tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post8342893680086023426..comments2024-03-20T10:16:21.352-04:00Comments on Pilgrims' Daughter: The Pilgrim Church: The Conversion of AugustineJenniehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comBlogger91125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-84802396878923068862010-11-18T19:11:02.755-05:002010-11-18T19:11:02.755-05:00By the way, this is not something you can force yo...By the way, this is not something you can force yourself to believe. Faith in the Real Presence can only come from the Holy Spirit...if it is given by the Father in heaven...Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-15510146762131031382010-11-18T11:12:32.761-05:002010-11-18T11:12:32.761-05:00"Again, we can go back and forth saying the b..."Again, we can go back and forth saying the bread and wine are or are not physically the body and blood of Christ, but how can we prove it?"<br /><br />Well, I can give you information on dozens of Eucharistic miracles where science has given up trying to explain the impossible. Scientists even became Catholics over some of these. I have personally seen and visited such, which are more than 1300 years old, in some cases. But, you would probably refuse to believe, attributing them to false signs. Yet, Jesus performed supernatural signs constantly to prove that He is God. The disbelievers likewise attributed His signs to the evil one. <br /><br /> "I believe the bread and wine in the Catholic Eucharist is just bread and wine just the same as that in the protestant Eucharist. Our faith must be in Christ and in His sacrifice on the Cross to save us, and if it is, it doesn't matter whether we think the bread and wine is physically the body and blood of Christ or whether we think the significance is that WE are the body of Christ washed by His blood."<br /><br />Oh really? If the bread and wine become Jesus in the flesh, it does not matter? Jennie, what we think does not matter. It is only what is, that matters. Here is a quote from Ignatius of Antioch at the end of the first century: Charity is no concern to them, nor are widows and orphans or the oppressed . . .They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which, in his goodness, the Father raised . . .Here is another:Be careful to observe [only] one Eucharist; for there is only one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup of union with his Blood, one altar of sacrifice, as [there is] one bishop with the presbyters and my fellow-servants the deacons.<br /><br />"Unless we are trusting in the Church to save us, or eating a piece of bread to save us."<br /><br />Jennie, we are trusting in Jesus Christ, who comes physically to us through that which was once bread and wine. If it were really still bread and wine, then we are the greatest of fools...please stop laughing...it is not polite...<br /><br />It is always Faith and Reason working together. Go back to the basics. If Jesus were talking figuratively in John 6, He would not have lost most of His disciples who had already left home and family to follow Him. Just be logical about it. This was the ONLY teaching in the entire NT that He lost His followers over. It is precisely because they did not believe it any more than you do. You are walking away too; you are just doing it 2000 years later.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-73480469314343312262010-11-18T11:12:22.186-05:002010-11-18T11:12:22.186-05:00Jennie - What Leo is saying is so right. But it&#...Jennie - What Leo is saying is so right. But it's not so hard to accept, when you think that the scripture authors themselves were not infallible, but what they wrote WAS.<br /><br />I know you do not AGREE that the Church teaches infallibly, but you believe the identical thing about scripture, as we do also. On what grounds can you condemn it (the magisterium) without also condemning the idea of an infallible canon of scripture that was produced by men.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11127291742330663617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-17914812097898677462010-11-18T10:42:05.587-05:002010-11-18T10:42:05.587-05:00"The RCC is not the one and only church, nor ..."The RCC is not the one and only church, nor is she perfect, and nor are any of them."<br /><br />You are correct if you say that no one IN the Church is perfect. If that were a requirement, none of us would be allowed to join.<br /><br />However, she is absolutely incapable of officially teaching error on Faith and Morals. Please try to separate actions of people in the Church from Church teaching. The role of the Church is to hand down the deposit of Faith and to provide the Sacraments.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-84858445564840909882010-11-18T10:39:29.630-05:002010-11-18T10:39:29.630-05:00"I have given examples in the past, but you j..."I have given examples in the past, but you just deny that it's possible that the Church can err."<br /><br />You have not given any viable examples where the Church has ever erred in an official teaching on Faith and Morals, or where she ever changed an official teaching. You even so much as accepted that the teachings on Morals have never changed. That would be most amazing to me, since the Church had a perfect chance to make friends with the world on divorce, contraception, etc. <br /><br /> When we have rebutted your examples, you did not provide what I would consider to be logical and fair defenses. I too, can find plenty of fictitious examples created by the heretics and enemies of the Church.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-91610992367981390752010-11-16T21:41:20.878-05:002010-11-16T21:41:20.878-05:00So then since your joy is in Him then your faith i...So then since your joy is in Him then your faith is in Him, and it doesn't matter if you're mistaken about the essence of the bread and wine, or in turn, if I am mistaken, since my faith is in Him, and my joy is to be part of His body as well.<br /><br />But we have to trust in Him, not in being in the right church, or doing anything.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-36892867603573244422010-11-16T19:29:15.772-05:002010-11-16T19:29:15.772-05:00You believe something is bread and wine, when Jesu...You believe something is bread and wine, when Jesus said it was his body and blood and commanded us to eat and drink, in remembrance of Him. And it is our joy to do so.<br /><br />In memory of Him, in perpetuity, amen.<br /><br />Dear Lord, heal us according to your will.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11127291742330663617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-69826903021580444982010-11-16T19:17:28.670-05:002010-11-16T19:17:28.670-05:00Leo,
There is a burden on the church to stand on t...Leo,<br />There is a burden on the church to stand on the truth and keep faithful to it. I disagree that the RCC is teaching the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and we can go back and forth saying "Does not!" "Does too!" until eternity, but it won't convince either of us. I have given examples in the past, but you just deny that it's possible that the Church can err. Yet the Old Testament church erred again and again, and the churches throughout the centuries have erred, are erring, and will err until Christ judges and finally purifies them. There is a reason Jesus spoke to 'the churches' in Revelation, and not 'the Church'. The RCC is not the one and only church, nor is she perfect, and nor are any of them.<br />Again, we can go back and forth saying the bread and wine are or are not physically the body and blood of Christ, but how can we prove it? I believe the bread and wine in the Catholic Eucharist is just bread and wine just the same as that in the protestant Eucharist. Our faith must be in Christ and in His sacrifice on the Cross to save us, and if it is, it doesn't matter whether we think the bread and wine is physically the body and blood of Christ or whether we think the significance is that WE are the body of Christ washed by His blood. Unless we are trusting in the Church to save us, or eating a piece of bread to save us. That's my concern.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-62079114409244921652010-11-15T00:07:05.539-05:002010-11-15T00:07:05.539-05:00"So, since it IS the case that historically t..."So, since it IS the case that historically there has been a variety of degrees of understanding on the 'presence of Christ' in the Eucharist, I would say that the fact that Catholics have solidified the doctrine on the most extreme side without any leeway for individual conscience and guidance by the Holy Spirit for individual believers, that the burden is upon the RCC to show that this extreme view is correct"<br /><br />Jennie, there is no burden upon the Church to prove anything. She merely teaches Truth and some falls on rocky soil, etc. <br /><br />There has always been a variety of beliefs and understandings by many...not, however, by the Church. What you miss is the fact that the Church teaches nothing on her own. She is merely the mouthpiece of the Holy Spirit. And,no, to your point, there is NO leeway for people to interpret their own versions of Truth when it comes to dogma. <br /><br />This is why the Apostles' Creed was written and why the Holy Spirit later defined it further to the Nicene Creed. There are specific truths about God and what we are to believe.<br /><br />Think about it this way. If the Eucharist really is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, why should there be any leeway in defining it?<br /><br />On the other hand, in the Protestant churches, it remains bread and wine and it can indeed be a simple memorial and everyone is free to view the ritual as they choose. However, every Protestant would be quick to say that it is still bread and wine and they would be right. If a Catholic were to say that your bread in your church became Jesus according to my interpretation, you would be most correct in saying that it did not. I would not be free to interpret that it did.<br /><br />So too, you are not free to interpret that the bread and wine consecrated by a priest is not Jesus Christ. You would simply be wrong and saying something which was not true.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-628400920575127072010-11-14T23:54:48.204-05:002010-11-14T23:54:48.204-05:00Jennie, to follow up on Christine's comments, ...Jennie, to follow up on Christine's comments, you are missing something quite basic about God. He wants EVERYONE to be saved, and the vast number of people in the world will never see or read scripture...some due to availability, some because they are illiterate, etc. <br /><br />Everyone who seeks God with all of their heart, mind, soul and strength, will surely find Him. We must first follow our consciences and we do not need scripture to find God. He seeks us out and gives every single person enough grace to get to heaven.<br /><br />Please try to broaden your perspective on this issue.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-21356712047481927792010-11-14T18:45:03.378-05:002010-11-14T18:45:03.378-05:00In your comments to Leo, there is nothing for Cath...In your comments to Leo, there is nothing for Catholics to disagree with, except for a couple of tweaks - "hearing by the word of God" you interpret "word" as scripture alone, maybe, while we would take it as all the ways God speaks plus the original Word, Jesus himself. I would think you could see it that way too.<br /><br />And this of yours <i>But we do not go beyond Scripture in the sense that somehow Scripture doesn't give us all we need.</i> I'm sure you don't mean that we don't need God himself, or that we don't need prayer, or that we don't need repentance, etc. Wouldn't you agree that IF a person somehow never had access to the bible, they could still know God?<br /><br />But all this is never to diminish the all-important inerrancy of scripture that Catholics revere as Christ's own body. <br /><br />Again, Jennie, we share so very much. The love of God and his word in all its forms, especially in scripture.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11127291742330663617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-4994935482482230942010-11-14T18:29:46.144-05:002010-11-14T18:29:46.144-05:00Maybe you weren't talking about just non-Catho...<i>Maybe you weren't talking about just non-Catholics who had left the Church, but about all non-Catholic Christians supposedly feeling like they have to justify not being Catholic.</i><br /><br />I'm not talking about all who've left the Catholic Church. I'm not talking about all non-Catholics.<br /><br />No, just talking about non-Catholic Christians who blog on a DAILY basis about only one thing, namely the Catholic Church, and do so in a way that is biased, disrespectful, arrogant and even sometimes hateful.<br /><br />As I said before, when people want to "share" their new understanding in a constructive way, that looks/sounds/feels different than the tone of the blogs of which we were speaking. So it makes it look as though they are obsessed with maintaining the strongest anti-Catholicism possible, NEVER conceding ANY point, never sincerely listening.<br /><br />Whereas at blogs like Called to Communion and the like, it is so obvious how they take each poster very seriously and respectfully.Christinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11127291742330663617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-3978696082442524902010-11-14T17:12:11.557-05:002010-11-14T17:12:11.557-05:00Here's another passage that shows that God bri...Here's another passage that shows that God brings us to Himself by scripture:<br />Romans 10:13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.” <br />14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written:<br /><br /><br /> “ How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace,<br /> Who bring glad tidings of good things!”<br /><br /> 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “LORD, who has believed our report?” 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-64445026744338638352010-11-14T16:59:28.369-05:002010-11-14T16:59:28.369-05:00He wants all to be saved and we must follow where ...<i>He wants all to be saved and we must follow where our consciences lead us. However, we are also obligated to properly form our consciences. Thus, a person who persists in sin or pride will ultimately deaden their conscience and fall prey to the admonition from the saints, "If you do not behave as you believe, you will eventually believe as you behave."<br /><br />To believe in and to trust Him goes beyond the scriptures, however, He is a real person and knows our deepest thoughts. If we submit ourselves completely to His will, He will most certainly lead us to Himself, with our without scriptures. He can never deny yourself. Thus, if your heart is pure, He will lead you home.</i><br /><br />Leo,<br />I believe scripture teaches that before we are regenerate we cannot follow our consciences because they are not trustworthy. I believe that even after salvation, our hearts can deceive us if we stray from God's word, and we can end up going the wrong way. We have Scripture and the Spirit to guide us after we are converted, but if we listen to other voices then we can be led astray and get into trouble.<br />'To believe in and to trust Him goes beyond Scriptures' but only in the sense that we must begin to act upon what we know by faith and not just remain as 'hearers of the word only.' But we do not go beyond Scripture in the sense that somehow Scripture doesn't give us all we need. I don't believe we can 'submit ourselves completely to His will' apart from Scripture. He uses Scripture to lead people to Himself by the Spirit. And our hearts cannot be pure apart from His righteousness and His word and His Spirit in us, so our hearts can lead us astray if we don't listen to His word, His voice as our Shepherd.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-38689641307380084632010-11-14T16:36:14.544-05:002010-11-14T16:36:14.544-05:00Maybe you weren't talking about just non-Catho...Maybe you weren't talking about just non-Catholics who had left the Church, but about all non-Catholic Christians supposedly feeling like they have to justify not being Catholic. I think that's even more far-fetched, since most Christians I know never give a thought to Catholicism and think it's a little weird that I'm interested in that subject at all if I mention it. They don't care one way or another about it. I think the guys online or writing books about it are in a very small minority.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-56725888673739640192010-11-14T16:08:24.887-05:002010-11-14T16:08:24.887-05:00The plain truth is that non-Catholic Christians of...<i>The plain truth is that non-Catholic Christians often feel a need to continually justify their separation from the Catholic Church - hence the need for blogs such as Beggars All and T-fan. If they are so very confident in their position, they wouldn't need to fight, fight, fight every day.</i><br /><br />First of all, that 'non-Catholic Christians often feel a need to continually justify their separation from the Catholic Church' is a false assumption. Certainly we see a few of them online on blogs, writing books and articles, etc., but how many of them do you never hear of that are just living their lives quietly out there somewhere? <br />It's also a false assumption that the ones you do see online are doing it because they have to justify themselves (they say often enough that we CAN'T justify ourselves :) for leaving the Catholic Church. I think they are doing it because they feel strongly that they came out of a false system and into the truth, and want to share this understanding. Of course, some of the bloggers have never been Catholic but come from a strong tradition of protestantism that has always stood against Roman Catholicism and feels it is right to continue to do this as long as the two sides exist. I myself am not an apologist nor a scholar, but was just wanting to understand something better and to share what I was learning.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-85860660457434718512010-11-14T15:46:18.774-05:002010-11-14T15:46:18.774-05:00There's no either/or. Can you see that the que...<i>There's no either/or. Can you see that the question of whether or not a passage is to be taken literally is just arbitrary for Protestants? Just one person's interpretation among so many. And it is often based on presuppositions. The presupposition in this case is "We can't believe in the Eucharist as Catholics see it", so every verse that relates to this must be rationalized/redefined/trivialized/made figurative in order to fit the presupposition.</i><br /><br />Actually, in the classical protestant understanding of Scripture, I believe interpretation is based upon comparing scripture to scripture, and considering the whole of scripture, as well as considering the understanding of the historical church on different doctrines, though scripture is always the final authority. In post-modern evangelical churches that have begun departing from the truth, who knows what they will come up with, or what they base their ideas on, but that was not the case historically and is not the case for many still.<br />So, since it IS the case that historically there has been a variety of degrees of understanding on the 'presence of Christ' in the Eucharist, I would say that the fact that Catholics have solidified the doctrine on the most extreme side without any leeway for individual conscience and guidance by the Holy Spirit for individual believers, that the burden is upon the RCC to show that this extreme view is correct; and that it is correct to say that salvation depends upon compliance with this view.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-21771452941381279172010-11-12T09:56:51.848-05:002010-11-12T09:56:51.848-05:00As I said on another thread, I'll be otherwise...As I said on another thread, I'll be otherwise occupied this weekend and may not be able to comment much, so I'll try to answer the other comments as soon as I can. Thanks!Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-28657330704295209262010-11-12T09:31:24.870-05:002010-11-12T09:31:24.870-05:00Jennie, I also appreciate your comment on Beggars ...<i>Jennie, I also appreciate your comment on Beggars All to address their approach. If we are all children of God, we should act like it while trying to understand what we all believe and why we believe it.<br /><br />I must say that I sense a profound difference in your approach towards us lately, and it is most appreciated.</i><br /><br />Leo,<br />Thanks; I felt like that title was unnecessarily offensive, but also that John B. didn't intend it the way it came across. But I've objected before to things like that on Reformed blogs. If one has to tell the truth and that offends someone, that's one thing; but if one is just being a smart-aleck or reacting to someone else in sarcasm, then that's not good. I think our society has been permeated with that attitude of 'sarcasm for effect' by all the entertainment we've been exposed to. That's why I don't let my children watch alot of recent movies and shows. They are full of just plain rudeness and narcissism. <br />I don't know that my attitude has changed. I think for a while, back when we had some intense discussions, that I was overwhelmed by the contentiousness that came out from some of my posts. I am easily overwhelmed when I feel attacked on all sides, especially when no one is helping me. But I've always felt strongly that people should make an effort to be civil and kind.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17126868703568627388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-88262944218478102202010-11-11T19:30:12.591-05:002010-11-11T19:30:12.591-05:00Christine,
Actually, I see that you answered one ...Christine,<br /><br />Actually, I see that you answered one of Jennie's points and I ended weakly repeating your point without realizing it. I had opened the window earlier and did not update it before answering...sorry.<br /><br />Jennie, I also appreciate your comment on Beggars All to address their approach. If we are all children of God, we should act like it while trying to understand what we all believe and why we believe it.<br /><br />I must say that I sense a profound difference in your approach towards us lately, and it is most appreciated.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-16306980314867426202010-11-11T14:31:06.916-05:002010-11-11T14:31:06.916-05:00"It doesn't say 'someday you will be ..."It doesn't say 'someday you will be a new creation.' It says 'is a new creation.' So we don't take communion to be saved, but because we are saved."<br /><br />Well, yes, to a point...We must be born of the water and of the spirit(baptized) and this allows us to enter the kingdom. However, we are commanded to eat His Body and drink His Blood if we want His life within us. This is the ordinary means He uses to transmit sanctifying grace to us. I am not saying that He will not act outside of ordinary means. He is God and can do whatever He pleases, whenever He pleases. <br /><br />We absolutely need sanctifying grace to be made holy, as this is an action of God upon us. He makes us clean through our consumption of the Eucharist. Christ is the food that assimilates us into Himself. Just as He made the unclean clean, so too He makes us into likenesses of Himself.<br /><br />We are indeed a new creation and He has given us Himself as food for the journey. It is not a coincidence that He multiplied the loaves before His teaching on the Eucharist. This was also a foreshadowing that He would multiply Himself to feed us.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-80455129019271553592010-11-11T14:20:01.210-05:002010-11-11T14:20:01.210-05:00"Jeremiah 15:16 Your words were found, and I ..."Jeremiah 15:16 Your words were found, and I ate them,<br />And Your word was to me the joy and rejoicing of my heart;"<br /><br />The word for 'eat' is not the same. The word used in John 6 is similar to 'masticate' which means to 'chew with the jaws'. It is a very explicit word to get the point across.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-38540800308976918892010-11-11T14:13:11.735-05:002010-11-11T14:13:11.735-05:00"But we only believe it because of His words ..."But we only believe it because of His words at the Last Supper and His teaching which is expressed in John 6."<br /><br />To clarify what Christine said, we also believe it because it is precisely what Jesus meant. This teaching has come directly from the apostles. It is a mistake to assume that it was not apostolic in practice. Remember that they gathered for the 'breaking of the bread' on Sunday which was the Eucharist. <br /><br />He did not say 'this is in remembrance of my body'. He said "This IS my Body." If He said "this is a bowling ball", it would have become a bowling ball.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-69499617617679688022010-11-11T14:07:30.280-05:002010-11-11T14:07:30.280-05:00"Jesus' sacrifice and our response of fai..."Jesus' sacrifice and our response of faith is what saves us, not eating the bread and drinking the wine."<br /><br />Again, you need to understand that it is no longer bread and wine. If it were, then you would be correct. This is why it is the only place in the entire NT that disciples left him in multitudes over a teaching. <br /><br />Think about it objectively. These disciples had left jobs, families, and homes to be with Jesus. They would not have gone back just because He was talking figuratively. They clearly understood that He was commanding what they saw as cannibalism and the drinking of blood which was forbidden based on scripture alone.<br /><br />This is why He chastised them for 'dilligently studying the scriptures, thinking that BY THEM they possess eternal life." They were refusing to come to Him because it seemed to them that He was contradicting scripture according to their own misinterpretation.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31521339.post-67954323531305379332010-11-11T14:00:52.942-05:002010-11-11T14:00:52.942-05:00"Yes, the Israelites literally ate the lamb, ..."Yes, the Israelites literally ate the lamb, and the literal lamb was not what saved them. It was God that saved them. It was their faith in God and obedience to His command to put the blood on the doorposts, etc., that saved them."<br /><br />Well, the literal lamb did not save them, but it was a foreshadowing of the ultimate Lamb who was to come, and He does indeed save us. The difference is that the new Lamb IS God.<br /><br />As you said, their obedience also played a role. Part of the demand was to physically eat the lamb which was slain. <br /><br />Again, this is why He was placed in a manger. It was not a cute coincidence; it was by design to show that He really becomes food for us. He is the main course at the heavenly banquet through the transubstantiation.Leohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15058964412856897008noreply@blogger.com