to His disciples said, "Take and eat THIS IS my body." Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, for THIS IS my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.

Mk14:22-24 While they were eating, He took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take it; THIS IS my body." Then He took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, "THIS IS my blood of the covenant which will be shed for many.

Lk22:19 Then He took the bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "THIS IS MY BODY, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me."

1Cor11:23-27 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and said, "THIS IS my body that is for you, do this in remembrance of me." In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my remembrance of me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord untilHe comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer FOR THE BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD. A PERSON SHOULD EXAMINE HIMSELF, AND SO EAT THE BREAD AND DRINK THE CUP. FOR ANYONE WHO EATS AND DRINKS WITHOUT DISCERNING THE BODY, EATS AND DRINKS JUDGMENT ON HIMSELF.

Sacred Tradition The current belief in this is contemporary with the apostles. Nowhere did they argue against it. It is as old as Christianity. To say this is wrong is to imply the apostles were derelict in their teaching, in which case Christians can rely on NONE of what we "know" about the faith.

Can you take these passages a different way if you want? OF COURSE YOU CAN!!!!! Although you may have to stand on your head to do it, you're likely to get as many interpretations as you get people reading it. That's why a Church (note the singular) is necessary. Not for its own sake, but for the role it plays.

You have an interpretation of these things that you believe was given to you by the Holy Spirit...BUT SO DOES EVERYBODY ELSE!!! EVEN THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU!!!!! Who's right and why? The only way to tell is by the authority that one (the Church) has to interpret "officially." Why does 1500 years (before protestantism) of Holy Spirit guidance disagree with *your* Holy Spirit guidance? Was the Holy Spirit leading 1500 (2000 if you count the Church since the reformation as well) years of Christians down the primrose path so He can give YOU the one, proper interpretation to come and save the world? If you say no, then you have taken the first step to understanding our position. If you say yes, I doubt there is much anyone can do for you...

aaaaaaa aaaaaaa

-- anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), February 09, 2001

Answers

The Apostles' Creed continues to be used as the baptismal profession of faith in most Western churches; Orthodox churches prefer to use the later Nicene Creed. In Roman Catholic practice, the Apostles' Creed is also recited in the daily office, before the first and after the last service each day. In most Protestant churches, it is used periodically at Sunday worship. Anglicans and Lutherans use it regularly in morning and evening prayer (matins and evensong).

I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended to the dead. On the third day he rose again. He ascended into Heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

-- Alberto Ponce (sabueso2@usa.net), February 09, 2001.


Just because you believe it's there, that don't make it so it'll happen. Them Pharisees and Sadducees was just as religious with those sacraments as they could be. But God said, "They stink in my nose." See, there was no sincerity. There was nothing to it that should be. You've got to come upon basical promise, and then upon your mental attitude towards it. Look at those four hundred priests that day, or prophets, Ahab had out there. They said, "Ramoth-gilead belongs to us. Joshua by the Holy Spirit divided this, and the Syrians has got it." And one prophet said, "Now, looky here. That's fundamentally right." Now, he was a real Baptist, and he said, "That's exactly right. That's the fundamental promise. That land belongs to us." So he made him two big horns and said, "Go up there, and take these horns and push Syria plumb off. That belongs to Israel." That's right. Fundamentally, it was right. But what did little Micaiah say? He said, "I saw Israel scattered like sheep having no shepherd." See? Ahab, that hypocrite down there, letting Jezebel run him around doing everything... The real Word of God coming through the prophet had cursed that thing. And how could God bless what the prophet had cursed in the Name of the Lord? Can't be. No matter how much religious nation we are, how much background we got, the thing is corrupted. Corrupted! It's gone. No matter how great our organizational life is in church, we believe in it. It's fine, all right. But the thing is corrupted. God's done laid them up on the shelf, and there they lay. And there's never a piece of history that any one ever rose again. So it's wrong. It's finished, wrote off. It's no good. His Word is always what He wants to see vindicated, and it'll only be vindicated upon certain conditions--that's when you meet those conditions. You seen people that can take the Word of God and just make it live for them. And others come right back with the same Word and can't do nothing with it. It's on conditions. That's right. Look here. I'll show you an example of that in the Bible. Israel was on the road up to the promised land. Here come Moab, which was the same religion exactly. That was Lot's daughter's child. And notice, when Balaam come down, it was God talking to him. He put seven altars, just like Israel had seven altars. He put seven clean sacrifices--bullocks on the altar. That's just exactly what Israel had. And another thing, he put seven rams--speaking of the coming Messiah. That's exactly what Israel had. Fundamental they were both right--fundamentally. But it was on conditions. Amen. He failed to see the real promise of God.

That's the same thing it was in the coming of Christ. That's the same thing it's come back to today. It's on condition.



-- William (prophet@email.com), February 10, 2001.


Jmj

Hello, William. You are quite a yarn-spinner!

"Look at those four hundred priests that day, or prophets, Ahab had out there. They said, 'Ramoth-gilead belongs to us. Joshua by the Holy Spirit divided this, and the Syrians has got it.' And one prophet said, 'Now, looky here. That's fundamentally right.' Now, he was a real Baptist, and he said, 'That's exactly right. That's the fundamental promise. That land belongs to us.'"

He was a "real Baptist?" How could that be, since ...
1. The word "baptist" does not appear in the Old Testament?
2. The Greek word "baptistEs" (baptizer) is used only of John son of Zechariah -- the last prophet?
3. Christians known as "Baptists" only began to exist in the 1600s (John Smyth = founder of denomination)?

St. James, pray for us. O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to you.
God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 10, 2001.


Sorry for the confusion, but Iam using it as a type. The Baptist are very fundamental in there way of believing, Iam using types here so put on your spiritual thinking cap. By the way, Iam not a Baptist.

-- William (prophet@email.com), February 10, 2001.

William,
You're making some very broad applications out of these verses from the OT,

The real Word of God coming through the prophet had cursed that thing. And how could God bless what the prophet had cursed in the Name of the Lord? Can't be. No matter how much religious nation we are, how much background we got, the thing is corrupted. Corrupted! It's gone. No matter how great our organizational life is in church, we believe in it. It's fine, all right. But the thing is corrupted.

Show us how that might apply, by our human reasonong to the Mystical Body of Our Lord, which is the Catholic Church founded by Him? With all due respect, Sir to your dignity etc., keep it to the point. Don't pull on the whole bag of string from Genesis to the end of the world. Thanks for your gentlemanly consideration.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 10, 2001.



You got an intellectual faith. Oh, you believe the Word, and you mix it and make it suit your theology. But once you come into the Kingdom of God through the Blood of the Lord Jesus, meeting upon the shed Blood, bought through the testimony, the public testimony of the crimson Blood of the Lord, you are in here in fellowship where God can bless you. And you can shout and praise the Lord, and the powers of God working. Why, it's God Himself, His own body, the mystical body of the Lord Jesus Christ here on earth operating upon the basis of the shed Blood. See what I mean?

Not upon the basis of the Methodist, Baptist, or Pentecostal church, or any other church; not upon the basis of water baptism, although it's good; it's all right, but not upon the basis of water baptism; not upon the basis of joining a church; joining a church is good; but it's upon the basis of the shed Blood. You might have fellowship with the church, the congregation, but you'll never have fellowship with God till you come on His basis, His terms. His terms is through the Blood.

And through the Blood you become a part of Him, into the same cell that He came out of. And the very Presence and part of God comes into you. By faith you purchase it. And that same Holy Spirit that was in the Lord Jesus Christ comes into you. And then you are sons and daughters of God, adopted by the Lord Jesus Christ into the Body of Christ. Amen. That'd make the Methodist shout..

God's people is His called-out people. I believe they're in every denomination; they could be Catholic; they could be Protestant; they could be Jewish; they could be any kind of a church. But the real church is the mystical Body of Jesus Christ.

Now, you cannot organize the mystical Body of Christ. Now, every person that comes to Christ, comes out of the world, comes into Christ, comes into His mystical Body. And you are a member of that Body when you are brought into this church, called-out and are baptized into this mystical Body. You get it? It's not Methodist, not Baptist, not Pentecostal, not Nazarene, not Pilgrim Holiness, not Catholic; but the Body of Jesus Christ. We'll pick that up a little deeper in other questions in a few minutes, as we go on into the deeper parts of it. But the Body of Christ is the church.

Eugene, I hope this has helped your human reasoning



-- William (prophet@email.com), February 10, 2001.


I didn't need human reasoning,, William. I asked you your human reasoning; and you misunderstood me.

I hear the Holy Gospel as it is interpreted by the Apostles of Jesus Christ, and then imparted to His Church. There can never enter into it a mistake or a human frailty. The Holy Spirit LIVES in the Church, and protects her. You know what you know from your human wisdom. The Church knows and teaches from Divine teaching. That is why she lives forever. Your teaching, William, though it's clear and captivating to you now, will pass away.

The Mystical Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. This is the way Jesus Himself tells us so:

, , , And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, ''Saul, Saul, why dost thou persecute Me ? '' And he said, ''Who art thou, Lord ?'' And HE said, ''I am Jesus, whom thou art persecuting. [It is hard for thee to kick against the goad]''. (Acts 9:4) Jesus was saying I'm the Church. This Church of the Christians was in its infant stage already the Roman Catholic Church. Jesus identified Himself with it! This was no ''denomination''. You have the historical Church to deal with. No way can you find another church of Jesus in and of that era. But it had the Lord and the Holy Spirit then and still has them today. You had better pay attention to my words, Prophet-- You came to the right place and you can start opening your eyes now!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), February 10, 2001.


William,
I have a request of you.
Please use the default font color -- black.
We are all grown-ups here. We are not impressed by someone showing off his ability to change colors from post to post. (I will pray for you if you were deprived of attention as a child and thirst for it now.)
You will see that several of us use HTML for emphasis (bolding, italicizing, underscoring, and rarely changing font size). I think it would be nice if you were to use colors to add emphasis to particularly important words or phrases.
I also have a practical reason for asking this of you. Some of your colors are almost impossible for me to read. They are barely visible against my background. And others reading here have even poorer vision than I do.
Thank you. God bless you.
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 11, 2001.

Greetings: Brother your zeal for Christ is awsome and Gods Spirit is really at work in your life. Those colours your using are an expressions of the joy of Jesus in you. These men are so bound by their traditions that they cant enjoy the freedom of Christ, I feel you William we are called out and saved, rejoice brother rejoice. They qoute what they want to continue in their traditions. paul the apostle rebuked Peter why? Isnt Peter suppose to be the leader. William were on the narrow road and singing to Our Lord for his love.

-- Jesus is the way (Jesusislife@Christianemail.com), February 13, 2001.

It was only a matter of time before you two found eachother. Birds of a feather...

about rebuking...

Alex, my father argued with his boss the other day. Does this mean my father has authority over his boss? Does this free him from being bound by his boss's word?

Can my father possibly talk his boss into changing his mind? of course, but his boss still has the authority and the final say!

................................

-- anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), February 13, 2001.



Greetings: Not if your dad is fired for disobediance. In the same way Jesus will say depart from me you worker of iniquity I never knew you, Amazing grace how sweet the sound. There is one thing about what you say there isnt any Spiritual wisdom in that your not being led by the Spirit, Why?. Your using human logic to understand an Almighty God and his ways. God is Spirit, Lean not on your own understanding but acknoledge him in all your ways. Amen Jesus saves

-- Alex follows Jesus (Jesusislife@Christianemail.com), February 14, 2001.

Yes, Junior, at least you are consistent, practicing what you preach.
You tell us, "Lean not on your own understanding."
It is clear that you do not depend on a shred of understanding.
You have given Anthony the "reward" of finding out how impossible it is to communicate with you. May the Lord forgive you.

John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 16, 2001.


The conclusion of John neither supports nor argues against your statement.

here is the footnote I have regarding Demetrius in 3John:

"BECAUSE OF THE FEAR OF FALSE TEACHERS, Demetrius, perhaps the bearer of the letter, is provided with a recommendation BY THE PRESBYTER; cf2COR3:1, Rom16:1...

in other words, anyone can *claim* the Spirit, but God gave us people with AUTHORITY to say who is a "false teacher" and who is not.

...............................

-- Anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), February 22, 2001.


Gentleman... I'm a born again Christian and I firmly believe in the teachings of the Bible as THE source for my answers to questions of a supernatural nature. Forgive me,for I know the posts I respond to are quite old, but I was searching on the web for some sensical answer to the 7 holy sacrements as my catholic friends are unable to answer me, and I stumbled across your posts. One thing thru and thru, from an objectionable standpoint, that I saw in each of your statements, were some very angry statements. Gentleman the Word of God admonishes us not to fight over His word. It's not our fight.

Please read Philipians 2:3 which states Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.

Then I might direct you to 2 Peter 1:20-21 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

The Lord is pretty clear on this. Don't go taking his word and twisting it around to suit your thoughts, desires, or books that you've written - if you want an answer it's IN the Bible. Plain and simple.

As for the concerns over Catholism I think they are very valid. Jesus himself warned against rituals and rote practices, and rules written up by men, and the book of Timothy warned against religions that would rise up and forbid their priests to marry, or abstain meat (perhaps during lent?) (1 Timothy 1:1-5) and not to call a man Father - for we have one father in Heaven (Matthew 23:8-10).

As for the claim that Catholism is the religion that originated w/the Disciples that I read here, that simply is not so. For when Jesus and his disciples walked the earth - and I figured this out by reading the four gospels - the Word of God showed no signs of what is traditional catholism today. From what I understand - Catholism as we know it rose up around 500 AD with a King in Rome who liked christianity - but didn't know how to get his people to stop worshipping idols -so he introduced the idea of "mary" as a saint - and the disciples as a saint... so that his people would not revolt against the new religion. I'm sorry the name of this king fails my memory at the moment. In addition to this, all thruout Acts, Romans, and Corinthians - Paul refers to all the members of the churches he is writing to as "Saints". So we are all saints in the Name of Jesus Christ. At least, we are if we believe that the Bible applies to Believers today, in 2002. Yet, the catholic church goes thru big strides to "canonize" people into sainthood. Why? Why the rituals of men when the bible clearly states we are all saints. (1 Corinthians 14:32-34)

At any rate. I'm terribly sorry to have butted in to your conversation. I was just intrigued at how informative your statements were in the beginning but quickly became so hostile and nasty towards one another.

One last verse and thank you for bearing with me -

Mark 12:30-32 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

Have a good night - and God bless you all....

-- Kisha Johnson (christian_Sister@hotmail.com), November 18, 2002.


Jmj

Hello, Kisha.

No need to apologize. You have not "butted into" our "conversation." Everyone is welcome to join in, as long as the rules are followed.

You stated: "The Lord is pretty clear on this. Don't go taking his word and twisting it around to suit your thoughts, desires, or books that you've written - if you want an answer it's IN the Bible. Plain and simple."

Sorry, Kisha, but it's not "plain and simple." If it were, then all Christians would be united. It is not "plain and simple" for you to figure out the meanings of many Bible verses. And that's why you belong to one of the 30,000 Protestant denominations begun since 1500. You are visiting a Catholic discussion forum, the "regular" visitors to which belong to the Church that Jesus founded at least 1,500 years before your denomination was founded. We know that the Bible is not always "plain and simple," which is why we need help from the Catholic Church's teachers (successors of the Apostles).

You continued: "As for the concerns over Catholism I think they are very valid."

No, dear. They are not valid. As you spend time here, reading through the archives of threads, you will come to realize that.

You also wrote: "As for the claim that Catholism is the religion that originated w/the Disciples that I read here, that simply is not so."

If it were "simply ... not so," we wouldn't have said that it is. You will realize this too, after more reading. [By the way, the word is "Catholicism," not "Catholism."]

You stated: "From what I understand - Catholism as we know it rose up around 500 AD with a King in Rome who liked christianity -- but didn't know how to get his people to stop worshipping idols -so he introduced the idea of 'mary' as a saint -- and the disciples as a saint... so that his people would not revolt against the new religion. I'm sorry the name of this king fails my memory at the moment."

This is a "classic" knee-slapper, Kisha. All you have to do is go to the Encyclopedia Britannica (not a Catholic book) and read the first few words about the Catholic Church there. You will then see that what you have just described is a TOTAL FICTION! It was invented by some anti-Catholic loonies, whose trash you have read. By reading garbage, you have jumped to all kinds of wrong conclusions. You shouldn't come to a Catholic forum and try to tell us Catholics about the history of our Church. Rather, you should ASK us about that history.

You stated: "So we are all saints in the Name of Jesus Christ."

Again because you don't know enough yet, Kisha, you assume that we believe differently. Actually, we agree with you that we are all "saints" (in one sense of the word) -- provided we are in a state of sanctifying grace. The word "saint" comes from the French (saint[e]) meaning "holy person." Not all Christians are "holy persons," but we hope that all will be before death, through repentance of their deadly sins.

God bless you.
John
PS: The disagreements you read above were very mild by comparison with others that have taken place. You can't expect men with strong convictions to act like little girls. Go back to the Bible and re-read the strong words used by Jesus, St. John the Baptizer, and St. Paul toward those whom they knew were wrong. Now see if you would use the following words of yours against Jesus and the saints, as you did against us: "One thing thru and thru, from an objectionable standpoint, that I saw in each of your statements, were some very angry statements."

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), November 21, 2002.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ