Sacrifice and Catholic teaching

[Arsenios]

Where does it say on scripture, that besides faith in Jesus, that receiving communion remits sins? "Do this in memory of me" as far as I know, doesn't mean "take and eat, it will remit/forgive/commute (or however you put it) your sins"

The Presence of Christ IS a certain relationship with sin - And not to its benefit...
However...
One must discern the Body and the Blood...

1Cor 11:27
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this Bread,
and drink this Cup of the Lord,
Unworthily,
Shall be guilty
Of the body
And of the Blood
Of the Lord.

 

[Arsenios]

You are intermingling two things. "This is my blood of the covenant", a statement about the cup of wine. This is before he was sacrificed. It was his blood because he said it was. I have never debated or doubted that.

"Poured out for the many for the forgiveness of sins" was also a declaration. That his blood, the next day, would be poured out for the forgiveness of sins, establishing the new covenant. It never talks in scripture, about there being another "represented" sacrifice, "bloodless" sacrifice, or anything of the sort. Rather, scripture says of his once and forever sacrifice, that there is no longer any need of sacrifice.

My difference to what you are saying, is that by merely taking communion, that sins are remitted. Communion without faith is drinking condemnation I think. You are forgiven by faith in Jesus. If you do not repent, and do not believe in Jesus, like the bad thief on the cross besides Jesus, even though some of Jesus literal blood might have splashed on him, he was more than likely done. But the other thief, who believed in him, and did not ever receive communion, was forgiven, and was and is with him in paradise. Peace

John 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them,
"Verily, verily, I am saying unto you,
'Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,
and drink his blood,
ye have no life in you.'"

The consecration of the Bread and the Wine is BY Christ...
ONLY Christ CAN give His Body and His Blood...
Hence for us the need that His Body, the Church,
Consecrate His Gifts and feed His Sheep...

The Communion of the Lord is unto the remission of sins...
It is a part "according to the whole", "kata holon" (eg "catholic") of the Household of God...
Which is the gathering of the Church called out from the world...
Your "merely taking communion" idea has no place here...

God bless your quest, my Brother...

Arsenios

 

[Monk Brendan]

Transubstantiation

Actually, the word Transubstantiation is the Roman teaching of HOW the change happens, and not whether it happens at all.

not so! the RC teaching on Transubstantiation means exactly that, the bead and wine CHANGE into the body/blood of Jesus Christ!

Again, it is only the HOW. The Orthodox and most Eastern Catholics simply say that the elements CHANGE to becomes the Body and Blood of Jesus.

The HOW we refer to as a Mystery.

The Change happens not, as some suppose, at the time we partake of the Eucharist, but when the priest asks the Holy Spirit to come and make the Change.

Here is the text:

Priest: Once again we offer to You this spiritual worship without the shedding of blood, and we beseech and pray and entreat You: Send down Your Holy Spirit upon us and upon the gifts here presented,

The Deacon, gesturing with his orarion toward the holy Bread, says:
Bless, Master, the Holy Bread.

And the Priest blesses over the holy Bread and says:
And make this bread the precious Body of Your Christ.

The Deacon, gesturing with his orarion* toward the holy Chalice, says:
Amen. Bless, Master, the holy Cup.

The Priest, blessing over the holy Chalice, says:
And that which is in this Cup, the precious Blood of Your Christ

The Deacon, gesturing with his orarion toward both Holy Gifts, says:
Amen. Bless, Master, both the Holy Gifts.

The Priest, blessing both the Holy Bread and holy Chalice, says:
Changing them by Your Holy Spirit.

Deacon: Amen. Amen. Amen.

*Orarion: Deacon’s stole

 

[Monk Brendan]

Too WRONG! Most of the RC dogma is NOT from the Bible, like Mary being sinless, where the Bible very clearly says that she "rejoiced in God my Saviour"! (Luke 1:47). If she were "sinless" why the need of a SAVIOUR?

Let me ask a question:

Can anything pure come from something impure? We all agree that Jesus was/is/will ever be pure, right?

Well, how can the Virgin Mary be impure?

As an EXTRAORDINARY GRACE, God protected Mary FROM sin, so that she could be the vessel for Jesus Conception, growth in her womb and birth.

There are two ways to be saved from a pit. The first (which happens to most of us) is to fall in, and be rescued from the pit.

The second way is to be led in such a way that you avoid falling into the pit. This is how Mary was saved. (Or did you think she asked YHWH into her heart, at the local synagogue, by walking down the aisle to the strains of "Just as I Am?"

 

[Monk Brendan]

Good grief here we go again. Another "I know what the Catholic Church really teaches" thread . And better yet, an ex Catholic spreading error. Does it ever stop?

Oh, you know how it goes. A convert is always more than willing to bash where he left, and protect where he moved to. It's not fair, and the truth may be lost in the multitude of words, but it happens.

 

[Monk Brendan]

The above quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia, mentions a "moment of sacrifice", and "act of sacrifice", and that it doesnt just "relate" to Calvary, but is "in itself a real sacrifice". This is straight out of the Catholic Encyclopedia. How do you explain that? It just doesn't seem any clearer than,"will not consist in a mere relation, but will be revealed as in itself a real sacrifice" . Painfully obvious to me. Also, like I mentioned above, Answer this simple question please-Is there any "moment of sacrifice", symbolically or otherwise, other than when Jesus' heart beat its last beat and he gave up his spirit? Also, is there any "act of sacrifice" other than when the Romans crucified him?

This, also is on that same web page:
"Protestants have no qualms accepting the perfect and efficacious nature of Christ’s sacrifice, but invite them to consider its eternal aspect. Jesus is eternally a priest, and a priest’s very nature is to offer sacrifice. In the case of Christ, the eternal sacrifice that he offers is himself. This is why he appears in the book of Revelation as a lamb, standing as though he had been slain (Rev. 5:6). He appears in heaven in the state of a victim not because he still needs to suffer but because for all eternity he re-presents himself to God appealing to the work of the cross, interceding for us (Rom 8:34), and bringing the graces of Calvary to us."

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Let me ask a question:

Can anything pure come from something impure? We all agree that Jesus was/is/will ever be pure, right?

Well, how can the Virgin Mary be impure?

As an EXTRAORDINARY GRACE, God protected Mary FROM sin, so that she could be the vessel for Jesus Conception, growth in her womb and birth.

There are two ways to be saved from a pit. The first (which happens to most of us) is to fall in, and be rescued from the pit.

The second way is to be led in such a way that you avoid falling into the pit. This is how Mary was saved. (Or did you think she asked YHWH into her heart, at the local synagogue, by walking down the aisle to the strains of "Just as I Am?"

You are trying to apply human logic to what is a Mystery! If God, Who is All powerful, can get a woman (Mary) to conceive Jesus in her womb, without the "natural" use of a human father. Why should it be incredible that this same God also ensured that Jesus Christ (Who Himself is Almighty God) is born without any sin from Mary? Luke 1:35 tells us how it was done, "And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born out of you, will be called Holy—the Son of God." Jesus remained "Holy" (sinless) due to the inworking of God the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary. You say this is not possible for God?

When the Apostle Paul wrote, "“None is righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3:10), and "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (verse 23), he also included Mary. There is not a single Bible verse that says Mary was without sin at any time. It comes from a fallible human, who thought he was God!

"We declare, pronounce and define that the doctrine which holds that the Blessed Virgin Mary, at the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace of the Omnipotent God, in virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, was preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin, has been revealed by God, and therefore should firmly and constantly be believed by all the faithful.

Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus, 1854

The Bible knows nothing of this, and yet this guy seems to know better! It is no wonder the RC are Orthodox churches are so strongly opposed to the Holy Bible ALONE as our Authority!

 

[Monk Brendan]

There hasn't been anything like an attempt at a counter-argument offered on this thread, for instance, just denial and personal attacks. To the reader, doing that amounts to writing, "I've got nothing."

I know that this page is long past the first of this thread, but Albion, I am not screaming denial and personal attacks. Read on, and you will find cogent and (without attacking anyone) real defense toward the lies told by anti-Catholics.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

I know that this page is long past the first of this thread, but Albion, I am not screaming denial and personal attacks. Read on, and you will find cogent and (without attacking anyone) real defense toward the lies told by anti-Catholics.

What lies? It is the RCC that makes up their "theology" as it pleases them, when they cannot find any Scripture support. I see online that this "pope" is also giving way to the wickedness of homosexuality. Soon there will be a "decree" from him, or another one, to say that this evil sin is allowed!

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

I know that this page is long past the first of this thread, but Albion, I am not screaming denial and personal attacks. Read on, and you will find cogent and (without attacking anyone) real defense toward the lies told by anti-Catholics.

more heresies of the RCC!

Pope Francis declares evolution and Big Bang theory are real and God is not 'a magician with a magic wand'

 

[Albion]

Sure there is. I listed several practical areas where Tradition fills in the missing piece.

Apparently, I am going to have to chalk this up to you not understanding what "Tradition" means in this context.

 

[Monk Brendan]

When the Apostle Paul wrote, "“None is righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3:10), and "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (verse 23), he also included Mary. There is not a single Bible verse that says Mary was without sin at any time. It comes from a fallible human, who thought he was God!

Like Martin Luther, who, when asked about a certain question replied, "Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and he says that a papist and a donkey are the same thing."

Or Calvin, that invented a new theology where men have no free will at all, and that God is a monster who willingly throws His creation into the lake of fire?

It doesn't take a cope and mitre to make an ass of yourself.

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

Like Martin Luther, who, when asked about a certain question replied, "Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and he says that a papist and a donkey are the same thing."

Or Calvin, that invented a new theology where men have no free will at all, and that God is a monster who willingly throws His creation into the lake of fire?

It doesn't take a cope and mitre to make an ass of yourself.

you speak for yourself!

 

[Monk Brendan]

more heresies of the RCC!

And the Protestants have not had a single heresy?

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

And the Protestants have not had a single heresy?

stop trying to defend the ERRORS of the RCC! I suppose the heresy of "papal infallibility" will allow for Evolution to become the accepted way this universe began, and Creation by God will be outdated! Such wickedness in the church!

 

[Monk Brendan]

you speak for yourself!

Far from it! I am not the one that has judged me a heretic and an unsaved sinner.

 

[Albion]

Well, by whatever name we want to call it, there were traditions or teachings that they were told to keep and hold to...

...which are not what "Holy Tradition" means. You are referring to customs, not to a second stream of God's revelation and define doctrine on that basis.

 

[Monk Brendan]

stop trying to defend the ERRORS of the RCC! I suppose the heresy of "papal infallibility" will allow for Evolution to become the accepted way this universe began, and Creation by God will be outdated! Such wickedness in the church!

I am NOT defending the Pope! Nor do I have to. But such vehemence about a proclamation of one who you do not even believe to be a Christian!

And, BTW, I am not a ROMAN Catholic! I am an Eastern Catholic, specifically a Melkite Catholic, and while I am in communion with the Pope, I am not under his control!

 

[Monk Brendan]

You are trying to apply human logic to what is a Mystery! If God, Who is All powerful, can get a woman (Mary) to conceive Jesus in her womb, without the "natural" use of a human father. Why should it be incredible that this same God also ensured that Jesus Christ (Who Himself is Almighty God) is born without any sin from Mary? Luke 1:35 tells us how it was done, "And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born out of you, will be called Holy—the Son of God." Jesus remained "Holy" (sinless) due to the inworking of God the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary. You say this is not possible for God?

And God can also PROTECT her from falling into sin just as easily!

 

[TheBibleIsTruth]

I am NOT defending the Pope! Nor do I have to. But such vehemence about a proclamation of one who you do not even believe to be a Christian!

And, BTW, I am not a ROMAN Catholic! I am an Eastern Catholic, specifically a Melkite Catholic, and while I am in communion with the Pope, I am not under his control!

you speak of errors among Protestants, which there are. You are not RC but you defend their "leader". If, as we have seen the "pope" is in error on Creation and homosexuality, then what of "papal infallibility"? No one else claims this for themselves!