Fiat Volvntas Tua

Gates of Hell

2011-11-19T05:15:00.000+08:00

The gates of hell can be understood in several different ways with “gates” referring to a city perhaps and hell referring to Hades which is divided into the abode of the lost “Gehenna” ( Luk 16:23) and the redeemed “Abraham’s Bosom”.

St. Peter being appointed as prime minister is an act of ordaining the office that is prophesied by the prophet Isaiah (Ch 22). As prophesied by Isaiah it is an enduring office that will remain for all times meaning that this same Church and the only Church founded on the rock of St. Peter will be present at the Parousia. This city on a hill that cannot be hid, meaning the Church, is well prepared by Christ to withstand the attacks from those demonic forces from Hades or the abode of the dead in Christ previously referred to as Gehenna before the gates of heaven were opened by Christ’s redemptive sacrifice. This is a sufficiently fortified city (Gen 22:17; 24:60; Isa 14:31, etc.) to withstand the spiritual warfare that will inevitably be fought by not only the demonic forces that oppose God but also those that do the will of evil because of their allowing themselves to be outside of His Church and influenced by false teaching that appeals to their own pride of the flesh and their itching ears. The demons and their human accomplices are opposed to that which is good such as the fullness of truth professed by the Church. The keys to this city or fortress against the attacks of Hell are given to St. Peter and thus the city or Church defends itself based on the teaching of the Church which is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”.

Another way of understanding the “Gates of Hell” is to understand that the Church is also on the offensive to rescue those who would be lost in the snare of Satan by the spread of God’s Word and the truth of the Gospel. But in either case it relates to Christ’s eventual and complete victory over evil by the Fortress of His Church. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

The Appointment of St. Peter as prime minister

2011-09-12T10:43:00.000+08:00

Commentary on Isaiah 22 and its relation to St. Peter

Certainly in Matthew 16 Jesus is referring to the prophecy of Isaiah in Isaiah 22 and in doing so He is fulfilling the prophetic imagery prophesied by the prophet Isaiah. The prime minister referred to by Isaiah is a type for the appointment of St. Peter to be the leader, steward and authority over His family or household. It further emphasizes by Christ’s actions in His appointment that He, Jesus, having received the throne of David by virtue of His Father is asserting His claim to the throne of David and as the rightful successor as king of all of Judah and Israel. He fulfills this by asserting the legal precedent necessary to fulfill prophecy and appoints St. Peter as the steward over His kingdom. He is claiming by this action what He came to do which was to establish a new and enduring Covenant with His Kingdom. But was this Kingdom fully established at this time or was it just a stepping stone to the establishing of His Kingdom in His appointment of St. Peter in Matthew 16? Certainly, the time had not yet come for the Prime Minister, St. Peter, to exercise the power of the keys for Christ had not yet revealed His glory or made claim to His kingdom with the establishment of the New Covenant. This would not happen until Calvary where Jesus would from the cross drink of the cup of consummation from the hyssop branch and then utter the words, “it is finished” after which He gave up His Spirit and His glory was revealed. He would finish His redemptive work three days later when He raised from the dead. Only then was all prophecy fulfilled and the law satisfied. St. Peter was now endowed with the Authority of Christ to be the royal steward over Christ’s kingdom. So great was this authority that He had the authority to bind or loose on earth as well as in heaven and became the spiritual father of Christ’s family. The keys represent the supremacy of the power bestowed on St. Peter and he is fastened on a peg and carries the weight of maintaining the King’s (Christ’s) house. So great are the parallels between Eliakim and St. Peter that it is implausible to deny that Eliakim is a type for St. Peter. The new kingdom is not a kingdom of land and of a people but it is the establishment of a spiritual kingdom of God and not of men. Keeping with the typology the office of Eliakim was an enduring office and so too is the office that St. Peter to which he has been appointed. Only the prime minister holds the keys of supreme authority and not only the first among equals but the special and singular authority among the disciples and visible head of the Church.

Let us look directly at the parallels between Isaiah 22 and Matthew 16.

The prime minister in David’s household had successors:

Isa 22:15, 1 Kings 4:6, & 18:3, 2 Kings 10:5, 15:5, 18:18

We see the full authority given to the prime minister:

Isa 22:22, Mat 16:19, Rev 3:7

Further teaching of the authority of the prime minister:

Mat 24:45, Luk 12:42, Gen 41:40, Gen 43:19

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Typical unreasonable hatred for Christ's Church

2011-09-11T13:13:00.001+08:00

This is a continuation of a conversation I have been having by email with a person that calls himself Edward which is typical of those who bear false witness against the Church and are unable to support their attacks on the Church or like here the attacks on the blessed mother from Scripture. They act as if their accusations are proof enough and that accusations equate to truth even if they are impotent to prove their accusations. It is typical that they cannot articulate why they disagree or support their disagreement from Scripture.

I do not post this on my blog to embarrass Edward but to show the level to which one can be deceived by false teachers and how hatred and bigotry can obscure one’s intellect and reason. I ask that all those who read this pray for Edward that he will come into the ark of the Church and reject the man-made sects that have deceived him and receive the fullness of truth contained only in Christ’s Church, the Catholic Church.

(Edward) “I have shown you many Scriptures where God says mary is a sinner.”

(Cristoiglesia) Actually you have not, I am still waiting and have asked for book, chapter and verse and you have been unable to provide even one. We both know that you cannot or you would have already provided one. It is not fair for me to ask you to do this because I know there is no such verse. I just wanted you to study the Bible and convince yourself that you are wrong. Here is why your assumption must be false:

All Christians will agree that there is at least one person who never sinned and that is our Lord and Savior. Being an exception means that there may be other possibilities of exceptions although we can agree that the circumstances of our Savior are unique being fully man and fully God. No other person future or past can make such a claim. As you know the Bible says that the blessed mother is "full" of God's grace at the Annunciation. We believe that God had prepared her for that moment of saying yes to be the God bearer. The womb that bore and nurtured our Lord is the Ark of the New Covenant which is Christ our Lord. God cannot dwell within sin so the blessed mother was saved by God's grace before she was even conceived in the womb immaculately. She was in need of a Savior as we all are and our Lord provided for her salvation and indeed her sanctity even before her conception. Being and remaining full of grace means that the blessed mother of God never sinned but would have been tempted to sin as the new Eve just as the original Eve was tempted. But just as her Son withstood temptation, her grace was so great that she was able to overcome all temptation.

(Edward)“Unfortunately you have chosen to listen to the catholic church instead of God.”

(Cristoiglesia) By being obedient to the Church and its teaching I am being obedient to Christ. It is truly a blessing that comes from God’s grace to have been chosen and called to His service in His Church. You suppose that there is a contradiction between listening to God and listening to the Church but the Church is His bride.

Jesus never gave any authority to written Scripture but instead to His Church who in turn wrote Scripture to be interpreted within His Church under the authority given by Him. St. Paul confirms this authority of the Church through apostolic succession when He instructed to hold fast what was taught by Word (oral) and letter (written). The Church does not have the authority to relinquish that which God has given regardless of the burden of protecting the Church. The Scriptures promise that this Church is the “bulwark and ground of the truth” and that promise will forever remain true.

The Church was also given the authority to come to clearer understanding of the truth in the living Church but such understanding should not take away from the teaching of the apostles but illuminate it. The authority given to the Church is great Jesus saying that the Church has the authority to bind and loose and again the Church is powerless to abdicate this divine responsibility. Some may say the Scriptures are true because of the truth they reveal in prophetic testimony and I say that the Church is true because of its testimony as an enduring Church for 2000 years just as Christ promised. The only high court of appeal is our founder, high priest and Savior Jesus the Christ who has never failed His Church, this relationship no book can supplant for it is through Him that the Church derives its holiness and its veracity and its immortality.

One cannot deny that the foundation of all Christianity through His Church is based on Christ’s words to St. Peter before the disciples. There is no doubt from the construction vernacular that Jesus was instructing them to build a Church with them as the foundation stones and Himself as the cornerstone. He built no other Church as no other was needed because the One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic, Church derives its perfection from Him through His promises. He prayed that we all be one within this Church. He said this Church would endure until the Parousia. He said of this Church that the gates of hell would not prevail against it. He said that He would be with this Church until the end of time. The Scriptures confirms these promises saying that this Church is the “pillar and ground of the truth”. He did not plan for the Church to be without leadership after the apostles died but provided that they choose successors to replace them in the enduring Church. This is confirmed it the book of Acts.

One can suggest that this Church is not the Church that Christ gave these promises and authority to but who else can support a claim that they are the true church represented by these promises if not the Catholic church. Some will suggest that the true church is the Gnostics or the Arians? Certainly remnants of those churches remain in modern incarnations of these heresies but can one claim the enduring characteristic promised by Christ? There is certainly no evidence that anyone can make a legitimate claim to Christ’s promises other than the Catholic Church. Some critics may claim that the reason that the Catholic Church has endured is because of political connections, but the truth is that it has endured because of the miracles of our Lord who persuaded a Pagan emperor to stop his persecution of the Church and not by some agreement of men. It is hard to persuade someone who is intent on your annihilation. Only God could convict the heart of the Pagan Emperor Constantine.

I would agree that there have always been those believers known to God who will be saved and I agree but I do not agree that those people are outside of His Church nor do I believe that it is possible for salvation without His Church but that it is possible only through his Church, Although I acknowledge, as does the Church, that this union may be imperfect, as with our separated brethren with different degrees of the fullness of truth which is perfected in His Church. All believers are taught by God through His Church.

While St. Paul spoke about the great apostasy, is it possible that he was speaking of the apostasy of the enduring Church that He created. Would not that apostate element be more described in the churches proceeding from the Reformation? Does the Bible not teach that we will know them by their fruits? It does and what are the fruits of the Reformation.

Reducing the Word of God to a book and confusing the truth with tens of thousands of exponentially increasing schisms in the dilution of the truth. Did not Christ pray that we all be one in His Church?

By forbidding the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ from Protestant worship.

Reducing salvation to a one time assent to faith and then teaching antinomianism.

Rejecting the authority Christ established.

These are just a few of the signs of a church in apostasy as represented by the Protestant churches. Could there be a better example of decay and perversion.

We can all agree as Christians that only God knows who are His faithful but do not let us confuse the facts of His teaching that we are to be one in the Church that He created. There is the Church that is gathered around the Bishop as the early Church is described by St. Ignatius and then there is the Church known only to God made up of those whose heart is pure in their love and devotion to God. But regardless they all will be saved by that which is promised to endure which is His Church. We can only pray that he will be merciful to the apostate and that they find the truth before it is too late.

(Edward) “There are no Born Again Christian churches that teach mary was sinless. Calvary Chapel has never taught mary was sinless. The Baptist Church has never taught mary was sinless. And the list goes on and on.

No born Again Theologian has taught mary was sinless. Dr. J. Vernon McGee never taught mary was sinless. Dr. Charles F. Stanley never taught mary was sinless. Walter Martin never taught mary was sinless. Dr. David Jeremiah never taught mary was sinless. And the list goes on forever. Its only the catholics who teach this doctrine about not anyone else who follows God only.”

(Cristoiglesia) None of these people that you mentioned was ever given any authority to teach anyone anything. They are heretics by their own actions. Why would you believe these men can usurp the authority given by Christ to His Church? All authority for teaching was given to Christ’s Church. Jesus said that His Church would never fall into apostasy when He said that the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church. The Bible says that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”. Jesus is not a liar and the Bible teaches truth but you give authority to men that Jesus never gave authority. Why do you not believe Jesus and the Bible over these men who reject what Christ founded. The Bible says of them that they cannot endure sound doctrine and are false teachers for this reason. If you or Anyone else truly followed God you would be one in His Church which is His will. Jesus is not the author of confusion and division which is rife in the Protestant sects. You will know them by their fruits and the fruits of Protestantism is more than 30,000 wounds in the Corpus Christi caused by these man-made sects seeking man-made doctrines instead of the teaching of God through His Church.

(Edward) “Jesus told us in the Bible we cannot serve two masters. His example was we cannot serve God and money at the same time. We also cannot serve God and mary at the same time. We cannot worship God and mary at the same time. No Born Again Christian serves two masters, its only the catholics who try to worship God and mary at the same time.

(Cristoiglesia) As I have told you many times Catholic Christians are forbidden by the teaching of the Church to worship anyone or anything but God. We honor the blessed mother of God just as the Bible teaches that His faithful will do. It is people like you who have an unreasonable and unbiblical hatred for the mother of God who serves your own prejudice by hating His mother. How do you justify hating Christ’s mother with supposed devotion to Christ? How will you defend yourself at judgment when Jesus asks why you did not honor His mother? Do you not realize that she is our mother as well as she was given by Jesus to the Church from the Cross as truly St. John represented the Church at Calvary. Is not one of the Ten Commandments to honor one’s mother and father? How do you honor her with your attacks on her?

(Edward) God clearly states mary was sinless. Its the catholics who have ignored what God has said and instead has listen to the catholic church only. The Mary in the Bible is not the mary the catholics are praying to and worshiping. Their mary is a false idol made up only in the last 200 years by the catholic church. Many a pope has followed and served mary, John Paul II being one of the examples.

(Cristoiglesia) As I have said and which you have been unable to refute is that we do not worship the blessed mother of God. We do ask her to pray for us because being the righteous woman she is then her prayers for us are of great benefit. She has achieved what we hope to achieve. There is no idolatry in the Catholic Church. Such practices are strictly forbidden. I have asked you to show me in the Catechism where the Church teaches what you say but you cannot but prefer, to your own condemnation, to bear false witness against the Church.

(Edward) “God has told us in His commandments not to have idols in our walk with God. But the catholics have ignored this commandment by having statues and graven images of mary in their life.”

(Cristoiglesia) Show me in the Catechism of the Catholic Church where the Church teaches idolatry. You cannot and continue to bear false witness against Christ’s Church. May our Lord have mercy on you.

(Edward) “Every time a catholic says the rosary, 91% are prayers to mary and only 9% are to God. Its a 10 to 1 ratio of prayers. No one can call themselves a Born Again Christian who prays 10 times more to mary than to God.”

(Cristoiglesia) Actually you are entirely wrong. All of the prayers are to God We are simply asking the blessed mother to pray for us and be our prayer partner. All of our prayers go to Jesus. Personally I rarely pray the Rosary but pray the Breviary instead. You do understand that when we “pray” to the blessed mother of God we are using the definition where “pray” = “asks”. We are asking her to join us in prayer. It is no different than someone asking you to pray for them. If they did would you accuse them of idolatry for asking you to be their prayer partner? Are you then an “idol”? By your logic you are an idol if anyone ever asked you to pray for them.

(Edward) “Jesus told us in the Bible there are wheat and tares in the world. The wheat are Born Again Christians while the tares are the catholics and everybody else who refuse to follow Jesus. In Matthew 7:21 Jesus tells us there are many people who think they are Born Again Christians but in realty are not Christians, we call them catholics.”

(Cristoiglesia) Before you call us “tares” you should be able to find at least one way we do not follow Jesus. But the truth is that you cannot make a case for even one instance where we do not follow Him. It is ironic that you would say such a thing considering that you are in a man-made sect following entirely the doctrines of men over the sound doctrines of Christ and His Church which you admittedly cannot endure. You profess false teachers like, McGee, Stanley, and Martin that satisfy your itching ears in place of Christ’s Church and the sound doctrines it teaches. Now who is refusing to follow Jesus. Jesus prayed the following prayer to the Father before He was crucified that clearly shows His will for all of His to be one in His Church. He prayed:

Joh 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

7Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.

8For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

9I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

10And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.

11And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

(Edward) “Everything i have shown you is from the Bible. I am just telling you what the Bible says. Why do you have such little regard for Scripture?”

(Cristoiglesia) You have been totally unable to support anything you say from Scripture.

(Edward) “The only person here who has hatred is you. Your hatred for the Born Again Christian is great. I have no hate for mary nor do i have hate for the True Church.

What i hate is people like you who trample on the Scriptures from God and who teach a different gospel. What i hate is people like you who teach lies about the mother of Jesus.”

(Cristoiglesia) Why would I hate a “born again” Christian as I am one as is every Catholic Christian. We are “born again” in the biblical sense as Jesus taught Nicodemus. In our conversations you have done nothing but attack the mother of God for no reason and with absolute nonsense that is completely unsupported in Scriptures. I have practically begged you to support your claims from Scripture and you have refused in every case. Of course I already knew you could not because what you claimed was simply bearing false witness and not based on any biblical teaching which indeed teaches the opposite of what you claim.

(Edward) You are correct when you say the Bible says it is not for private interpretation. This is why the catholic church has no right to private interpretation of the Bible. The catholic church needs to see how the Born Again Christians interpret the Bible and follow them.”

(Cristoiglesia) The Bible teaches that it is to be understood in the community of Christ’s Church and not used as a tool of division, confusion and a tool to attack Christ’s own Church and His mother. Jesus gave all authority to teach to His Church but you follow the doctrines of men instead which I am afraid you will do to your destruction. I know how those false teachers you mentioned teach and it is false teaching and man-made doctrines.

(Edward) “This is why we have today all these false doctrines about mary from the catholic church. The catholic church has basically declared only their private interpretations are true while condemning all interpretations from the True Christian Church as being false. This is how Satan has influenced the catholics to follow mary and pray to her.”

(Cristoiglesia) Do you not realize that every time you accuse the Church of teaching falsely that you call Christ and liar and the Bible a false teacher. But, you persist even though all evidence is to the contrary of what you claim.

(Edward) “I know that nothing i have said or what anyone else will say will change your mind to follow God instead of worshiping and praying to mary.”

(Cristoiglesia) You are correct I will never follow the doctrines of men in man-made sects rather than Christ’s Church. Claiming I worship the blessed mother is bearing false witness against me.

(Edward) ”Not everyone who claims to be a Christian is a Born again Christian. Very few catholics will enter into heaven, most will not make it in. If you want to hear the truth in the Bible we can continue to talk, but if all you want to do is deny the truth in the Word of God then you need not respond any more.”

(Cristoiglesia)It is you that is in denial in your man-made sect. If you can support any of your claims from Scripture let me know. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Refuting "CARM's" claim that the Catholic Church is not Christian

2011-08-29T10:53:00.001+08:00

(Cristoiglesia) This is a refutation of the claims of Matt Slick about Christ’s own Church the Catholic Church claiming that the Church is not Christian even though it is the original Church founded by Jesus and the Disciples which Jesus said would endure for all times and that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

(Matt Slick)“Is Roman Catholicism and Christianity the same thing?

(Matt Slick) “No, Roman Catholicism and Christianity are not the same thing. Christianity is properly defined by certain doctrines that are revealed in the Bible.“

(Cristoiglesia) Really, so it is your contention that the Church founded by Jesus with Himself as the high priest and cornerstone, St. Peter as His prime minister fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah of the Messiah establishing an enduring office and the disciples as the foundation stones that is built upon by apostolic succession is not Christian? But, I do agree that Christianity is defined by its doctrines in accordance with Scriptures.

(Matt Slick) “It is not defined by simply saying that as long as you believe in Jesus, you're a Christian. Mormons believe in Jesus, but their Jesus is a brother of the devil in the pre-existence. The Jesus of the Jehovah's Witnesses is Michael the Archangel. So, just saying you believe in Jesus doesn't make you a Christian. This is why the Bible tells us who Jesus really is, God in flesh, creator of the universe.”

(Cristoiglesia) We agree again.

(Matt Slick) Likewise, there are essential doctrines, and if any of those essential doctrines are violated, then a church would only appear to be Christian but not really be Christian. What are those doctrines? The Bible tells us. Let's take a look.

There is only one God and you are to serve no other gods (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)
Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4)
Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9).
God is a Trinity (Matt. 28:19; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; 2 Cor. 13:14)
Jesus was born of the virgin Mary (Matt. 1:25)

(Cristoiglesia) We are still in agreement.

(Matt Slick) So, someone who is a true Christian will believe these things and not violate them. Roman Catholicism violates two of them.

(Cristoiglesia) I agree that Christians should not violate any of the teachings of the Bible but your claim that Christ’s Church violates two of them is preposterous and makes Jesus a liar and the Bible a false teacher. Jesus says that the “Gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church” and if what you say can be proven it makes Christ a liar. Furthermore, the Bible says that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” which makes the Bible a false teacher. I must reluctantly say here that you sound unlike one who is a follower of Christ as you are bearing false witness against Jesus and the Bible. You instead sound like one who has a spirit of contention against the teaching of Jesus and the Bible and subsequently the Church.

(Matt Slick) First of all, by its practice of promoting Mary (and the Saints) to the level of God-like capabilities, they break the commandment to have no other gods before the true and living God. In Roman Catholicism, they say that Mary is the mediatrix (Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 969); Mary made atonement for the sins of man (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, page 213); Mary is the subject of preaching and worship ((Vatican Council II, p. 420); etc.

(Cristoiglesia) The Church has not “promoted” the blessed mother of God to a Goddess status. I assume you are speaking of the fact that the saints can hear our prayers as the “God-like capabilities” but you fail to make a case that this equals Goddess status in the eyes of the Church. Search the catechism all you want and you will never see any teaching of the blessed mother of God being a Goddess or even suggesting any such thing. So there is no teaching in the Catholic Church that says that the blessed mother of God is a Goddess. So, you are guilty of bearing false witness which is a mortal sin against the Decalogue. You even take the liberty of not only calling the blessed mother of God a Goddess but also claiming that the Church places her on a higher level than Her Son. One will never see any such Catholic teaching. The truth is that the blessed mother of God always points to her Son as the source of our Salvation and your claim against her and the Church is a direct insult to her who would never allow such blasphemy as the Church teaches that Christ is the source and foundation of our hope for eternal life.

(Matt Slick) Also, Catholicism violates the biblical doctrine of salvation by grace through faith alone.

(Cristoiglesia) There is no biblical doctrine of “faith alone” but instead such a doctrine is entirely man-made. The biblical teaching by St. James in his epistle is that faith without works is dead faith and that is the only place in all of Scriptures that “faith alone” is mentioned.

(Jas 2:17 KJV) Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

However, one does receive grace through faith. But as James says dead faith is without merit.

(Matt Slick) Paul the apostle, for example, tells us in Romans 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness."

(Cristoiglesia) According to Josephus and supported by Scriptures Abraham was formerly an idolater before being chosen by God. This verse is saying that as an idolater he did not merit his vocation by his works. After being called and having left his country because God had called him to do so he believed in God’s promises. The faith and justice were reputed to him as God’s gift. He did not have a dead faith as St. James forbids but instead an active faith is shown throughout his life in love and in charity for others. Your supposition that Abraham had a dead faith is a false understanding based on eisegesis.

(Matt Slick) But Roman Catholicism denies that and says, "...so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments," (CCC, par 2068). Also, consider this:

"If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema" (Council of Trent, Canons on Justification, Canon 9).

(Cristoiglesia) As you can see your eisegesis of St. Paul’s teaching has resulted in you coming to a false conclusion and cause you to teach falsely. The Church was clearly correct and authoritative in teaching that faith without works is dead faith.

(Matt Slick) So, even though Roman Catholicism claims to be Christian and that it is the one true church, it violates the essentials of the Christian faith. It goes beyond what is written in God's word (1 Cor. 4:6). It denies the sole and true sovereignty of the living God by promoting prayer to and the worship of Mary. Also, it denies justification by faith alone in Christ alone. It is not a Christian church.

(Cristoiglesia) Not only does the Church proclaim to be the one true Church so does Jesus, the Bible, historical evidence and patristic evidence. You have not made a case for the Church contradicting or “violating” any “essentials” of the Christian faith. Instead you attempt to make the doctrines of men and devils of the Protestant sects as “essentials” of the Christian faith without any scholarship or cogent argument for your position. You quote St. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian Church as an example of the Church somehow contradicting the Scriptures without any support other than it being an egregious accusation without and foundation. Such an attack using the Scriptures of the Church is nothing less than shameful. You make the statement that the Church “denies the sole and true sovereignty of the living God by promoting prayer to and the worship of Mary” and you must know that this is false. Do you not know that the Church forbids the worship of anyone or anything but God? Certainly you are quick to quote the catechism out of context when you think it suits your purpose but quotes of the Catechism are absent when they contradict your ignorant claims. Here is what the Catechism says about idolatry of which you accuse the Church:

Idolatry

2112 The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of "idols, [of] silver and gold, the work of men's hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see." These empty idols make their worshippers empty: "Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them."42 God, however, is the "living God"43 who gives life and intervenes in history.

2113 Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc. Jesus says, "You cannot serve God and mammon."44 Many martyrs died for not adoring "the Beast"45 refusing even to simulate such worship. Idolatry rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God.46

2114 Human life finds its unity in the adoration of the one God. The commandment to worship the Lord alone integrates man and saves him from an endless disintegration. Idolatry is a perversion of man's innate religious sense. An idolater is someone who "transfers his indestructible notion of God to anything other than God."47

Here is what the Church teaches about the sovereignty of God over His creation:

V. GOD CARRIES OUT HIS PLAN: DIVINE PROVIDENCE

302 Creation has its own goodness and proper perfection, but it did not spring forth complete from the hands of the Creator. The universe was created "in a state of journeying" (in statu viae) toward an ultimate perfection yet to be attained, to which God has destined it. We call "divine providence" the dispositions by which God guides his creation toward this perfection:

By his providence God protects and governs all things which he has made, "reaching mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and ordering all things well". For "all are open and laid bare to his eyes", even those things which are yet to come into existence through the free action of creatures.161

303 The witness of Scripture is unanimous that the solicitude of divine providence is concrete and immediate; God cares for all, from the least things to the great events of the world and its history. The sacred books powerfully affirm God's absolute sovereignty over the course of events: "Our God is in the heavens; he does whatever he pleases."162 And so it is with Christ, "who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens".163 As the book of Proverbs states: "Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the LORD that will be established."164

304 And so we see the Holy Spirit, the principal author of Sacred Scripture, often attributing actions to God without mentioning any secondary causes. This is not a "primitive mode of speech", but a profound way of recalling God's primacy and absolute Lordship over history and the world,165 and so of educating his people to trust in him. The prayer of the Psalms is the great school of this trust.166

305 Jesus asks for childlike abandonment to the providence of our heavenly Father who takes care of his children's smallest needs: "Therefore do not be anxious, saying, "What shall we eat?" or "What shall we drink?". . . Your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well."167

Since “faith alone” is not a biblical teaching and is, in fact, contradicted by Scriptures it would seem by any reasonable person that based on your attack on Christ’s Church in your commentary and by using your own standards as what makes a Church Christian you have indeed illustrated that you have been a false witness against the Church in your effort to justify your own unbiblical theological errors and disobedience to the teaching of Jesus and the written Word of God. May our Lord have mercy on you. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Showing love for one another through prayer

2011-08-29T00:30:00.000+08:00

(Bird of Paradise) “Yes I can support my claims. I will start with 'praying to saints'. I want you to read the entire message, due to the fact that I will adress common catholic counter arguements in the end. If you still have counter arguements, I expect you use passages to back them up. If you are incapable of using passages, you would have proved my point (Catholics don't follow the bible).”

(Cristoiglesia) It appears that you come to this discussion with the erroneous presumption that the Catholic Church does not follow the Bible. Now I cannot address this fully unless you define what you mean by “follow the Bible”. If you are referring to the unscholarly approach to biblical hermeneutics of some Protestants called in the Latin “Sola Scriptura” of Bible alone then I am indeed guilty as is the Church. However, using proper biblical hermeneutical principals I will address and points you make with biblical citations as well as sound scholarship as to their meaning. I will not use Scriptures to support my teaching without explaining the correct and reasonable meaning of those Scriptures as well as the context they are presented. I do concede that there are differences in the approach to Scriptures between many Protestants and the Church founded by Christ as would be expected as there is a profound difference in authority between Christ’s authority as the founder of the Church and man’s authority in the founding of the many thousands of counterfeit sects to what our Lord has established and prayed that we have unity within. Your implicit claim will likely be that these man-made sects have the same authority or greater than the authority given by Christ to His Church. So much of what we will discuss has to do with that authority which I believe is Christ through His Church and you will obviously proclaim to be the Canon of Scriptures produced by the Church by the African Synods in the late 4th and early 5th centuries that confirmed the Canon of Pope St. Damasus is the sole authority of faith. Such a conclusion as this on your part cannot be supported in any reasonable way and certainly not by Scriptures which stands in witness against such an approach. Ironically in itself it is contradictory to the Scriptures themselves, which says that not all of Jesus’ teaching is contained within and that which is contained within is not for private interpretation. Instead the clear teaching of Scriptures is that it is to be understood and interpreted within the community of the Church and not individually or outside of this God given authority. I certainly will be careful not to be guilty of such an error.

Furthermore, I believe it is ridiculous and unreasonable to assume that the Church who wrote the New Testament, as all the writers were Catholic Christians, and canonized the Christian Canon would not follow the Bible that it chose as the rule of faith for Christian teaching. I submit that the Scriptures are not extra ecclesial but are to be understood in the Church under the authority of teaching given to the Church by Christ and the comforting guidance of the Holy Spirit that is absent outside of Christ’s Church. So, in summation, we follow the Bible according to the authority of Christ given to His Church instead of the unreasonable and unbiblical extra ecclesial approach to the Bible of non-Catholic Christians.

The approach to authority is very different in the ancient Church than in the modernist Protestant church. The Catholic Church follows the “Word of God alone” while the Protestant ecclesiastical groups follow Sola Scriptura which states that only God’s written word is authoritative. The latter is a sixteenth century man-made doctrine designed to destroy the unity of the Church and fragments the entire body of Christ by exponentially increasing schisms caused by accepting only part of God’s word by the Protestants. Sola Scriptura is not a doctrine for a better understanding of the Logos but instead is designed to circumvent the legitimate authority of the Church given by Christ.

It is the belief of the ancient Church that is the Magisterium of the Church that has the authority given by Christ to expound on, recognize and guard the Word of God. The Word of God is not only the written Scriptures but all that is handed to the Church by the Holy Spirit. In so doing and carrying out her responsibility the Church is the true servant of the Word.

God’s people have never been Sola Scriptura advocates. In Jesus’ day the orthodox Jews were not, nor were Jesus or the apostles. The continuation Sola Verbum Dei is a theological continuation of God’s Word from the Old Covenant to the New. The only ones who believed in anything resembling Sola Scriptura were the Sadducees who were the theological liberals of their day. We know that the first century Christians did not believe in Sola Scriptura by the teaching of St. Paul in Holy writ:

(2Th 2:15 DRB) (2:14) Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.

The Church teaches that the Word of God is the Logos:

(Joh 1:1 DRB) In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God.

(Joh 1:2 DRB) The same was in the beginning with God.

(Joh 1:3 DRB) All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.

(Joh 1:4 DRB) In him was life: and the life was the light of men.

So the question among Christians should not be what is the Word but instead how is the Word revealed to man. To the Protestant the Word is only revealed in written form called Sola Scriptura. To the Catholic Christian the word has a much broader meaning and is revealed to man in more than a written form where men were inspired to reveal God’s Word. Catholics believe that inspiration is not only personal as with the biblical writers but is also revealed to and through the Church such as in the Ecumenical Councils and through the authority exercised through the Church to recognize, guard, interpret and teach the Word. The Church throughout history has faithfully exercised her authority to guard the word of God against the attacks of heresies, such as Sola Scriptura.

Should I conclude by saying that you do not follow reason or the Holy Spirit in using your private interpretations to support your preconceived ideas making you guilty of eisegesis in your extra ecclesial approach to Scripture?

(Bird of Paradise) “Praying to the dead is forbidden in the bible. Deuteronomy 18:11 tells us that anyone who “consults with the dead” is “detestable to the Lord.” You can also find these verses in Leveticus 20:16 and18:31.”

(Cristoiglesia) (Deu 18:11 KJV) Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.

Here the Bible is speaking of the practice of the occult. A charmer is one who makes a compact with the devil as is defined as familiar “spirits”. Necromancers do their work to deceive those that consult them. As in Isa 24:4, 1 Kin 28:7.

(Lev 20:16 KJV) And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

I see no parallel between this verse and necromancy.

(Lev 18:30 KJV) Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that ye commit not any one of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I am the LORD your God.

There is no Lev 18: 31 so I assumed you meant Lev 18:30. This verse is not related to necromancy.

The Church would agree that necromancy is forbidden in Scriptures. We would also agree that one who practices necromancy has a pact with the devil to deceive.

(Bird of Paradise) Just look at Saul. He contacted Samuel and was killed for it. 1 Chronicals 10:13 also states that this is the reason he died.

(Cristoiglesia) (1Ch 10:13 KJV) So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it;

It was the sacrifice he offered unlawfully that precipitated his demise. He also was guilty of necromancy.

As I said before the Church agrees with the Scriptures that God forbids necromancy. By your statements you have put the onus on yourself to show some evidence that the Church teaches necromancy. There is none and such accusations are vacuous and false as a result.

(Bird of Paradise) “Now, the common catholic counter arguement for this: But the new testament speaks of how we will live eternally now! Thus, are we ever reall dead?”
(Cristoiglesia) No, that is not our argument against necromancy. Our argument against necromancy is that God forbids such practices as having a pact with the devil or having trust in those who do.

Yes, the Church does teach that we have eternal life when we are saved and that our souls never die whether in hell or in heaven. The Bible says that when we are absent from the body we are present with the Lord:

(2Co 5:6 KJV) Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

(2Co 5:7 KJV) (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

(2Co 5:8 KJV) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

(Bird of Paradise) “True, we live forever in Gods arms but the new testament still recognizes death in the same manner. When somebody dies, the new testament still uses the term 'dead'. The meaning of 'death' itself never changed. There is no difference between the idea of death in the OT and the NT.”

(Cristoiglesia) Do you mind going into more detail and perhaps provide some scriptural references to your claim. I am sorry but your claim does not represent fact and I cannot comment on your claim unless you can elucidate us with the source of your claim other than your fanciful proclamation.

(Bird of Paradise) “Another common arguement includes: But the Old Testament shouldn't be followed!”

(Cristoiglesia) I have made no such claim nor is it the teaching of the Church.

(Bird of Paradise) “This is not true. Matthew 5:17 makes it clear that Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but fullfill it.The law is still revelant in countless ways.”

I have no disagreement with this nor does the teaching of the Church. You are trying to make a case that the Church teaches falsely by attributing to the Church teachings that are foreign to the teaching of the Church. The Church does not teach or practice necromancy and you have not even attempted to prove that it does which seems to be your claim. This is a diversion and not an argument against the Church as it has no basis in Church teaching. We do believe in the Law of God and that Jesus fulfilled the law. We do acknowledge that all the Mosaic laws are not relevant under the new covenantal relationship with Christ but that their moral precepts still apply. Again this is a diversion from the issue and is not based on the true teaching of the Church but is instead an attempt to build a straw man to argue against. Certainly you failed to argue against the straw man as well as against the true teaching of the Church which you did not even address.

It is disingenuous to state that the practice of praying for each other has no biblical foundation, we are instructed in Scripture to have a prayer life for others as it is part of God’s commandment to love one another.

(2Co 5:8 DRB) But we are confident and have a good will to be absent rather from the body and to be present with the Lord.

The Catholic Church does not teach that it is absolutely necessary for one to ask for the intercession of saints for salvation. The Church does teach that prayer to God is necessary for salvation for all believers. For a Catholic it would be wrong to ignore the liturgical worship offered to God at feast days for the saints and the prayers asking for their intercession.

The Communion of Saints is a dogma of the ancient Church and is recorded in the apostles Creed. It simply states that the faithful because of their relationship with Christ are alive even after the death of their flesh and worship with us. To us the Church is made up of the Church militant who represents all those believers living out their hope in the flesh.

(Phi 2:12 DRB) Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

(Phi 2:13 DRB) For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and to accomplish, according to his good will.

It consists of the Church Suffering who are those who are temporarily in need of further purgation from sin so that they may enjoy the presence of God.

(2Ma 12:46 DRB) It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Lastly, the Communion of the Saints consists of those who have won the race:

(Phi 3:14 DRB) I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ Jesus.

Their immortal souls are in heaven in God’s presence:

(Rev 5:8 DRB) And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

The universal stream connecting all of God’s creation is His love, which we take on in our baptism into our journey towards sanctification. This is not an emotional but a desire placed in us by the Spirit of God that endures as a desire for those other than ourselves and this love extends even to our enemies. This is truly a love that comes only from God and is a foreign concept and nonsense to those who have not received God’s salvific grace. This desire within our souls does not end with the death of our flesh but continues into eternity where the saints through their intercession in prayer encourage us in our race and assist us to endure unto our union with God.

I think that some people of faith, who do not understand the Communion of Saints, somehow believe that asking saints to pray for us is detracting from our love or our trust in God. In truth it is impossible, if we truly love as God commands and has given us the grace to understand, not to pray to those whom we love and in turn we expect them to return that same love to us by praying for us and presenting our prayers to God. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

The Church testifies of Christ

2011-08-21T01:56:00.000+08:00

Let us look at the teaching of our Lord about His Church. Using construction vernacular He said that He was the King, High Priest, and Cornerstone of the Church. The beginning of a firm/solid/ foundation is always the cornerstone which holds together the elements of the construction.

He appointed St. Peter as the prime minister of the Church fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah that the Messiah would ordain an enduring office of prime minister and that that prime minister would be given the keys to the kingdom. This is exactly what He did when appointing St. Peter. The keys represented his office and the authority of that office which was to have the power of the king in ministering to the kingdom and the authority to teach and proclaim the will of the king. (Isa 22:20-25)

The disciples are called the 12 foundation stones (Rev 21:14) of the Church continuing illustrating the permanence of what God is building. It is not a foundation of sand that is temporary but is of an enduring nature to last until the Parousia and strong enough to withstand the tumultuous attacks of hell that would surely attempt to prevail against the Church using every method of attack from within and from without. Even the world would hate that which our Lord had built just as it hated Him. This enduring leadership is the foundation of a Church that can truly be called the "pillar and foundation of the truth" because that which Christ has ordained shall never pass away or be absorbed into the world but will for all time remain heavenly as the ark for humanity where all may be saved just as the ark of Jonah was the type for the Church which must endure within the evil of the world to bring the faithful into the promised land of heaven.

Last of all, the Church stands as testimony to the veracity of Christ and His promises to humanity. The Church is the fulfillment of Scriptures in its enduring quality as well as it being that pillar or bulwark of truth in a world filled with lies, temptation and sins that will murder souls to Christ and decrease the harvest. Its unity in His will with faith and oneness of its mission to proclaim the Gospel after 2000 years is a miracle in itself but also it proclaims the divinity of our Lord where in His prophetic vision, competence of His leadership as the builder of His Church and His promises of His Church makes it truly a city on a hill that cannot be hid (Mat 5:14) frustrating its detractors and more truly the "gates of hell". God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with Ernest S about apostolic authority and the Church

2011-07-22T13:13:00.000+08:00

(ErnestS) “Still you give no Scripture to show you are not bound by the Apostles’ word

The line stops with the Apostles and all are sealed up to their authority. That is what < We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error > means

What you write is only your word and it contradicts the Apostle.

That is why I need God’s word. Without that the RCC is of the spirit of error and must be witnessed against as corrupt and deceitful and opposed to Christ.”

(Cristoiglesia) Actually I did provide Scripture by our previous email which is contained below. 1 Joh 4:6 is speaking of the authority of the Church. In the first century we know what the definition or understanding of what Church means to the primitive Catholic Christians. St. Ignatius in his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans in the first century of the Church defined the Church as those who gathered around the bishop saying “where the bishop is there is the Church”. Now St. Ignatius along with St. Polycarp had unique qualifications among the direct successors of the disciples. They were both disciples of two of the twelve disciples of our Lord, St. John and St. Peter. St. Ignatius was third in line as the successor of St. Peter of his bishopric of Antioch. St. Ignatius was ordained and consecrated by St. John and St. Peter as their successor. Surely St. Ignatius teaching had the confidence of St. Peter as well as St. John when they chose him as a disciple and successor. So as is clearly apparent, is that the Church is inseparable from the teaching and authority of the apostles. The same authority remains today in the successors of the apostles in an unbroken line for 2000 years. Where the bishop is there is the Church defines the first century understanding of the Church from the direct successor of two of the disciples of our Lord.

All authority was given to the apostles from Christ and at least some of that special authority is recorded in Scripture and is certainly attested to by the ante Nicene fathers.

There is no doubt that the apostles knew that their ministry would survive their death as it was needed to be a permanent living presence until the Parousia.

(Mat 28:20 DRB) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Knowing their responsibility in preserving the teaching of Christ they ordained successors giving them the gift of the Spirit with Episcopal consecration:

(Act 1:8 DRB) But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth.

(Act 2:4 DRB) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost: and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak.

(Joh 20:22 DRB) When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

(Joh 20:23 DRB) Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

(1Ti 4:14 DRB) Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.

(2Ti 1:6 DRB) For which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.

(2Ti 1:7 DRB) For God hath not given us the spirit of fear: but of power and of love and of sobriety.

There is no doubt that “Apostolic Succession” is a historical fact. Scriptures, as well show clearly that Christ chose these apostles and commissioned them to establish and continue his work with his authority and they ordained successors. It is Apostolic Succession that is the link connecting the Church to Christ. It is the authority from Christ of the Episcopacy that brings so many knowledgeable people to return to the Catholic faith as I am a witness.

We see those who were ordained in apostolic succession fulfilling their ministry:

(Act 20:28 DRB) Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood.

(1Th 1:1 DRB) Paul and Sylvanus and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians: in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ.

(1Th 1:2 DRB) Grace be to you and peace. We give thanks to God always for you all: making a remembrance of you in our prayers without ceasing,

(1Th 1:3 DRB) Being mindful of the work of your faith and labour and charity: and of the enduring of the hope of our Lord Jesus Christ before God and our Father.

(1Th 1:4 DRB) Knowing, brethren, beloved of God, your election:

(1Th 1:5 DRB) For our gospel hath not been unto you in word only, but in power also: and in the Holy Ghost and in much fulness, as you know what manner of men we have been among you for your sakes.

(1Th 1:6 DRB) And you became followers of us and of the Lord: receiving the word in much tribulation, with joy of the Holy Ghost:

(1Th 1:7 DRB) So that you were made a pattern to all that believe in Macedonia and in Achaia.

1Th 1:8 DRB) For from you was spread abroad the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and in Achaia but also in every place: your faith which is towards God, is gone forth, so that we need not to speak any thing.

(1Th 1:9 DRB) For they themselves relate of us, what manner of entering in we had unto you: and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God.

(1Th 1:10 DRB) And to wait for his Son from heaven (whom he raised up from the dead), Jesus, who hath delivered us from the wrath to come.

(2Ti 1:6 DRB) For which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.

(Tit 1:5 DRB) For this cause I left thee in Crete: that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and shouldest ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee:

(Tit 1:6 DRB) If any be without crime, the husband of one wife. having faithful children, not accused of riot or unruly.

(Tit 1:7 DRB) For a bishop must be without crime, as the steward of God: not proud, not subject to anger, nor given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre:

(Tit 1:8 DRB) But given to hospitality, gentle, sober, just, holy, continent:

(Tit 1:9 DRB) Embracing that faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine and to convince the gainsayers.

(1Ti 4:14 DRB) Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.

(2Ti 1:6 DRB) For which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.

St. Paul goes on to instruct St. Timothy as to who is a qualified candidate for ordination:

(1Ti 3:1 DRB) A faithful saying: If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth good work.

(1Ti 3:2 DRB) It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher,

(1Ti 3:3 DRB) Not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous, but

(1Ti 3:4 DRB) One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity.

(1Ti 3:5 DRB) But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?

(1Ti 3:6 DRB) Not a neophyte: lest, being puffed up with pride, he fall into the judgment of the devil.

(1Ti 3:7 DRB) Moreover, he must have a good testimony of them who are without: lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

(1Ti 5:22 DRB) Impose not hands lightly upon any man, neither be partaker of other men's sins. Keep thyself chaste.

We also find in the Scriptures that those in Apostolic Succession had particular and varied duties:

(1Co 12:27 DRB) Now you are the body of Christ and members of member.

(1Co 12:28 DRB) And God indeed hath set some in the church; first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors: after that miracles: then the graces of healings, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches.

(1Co 12:29 DRB) Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all doctors?

(Eph 4:11 DRB) And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors:

(Eph 4:12 DRB) For the perfecting of the saints, for the word of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

We are further reminded of the foundation of the Church:

(Eph 2:19 DRB) Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners: but you are fellow citizens with the saints and the domestics of God,

(Eph 2:20 DRB) Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:

This is only some of the Scriptures speaking of apostolic succession and the duties, need and authority of the office.

What I wrote contradicts your misunderstanding of the teaching of the apostles. The apostles and their successors are the Church and have been for 2000 years.

The onus is still on you to prove where the Church is the “spirit of error” and “corrupt and deceitful and opposed to Christ”.

(ErnestS) “The church of God is built on the Apostles No mention of any successors there at all. Not at all. The foundation is Christ, His Prophets and Apostles. Nothing else. The foundation stopped with the Apostles. Upon them the building commenced. As on, and from, the day of Pentecost. About three thousand souls. Look it up if you cannot remember.”

(Cristoiglesia) One cannot deny that the foundation of all Christianity through His Church is based on Christ’s words to St. Peter before the disciples. There is no doubt from the construction vernacular that Jesus was instructing them to build a Church with them as the foundation stones and Himself as the cornerstone. He built no other Church as no other was needed because the One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic, Church derives its perfection from Him through His promises. He prayed that we all be one within this Church. He said this Church would endure until the Parousia. He said of this Church that the gates of hell would not prevail against it. He said that He would be with this Church until the end of time. The Scriptures confirms these promises saying that this Church is the “pillar and ground of the truth”. He did not plan for the Church to be without leadership after the apostles died but provided that they choose successors to replace them in the enduring Church. This is confirmed it the book of Acts and the Scriptures previously provided. Certainly Christ could be seen as being incompetent in building His Church if the foundation He laid was not intended to be built upon by successors and only have authority for one generation. This would not be a competent plan for an enduring Church and such a foundation with nothing built upon it would have been nothing more than incompetent folly. We know that in order to fulfill the prophesy of Isaiah (Isa 22) St. Peter was appointed as the prime minister of the Church. This was to be an enduring office that Christ ordained in order to fulfill the Scriptures that required successors. You can easily prove your point in view of all the evidence to the contrary that authority ceased with the death of the apostles by simply providing a Scripture reference that supports your contention. Note that at Pentecost they all came to faith by gathering around the bishops. Where the bishop is, there is the Church. It is still the same to this day.

(ErnestS) “While you are there you will see they were all Jews. Not a Roman Catholic in sight! Ha-ha. The RCs didn’t come until some three hundred years later. I know, I know you think Adam and Eve were R Cs but the Bible and history show otherwise. You listen too much to the absurd lies of the RCC.”

(Cristoiglesia) I have already explained to you that “Roman Catholic” was a pejorative term given to those faithful and obedient to Christ’s Church by the Protestant rebels against the Church in the sixteenth century. Previously the Church was known only as the Catholic Church but we have embraced the name “Roman Catholic” because it reminds us of the persecution we endured for our faith in Rome and the martyrdom of the disciples of our Lord and their successors like St. Ignatius that I mentioned earlier. As I mentioned to you earlier in a previous response the first century Church contained Jews who became one with Christ under the New Covenant and were baptized and born again into the faith at Pentecost. They were perfected Jews and Gentiles but upon their Baptism and faith in Jesus they became Christians and indeed Catholic Christians as no others calling themselves Christian existed. As a side note….the followers and faithful of Jesus were first called Christian at St. Peters bishopric at Antioch and first called Catholic there as well. So at Pentecost they were all Catholic Christians. This is 300 years prior to your understanding of the beginning of the Church which cannot be supported by Scripture, history or patristic evidence. Such a beginning of the Church is only found in the imagination of the ignorant of Scripture, history and the teaching of the fathers of the Church. It is prideful fanciful revisionist history that convicts you of error.

(Ernest S) “In any event there can be no successors to the Apostles because then the foundation would not be laid and none could be built until that foundation was completed. No building can be built without a foundation, that would be absurd, don’t you agree? You wouldn’t think to put the roof up first, would you? Ha! Ahaa-ha! Silly isn’t it?”

(Cristoiglesia) The foundation was completed by Christ with himself as the cornerstone and the 12 disciples as the 12 foundation stones that the Church was built upon through apostolic succession with St. Peter given the keys to the Church and being appointed as the first prime minister of the enduring office ordained by Christ to fulfill the Scriptures as I have previously pointed out. As you see from Scriptures the foundation was completed by Christ and He was not incompetent as you suppose by your false statements.

(Ernest S) “You see? It is stacking up against you. It will get heavier and heavier the more you go on. Now you have another Scripture that slays the RCC and the foolish, absurd things you say. Roof up first! Ha! Nice one! Some scholarship!!! Aha-haa-ha!”

(Cristoiglesia) Excuse me, it is you that made the absurd supposition of putting a roof before the foundation and not I nor Christ. Christ built the foundation with Himself as the cornerstone and the disciples as the foundation stones just as the Bible says. It was complete and prepared for an enduring Church that so far has lasted for 2000 years as testimony to Christ’s promise to the world of an enduring Church until the Parousia.

(Ernest) “None of the so called church fathers have any authority whatsoever, You would be in a pretty pickle if they did because they disagreed! ---Ouch! You see where this is going? With your great learning and scholarship and that?”

(Cristoiglesia) I see where it is going very clearly. You are continuing to dig yourself a deeper hole of error.
The fact is that the Church fathers had the same authority as the apostles as the successors of the permanent office of the apostles. It is an enduring office for an enduring Church. It is true that some disagreed individually but not corporeally as their disagreements were handled in the ecumenical Councils by the whole Church. If you read about the Council of Jerusalem we find it being convened to settle the dispute over the Gentile converts and a consensus was arrived at by the Church corporeally to settle the disagreements. The Church teaches infallibly corporeally and not individually except in the rare instance of the Pope speaking ex cathedra.

(ErnestS) “How wise of God to seal up the authority with His Apostles. He did not and does not need scholarship. We have it all in the Bible. How wise and thoughtful He is! And how utterly foolish and sinful are men… with their scholarship.”

(Cristoiglesia) There is absolutely no evidence that God did what you claim from any source. I can certainly see why Satan would deceive men to reject sound biblical hermeneutics as you do and that is because it is easier to deceive the ignorant. The Bible clearly states that it is not to be interpreted privately but instead teaches that it is to be understood in the community of the Church under the teaching authority given by Christ to the Church. Individuals have absolutely no authority to interpret Scriptures from Christ or any other source but Christ’s Church.

2 Peter 1:20-21 (King James Version)

20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21For 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.

So clearly, rejecting scholarship is what is foolish as it leads to false teaching, practice and doctrines as the more than 30,000 Protestant sects testify with their diverse heresies and departure from the authority of the apostles. Such an approach Is in direct opposition to God’s will that we be one in His Church as He prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane. Protestant teaching is not of God but comes from a different source which is a spirit of contention and division within the Body of Christ.

(Ernest S) “Cain was the first person not to see God and how quickly he departed from the truth. So God has sealed us all up to those who have seen God. What a very long way we have now come, since you and the RCC do not even hear Him.”

(Cristoiglesia) As I have clearly illustrated from Scripture and history the Church remains with the leadership of the apostles through their successors. You are impotent to show any verse of Scripture that apostolic authority ceased with the physical death of the apostles. You could not even muster a reasonable explanation of why this is even possible. The Church and His faithful indeed hear Him and follow Him in spirit and truth. We do not fall for the doctrines of men but simply obey the authority that He left on earth, His Church, as it has been for 2000 years and will be until He comes again. His lambs know His voice.

(Ernest S) “Do you need more time to search for a Scripture to excuse you from the Apostles’ word? Since you have had nearly 1,700 years and still not come up with one, it surely does not look likely you are going to be able? But you can have some But you can have some more time if you like.

Meanwhile the witness of God against the wicked antichristian RCC filled to overflowing with the spirit of error, goes on.”

(Cristoiglesia) The Church has endured for 2000 years following the only authority that Christ provided which is His Church founded on the foundation of the apostles and He as the cornerstone. That authority endures today as the Church endures today and will for all times. It is you that reject that authority whether out of ignorance, pride, hatred or bigotry it does not matter but what matters is that it is you that does not recognize His authority despite the scriptural teaching that supports the Church as having divine authority through apostolic succession. You have been given the scriptural evidence that Christ’s authority still exists in His Church. It is up to you to continue to reject the God given authority and be obedient to His Church or reject it to your own peril.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Assurance of Salvation discussed with "Doug"

2011-07-03T15:01:00.000+08:00

[The following is the first exchange that took place between one calling himself Doug and I about sanctification and justification contrasting the teaching of John Calvin and the teaching of the Church in the Bible and exposed fully in the Catechism.]

(Doug) “I appreciate the kind email, but you are sadly mistaken my friend. Paul clearly contrasts faith with works in passages like these: "But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5); "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (Eph. 2:8,9).”

(Cristoiglesia) Without eisegesis it is impossible to come to the same conclusion as you. In Romans 4:5 the Scriptures are speaking of Abraham who was an idolater before coming to faith in God. The Scriptures are simply saying that as an idolater he did not merit God’s appointment by his works. After God called him Abraham believed God’s promises and justice prevailed as both were gifts of God. Certainly Abraham is not an example of dead faith but instead it is an example of active faith full of charity as His life exemplifies.

In Ephesians 2:8-9 we see the biblical testimony that faith is the genesis as well as foundation of justification as the first of virtues in a virtuous life. The absence of faith separates one from God and any possibility of a familial relationship as such is not pleasing to God. It is by God’s grace that we receive this salvific grace. In receiving this grace we grow as a result with grace being the whole cause and justification being the effect.

There is no contrast indicated in these passages but instead they are speaking of faith and works being integral in a familial and pleasing relationship with God coming from God’s grace and through the Holy Spirit prompting us through grace to serve God. Romans uses Abraham as an example of this grace and Ephesians simply confirms the abundance of God’s grace for faith and for works.

(Doug)”The Bible says we can KNOW that we are saved right now (1 John 5:13). You can't know for sure that you're saved if your works are involved since you're nothing but a dirty rotten sinner to the core (as am I).”

(Cristoiglesia) I do not see how anyone reading this verse in context could ever come to a conclusion as you, Calvin and Jansenius before him.

The preceding verses and especially verse 3 contradict such a conclusion. The burden of following God’s commandments should not be approached as impossible to overcome which causes one to arrive at despair and hopelessness. We have many examples of the martyrs of the faith who have suffered into death rather than sin against God. They are a clear example against total depravity as you suggest. The abundance of grace given by God and our response to that grace allow us and indeed encourage us to overcome that which you, Calvin and Jansenius proclaim are impossible. We can turn from temptation and deny self. We can suffer death for Him rather than sin. It is God’s grace that we receive which makes the yoke of our belief in Christ a light burden for the faithful to bear. (Mat 11:30) We certainly can by His grace reject sin. God does not command that which is not possible to follow as Calvin and Jansenius proclaim in their heretical teaching.

(Doug) “Consider the warning of Jesus in Matthew 7: 21-23.

So, who among those who say "Lord, Lord" will enter? Answer: those who do the will of the Father.”

(Cristoiglesia) In these verses God is illustrating that it is not enough to believe in Him and to hear His words but that the evidence of salvific grace in our lives is the joining of works to our faith as on the last day when every knee will bow and every tongue will confess it is our works in obedience to our faith that will be judged. If one had not faith how could they cry out Lord, Lord. Even one with the strongest of faith without works will not see the beatific vision. (1Cor13) We are being instructed by His Word that those who profess even constantly their faith but care little for receiving Him and responding to His grace by receiving that grace into their own spirit will find that their presumption of their deceitful consciences towards themselves will result in great disappointment and eternal damnation.

Not only do the righteous receive the gifts of prophecy and of miracles but it also comes by the wicked as the biblical example of Caiphas and Balaam. The Scriptures are illustrating that even with the evidence in our lives of prophecy and miracles will not save us if not accompanied and assisted by good works. God sometimes works through men who do not have lives that are congruent with faith in God but yet they become tools of God to encourage others in their faith despite their personal lack of faith. We have the example of Balaam who had no faith yet was used by God to give advantage to others. Judas even cast out devils despite his personal wickedness. As St. Chrysostom said in quoting St. Paul, “if I had all faith so as to remove mountains, and if I knew all mysteries, and was possessed of all wisdom, but had not charity, I am nothing."

(Doug) “What, then, does Jesus mean by the will of the Father and who are those who do it?

A person who trusts in Christ alone obeys completely the will of the Father to believe in Jesus Christ alone for eternal salvation. Such a person obtains absolute perfection before God [positionally speaking] since Christ takes away all of his sins and gives him His righteousness in exchange (2 Cor. 5:21; Col. 2:13-14; Heb. 10:1-18).””

(Cristoiglesia) Perhaps you would like to point out the verse in Scriptures that says
“Christ alone”. Please define “positionally speaking” so that I can respond.

(2Co 5:21 DRB) Him, who knew no sin, he hath made sin for us: that we might be made the justice of God in him. Sin for us... That is, to be a sin offering, a victim for sin.

This verse says that Jesus had never sinned nor is He capable of sinning. When the Scriptures say “he hath made sin for us” is usually understood to refer to His atoning sacrifice on the Cross. This is supported by the Church fathers including St. Augustine with its foundation in Scriptures. The verse further explains that as a result of His sacrifice we might be justified and sanctified by His grace and His resulting justice from Him. He is a sin offering and victim for sin. Perhaps you could share how this verse supports your theological understanding

(Col 2:13 DRB) And you, when you were dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he hath quickened together with him, forgiving you all offences:

(Col 2:14 DRB) Blotting out the handwriting of the decree that was against us, which was contrary to us. And he hath taken the same out of the way, fastening it to the cross.

Verse 12 puts verses 13-14 into context as this is speaking of the benefits of Baptism. “Blotting out refers to the sentence of eternal death brought on by the sinful Adam and for all of his posterity being removed by Baptism through His sacrifice. (Heb 10:1 DRB) For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, by the selfsame sacrifices which they offer continually every year, can never make the comers thereunto perfect.

It is saying that it is this “original sin” that is taken away or blotted out by Christ’s atoning sacrifice. The reference to the cross represents the sin of Adam upon the Cross and the atonement of His death for that sin that condemned men to death. Again I fail to see how these verses that you use to support your statements contribute to the statements any credibility or veracity.

(Heb 10:2 DRB) For then they would have ceased to be offered: because the worshippers once cleansed should have no conscience of sin any longer.

(Heb 10:3 DRB) But in them there is made a commemoration of sins every year:

(Heb 10:4 DRB) For it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away.

(Heb 10:5 DRB) Wherefore, when he cometh into the world he saith: Sacrifice and oblation thou wouldest not: but a body thou hast fitted to me.

(Heb 10:6 DRB) Holocausts for sin did not please thee.

(Heb 10:7 DRB) Then said I: Behold I come: in the head of the book it is written of me: that I should do thy will, O God.

(Heb 10:8 DRB) In saying before, Sacrifices, and oblations, and holocausts for sin thou wouldest not, neither are they pleasing to thee, which are offered according to the law.

(Heb 10:9 DRB) Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: He taketh away the first, that he may establish that which followeth.

(Heb 10:10 DRB) In the which will, we are sanctified by the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ once.

(Heb 10:11 DRB) And every priest indeed standeth daily ministering and often offering the same sacrifices which can never take away sins.

(Heb 10:12 DRB) But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God,

(Heb 10:13 DRB) From henceforth expecting until his enemies be made his footstool.

(Heb 10:14 DRB) For by one oblation he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

(Heb 10:15 DRB) And the Holy Ghost also doth testify this to us. For after that he said:

(Heb 10:16 DRB) And this is the testament which I will make unto them after those days, saith the Lord. I will give my laws in their hearts and on their minds will I write them:

(Heb 10:17 DRB) And their sins and iniquities I will remember no more.

(Heb 10:18 DRB) Now, where there is a remission of these, there is no more an oblation for sin.

This passage simply says that Jesus is like us in representing us on the cross except for sin. He experienced temptation, suffered unto death as fully man so that He could experience the desire for mercy, feel compassion for the sinful in all of our temptations and sufferings so that He might become the High priest which was His destiny and our blessing through His grace. How do these verses relate to your theological conclusions.

(Doug) “James 2 is talking about a dead faith that was at one time alive. Believers who don't live godly lives will experience profound regret at the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10). “

(Cristoiglesia) I do agree that those who do not live godly lives will suffer regret at judgment but I do not see the support for a theological position that it is speaking of fallen away Christians who have lost their faith. It instead is speaking of God’s grace working through the faithful in producing good works as evidence of their faith. Thus as James stated faith without works is a dead faith because it is evidence that the person is not being obedient and responding to the Holy Spirit which surely provokes the faithful to works such as charity, mercy and denial of self.

I know how seductive it is to choose eisegesis over exegesis when approaching Scripture. I was a Protestant for 50 years and fell for some of the same man-made doctrines as you because I was unable to accept sound doctrines and used eisegesis to satisfy my itching ears also. I find it very sad when people are still lost in the false teaching of men and reject the sound doctrine that Jesus promised in His Church. It all comes down to either trusting in Christ’s promises or the doctrines of men like Calvin, in this case, it is the latter who is a heretical false teacher.

I can see how someone taking Scriptures out of the whole context of the Bible could come to believe in false doctrines. But, using improper biblical hermeneutics such practices can only lead to error as you have illustrated. The facts are that the Bible teaches that salvation is a lifelong process culminating in judgment. Our sins are not covered by Jesus but by His blood we are made pure and Holy and indeed sanctified so that we may receive the beatific vision. No sinful soul even covered in a cloak of deception can entire heaven but only the sanctified soul purified and cleansed by the redemptive blood of Christ. The fruit of our godly grace are the obedient works we do when prompted by the Holy Spirit and are evidence of the redemptive grace in our lives. Thus the Bible says that faith without works is dead faith and evidence that we are not one in the family of God as we might suppose. God calls us in His greatest commandment to love one another and this is evidenced in our godly works like sacrifice and prayer for one another.

(Doug) “With all due respect, you are the one who is rejecting the clear teachings of scripture. I find it very sad when a can’t see salvation for what it is – a completely free gift received through faith and apart from any works that we do. You obviously couldn’t refute the passages that I quoted earlier. You would probably have to go to the Catholic Catechism for that.”

(Cristoiglesia) Well as you can see from my previous commentary I have refuted your eisegesis soundly with Scripture and reason. I cannot find a single biblical verse that says that salvation is “a completely free gift received through faith and apart from any works” instead you add the word “any” which makes your claim false. The Bible only condemns one kind of works and that is the works of the law which is referring to the written Mosaic law alone. It is saying that a knowledge of the law is a knowledge of sin and recognizing what is sinful but the Bible does not condemn godly works prompted by the Holy Spirit working in one’s life but instead condemns those who do not acknowledge and conform to the precepts of the law making them even more guilty.

(Rom 3:28 DRB) For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law.

Since Christ has come God’s justice which has made others just must come by faith in Christ. It is by Christ’s grace which all whether Jew or Gentile, because of His sacrifice as the propitiation for the sins of all men are saved. We must have faith in His blood shed on Calvary for us And knowledge that He died for us. He is the sole justifier for man. As Gentiles we are justified without the Mosaic law but the Jews who have been under the law of Moses cannot receive sanctification, justification or receive salvation except by the faith and grace of Christ. St. Paul is teaching in chapter 3 verses 20 and 28 of his letter to the Romans that man is justified without the works of the Mosaic law. He further teaches that there are no works of the Mosaic law or works by the law of nature will justify man. He further emphasizes that believing in faith alone for salvation would be contrary to the Gospel. Works must be joined to faith and God’s grace.

In chapter 4 verses 3 and 5 when speaking of Abraham as an example that we are justified by faith or believing but nowhere does he say we are saved by faith alone. Only the heretics proclaim salvation by the sufficiency of faith alone.

(Rom 2:6 DRB) Who will render to every man according to his works.

(Rom 2:13 DRB) For not the hearers of the law are just before God: but the doers of the law shall be justified.

(Gal 5:6 DRB) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision: but faith that worketh by Charity.

(1Co 7:19 DRB) Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing: but the observance of the commandments of God.

St. James acknowledges the consistent teaching of Scriptures when he reiterates that faith without works is dead faith.

(Doug) “I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with Calvin. He actually held to a lot of doctrines that I also reject such as perseverance of the saints. I am a Dispensationalist just to be clear. However, systems of theology don’t determine who enters heaven or not. A person must be born again through faith in Christ (apart from works…as the verses I pointed out yesterday clearly show) in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”

(Cristoiglesia) I am not obsessed with John Calvin but only recognize that he has been used as a tool for evil in his teaching of heresies like faith alone. I have little regard for the ravening wolves and false teachers like Calvin. We can discuss Dispensationalism separately as it does not apply to this discussion and would just be a separate tangent to the discussion. I would agree that “systems of theology” do not determine who is saved as all salvation is by God’s grace and I would agree that one must be “born again” through Baptism to be saved as the Bible teaches that this is the path to salvation. But you seem to suggest another teaching on being “born again” that is not at all biblical. Being “born again” is only mentioned in the context of baptism.

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered: Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but incorruptible, by the word of God who liveth and remaineth for ever.

As you can see by these verses we must follow the Word of God which states that we are born again by Baptism and not only by faith.

(Doug) “In Matthew 7:21-23, the people shouting “Lord, Lord…” were not Buddhists or Hindus. These represent individuals who claimed to do righteous works in the name of Christ. Because they felt their meritorious works earned them kingdom entrance, they were flatly denied. This is why Jesus told Nicodemus “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3).”

(Cristoiglesia) Surely St. Matthew is writing of those who do not do the will of God yet claim to be Godly. It is not the will of God to simply proclaim faith without living that faith by their works. One can bear good or bad fruit but only he who bears good fruit. When one bears good fruit as a result of the indwelling and obedience to the Holy Spirit which is God’s will. Those that reject the Holy Spirit and have no evidence of the continuance of good works like charity and mercy are instead evidencing that they are not in Christ but instead are of the world.

In verse 21 St. Matthew is teaching that believing in Him is not sufficient nor is hearing His words. Instead it is teaching that we must incorporate works with faith as this is how we will be judged on the last day. Even the strongest of faith without the works of justice will gaze on the beatific vision. Having the Lord continually in one’s mouth is not enough but it is necessary for one to be penetrated by His Spirit in full acceptance in their own spirit or to find their presumption of their faith without works being sufficient to be woefully disappointed. Surely St. Mathew is not speaking of those without faith or they would not cry out “Lord, Lord”.

(Doug) “I can know right here and now that I possess it based on the simple promises of Jesus. His Words take priority over what the Catholic Church teaches or what some priest thinks is the correct way to salvation”

(Cristoiglesia) I understand that you have been deceived by Calvinist teaching into thinking that you have already been saved but that will not occur until your death and judgment according to biblical teaching. Only our sovereign God declares one saved and that is done at judgment. We cannot proclaim ourselves or others saved without prideful presumption. You are looking for cheap grace but that grace was earned for us by our Lord at Calvary and carried a heavy price of suffering to atone for our sins and open the door to heaven for us through our repentance.

The truth is that the Church teaches and proclaims the true Gospel which says that we are only saved by His sovereign grace. The Church proclaims the Word of God and not others claiming to have the authority to do so from Christ that was given only to His Church. The Bible states that it is not for private interpretation but must be interpreted through the Church lest we fall for error and heresy. If one truly believes in God and His Word then they will follow only HIS Church and not man-made counterfeits or false doctrines of heretics. Only His Church is called the “pillar and foundation of the truth” which can only be the Catholic Church. Jesus prayed on the “Mount of Olives” in the “Garden of Gethsemane” that we all be one in His Church as He and the Father are one. So, According to Jesus and the Bible the Church is the teaching of the correct way to salvation and not the teaching of Calvin or other heretics.

(Doug) “My willingness to serve Christ stems from the gratitude I have for His free gift of salvation as well as a desire to receive a special inheritance and reward for faithful service at the Judgment Seat (2 Cor. 5:10). Hell is not an option since I have already passed from death into life (see John 5:24)!”

(Cristoiglesia) St. Paul disagreed with your conclusions:

Php 2:12 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

(Doug) “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). This is so simple that a young child can grasp it! This is why we can KNOW right here and now that we are saved (1 John 5:13). Praise God that I know I’m on my way to heaven :-)”

(Cristoiglesia) John 3:16 in the original language teaches us that we must continue to believe for everlasting life just as St. Paul warned in Php 2:12. Taking verses out of context with the whole of Scriptures almost always results in error as you have proven here but eisegesis instead of exegesis compounds the error. 1 John 5:13 does not support your conclusion but stands in opposition to it. The presumption of salvation for oneself or others is a grave sin against God.

(Doug) “Perhaps you have been born again at some moment in the past (since it seems you did at one time embrace the truth). Given the fact that God promises us life that is eternal, your salvation can't be touched if that is the case. However, you will experience loss of reward at the Judgment Seat as you see all of your works burn up (1 Cor. 3:15). You will be denied the privileges of reigning and ruling with the King of kings (2 Tim. 2:12).”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, I have been baptized and born again in the biblical sense with Baptism which has made a permanent mark on my soul. It was done in a valid Protestant ceremony when I was eight days old. I have come into the fullness of truth through the Catholic Church as the Bible teaches. But I approach my salvation with fear and trembling that I may fall away just as does St. Paul in His teaching. St. John said in John 3:16, I must continue in faith in Christ to be saved.

(Doug)“My prayer is that God will open up your heart to see that His death on the Cross FULLY paid for all your sins. Your soteriological writings are so foreign to scripture that it would be almost laughable if it weren't such a serious issue being discussed. Read John's Gospel since the purpose statement is clearly stated in John 20:31.”

(Cristoiglesia) I am fully aware of what Jesus did for us on the cross and it was not to award us with cheap grace but a grace paid for with His blood and suffering. It is clearly you that has little regard for Scripture with your proof text methodology and eisegesis. You create with your misunderstanding of Scriptures more contradictions than any consistency of truth. When you create contradictions it is a clear indication of error for both error and truth cannot coexist in God’s Word or in His Church which is truly the “pillar and foundation of the truth” as the Bible states.

My writings are consistent with the Word of God and would only be laughable to one that is captured in the snare of false teachers that twist the Word of God to their own profit as did Calvin whom you follow. He was a Secular Humanist lawyer that wanted to establish a theocracy that had God as a servant of the people instead of the consistent teaching of the Church and of the Bible of man being created to serve God. You think as a result that God owes you a debt because of your belief in Him regardless of whether you accept His will prompted by the Holy Spirit to do His works of charity and mercy and become the good fruit that He promises will have the beatific vision and not the bad fruit of those who cry, Lord, Lord as the heretics have taught you. The issues of salvation are serious and as it is proven by this discussion many are seduced by the doctrines of men and devils because such teaching satisfies their itching ears. But false teaching or cheap grace do not lead to salvation and that is the truth I must share with you.

(Joh 20:31 DRB) But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name.

May you learn to do His will, reject false teaching and live out the true evidence of salvific faith through your works. May our Lord have mercy on you and by His grace may you come to faith in His Church and reject the doctrines of men and devils. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Church criticisms discussed with "Darrin"

2011-06-18T00:38:00.000+08:00

(Darrin) “Jesus did not found the Catholic church. The church began with Jews. Actual Christ followers.”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, most of the early Church was made up of converts to Christ from the Essene sect of Judaism. Some came from other Jewish sects. As an example St. Paul was a Pharisaical Jew who preached and converted the Gentiles.

One cannot deny that the foundation of all Christianity through His Church is based on Christ’s words to St. Peter before the disciples. There is no doubt from the construction vernacular that Jesus was instructing them to build a Church with them as the foundation stones and Himself as the cornerstone. He built no other Church as no other was needed because the One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic, Church derives its perfection from Him through His promises. He prayed that we all be one within this Church. He said this Church would endure until the Parousia. He said of this Church that the gates of hell would not prevail against it. He said that He would be with this Church until the end of time. The Scriptures confirms these promises saying that this Church is the “pillar and ground of the truth”. He did not plan for the Church to be without leadership after the apostles died but provided that they choose successors to replace them in the enduring Church. This is confirmed it the book of Acts.

One can suggest that this Church is not the Church that Christ gave these promises and authority to but who else can support a claim that they are the true church represented by these promises if not the Catholic church. Some will suggest that the true church is the Gnostics or the Arians? Certainly remnants of those churches remain in modern incarnations of these heresies but can one claim the enduring characteristic promised by Christ? There is certainly no evidence that anyone can make a legitimate claim to Christ’s promises other than the Catholic Church. Some critics may claim that the reason that the Catholic Church has endured is because of political connections, but the truth is that it has endured because of the miracles of our Lord who persuaded a Pagan emperor to stop his persecution of the Church and not by some agreement of men. It is hard to persuade someone who is intent on your annihilation. Only God could convict the heart of the Pagan Emperor Constantine.

(Darrin) “Burning at the stake. Does the name John Huss mean anything to And even "IF" you were correct about them wanting to preserve the so called correct translation. Does that warrant burning at the stake? Not very Christian like. Or are you denying the church ever burned anyone?? There are many other, but thats good enough. ”

(Cristoiglesia) It is funny that you would mention Jan Huss. I am very familiar with Him as I was a Moravian (Hussite) for 50 years of my life before coming home and becoming a Catholic Christian. Hus was not burned at the stake by the Church which asked for mercy for him after declaring him a heretic at the Council of Constance. He was convicted, condemned and burned at the stake by secular authorities and not the Church as you have claimed.

(Darrin)” Latin was the common language of what people? Not Europe.”

(Cristoiglesia) Latin in the Middle Ages was the language of the educated people who could read all over Europe. People were much more likely to read Latin than any other language if they read at all.

(Darrin) “You are right about one thing....Jesus did say people would turn to false teachers to satisfy their desires. The Catholic church teaches tradition and the Pope are equal to if not exceeding in authority with the bible.”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, Jesus did prophesy about the Protestant rebellion in 2 Tim 4:3. The Bible is a part of Sacred Tradition that St. Paul told the Church to hold fast. St. Paul did not try to divide Sacred Tradition and neither does Christ’s Church. The Pope is the prime minister of the Church appointed by Christ as an enduring office of the Church which fulfills the Scriptures and the prophecy of Isaiah. The Pope is not the primary teaching authority of the Church but instead it is the Magisterium. He only teaches infallibly when speaking ex cathedra which has only been done a few times in the 2000 year history of the Church and always in full accordance with the Magisterium and the whole of Sacred Tradition which is including the Scriptures.

(Darrin) “You pray to Mary to intercede. Why?”

(Cristoiglesia) The simple answer is because the prayers of the righteous are of great benefit to us according to the Bible. No one has ever been more righteous than the blessed mother of God.

First of all it is disingenuous to state that the practice of praying for each other has no biblical foundation, we are instructed in Scripture to have a prayer life for others as it is part of God’s commandment to love one another.

(2Co 5:8 DRB) But we are confident and have a good will to be absent rather from the body and to be present with the Lord.

The Catholic Church does not teach that it is absolutely necessary for one to ask for the intercession of saints for salvation. The Church does teach that prayer to God is necessary for salvation for all believers. For a Catholic it would be wrong to ignore the liturgical worship offered to God at feast days for the saints and the prayers asking for their intercession.

The Communion of Saints is a dogma of the ancient Church and is recorded in the apostles Creed. It simply states that the faithful because of their relationship with Christ are alive even after the death of their flesh and worship with us. To us the Church is made up of the Church militant who represents all those believers living out their hope in the flesh.

(Phi 2:12 DRB) Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

(Phi 2:13 DRB) For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and to accomplish, according to his good will.

It consists of the Church Suffering who are those who are temporarily in need of further purgation from sin so that they may enjoy the presence of God.

(2Ma 12:46 DRB) It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Lastly, the Communion of the Saints consists of those who have won the race:

(Phi 3:14 DRB) I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ Jesus.

Their immortal souls are in heaven in God’s presence:

(Rev 5:8 DRB) And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

The universal stream connecting all of God’s creation is His love, which we take on in our baptism into our journey towards sanctification. This is not an emotional but a desire placed in us by the Spirit of God that endures as a desire for those other than ourselves and this love extends even to our enemies. This is truly a love that comes only from God and is a foreign concept and nonsense to those who have not received God’s salvific grace. This desire within our souls does not end with the death of our flesh but continues into eternity where the saints through their intercession in prayer encourage us in our race and assist us to endure unto our union with God.

I think that some people of faith, who do not understand the Communion of Saints, somehow believe that asking saints to pray for us is detracting from our love or our trust in God. In truth it is impossible, if we truly love as God commands and has given us the grace to understand, not to pray to those whom we love and in turn we expect them to return that same love to us by praying for us and presenting our prayers to God.

(Darrin) “Jesus said no one comes to the Father but by me. Not Mary to Jesus to the Father. “

(Cristoiglesia) As you saw from the commentary above we do exactly as the Bible says as the blessed mother intercedes and takes our prayers to Her Son for our benefit.

(Darrin)“You bow down to mud puddles that give an image of what you think might look like Mary.”

(Cristoiglesia) Really? When did I do that? Don’t be ridiculous and immature.

(Darrin) “I hate to tell you Mary was not a white western or European woman, but you portray her as such in your statues.”

(Cristoiglesia) She is also portrayed as Hispanic, black and Indian. She is the mother of all of us and is portrayed as such in different cultures.

(Darrin) “I wont even get into the idol worship.”

(Cristoiglesia) Why not? The Church condemns any kind of idol worship. Catholic Christians are forbidden to worship anyone or anything but God. Read the Decalogue where it is forbidden as a mortal sin.

(Darrin) “Talking about false teachers.....How about bowing to the Pope or even a statue of the Pope? I hate to tell you. He is a sinner just like you and me.
I suppose we can get into all kinds of other heresies, but you will find a way to dismiss them, so what is the point.”

(Cristoiglesia) We bow to the Pope out of respect for the divine office he holds which is ordained by Jesus Himself. Yes the Pope is a sinner. Why would you or anyone else think that he is not? The Church has never taught that the Pope is not a sinner. What do you mean all kinds of “other” heresies? You have not identified a single one. I will address any you can allege.

(Darrin) “You worship Peter. Upside down cross on the Popes chair.”

(Cristoiglesia) As I said before the Church forbids idolatry in any form. We do not worship any creature like the Pope. Of course there is an upside down cross on the Pope’s chair. It is the symbol of his office and signifies the manner of his death in Rome. After being condemned to death St. Peter requested that he not be crucified like our Lord as he said he was not worthy to be treated the same way. Instead he asked that he be crucified upside down and the Roman authorities honored his request, thus the upsides down cross as the symbol of St. Peter.

(Darrin) “The New Testament was completed and compiled at the end of the 1st century. The Catholic church laid claim to it 200 years later.

(Cristoiglesia) It seems as if you do not know the history of the Bible.

In first century Jerusalem there were at least four OT Canons in use by different Jewish Groups. There was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Ethiopian Jews and the Diaspora/Essene Jews. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 200 years ago when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon eliminating the Deuterocanonicals from their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of Christ’s Church that the Deuterocanonicals were never believed to be inspired and just the opposite is true. The decision by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never a question about their inspiration.

The OT Canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish Canon not chosen by the Jews until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the new group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. Until then as I said previously there were many Canons in use. The adoption of the Canon missing the Deuterocanonicals united the Jews against the Christians was decided in the Jewish Council of Jamnia because the Deuterocanonicals referred too strongly to the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.

Some Protestants will claim that only the Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church deferred that decision to Christ and the disciples and it is clear through biblical research, that the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon that was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that resulted in His crucifixion suggests the source of this confusion as from the father of lies who led the Pharisees to accuse Christ and petition for His punishment. It is another way that Satan divides the body of Christ and separates the faithful denying Christ’s prayer that we all be one in Christ through His Church. The Christian Church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.

Some Protestants erroneously believe that Catholics added to the Bible with the Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as witnessed by Christ’s Church. The facts are that the Protestants removed the Deuterocanonicals and even considered strongly to remove some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr. Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with His heretical man made doctrines of the “Solas”, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John because of its teaching of the commandment to Eat Christ’s Body and drink His Blood which contradicted his view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even Fr. Martin Luther could not endorse such a departure from Scriptures and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

(Darrin) “So you are saying Catholics were not Jews or Gentiles.....Really?”

(Cristoiglesia) No, I said that the first converts were from the Jews and the Gentiles. When they became Christians and followers of Jesus they were then Catholics or a part of perfected Judaism. They came under the New Covenant of Christ and into that familial relationship where He abided in them and He in them.

(Darrin) “If the first followers were Catholics, why is this term not mention in the book of Acts or anywhere else? Or even in the writings of Josephus? No they called themselves Christians and/or Jews.

(Cristoiglesia) The followers of Jesus were first called Christians at Antioch which was the bishopric of St. Peter. These Christians were first called Catholic by St. Ignatius who was the third bishop of Antioch late in the first century or early second century in His letter to the Smyrnaeans while on his way to be martyred in Rome. St. Ignatius was the disciple of St. John and of St. Peter along with his friend Polycarp. St. Ignatius defined the Church as those who gathered faithfully around the bishop saying, “where the bishop is there is the Church”. Thus, without apostolic succession there is no Church. Christians are the followers of Christ and not Jews as you presume. When they believed and followed Christ they became Catholic Christians through their Baptism into the Corpus Christi.

Josephus was a secular writer and historian and not a Church historian.

(Darrin) Paul called himself a Jew among Jews and he was a Christ follower.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, he was identifying himself as a former Jew believed to be among the sect of the Pharisees. When He became a follower of Christ He became a Christian and a part of the familial relationship In Christ called the New Covenant since the Old Covenant was completed on the Cross when Jesus said “it is finished” before He gave up His spirit.

(Darrin) “All I can say is, all this side stuff really wont matter as long as you are trying to do all the required works to merit heaven.”

(Cristoiglesia) Pelagianism has been condemned centuries ago by the Church and has never been a part of the teaching of the Church and is a heresy. The Church forbids required “work” to get into heaven. However works are meritorious to us when provoked by the Holy Spirit.

Initial salvation comes through the encouragement of the Holy Spirit bringing us to faith and sanctification. This grace given by God is unmerited and certainly not earned. Catholic teaching is that all works are not the result of our own efforts but are produced by His grace. At judgment God will see our works produced by His grace as meritorious. Through God and His grace working in our lives we earn our salvation. Catholic teaching in regards to merit is very similar if not identical to the Protestant monergistic view, meaning that all is of God, approach rather than a synergistic approach, some of God and some of us, as Catholics get accused. The actual view of Catholics is that God does all the work and we do all the work. Catholics give all the credit to God but also understand that their response to grace is deserving of merit.

The way I see it is that we respond to God’s promises He is obligated to fulfill a debt He has incurred through His promise. We through His grace put faith and trust in those promises. Since God promises us eternal life by our faith then He has created an obligation for Himself. It is God’s promise that makes it a merit and not our work because God represents to us justice and truth and by us responding to His commands through the Spirit He has created a debt deserved by crediting us with merit even though it is through Christ and the Holy Spirit that we responded to His commands and will.

(Darrin) And please dont forget to sacrifice Christ again in every church around the world since His one time sacrifice was insufficient.

(Cristoiglesia) Christ can never be sacrificed again. Once is indeed sufficient and this one sacrifice is made present in every Catholic Church around the world. Jesus said, “Do this in “anamnesis” of me which is to make the past as a present reality.

The Passover Seder was completed on the cross with the words, “It is finished” meaning the Old Covenant relationship with man but it began in the upper room. Jesus was acting as both priest and as the victim. Jesus instructed the disciples to do this in “remembrance” of me in most English translations. However “remembrance is not a direct translation but what we call an approximation since there is no word in the destination language that has exactly the same meaning. So “Remembrance” is as close as one can get to the original Koine Greek. The Greek word that is being translated is “anamnesis” which does not mean to recall a past event to memory as is the meaning of “remembrance”. Instead it means that a miracle is occurring where the past or the future is being made present. It represents an act that transcends time and place. In the case of the last supper Jesus is making the future present. Today when we receive the truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity Jesus is making the past present. We are literally present at the foot of the Cross when the Eucharist is celebrated.

Jesus NEVER said to commemorate His sacrifice or that the elements were symbols but instead in the most literal language possible said, “This is my Body, This is my Blood.” Actually, Jesus was speaking literally and was certainly not using symbolic language that might indicate that what He was saying is not literal. Jesus was present at the Last Supper in both a corporeal natural way and in a sacramental way in the elements He consecrated. This is identical to the way He is present today in the Eucharist. It truly is a mystery as to how He can be present in these ways simultaneously but nonetheless it is a religious truth. We could never understand it but our inability to understand does not make this impossible. It is no different than believing God is omnipotent even though there is no way to comprehend this with our finite minds and intellect. Certainly the creator of all things can make Himself into the bread and the wine.

There is no indication from any teaching of Christ on the Eucharist that the bread and the wine are symbols but instead Jesus said, “This is my Body, this is my blood”. He never said that the elements of the bread and wine were symbols but used literal language instead. Had this been His intent He could have easily said exactly what you claim but He did not do so.

(Darrin) “By the way, how many things do you have to do to merit heaven? Baptism, confession, rosary.... I know there are several more. I really hope that works for you.

(Cristoiglesia) I know that you are the victim of false teachers and what you think you know as facts are false. We all, as Christian, attain heaven by God’s grace alone. No amount of works merit heaven but the Bible warns us that faith without works is dead faith and that we cannot be saved by faith alone but also by works prompted by God’s grace. Remember that the only works that are condemned in Scriptures are the works of the law which are likened to filthy rags. It is said in context as a referenced to the Korban law which is a part of the Mosaic Law. Nowhere does the Bible condemn works but instead encourages works and obedience to Christ’s commandments. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Christian Faith and Life discussed with "Jim"

2011-06-13T10:33:00.000+08:00

(Jim) Thank you again for your thoughtful response. I believe that I told you that I have no bone to pick with the Catholic church, and would love nothing more than to be convinced that they are of the truth. I was pleased to see how you articulated that salvation is indeed by the grace of God from beginning to end. I have no problem with church tradition being of value if there is no contradiction between it and scripture. As for purgatory, I wish that it could be clearly established in the pages of scripture. I know there is a passage in 1 Cor. 3, but it seems to be metaphorical (works tested by fire) of what happens at the bema seat judgment of believers.

(Cristoiglesia) I came home to the Catholic Church from a different perspective. I believed and had a studied conviction that the Catholic Church taught falsely and in fact was nothing that it claimed to be. However I was blessed with a Berean spirit and set out to prove the Church wrong. In the process I was surprised and indeed blessed to learn that the Church did not teach, practice or have a faith that was contradictory to the Scriptures but was instead the personification of those teachings. It teaches a perfection that still astounds me and convinces me of the veracity of the Church, the Bible and Christ. The Church teaching is a mosaic that fits together perfectly with the Bible and Christ. Only from a divine source protected by divine authority could this be possible in my humble opinion. I have been unable to find and support any contradiction between what the Church teaches and the Bible and Christ.

I think that Purgatory is clearly established in Scriptures but I would agree that it is not explicit in Scriptures. But, the implicit teaching of the process of purgation is overwhelming and results in the fact that the Doctrine of Purgatory is one of the most biblically supported of all Doctrines and is in perfect accordance with systematic theology and sound biblical hermeneutics. There is no place in the entire Bible where the Doctrine of Purgatory is contradicted in any way. But the lack of contradiction does not make it a sound teaching but instead what makes it sound teaching is that it is the only logical conclusion that one can come to when examining the implicit evidence from Scripture. The only conclusion that one can come to from Scriptures if there is no Purgatory is that heaven will be a lonely place if it does not exist and that God’s salvific grace will not extend as generously among His faithful as we hope.

(Jim) I teach a class for new believers. In this class I teach them that initial saving faith is best defined in Romans 10:9, which requires surrender to the authority of Christ, and belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the basis for their righteous standing before God. I also teach them that baptism is the non-optional expression of their acceptance of God's grace. I teach them that they are justified by Christ's blood, and are united with Christ in His body in His death and resurrection and the reality of their new identity is best described in Galatians 2:20. But while we are a new creation in Christ, we still struggle with the flesh which is able to be overcome by the indwelling Spirit as expressed in Romans 8, especially verse 11.

I conclude my introductory course with the response to God's grace that is found in Romans 12. I summarize it into three primary thoughts: Presentation, transformation, and occupation. Presentation is when we present our bodies to God as a living sacrifice in a 100% commitment to following Christ. Transformation is where we turn away from the world and embrace the renewing of our mind by saturating ourselves in the teaching of the word of God. The word of God is like fuel, and the Spirit of God is like oxygen. And together they create a mighty flame which is able to burn away the corruption of sin that lingers in our flesh and give us the mind of Christ. And finally, occupation is to re-channel our energies in the transforming power of the Spirit to embrace the spiritual giftedness God has given us to exercise within the church, and to live a life of love as outlined in verses 9-21. At the end of this course, I present each one with a small funnel, inscribed with "be a funnel" and "Romans 5:5". The point of this is to be a regular reminder that the outworking of their new life in Christ is that they are to be a channel of God's love through the Spirit to the world we live in.

(Cristoiglesia) I think that your class is beneficial to new Christians as they are often confused as to what is happening to them. We recognize the call of the Holy Spirit to faith but are confused as to why and the particulars to that call which may inhibit our response. You should emphasize their having openness to the changes the Spirit is in their lives.

I am especially approving of the fact that you emphasize their call to service of God and responsibility to preach the Gospel by example and by Word. This is very Catholic in nature as every Catholic is taught and instructed to go and preach the Gospel at each Mass as a part of the priesthood of all believers. I am also encouraged to see that you teach them to recognize and to use their spiritual gifts to the benefit of God’s kingdom on earth.

I am pleased that you are teaching the importance of Baptism and the biblical teaching on being renewed as new creatures and being born again through Baptism. It is through our Baptism that we are cleansed and made worthy of the familial relationship with Christ that we maintain through contrition and repentance when we are seduced by sin. But I am disappointed that you are not teaching them God’s other commandment which is to eat His truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity so that we may abide in Him and He in us as His great feast provides through His grace. He says that unless we eat His Body and Drink His Blood we have no life (eternal) in us. St. Paul emphasizing its importance said that unless we discern His Body at this great feast then we bring condemnation on ourselves by receiving it unworthily. In John 6 it is recorded that Christ said that this hard teaching must be discerned through a special gift by our cooperating with His Spirit communicating with ours. It is said that we can never understand His teaching through our carnal senses of reason or intellect but by being sensitive to the spirit instructing us when we remain in Him. All Christians should communicate to non-believers by asking, “have you eaten His Body and drank His Blood so that He can abide in you and you in He as He commanded?” It is sad that so many professing Christ in their lives denies this plainest of His teaching and refuses to do as He says but instead accept a metaphorical representation and perversion of His great feast. They should take notice that if the Israelites had done the same at Passover and only ate a metaphorical representation of the lamb that they would have brought death of their first born on their family. So too do so many refuse His commandment and the saving grace that His feast provides. You may also emphasize the importance of a systematic prayer life and the necessity of their life being one of constant prayer to God for themselves and others.

(Jim) I have had some former lifelong Catholics in my class and they are a source for some of my understanding. Often they are brought to tears as they recount the system of works that they believe they were taught. Either they were poorly taught, or they poorly understood. God bless, Jim

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, there are many Catholics that are Catholics in name only and often claim to be Catholic out of a cultural association instead of a spiritual one. They are often not the faithful ones who are properly catechized and who attend Church and practice their faith. They profess Catholic Christianity because they were born into a family who are culturally Catholic but know nothing of what being a Catholic Christian entails in devotion and practice. God Bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion of Authority, Justification and Purgatory with "Jim"

2011-06-13T07:13:00.001+08:00

(Jim) “[Catholics hold church tradition as an equal authority to scripture. That is not a lie. And as a result, many of our differences come out of this.

I looked up the Catholic catechism online and this is what I found in regards to the issues I addressed in my post:

"As a result the church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from holy Scripture alone. BOTH SCRIPTURE & TRADITION MUST BE ACCEPTED & HONORED WITH EQUAL SENTIMENTS OF DEVOTION AND REVERENCE."

That's what I said.]”

(Cristoiglesia) Of course, this is not at all what you said. You said instead, “Catholics hold church tradition as an equal authority to scripture. That is not a lie. And as a result, many of our differences come out of this.”

The Church is saying that it is not equal authority but the same authority undivided. Both come from the same source and as a result they must be treated with equal devotion and reverence as Sacred Tradition. Both are the teaching of God which is the deposit of truth and revelation to the Church. We have recorded this in the Bible so that there can be no mistake about Christ’s teaching. St. Paul recorded that we are to hold fast to all Sacred Traditions whether transmitted orally or in writing. The Bible also records that not all things taught by Jesus are written down in the Scriptures but some are a part of the deposit of the oral tradition that led the Church for 400 years without the benefit of the written tradition. Certainly the Church being the very Church that Jesus founded would hold all of His teaching that was delivered to them as having authority. What I took issue with is that you suggested erroneously that the Church separates these two forms of God’s Word which would be in violation of what is written by St. Paul. It is as if you are accusing the Church of heresy similar to the unbiblical Protestant heresy of Sola Scriptura which seeks to divide God’s Word and marginalize the oral Sacred Tradition of not having authority over the faithful. From the teaching of the Scriptures it is clear that God’s revelations to man are from both the written and the oral means and both are His divine Word not to be divided or marginalized. Naturally when one accepts only a part of the Sacred Tradition that God delivered to His Church whether the oral or the written, such an approach invites error and in doing so the tens of thousands of Protestant sects are sure to be the genesis of error in their approach to divide and marginalize one part of God’s Word over another. Is this not what St. Paul warned against? Of course it is. If the Church did not take this approach then from a biblical mandate of accepting all of God’s Word as equal in devotion and reverence then any of its teaching would be and should be treated with skepticism as it would not be following the entirety of God’s Word as defined by St. Paul which we are to hold as equal in devotion and reverence. If the Church divided God’s Word then the Church could not be called the “Pillar and foundation of the truth” which the Bible authoritatively says it personifies. Division and confusion are the tools of Satan whether it is used to divide God’s Word or the Corpus Christi.

(Jim) “[2. Catholics believe that we are saved by faith and works. They've told me this. So that is not a lie. And that is contrary to scripture. Faith produces works through the power of the Spirit. But works do not produce salvation.

CCC 2027: No one can merit initial grace which is at the origin of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and others all the graces needed to attain eternal life."

This sounds to me like God's grace gives us the ability to merit eternal life by our works. Am I mistaken?]”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, of course you are mistaken. All salvation is by God’s grace and not by men’s works. There are no works pleasing to God unless man is moved by God’s grace and even then this is a sign of one’s cooperation with grace. As St. James says in His epistle, “Faith without works is dead faith”. Initial salvation comes through the encouragement of the Holy Spirit bringing us to faith and sanctification. This grace given by God is unmerited and certainly not earned. Catholic teaching is that all works are not the result of our own efforts but are produced by His grace. At judgment God will see our works produced by His grace as meritorious. Through God and His grace working in our lives we earn our salvation. Catholic teaching in regards to merit is very similar if not identical to the Protestant monergistic view, meaning that all is of God, approach rather than a synergistic approach, some of God and some of us, as Catholics get accused. The actual view of Catholics is that God does all the work and we do all the work. Catholics give all the credit to God but also understand that their response to grace is deserving of merit.

The way I see it is that we respond to God’s promises He is obligated to fulfill a debt He has incurred through His promise. We through His grace put faith and trust in those promises. Since God promises us eternal life by our faith then He has created an obligation for Himself. It is God’s promise that makes it a merit and not our work because God represents to us justice and truth and by us responding to His commands through the Spirit He has created a debt deserved by crediting us with merit even though it is through Christ and the Holy Spirit that we responded to His commands and will. Protestants error is in believing that God does not desire our obedience to the Spirit when we respond with good works. They confuse these divinely inspired works with the works of the law that do not gain us merit just as the Scriptures teach.

(Jim) Catholics believe in the doctrine of purgatory. That is no lie. They believe that it is the purging of sin from our soul. The bible teaches that we have been crucified with Christ and that our old soul life has died and we have raised up with Christ unto newness of life. And the spiritual life that now lives in us is the Spirit of Christ. Spiritually, we are perfect and fit for heaven. A cursory reading of the latter half of Romans 7 reveals to us that our struggle with sin in this life is centered in our body and the members of our body. So when we lay aside our body at death, there is nothing left to be purified. We have at that point been set free from the presence of sin and are ready to enter into heaven.

Purgatory: "CCC- On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified here on earth or after death in the state called purgatory."

(Cristoiglesia) Of course, we believe in Purgatory and yes it is a process of purgation (cleansing) that removes any signs of sin. Even venial sins leave a residual stain on the soul that must be removed before one can enter into the beatific vision. This is made possible by the blood of Jesus shed on the cross which was and is for man’s atonement.

This explains the Doctrine of Purgatory in more detail:

http://fiatvolvntastua.blogspot.com/2009/06/what-should-we-understand-about.html

You said, “The bible teaches that we have been crucified with Christ and that our old soul life has died and we have raised up with Christ unto newness of life. And the spiritual life that now lives in us is the Spirit of Christ. Spiritually, we are perfect and fit for heaven.”

That is correct but the Bible also tells us that sin separates us from that familial relationship that you paraphrased from Scripture. We continue to sin our entire lives. We are reconciled back into that relationship which sin has compromised by contrition and repentance. This is called by the Church the Sacrament of Reconciliation which our Lord ordained by giving that power and authority to His Church when acting in persona Christi.

I think you have illustrated why we should not approach the Bible in a “cursory” way. The Bible should never be understood in a haphazard or superficial way as you suggest or error will certainly result as you have stood witness. You are in error when you say that the Bible teaches that we can secure our salvation by simply confessing assent to belief in Christ. This act or work of the law does not secure salvation even when prompted by God’s grace as is always the case. We must also endure in this salvific grace to be saved. We must abide in Him and Him in us to be saved. The Bible states that Jesus said that to do this we must eat the great feast that He provides which are His truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. We must approach this salvific promise with fear and trembling according to St. Paul and must not presume a debt owed to us but instead a gift of grace given to merit our salvation. We must not fall away through sin or in any way abandon this free gift of salvific grace. A sinful soul will not enter into the beatific vision even in a cloak of Christ’s blood as you suggest but must indeed be purified and made perfect by Christ’s sacrifice. We are made pure and holy by the cleansing of His blood instead whether in this life by confession and reconciliation or through purgation in the life to come. This is the teaching of His Word through His Church. God Bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion with "Saul follower of Jesus" on the meaning of Church and its necessity for salvation

2011-05-29T12:27:00.002+08:00

(Cristoiglesia) ” What the church does say is that there have always been those believers known to God who will be saved and I agree "

(Saul follower of Jesus) Therefore we do not need the catholic church for receiving Salvation.

(Cristoiglesia) "I do not agree that those people are outside of His Church nor do I believe that it is possible for salvation without His Church "

(Saul follower of Jesus) You are saying only in your church can anyone receive Salvation. You cannot have your cake and eat it also. Either you can receive Salvation outside of the catholic church or you cannot, you cannot have it both ways.

(Cristoiglesia) And yes we are taught by God through His church which is Jesus.

(Saul follower of Jesus) If you acknowledge we can receive Salvation outside of the catholic church proves the Christian churches are the true church also, but if you insist Salvation is only from the catholic church shows that your church is a cult like the Mormon church.

So now the question is:" Is Salvation received only if a person is in the catholic church or can a person receive Salvation in a Christian church also?"

Therefore His Church is not the catholic church but His church is the body of all the believers in the world. Which means all the Christian churches are the true church and do have the fullness of Faith.

(Cristoiglesia) I am at a loss as to how you can logically come to the conclusions that you do. Your logic defies reason and does not follow the facts. The normative way for one to come to Christ is through His Church that He established on earth. He founded only one Church and that is the Catholic Church. All others claiming Christianity are man-made counterfeits like your own.

However, the Bible also says that the evidence of creation is all that is needed to come to faith but this is not the normative way that Christ established in His Church. We also have faith in God’s mercy that even those who are in protest of His Church and reject it will have the opportunity for the grace of salvation. But that grace comes only through His Church and the Sacraments. Even those who do not receive the Sacraments and thus God’s grace may be saved by His mercy if they were properly disposed to receive it but had no opportunity or knowledge of its necessity as in one being influenced by false teaching like is common in heretical sects like yours. As example, many Protestants deny the efficacy of Baptism or refuse the commandment to eat His Body and drink His Blood even though the Bible clearly a state that those who refuse these graces will not be in the familial relationship that He desires and indeed commands. They deny His Church as their teaching authority for faith and morals in favor of their man-made counterfeit teaching authority. They follow the doctrines of devils like Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide when the Bible clearly condemns such nonsense. Even though they may do all of these things God’s mercy may be such that even these people may be saved but only through the Church which is the door to salvation.

CCC-846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
Contrary to what you desire and what you proclaim to the contrary Christ only founded one Church and not tens of thousands and that Church is the Catholic Church. All biblical, historical and patristic evidence confirms this fact. Historically, we can also understand that the Protestant sects have no claim as the true Church of Christ but can only claim legitimately to be a man-made counterfeit. Furthermore the Catholic Church is the only Church that legitimately should claim to be Christian as it is the only Church founded by Christ but the Church recognizes the possibility and prays that those who are outside of this one Church will receive a measure of God’s mercy that will allow them to be saved in spite of their disobedience and ignorance if they are validly baptized and God chooses to give them salvific grace. However this is very much in doubt since our Lord commanded that unless we eat His Body and drink His Blood that we have no life in us which is to abide in Him and Him in us. Without this great feast He provides Jesus say’s that one is not in the familial relationship that He desires according to the New Covenant He established on the cross when He said “It is finished” meaning the Old Covenant and introduced in the glory He revealed on the cross His new covenant with mankind and transformed the Passover into the new sacrifice of the New Covenant where He commands as His faithful to eat His truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. Just as in the Passover we must eat the real Lamb of God and not a metaphorical Body and Blood as some would claim in rejecting His commandment.

There is no authority from Christ for the Protestant sects and counterfeit churches and their claim of being a true Church has no biblical, historical or patristic evidence to support such a supposition. It is nothing more than wishful thinking by those who have created these white-washed tombs full of the appearance of obedience and worship but not in truth.
All authority was given to the apostles from Christ and at least some of that special authority is recorded in Scripture and is certainly attested to by the ante Nicene fathers.

There is no doubt that the apostles knew that their ministry would survive their death as it was needed to be a permanent living presence until the Parousia.

(Mat 28:20 DRB) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Knowing their responsibility in preserving the teaching of Christ they ordained successors giving them the gift of the Spirit with Episcopal consecration:

(Act 1:8 DRB) But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth.

(Act 2:4 DRB) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost: and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak.

(Joh 20:22 DRB) When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

(Joh 20:23 DRB) Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

(1Ti 4:14 DRB) Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.

(2Ti 1:6 DRB) For which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.

(2Ti 1:7 DRB) For God hath not given us the spirit of fear: but of power and of love and of sobriety.

There is no doubt that “Apostolic Succession” is a historical fact. Scriptures, as well show clearly that Christ chose these apostles and commissioned them to establish and continue his work with his authority and they ordained successors. It is Apostolic Succession that is the link connecting the Church to Christ. It is the authority from Christ of the Episcopacy that brings so many knowledgeable people to return to the Catholic faith as I am a witness.

We see those who were ordained in apostolic succession fulfilling their ministry:

(Act 20:28 DRB) Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood.

(1Th 1:1 DRB) Paul and Sylvanus and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians: in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ.

(1Th 1:2 DRB) Grace be to you and peace. We give thanks to God always for you all: making a remembrance of you in our prayers without ceasing,

(1Th 1:3 DRB) Being mindful of the work of your faith and labour and charity: and of the enduring of the hope of our Lord Jesus Christ before God and our Father.

(1Th 1:4 DRB) Knowing, brethren, beloved of God, your election:

(1Th 1:5 DRB) For our gospel hath not been unto you in word only, but in power also: and in the Holy Ghost and in much fulness, as you know what manner of men we have been among you for your sakes.

(1Th 1:6 DRB) And you became followers of us and of the Lord: receiving the word in much tribulation, with joy of the Holy Ghost:

(1Th 1:7 DRB) So that you were made a pattern to all that believe in Macedonia and in Achaia.

1Th 1:8 DRB) For from you was spread abroad the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and in Achaia but also in every place: your faith which is towards God, is gone forth, so that we need not to speak any thing.

(1Th 1:9 DRB) For they themselves relate of us, what manner of entering in we had unto you: and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God.

(1Th 1:10 DRB) And to wait for his Son from heaven (whom he raised up from the dead), Jesus, who hath delivered us from the wrath to come.

(2Ti 1:6 DRB) For which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.

(Tit 1:5 DRB) For this cause I left thee in Crete: that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and shouldest ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee:

(Tit 1:6 DRB) If any be without crime, the husband of one wife. having faithful children, not accused of riot or unruly.

(Tit 1:7 DRB) For a bishop must be without crime, as the steward of God: not proud, not subject to anger, nor given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre:

(Tit 1:8 DRB) But given to hospitality, gentle, sober, just, holy, continent:

(Tit 1:9 DRB) Embracing that faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine and to convince the gainsayers.

(1Ti 4:14 DRB) Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.

(2Ti 1:6 DRB) For which cause I admonish thee that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.

St. Paul goes on to instruct St. Timothy as to who is a qualified candidate for ordination:

(1Ti 3:1 DRB) A faithful saying: If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth good work.

(1Ti 3:2 DRB) It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher,

(1Ti 3:3 DRB) Not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous, but

(1Ti 3:4 DRB) One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity.

(1Ti 3:5 DRB) But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?

(1Ti 3:6 DRB) Not a neophyte: lest, being puffed up with pride, he fall into the judgment of the devil.

(1Ti 3:7 DRB) Moreover, he must have a good testimony of them who are without: lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

(1Ti 5:22 DRB) Impose not hands lightly upon any man, neither be partaker of other men's sins. Keep thyself chaste.

We also find in the Scriptures that those in Apostolic Succession had particular and varied duties:

(1Co 12:27 DRB) Now you are the body of Christ and members of member.

(1Co 12:28 DRB) And God indeed hath set some in the church; first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors: after that miracles: then the graces of healings, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches.

(1Co 12:29 DRB) Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all doctors?

(Eph 4:11 DRB) And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors:

(Eph 4:12 DRB) For the perfecting of the saints, for the word of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

We are further reminded of the foundation of the Church:

(Eph 2:19 DRB) Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners: but you are fellow citizens with the saints and the domestics of God,

(Eph 2:20 DRB) Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:

This is only some of the Scriptures speaking of apostolic succession and the duties, need and authority of the office.

The invisible Church are those who have faith in our Lord but one cannot discern who are a part of His invisible Church. However, Jesus and the disciples founded a visible Church and we see the formation of that Church in the book of Acts. This Church is the Catholic Church and is the self-same Church that Jesus prayed that we would all be one within. Otherwise as professed Christians and not being obedient to His Church would place us outside of His will, blessings, promises and grace; if not fully but in great measure. Those outside of His will would be those that some describe as "playing" at Christianity and not following Jesus.

There are some outside of the visible Church which some call a "remnant" that are not be on the path to the narrow gate but may be saved by God's mercy. These are those who seek God but are deceived into being outside of His visible Church by no fault of their own. While not a part of the visible Church they can be considered a part of the invisible Church. So, Jesus and the disciples formed a visible Church as we see after Pentecost recorded in the book of Acts and it could be said that there are those known only to God who are a part of that visible Church against their will or knowledge that will be received in Glory to be a part of the Church Triumphant. But, as one can see in Scripture this is not the ordinary way to be saved through His Church but as an extraordinary example of His mercy.

The gates of hell will never prevail against His visible Church because of the protection of the Church by the Holy Spirit given at Pentecost. The Church is other worldly and heavenly in its nature and is endowed with its holiness and veracity from its founder Jesus. Jesus gave His promises to His visible Church so that the world could see the testimony of His Church as the pillar and ground of the truth and a shining city on a hill (Mat 5:14) It is the will of God that all should be saved by and through His Church as it is the Church that was commissioned to spread the Gospel throughout the world both corporeally and individually. The Church is a refuge and the Ark from the sins and temptations of the world. It is heaven on earth where Christ dwells in the Tabernacles and is worshipped. So if the visible Church ceased to exist it would make Jesus a liar and a pretender as the Messiah and Savior of the world because all of His promises would be proven false.

Unity requires that there be a knowledge and physical manifestation of that unity. That is the Catholic Church which is the visible Church. The invisible Church does not represent unity because it is known only to God which may be unified in faith but not in purpose.

The purpose of the Church is its testimony in spreading the "good news" to the world. That requires a visible unity. The world will never know if those who are in the invisible Church are preserved but the visible Church will always be the witness to the world that it remains after empires and governments have fallen, political ideologies have been born and died and false and counterfeit religions have come and gone. It is a testimony that Jesus is God of the Trinity and that His will be done on earth as well as in heaven regardless of the snares of Satan and His lies against humanity. God bless You!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with "John the Baptist" about the celibate priesthood, fasting and prayer

2011-05-08T20:28:00.000+08:00

(John the Baptist)1Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 2through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, 3who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.
6If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine that you have followed. 7Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; 8for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. 9The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance. 10For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

"who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created"
The catholic church forbids the priest from marriage.
The catholic church forbids eating meat on fridays.

(Cristoiglesia) First of all the Church does not forbid marriage but instead encourages marriage. Priests take a vow of chastity by their own choice. There are 23 Rites in the Catholic Church and of these 23 Rites only one chooses from among the candidates who have chosen to remain chaste. Both St. Paul and Jesus recommended chastity for those in ministry so your argument is with them and not with the discipline among priests being obedient to what Jesus and St. Paul recommended.

Fasting is a form of prayer to God in which we sacrifice for Him in order to focus on Him instead of worldly desires. Fasting is a practice of the Church from the beginning of the Church and it is a practice which was started by the apostles and continues today. So no food is forbidden it is just that once a week the faithful were asked to focus on the Lord instead of one’s earthly desires. Clearly this is not in opposition to biblical teaching which means that the food laws of the Old Testament are no longer necessary for Christians. Please refer to the first Council of Jerusalem where this was discussed and decided. It opened the way for the Gentiles to become Christians.

(John the Baptist) "irreverent, silly myths"
The doctrines of mary the catholic church has invented.

(Cristoiglesia) The teaching about the blessed mother of God is not irreverent, silly myths but is instead the truth. You should ask yourself why you and your sect hate the blessed mother of God so much and why you are not a part of those who call her blessed as the Bible states the faithful in Christ will do. Do you really believe that Jesus approves of you and others attempting to marginalize his mother who always points to her Son as the source of our salvation and hope?

(John the Baptist) This is what is happening to the catholic church today.

(Cristoiglesia) If you mean teaching the truth then you are correct but you are suggesting error without any reasonable explanation and only making empty accusations.

(John the Baptist) "But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.
7"And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words.

"meaningless repetition"
The Rosary is a meaningless repetition of a prayer to mary.

(Cristoiglesia) Personally I rarely pray the Rosary but instead I pray the Breviary. It is obvious that you do not know anything about the Rosary prayer. The Bible forbids vain repetition in prayer. The operative word is “vain”. The Rosary prayer is as far from a vain repetition as one can get when praying. The Rosary prayer focuses on God, especially his passion for us, and in the Rosary prayer we evoke the blessed mother of God as our prayer partner to her Son. It is far from meaningless, vain or repetitious in the sense of the Scripture you recite out of context and understand by eisegesis.

(John the Baptist)You really should listen to people like Dr. Stanley and Dr. McGee for they do have a lot of knowledge about God and His Book the Bible. They have millions and millions of Christians learning from them.

How many people are listening to you? Very few if any.

(Cristoiglesia) I did not enter into ministry for fame and fortune but to spread God’s Word. The people you cite are false teachers who satisfy the itching ears of those who cannot endure sound doctrine. If one learns false teaching does that make on more faithful to Christ or less faithful. I would suggest the latter. That is the reason that the Bible says we are not to follow such teachers. The Bible further states that such misplaced devotion may be the cause of the destruction of the soul. The Bible warns such people that at judgment that our lord will state, “depart from me, I never knew you.” There are over a billion Catholics who listen to and follow the teaching of the Church to the best of their ability.

(John the Baptist) The catholic church and you are Irrelevant today, you cannot keep the people from following Jesus like the catholic church has done for hundreds of years. Hopefully on day you will wake up to the truth in the Word of God the Bible.

(Cristoiglesia) By irrelevant you are saying that the teaching of the disciples and Jesus are not relevant in these modern times and that modernist teachers are more in line with what people want to hear than Christ’s own Church. Certainly you seem to be an example of one enticed by their worldly relevance. Such relevance does not please God who spoke of abstaining from the worldly and embracing his kingdom instead. Do you really believe that those teachers that are in protest of Christ’s own Church and his teaching through his Church are provoking people to come to Jesus by their heretical false and worldly teaching. Do you not believe the Bible when it says that his Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” and not these heretics? Do you think that maybe people who follow these false teachers are in danger just like Jesus said?

A reasonable person not persuaded by the doctrines and churches of men would reject these false teachers and be faithful to the authority that Jesus placed on earth for his faithful which is his Church. The Church has endured for 2000 years as Christ promised and will endure until the Parousia just as he promised. You may remain outside of the Ark of His Church that he provided for all humanity from a sinful and seductive world and suffer the fate that he warns all men which is hearing his words, “depart from me, I never knew you”. Jesus calls all men to be faithful to his Church. He is calling you home to his Church. Give up your worldly pride and do his will. Jesus prayed at the mount of olives at the Garden of Gethsemane before his arrest and subsequent sacrifice to his Father that we all be one as he and the Father are one.” That unity of his will is in his Church. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with one calling himself "John the Baptist"

2011-05-07T03:12:00.000+08:00

(John the Baptist) Its interesting that Scriptural teaching actually involves the Scriptures in the bible!

(Cristoiglesia) Correct and it involves all of the Scriptures and using a proper hermeneutical approach to them. It also involves all of the Scriptures including all of the books that the Protestants have removed from Scriptures. Only if the Bible is approached this way can anyone come to rational and correct theological conclusions.

The New Testament of the Bible is written by Catholic Christians and it is about the Catholic Church. The Bible obviously follows the Church. Contrasted to the Protestant churches use the Bible to support their man-made doctrines and practices without considering its broader contextual teaching. What results is cobbled together theology that supports preconceived conclusions. The Catholic Church has a different approach and that is to go to the Bible to learn instead. We do not need a book to base our beliefs on as we have our founder Christ a we represent His teaching in practice. We are His promises of an enduring Church that is free from apostasy because of the teaching authority He left on earth that remains through apostolic succession. Sometimes one has to study for things to make sense but study is much like when a athlete practices. His practice must be perfect for the athlete to become perfected. Practicing to do something incorrectly just makes one better at error. So too when you study you must use good source material otherwise you just get better at knowing what is false instead of the truth. Studying the Scriptures requires good teachers knowing sound doctrine. The Bible teaches us what happens to people who gather around them those teachers who satisfy our itching ears instead of those who teach the truth. It is through learning that we accept sound doctrine that is sometimes hard teaching as Jesus gave the example in the Synagogue in Capernaum in John 6 where almost all of His disciples left Him over His teaching to eat His Body and drink His blood. He said these hard teachings are not understood by reason or carnal and worldly knowledge but by faith through our spirit for those who are in Christ.

The Protestant churches are based on worldliness and secular humanist philosophy. Coming out of Scholasticism the world was prepared by Satan to receive false teaching. Many people found the Church repressive by demanding that to be in Christ we must be obedient to Christ in His Church. Out of pride they grew weary of a God and a Church that taught that our purpose was to serve God. They were susceptible to the teaching of a God that served man instead. This began the spread of schism and all kinds of false teaching. There are now well over 30,000 exponentially increasing schisms in the Church with each representing a wound to the Corpus Christi. We know that the Bible teaches us that we will know them by their fruits and the fruits of Protestantism is division and false teaching mixed with some truth.

So, in conclusion, The Catholic Church, Christ's own Church which inspired with the guidance of the Holy Spirit the New Testament Scriptures and canonized the entirety of the Christian Bible by all reason and scholarship must contradict the Bible the least of all. In this case the Church does not contradict the Bible in any sense but is the personification of the Bible and heaven on earth.

(John the Baptist) One more time for Scriptural teaching. Where in the Scriptures of the bible does God say mary is the Queen on Heaven?

(Cristoiglesia) I am sorry, I made the assumption when I answered you previously that you were familiar with the Scriptures that point to Jesus as our King. But since you are unfamiliar with Scriptural teaching here are some of the Scripture verses that support Jesus being King:

• when the Lord your God was your king, 1 Sam. 12:12
• King of glory shall come in, Ps. 24:7
• God is the King of all the earth, Ps. 47:7 (Zech. 14:9, 16).
• Holy One of Israel is our king, Ps. 89:18
• Lord is a great God, and a great King, Ps. 95:3
• children of Zion be joyful in their King, Ps. 149:2
• mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts, Isa. 6:5 (2 Ne. 16:5).
• Thine eyes shall see the king, Isa. 33:17
• your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King, Isa. 43:15
• Lord the King of Israel, and his redeemer, Isa. 44:6
• Lord … is the living God, and an everlasting king, Jer. 10:10
• King shall reign … execute judgment, Jer. 23:5
• thy King cometh unto thee, Zech. 9:9 (Matt. 21:5; John 12:15).
• I am a great King, saith the Lord, Mal. 1:14
• Where is he that is born King of the Jews, Matt. 2:2
• Jerusalem … city of the great King, Matt. 5:35
• King say … Come, ye blessed, Matt. 25:34
• Art thou the King of the Jews, Matt. 27:11 (Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3; John 18:33).
• This Is Jesus the King of the Jews, Matt. 27:37 (Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; John 19:19).
• Blessed be the King that cometh, Luke 19:38
• Son of God; thou art the King of Israel, John 1:49
• Jesus therefore perceived that they would … make him a king, John 6:15
• Hail, King of the Jews, John 19:3
• Behold your King, John 19:14
• there is another king, one Jesus, Acts 17:7
• unto the King eternal, immortal … be honour and glory, 1 Tim. 1:17
• King of kings, and Lord of lords, 1 Tim. 6:15
• true are thy ways, thou King of saints, Rev. 15:3
• on his thigh a name written, King of Kings, Rev. 19:16 (Rev. 17:14).

As you can see the Bible clearly states on many occasions that Jesus is our King. If you had studied the culture of biblical times you would know that the mother of the king is always referred to as the queen. So, in calling the blessed mother of our Lord “Queen” it is simply affirming and giving praise to her Son as we recognize Him as King. This is just another way that the blessed mother of God points to her Son as to where our hope lies and our worship should be directed. Do you also need me to provide the Scriptures telling us that the blessed mother is the mother of Jesus? I can do so but it would be better for you if you researched the Scriptures for yourself to enhance your knowledge.

(John the Baptist) To do Scriptural teaching of this doctrine you need to show actual Scriptures that back up this doctrine. Not man's logic and wisdom in what the catholic church wants to be a doctrine. You need proof that this doctrine is from God. But all i see from the catholic church is man' rambling about nonsense and pure gobble **** with absolutely no evidence from the very Bible your church claimed to have written.

(Cristoiglesia)The misuse of Scripture does not help credibility for one may encounter those knowledgeable in Scriptures like those encountered by St. Paul and St. Silas in Acts 17:11. When one practices this kind of deception it makes them appear as a demagogue instead of one being a teacher in truth. It would be better if one simply stated one’s opinion without the “proof text”, which with proper exegesis does not prove or support one’s opinions. Certainly, the Bereans would have been even more skeptical if St. Paul and St. Silas had used improper hermeneutical methods in spreading the Gospel and would have had little success. The Bereans would have noticed that the use of Scriptures did not support the claims when understood using proper methodology. In fact, proper understanding of the Scriptures often illustrates the opposite of what is claimed. Much too often those attempting to convince others of their views are those that are predisposed to hate others and find it necessary to justify their own beliefs while demogoguing those beliefs held by others.

Before one uses “proof texts” to support one’s position, one should be aware that the scriptures they are using are a translation from another language that most often does not allow a word for word translation but instead the translator must seek equivalence in meaning rather than it being an exact word for word translation. Today we are two thousand years removed from the writing of the NT Scriptures, are in a different place and a different culture. For proper exegesis these things must be taken into consideration. This is why the Reformers, especially Martin Luther, were frightened and feared damnation by the misunderstanding of the new theory of “sola Scriptura”. This theory was meant to be a partnership between the layman and the scholar and not a license for each individual to become their own theologian. This is how false teaching propagates itself and is responsible for thousands of exponentially increasing schisms within the body of Christ.

This is why many of us (conservative, traditional and orthodox) in the Christian academic community use the interpretation theory of grammatico-historical exegesis. This method dictates that one coming to understanding of Scripture take into consideration the language , history and culture in which it is written or the context of the time, culture and history. To do otherwise is to allow our preconceptions to determine the meaning causing great error. We must learn and to strive to turn off our mental filter and allow the Scriptures to instruct instead of allowing our preconceptions to obscure what the Scriptures teach. When doing apologetics it is better to use “proof texts carefully as not to misuse them to spread false teaching and doctrine.

The proof text methodology of understanding Scripture meaning puts too much emphasis on the practical side of understanding. Typically the interpreter searches for topical texts to support their preconceptions. For instance, if one begins with a preconception that the Catholic Church is apostate, and that it’s various teaching and doctrines are false; one finds value in these texts and use them for their short, epigrammatic use of several key words that coincide with your presuppositional theme or topic rather than the evidence or support they actually bring from their own context. It is the ignoring of the context that makes this methodology wrong and, in fact, useless. This methodology treats the Bible as some sort of magical, mythological book where one can choose from its anthology of sayings for every occasion to support ones worldly views or fleshly desires. This is no different from the liberals or progressive Christians who use the Scriptures as a menu for creating their own personal theology and god, picking and using Scriptures without understanding. Scriptural texts always belong to larger units and address specific situations, coming out of historical purposes for which they were written and contexts for which they are now relevant. Most often, interpretation using this method shows a naïve reading of the text and disregards the purpose for which the text was written. There is no regard for the historical context which is relevant for understanding or the genre conventions which shape the understanding. What many have engaged in when using these texts is allegorization and other forms of reckless use of Scripture texts to support one’s prejudices against those whom they disagree, such as the Catholic Church, and have ignored their intended purpose and usage as determined by context, grammar and history. I cannot over emphasize the importance of context.

Generally in apologetics those using improper methodology are among the thousands of cult groups just making attempts to spread animosity among the body of Christ. They are not attempting to contribute to the learning of others or to participate in a discussion or debate but to proselytize their cultist views or to confuse those who are seeking and are weak in knowledge.

(John the Baptist) Sound doctrines? The doctrine of mary being the Queen of Heaven is not a sound doctrine. Sound doctrines are those in the Bible. Those which God has given us through the Word of God, not through a false church your Roman catholic church.

(Cristoiglesia) So are you denying that Jesus is King or that the blessed Mother is indeed his mother?

(John the Baptist) Your church has no authority to make up stories from men and call them doctrines of God. Your church has no authority to teach your doctrines as commandments of God.

(Cristoiglesia) Correct but you would spend many lifetimes trying to find where the Church has done what you claim. The only man our doctrines come from is Christ which is why we are called the “pillar and foundation of the truth” as opposed by what the Bible says about people like yourself that can not endure sound doctrines and who seek out false teachers that will satisfy their itching ears.

(John the Baptist) Your church the Roman catholic church is Irrelevant.

(Cristoiglesia) Nothing Jesus founded or taught is irrelevant. In Christian theology the Protestants are those who are irrelevant.

(John the Baptist) Repent and return back to Jesus before it is too late and you miss out on entering into heaven.

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus warned at the synagogue in Capernaum and emphasized the literalness of his words redundantly that we must eat His Body and drink His Blood for eternal life. Have you done as He commanded? He said that this was necessary for us to abide in Him and He in us. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with John the Baptist about the blessed mother of God

2011-05-05T10:49:00.003+08:00

(John the Baptist) How can we be one in church when your church teaches false doctrines about mary?

(Cristoiglesia) According to the Bible it is impossible for the Church to teach false doctrines. What your statement clearly reveals is that you cannot endure sound doctrines. By not enduring sound doctrines you willfully place yourself outside of Christ’s Church.

(John the Baptist) Your church teaches:
Mary was conceived without original sin
Marry lived a sinless life
Marry was bodily assumed into heaven at the end of her earthly life

(Cristoiglesia) We are all born with original sin which was caused by our original parents bringing sin and death into the world. We have inherited that sin nature from the original fall from grace.

As was prophesied in the Old Testament a virgin will bear a son called Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14). That Son is to become the Lamb of God and a replacement for the Paschal Lamb of Passover which is emblematic of Christ as the feast of the New Covenant. This prophecy is important in that it illustrates the necessity of the perfect sacrifice. Not one of a perfection of the flesh as the Paschal Lamb refers but the perfection of the soul which requires a divine nature as no human alone could fulfill the perfection required by the Father but only the God-man in Jesus. Being fully God, He could not dwell and be nurtured in a vessel containing sin nor could the Lamb of God inherit the original sin of our original parents. So, out of necessity and in preparation to the blessed mother’s obedience she was saved by Christ at her conception. The blessed mother was in such a state of grace before conceiving and nurturing the unborn Jesus that she is described as being “full of Grace”. Of course being full of God’s grace leaves no room for sin.

Now keep in mind that some may argue that Jesus does not qualify as a type of the Paschal Lamb because the Paschal Lamb was required to be without any physical blemish. Certainly, the wounds of Jesus by His scourging left Him as anything but a physically unblemished sacrifice. It is significant to acknowledge that the Paschal Lamb of the Passover saved one from physical death while Jesus being emblematic saves one from the death of the soul into sin. Therefore, the Lamb of God had the perfection of the soul necessary to atone for sin which causes spiritual death.

Furthermore, while the obedience of the Israelites at Passover instituted a special kinship of the people as the family of God so too does the new kingdom instituted by Christ’s atoning sacrifice institute a new kinship or Covenant signified by the fact that we are to eat the Lamb in all its Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity just as the Israelites had to eat the Lamb to be saved. Just like them it could not be a symbolic Lamb but its real flesh consumed; so too are we to partake of the reality of the feast provided by our Lord.

People may argue that it is not possible for Christ to save the blessed mother at her conception as the atoning sacrifice on the Cross has not yet occurred; this same argument by critics of the Eucharist argue similarly. But the fact is that God dwells outside of time where everything is in the eternal present without future or past. In the Scriptures according to St. Johns account of Jesus’ Colloquy at Capernaum in chapter 6 he said, “do this in remembrance of me” as translated into English but this is often a misunderstanding as to what Jesus was really saying because in English “remembrance means to recall a past event which is an approximation of the Greek meaning since there is no corresponding English equivalent. . However, the Koine Greek word used was “anamnesis” which has in its meaning an expectation of a miracle which transcends time and place. So what was truly being conveyed by Jesus’ words recorded by St. John is that the disciples truly ate the sacrificed flesh and drank the spilt Blood of our Lord just as we do today sharing in that one sacrifice presented by our Lord and shared by the entire Church in all its glorious manifestations. Therefore His atoning sacrifice provides for all humanity past, present and future.

All Christians will agree that there is at least one person who never sinned and that is our Lord and Savior. Being an exception means that there may be other possibilities of exceptions although we can agree that the circumstances of our Savior are unique being fully man and fully God. No other person future or past can make such a claim. As you know the Bible says that the blessed mother is "full" of God's grace at the Annunciation. We believe that God had prepared her for that moment of saying yes to be the God bearer. The womb that bore and nurtured our Lord is the Ark of the New Covenant which is Christ our Lord. God cannot dwell within sin so the blessed mother was saved by God's grace before she was even conceived in the womb immaculately. She was in need of a Savior as we all are and our Lord provided for her salvation and indeed her sanctity even before her conception. Being and remaining full of grace means that the blessed mother of God never sinned but would have been tempted to sin as the new Eve just as the original Eve was tempted. But just as her Son withstood temptation, her grace was so great that she was able to overcome all temptation.

Yes, the Church teaches the truth that the blessed mother of God was assumed into heaven at the end of her earthly life.

(John the Baptist)Mary is a mediatrix
Mary is a co-redemptrix

(Cristoiglesia) Here is the teaching of the Church from the Catechism in regards to your claims:

488 "God sent forth his Son", but to prepare a body for him, 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":
The Father of mercies willed that the Incarnation should be preceded by assent on the part of the predestined mother, so that just as a woman had a share in the coming of death, so also should a woman contribute to the coming of life.

489 After a long period of waiting the times are fulfilled in her, the exalted Daughter of Sion, and the new plan of salvation is established."

494 At the announcement that she would give birth to "the Son of the Most High" without knowing man, by the power of the Holy Spirit, Mary responded with the obedience of faith, certain that "with God nothing will be impossible": "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be [done] to me according to your word." Thus, giving her consent to God's word, Mary becomes the mother of Jesus. Espousing the divine will for salvation wholeheartedly, without a single sin to restrain her, she gave herself entirely to the person and to the work of her Son; she did so in order to serve the mystery of redemption with him and dependent on him, by God's grace:

As St. Irenaeus says, "Being obedient she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race." Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert. . .: "The knot of Eve's disobedience was untied by Mary's obedience: what the virgin Eve bound through her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith." Comparing her with Eve, they call Mary "the Mother of the living" and frequently claim: "Death through Eve, life through Mary."

502 The eyes of faith can discover in the context of the whole of Revelation the mysterious reasons why God in his saving plan wanted his Son to be born of a virgin. These reasons touch both on the person of Christ and his redemptive mission, and on the welcome Mary gave that mission on behalf of all men.

511 The Virgin Mary "cooperated through free faith and obedience in human salvation" (LG 56). She uttered her yes "in the name of all human nature" (St. Thomas Aquinas, STh III, 30, 1). By her obedience she became the new Eve, mother of the living.

964 Mary's role in the Church is inseparable from her union with Christ and flows directly from it. "This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ's virginal conception up to his death"; it is made manifest above all at the hour of his Passion:
Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross. There she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, joining herself with his sacrifice in her mother's heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim, born of her: to be given, by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross, as a mother to his disciple, with these words: "Woman, behold your son."

967 By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus) of the Church.

968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace."

969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."

970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it. No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."

973 By pronouncing her "fiat" at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body."

(John the Baptist) Mary is the Queen of Heaven

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus is the King and the mother of the King in the first century was always called the Queen. We give the same respect for our king to his mother.

(John the Baptist) Yet none of these doctrines about mary are found anywhere within the pages of Scriptures!

(Cristoiglesia) Really? So are you are saying that none of these teachings are in the Bible either explicitly or implicitly and that it is impossible to come to the theological conclusions of any of these teachings from the Bible. Additionally, are you not putting the cart before the horse by attributing to the Bible, which is the product of the Church, a teaching authority that usurps the authority of the Church given by Christ? In other words, how does something not being mentioned in the Bible detract from the teaching of the Church? It does not.

(John the Baptist) The mary of the bible is far different from the picture portrayed above. Indeed the biblical mary is a "bondslave of the lord", Luke 1:38, a humble servant of God.

The humble attitude of the biblical mary is far removed from the veneration paid to her by the Roman catholic church.

(Cristoiglesia) Behold the handmaid. With all modesty and humility of heart and mind, the blessed Virgin consented to the divine will: and from that moment in her was conceived the Savior and Redeemer of the world. (Witham) --- Thus ought the virgin, who brought forth meekness and humility itself, to shew forth an example of the most profound humility. (St. Ambrose)

(John the Baptist) There is nothing in the bible about any of the doctrines about mary held by your church.

(Cristoiglesia) You cannot be serious.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with "John the Baptist"

2011-05-04T09:19:00.001+08:00

(John The Baptist) Its interesting that the Rock in Matthew is Jesus and not peter. Through out all the Bible the Rock has always been Jesus, not peter.

(Cristoiglesia) Clearly in this instance Jesus is speaking to St. Peter in the presence of the other disciples and is in the process of changing Simon’s name to Peter. Throughout the Old Testament name changes are significant and most often represent a calling to special service to God. In this case Jesus is emphasizing the fact that Simon, being known as Peter, is the prime minister of His Church as prophesied.

Matthew 16:18: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church."

Of course, this is the verse where our Lord appointed Simon as the leader of the disciples, head of the Church on earth and the Pope. It is believed by some Protestants that they can defend their position of Simon not receiving the authority from Jesus by using the original Greek.

The claim made is that there is a difference between the Greek words “petra” and “petros”. Now, if this discussion between Jesus and Simon had occurred a few centuries earlier before Attic Greek had ceased to be and lost in antiquity it might be a valid argument. However, in the first century when this discussion occurred the Greek language was Koine Greek instead. In Koine Greek there is no difference in the meaning between “petra” and “petros” except in Koine Greek “petra” is feminine and “petros” is the masculine form. So what I am saying is that one is making a great error in interpretation to assign the Attic Greek meanings large stone and small stone, which was used in ancient Greek poetic writings, when that language was gone for centuries in usage.

Now, let us look at the Aramaic which is the familial language spoken by Jesus and the disciples which is the language which this discussion recorded in the Scriptures in Koine Greek occurred. We know that Jesus spoke in Aramaic because His words on the cross are in Aramaic (Matt 27:46). In fact, the book of Matthew was originally written in Aramaic according to most scholars including myself. Also in the St. Paul’s letters to the Galatians and to the Corinthians we see the word Cephas a total of eight times which is the English equivalent of kepha. Kepha always means rock. So, in Matthew 16:18 it would read using the Aramaic “You are Kepha and on this Kepha I will build my Church.” There is no big rock and pebble as evidence was given in the then dead Attic Greek. So in the original language Jesus does not offer a contrast but instead He clearly is calling Simon the rock.

If one is not yet convinced that the rendering in Attic Greek is improper let us look at Matthew 16:18 with the Attic Greek interpretation and see which one makes the most sense…. “Blessed are you Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my father in heaven. And I tell you, you are just a little pebble and upon this rock I will build my Church.” Instead of the Koine Greek “you are Rock (Petros) and upon this rock (petros) I will build my Church. He goes on to give Simon Peter the keys to heaven showing the authority of the rock named Peter. As the King of Kings Jesus is making Peter His prime minister of His kingdom and we can see the foreshadowing from Isaiah 22: 21-22 and the leader of the flock from John 21:15-17. It shows in Isaiah the passing on of the keys from one to another for authority of the kingdom just as the authority of the papacy is passed on.

(John the Baptist) Its irrelevant what you or the catholic church says for neither one of you have the truth. The truth is that Jesus is the Rock the church was built on not peter.

(Cristoiglesia) It is interesting that you claim to be a follower of the Bible and yet deny the teaching of Scripture that says that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”. So, your argument against the Church that Christ founded not having the truth is, in fact, contrary to the teaching of Scripture. I assume you ignore this teaching as it threatens your prejudice against Christ’s Church and your own desire to support your disobedience by ignoring this teaching and remaining outside of his Church preferring instead those false teachers that satisfy your itching ears.

(John the Baptist) In Matthew 18 Jesus also gives all authority to all the disciples not just to peter.

(Cristoiglesia) Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Here Jesus is speaking to and about Peter. Perhaps you are speaking of Matthew 18:18 when Jesus said the following:

Matthew 18:18 (New International Version, ©2011)
18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be[a] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[b] loosed in heaven.

Here Jesus was indeed speaking to all the disciples and giving this authority to them and thus to the Church. This, however, does not detract from the clear teaching of Scripture that St. Peter is the prime minister of the Church appointed by Christ to fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah.

(John the Baptist) Therefore what you says is irrelevant for you do not have the truth.

(Cristoiglesia) As I quoted from Scriptures Christ’s Church the Catholic Church does have the assurance of truth as the Bible calls the Church the “pillar and foundation of the truth”. What I have shown you is the teaching of the Church for 2000 years. May the Holy Spirit inspire you top the truth proclaimed in Christ’s own Church. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Authority of the Pope

2011-05-03T05:13:00.000+08:00

(John the Baptist) The church is the body of Jesus and Jesus is the head of the body. The pope has no authority over the church, only Jesus has that authority. If the pope did have authority then he has to follow what Jesus says not what he wants. Listening to all the things the pope is saying, it seems the pope is moving away from the truths in the Bible and away from Jesus.

Colossians 1:15
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.

(Cristoiglesia) Let us look at what the whole body of Scriptures says instead of using an eisegetical approach to understanding as you have done. The Bible teaches us that Jesus is the high priest, St. Peter is the prime minister and the twelve disciples are the foundation stones of the Church. Unlike what you claim without citing a single example, papal teaching has never contradicted anything that our Lord has taught but instead has confirmed His teaching and proclaimed it to the world. Nothing in the Scriptures you provided denies the authority that Jesus gave to St. Peter and His successors as prophesied by Isaiah in fulfilling the Scriptures. The Church is given all authority on earth by Jesus and St. Peter and His successors are the prime ministers. In the late first century after the founding of the Church at Pentecost St. Ignatius the third bishop of St. Peters bishopric at Antioch defined the Church as it was understood in the apostolic times as those who gather around the bishops saying, “where the bishops is there is the Church” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans). Without the Pope and the other bishops there is no Church as the visible and invisible Church are those who are obedient and faithful to the bishop. The Pope is the visible head of the Church serving as the servant of servants.

Jesus gave the authority to St. Peter saying to him with the witness of the other disciples:

Matthew 16:13-19 (King James Version)
13When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

In using the construction vernacular Jesus was speaking of building His Church and giving the authority, represented by the keys, to St. Peter. In doing so He fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah of the Messiah appointing an earthly prime minister of the Church and establishing the enduring office of prime minister that would endure for all times.

(John the Baptist) Jesus says He is the head of the church not the pope.

(Cristoiglesia) As you can clearly see, Jesus being the high priest does not detract from the fact that Jesus with the authority of the High priest appointed St. Peter as His prime minister of His enduring Church on earth. We further understand from Scriptures that it is this Church under the leadership of the prime minister appointed by Jesus that contains those who are obedient and faithful to Christ’s desire that we be one in His Church.

John 17:21 (King James Version)
21That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Why the blessed mothers perpetual virginity?

2011-04-30T10:34:00.000+08:00

I think the foremost reason that the blessed mother’s perpetual virginity is important is because it puts into question the very veracity of Christ as the messiah prophesied.

We see from Scriptures that it is likely that the blessed mother had made a vow of virginity even before the angel of the Lord visited her which is evidenced by her answer to the angel saying, “how can this be done because I know not man?” St Augustine and subsequent fathers of the Church and theologians have reasoned from this response that she indeed had made a vow of virginity and subsequently it would be unreasonable for one so faithful and obedient to God to have at any time abdicated her vow.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae there are three reasons why she was forever virgin:

First, it would follow that since Jesus was the only begotten Son of the Father that He should also be the only begotten Son of His mother.

Secondly, the virginal womb of the blessed mother is the shrine of the Holy Spirit where Christ was formed and subsequently nurtured.

Thirdly, such a premise would be derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God’s mother. It would suggest that she was ungrateful and unsatisfied to God for the gift of such a Son.

It is further fitting and logical that the blessed mother of God is the tabernacle of the Lord and her womb is the ark of the New Covenant. Just like the ark carried by the Israelites that contained the law of God, Aaron’s rod and manna from God it should be understood that no man could ever touch what God had consecrated to himself and live. So, it would follow that if St. Joseph, as some have claimed through eisegesis of Scripture, had consummated his marriage to the blessed mother of God and lived then it would put into question even the possibility that Jesus was the messiah prophesied which would mean that the world still awaits the messiah or Savior of the world.

One can find in the writings of Origen and St. Ambrose further explanation of the impossibility that the blessed mother of God was not the perpetual virgin as the Church has always claimed her to be for 2000 years. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion with Frank about the Eucharist

2010-12-15T14:15:00.000+08:00

(Frank) Introduction - Jesus' own statements When Jesus instituted the Church ordinance of the Lord's Supper or Communion at His "Last Supper," He made some statements that the Roman Catholic Church has taken to be a literal saying.

(Cristoiglesia) First of all let me correct an error of yours. Jesus did not institute an “ordinance” but a Sacrament and His words were literal.

(Frank) And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of me." And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood. (Luke 22:19-20)

This saying, or something similar to it, is given in three of the four gospels and in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. In all accounts, Jesus is quoted as saying, "this is My body" referring to the unleavened bread and "this is My blood of the covenant" referring to the cup. However, it is obvious that from the situation that these words were not meant to be taken literally. How could Jesus, still present in His own body, say that bread and wine were His body and blood? Jesus told them to commemorate His sacrifice and New Covenant by using the bread and wine as symbols of His body and blood.

(Cristoiglesia) The Passover Seder was completed on the cross with the words, “It is finished” meaning the Old Covenant relationship with man but it began in the upper room. Jesus was acting as both priest and as the victim. As you mentioned Jesus instructed the disciples to do this in “remembrance” of me in most English translations. However “remembrance is not a direct translation but what we call an approximation since there is no word in the destination language that has exactly the same meaning. So “Remembrance” is as close as one can get to the original Koine Greek. The Greek word that is being translated is “anamnesis” which does not mean to recall a past event to memory as is the meaning of “remembrance”. Instead it means that a miracle is occurring where the past or the future is being made present. It represents an act that transcends time and place. In the case of the last supper Jesus is making the future present. Today when we receive the truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity Jesus is making the past present. We are literally present at the foot of the Cross when the Eucharist is celebrated.

Jesus NEVER said to commemorate His sacrifice or that the elements were symbols but instead in the most literal language possible said, “This is my Body, This is my Blood.” Actually, Jesus was speaking literally and was certainly not using symbolic language that might indicate that what He was saying is not literal. Jesus was present at the Last Supper in both a corporeal natural way and in a sacramental way in the elements He consecrated. This is identical to the way He is present today in the Eucharist. It truly is a mystery as to how He can be present in these ways simultaneously but nonetheless it is a religious truth. We could never understand it but our inability to understand does not make this impossible. It is no different than believing God is omnipotent even though there is no way to comprehend this with our finite minds and intellect. Certainly the creator of all things can make Himself into the bread and the wine.

There is no indication from any teaching of Christ on the Eucharist that the bread and the wine are symbols but instead Jesus said, “This is my Body, this is my blood”. He never said that the elements of the bread and wine were symbols but used literal language instead. Had this been His intent He could have easily said exactly what you claim but He did not do so.

(Frank) Passover - the origin of Communion The use of the unleavened bread and wine did not originate with the Lord at the Last Supper. Jews had been celebrating Passover for thousands of years. The unleavened bread was a symbol of the bread that did not have time to rise, because of their haste in getting away from Pharaoh in their flight from Egypt. The Jews had a tradition regarding the unleavened bread (matzah). Three matzahs are put together (for the Christian, representing the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The middle matzah is broken, wrapped in a white cloth, and hidden, representing the death and burial of Jesus. The matzah itself is designed to represent Jesus, since it is striped and pierced, which was prophesized by Isaiah, David, and Zechariah. Following the Seder meal, the "buried" matzah is "resurrected," which was foretold in the prophecies of David.

(Cristoiglesia) While I like the symbolism for Christians such as the 3 pieces of unleavened bread representing the three persons of the Trinity (I know that you are a modalist and did not mean Trinity but I like the Christian symbolism as well) the Jews would not agree with you.

(Frank) It was during a Passover Seder that Jesus proclaimed that the meal represented Himself and that He was instituting the New Covenant, which was foretold by Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah. The celebration of this covenant has become the ordinance of communion in the Christian Church. At the end of the meal, Jesus took the unleavened bread, broke it, and said that it represented His body. Then He took the cup of wine, which would have been the third cup of the Seder - the cup of redemption. He said that it was the new covenant in His blood "poured out for you." It is through the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus Christ that we are declared clean before God, allowing those of us who choose to accept the pardon, to commune with Him - both now and forevermore through the eternal life He offers.

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus NEVER claimed that the elements of the Eucharist represented Himself but instead He proclaimed it to be His truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. He said “This is my Body, this is my Blood”. There was no indication that what He instituted represented His Body and Blood but the words were literal indicating a literal understanding. He did not establish an ordinance but a Sacrament. It is wrong for you to add to Scriptures your own meaning to Christ’s plain and literal teaching. You are not applying sound hermeneutical practice but instead using eisegesis which is injurious to proper understanding and as such it has resulted in false teaching or what may be referred to as the creation of a doctrine of men with no biblical support.

(Frank) John 6 - Jesus declares the Eucharist to be His body? The primary passages cited to support the doctrine of transubstantiation are in John chapter 6. In this chapter, Jesus makes statements such as these:

Jesus therefore said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. (John 6:53-56)

(Cristoiglesia) Surely and truly these are literal words by our Lord.

(Frank) Reading this verse out of context makes it look like Roman Catholics have a good point that Jesus indicated that you must eat His body and blood. However, we
will find a different meaning when we examine the entire chapter in the context of what Jesus was saying. So, get out your Bible and follow along as we look at John 6 to determine if it really is literal or symbolic.

Where does this conversation start? The chapter begins with the feeding of the 5,000 with bread and fish. It is not coincidence that this event, which takes place at the beginning of the chapter is referenced again at the point that Jesus declares Himself to be the bread of life. The crowd that had been fed real bread at the beginning of the chapter were back to get another free handout:

Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. (John 6:26)

You must believe in Me - Jesus' main message The rabbis had quoted Psalms 72:16 to prove that the Messiah, when he came, would outdo Moses with manna from heaven. Jesus, claiming to be the Messiah, offered to give bread for eternal life (John 6:27). The crowd then asked Jesus, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" (John 6:28) Jesus' answer was:
"The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."(John 6:29)

(Cristoiglesia) Just a note here, Jesus was calling for a right belief in Him and not a man-made interpretation of what it means to believe.

(Frank) You will notice that He did not mention anything about eating, but only about believing.

(Cristoiglesia) He will!

(Frank) Jesus declares the metaphor next, they talked about a miraculous sign and the manna God had given them in the desert (a references to what the rabbis had said about the Messiah). Jesus declared Himself to be the true bread out of heaven (John 6:32-33).The Jews asked for this bread, demonstrating that they did not understand that Jesus was giving them an earthly metaphor for a spiritual truth. Jesus' response was to define the metaphor:

Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go
hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. (John 6:35)

It is obvious from this statement that Jesus is NOT referring to physical bread. All who eat physical bread will hunger again. Jesus is declaring Himself to be spiritual bread. Those who "eat" of the spiritual bread by believing in Him will not hunger again. Jesus has clearly defined the "eating" of Himself as "He who comes to me" and the drinking of Himself as "he who believes in me". In this verse, Jesus has defined the entire metaphor as being a symbolic representation of spiritual truth. One can find other examples of "eating" and "drinking" from Jesus' other sermons:

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. (Matthew 5:6)

If anyone believes in Jesus, his spiritual hunger will be satisfied. The Eucharist cannot satisfy one's physical hunger. Neither can it satisfy one's spiritual hunger. This hunger can only be satisfied by the living bread (John 6:51), which is the living Lord Himself.

You must believe in Me - How many times does Jesus need to say it? Following the
statement of John 6:35, Jesus again makes the claim that they must believe in Him:

But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. (John 6:36) For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:40)

Jesus has already told the unbelievers four times that they must believe in Him, yet they still don't get it! The Jews started complaining again that Jesus claimed to be bread from heaven (John 6:42-43). Obviously, real bread does not come from heaven. It comes from grain grown on the earth. Jesus could only be referring to spiritual bread. The analogy is quite clear that Jesus is the spiritual bread from heaven that gives spiritual (eternal) life. Physical bread gives physical life. Spiritual bread gives spiritual life. Jesus talked
twice more about believing in Him:

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:44)

I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. I am the bread of life. (John 6:47-48)

You will notice that I have combined verses 47 and 48. This is the natural flow of the original Greek. All the verse notation in our modern Bibles is NOT in the original Greek and was artificially added. If you read the Bible using verse and chapter breaks as indication of context, you can get into real trouble. Jesus clearly states that those who believe have everlasting life and that He is the "bread" that gives that life. It has nothing to do with the Eucharist and nothing to do with eating. It is an earthly example comparing physical bread for physical life with heavenly bread (Jesus Himself) for eternal life. The symbolism is quite clear. Jesus continues to pound away at the difference between physical bread and spiritual bread:

Your forefathers ate the manna [physical bread] in the desert, yet they died. (John 6:49) But here is the bread that comes down from heaven [spiritual bread - Jesus],which a man may eat and not die. (John 6:50)

If you eat the Eucharist, you will still die. It is only by belief that one will live forever.

"Bread of heaven" for the world vs. Eucharist for the believer However, if you "eat" the Bread of Life, you will live forever:

I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." (John 6:51)

(Cristoiglesia) I would remind you that the manna from heaven was real food and not symbolic. If the Israelites had not eaten the real food (manna) and ate a symbolic food as you describe as faith they would have died in the desert. The faith was fulfilled by the manna just as our faith is fulfilled by eating the truly, real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord. The food that Jesus is speaking of is the food for eternal life. He goes on to explain this in the most literal of language for those that doubts as you do what he means.

If one understood the culture of the time they would never come to a conclusion that the teaching of our Lord was figurative. In Arab countries today “to eat the flesh and drink the blood” in a figurative sense is to inflict upon a person extreme injury by false accusation and it was the same in Jerusalem in the first century. So if indeed, according to the understanding of the time, Jesus was to say this He would be promising everlasting life to someone for hating Him and slandering Him. That would make Jesus’ teaching nonsensical as He would be saying that one who reviles Him would have eternal life.

(Frank) Jesus declares that this spiritual bread is His body, which He gives for the life of the world. This is not a vague reference to the Eucharist, but a reference to the sacrifice of His body and blood, which He gave at the cross of Calvary. The Eucharist is not given for the world, but is given to the believer. However, Jesus' body was given as a sacrifice for the sins of the entire world (John 1:29, John 3:16, 2Corinthians 5:19, 1 John 2:2, 1 John 4:14).

The Jews still did not understand that Jesus was giving them spiritual truth and they said:

Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" (John 6:52)

This is an obvious giveaway that the Jews had no spiritual discernment and weren't “getting it." The whole time, Jesus had been comparing Himself as spiritual food for eternal life and they are still thinking about their stomachs! It was like Nicodemas asking how He could be born again by entering into his mother's womb a second time. The parallel is obvious. You are born physically in the first birth. You must be born spiritually in the second birth to gain eternal life. Likewise, you eat physical bread to live physically, but you must "eat" (i.e., believe) spiritual bread (Jesus) to live eternally.

(Cristoiglesia) Wrong! Nowhere does Jesus say that we must eat spiritual bread (whatever that is). If they had any doubts about what Jesus was saying He made it clear in verses 53-58 where He emphasized the literalness of His teaching lest anyone had any doubts. He told them to gnaw on His Flesh and drink His Blood. Certainly these are NOT the words of metaphor but an emphasis on the literal teaching.

(Frank) Transubstantiation problems If we interpret the verses that you must literally eat Jesus' body and blood, we run into some obvious problems. First, the verses claim that you must eat His body and drink His blood to have eternal life. Over and over again in this chapter, Jesus made it clear that eternal life came from believing in Him. We "eat" Jesus only in a spiritual sense. Eating is not a spiritual act - only believing.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, Jesus said we must believe in Him for eternal life but this does not exclude His commandment to eat His Body and to drink His Blood. Jesus said this bread is my flesh, which destroys your contention that Jesus was speaking metaphorically only.

(Frank) The thief on the cross did not eat Jesus' body or drink His blood, so Jesus lied when He told him that He would be with Him in heaven that very day. Of course Jesus did not lie! The man believed in Jesus and was given eternal life without eating His body and drinking His blood.

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus said to the thief that he would be in heaven. This was a promise of eternal life but Jesus did not say when he would be with Him in heaven “that very day”. That would have been impossible since Jesus had not yet resurrected. This man was saved under the Old Covenant by Jesus looking into His heart and knowing His belief. David was saved yet did not receive the blessed feast of our Lord as did the other Old Testament prophets and patriarchs.

(Frank) In John chapter 6, Jesus was illustrating spiritual truths with earthly examples. Eternal life comes from belief, not eating the Eucharist. To test whether Jesus was referring to the Eucharist, substitute the word "Eucharist" in every instance where Jesus uses the term "bread." You will soon find that this interpretation makes Jesus proclaim heretical ideas.

(Cristoiglesia) I tried it and you are wrong.

(Frank) The second problem is that if one were to interpret the entire discourse in terms of the Eucharist, Jesus would have been talking utter nonsense to the Jews. Why would Jesus be telling the unsaved Jews about the Eucharist, which was to be given to the church, but had not even been instituted yet (not until the Passover on the eve before Jesus was crucified)? He wasn't! Jesus was trying to make them understand that belief in Him (the bread from heaven) was the only way gain eternal (spiritual) life.

Third, the Bible prohibits the eating of blood:

As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality." (Acts 21:25)

If the Eucharist really becomes the blood of Christ, then we are sinning by eating it!

(Cristoiglesia) It was hard teaching and no one who heard the teaching understood its meaning. To understand this with the privilege of knowing the future we find that this colloquy occurred a year before the sacrifice of Calvary and Jesus gave it in preparation for the disciples to understand when everything unfolded on the cross. It was not fully understood until His resurrection. Then the twelve came to understanding. They understood that His sacrifice replaced the Passover sacrifice and that just as the Israelites were required to eat the Paschal Lamb so were they to eat who they now knew was the Lamb of God prophesied. What was originally hard teaching became clear. If the Israelites of the Exodus had not eaten the Lamb then their first born sons would have died. It was the eating of the Lamb that gave them life as it is the eating of the Lamb of God that gives us life. They could not have eaten a symbolic lamb or a substitute of the lamb but the actual lamb for their first born sons to live. So too must we eat of His Body which is the Lamb of God.

In truth what confused them was that the teaching of Moses said that to drink blood of an animal separated one from the familial relationship of the Old Covenant. They did not know of the final sacrifice to come where the eating of the flesh and the drinking of the Messiah’s blood is what brings one into the familial relationship with our Lord and gives us eternal life. Unless we eat His flesh and drink His blood we have no life eternal in us. Some who heard his colloquy believed He was teaching them to leave the Old Covenant relationship with God that they enjoyed and that is why all but the twelve left Jesus and never followed Him again. In truth He was preparing them for the new relationship of the New Covenant.

(Frank) A fourth problem is that the Catholic Catechism claims that Jesus is sacrificed at every Mass,13 while the Bible claims that Jesus' one sacrifice was sufficient:

When Jesus therefore had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit. (John 19:30) For the death that He died, He died to sin, once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. (Romans 6:10) For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. (Hebrews 7:26-27) But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. (Hebrews 9:11-12) Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now He has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of Himself. (Hebrews 9:26) so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and He will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for Him. (Hebrews 9:28) By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:10) But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, He sat down at the right hand of God. (Hebrews 10:12) For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. (Hebrews 10:14) For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; (1 Peter 3:18)

(Cristoiglesia) You make a gross error in thinking that the sacrifice that occurs at every Mass is a different sacrifice than the one from the cross. The truth is that it is the self same sacrifice that we celebrate through the miracle of our Lord of anamnesis. He makes the past present for us and we are present at the foot of the cross with St. John and the female disciples of our Lord. We are there with the whole Church, Militant, Suffering and Triumphant and we all along with our high priest Jesus offer to the Father this sacrifice for the redemption of mankind. This is the belief that Jesus spoke of that we must discern in our spirit as taught by the Holy Spirit that indwells in His people of the New Covenant. Jesus calls for us to believe but it is a call to the right belief and that is that the bread is His Body and the wine is His blood. St. Paul in Scriptures in His epistle to the Corinthian Church speaks of the necessity of discerning the Body or we bring condemnation on ourselves and can even die. Certainly he is not speaking of something symbolic for one cannot be guilty of injury to a person simply by attacking a picture of a person. Why would we be condemned for believing a metaphor?

(Frank) What did Jesus say He was talking about Jesus ends the discourse by telling them that He was talking about spiritual truths:

The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. (John 6:63)

Jesus establishes the metaphor He will use throughout the sermon that coming, believing, eating, drinking - all of these lead to eternal life. They are not different things but the same thing. Jesus is directing those who were seeking merely physical benefits from Him to the fact that He does not promise such things: He promises spiritual nourishment to all who come to Him as their source.

(Cristoiglesia) Now you are coming to a ridiculous conclusion. Jesus has just commanded His followers to eat His flesh and drink His blood and then states that to do so is to no avail or a waste of time. Why would Jesus command them to do something that would be pointless? He did not and you are trying to twist the interpretation away from the Catholic understanding in a most ridiculous way.

(Frank) Other physical examples to illustrate spiritual truths Bread was not the only earthly example Jesus gave to try to make people understand that they must come to Him. Jesus said that He was the light of the world:

When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." (John 8:12)

Does this mean that Jesus was composed of fire?

(Cristoiglesia) This metaphor compares Christ’s teaching to enlightenment.

(Frank) He also said that He was the gate:

Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep. (John 10:7)
I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. (John 10:9) Does this mean that He was made out of wood and that He would give them grass?

(Cristoiglesia) In this metaphor Jesus compares himself to a gate through which one must pass to eternal life.

(Frank) Jesus claimed to be the good shepherd of sheep:

"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. (John 10:11)

Jesus never was a "real" shepherd, but was a carpenter by trade.

(Cristoiglesia) This metaphor says He is like a shepherd. There is no evidence that Jesus was ever a carpenter.

(Frank)Jesus claimed to be a vine:

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. (John 15:1) "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. (John 15:5)

Does this mean that Jesus was part plant?

(Cristoiglesia) In this metaphor Jesus compares himself to a vine that connects him to life.

(Frank) Jesus also claimed to be able to give "living water:"

Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have asked him and he would have given you living water." (John 4:10)

Does this mean that we should institute a church ordinance in which water is given to people in order to be saved?

(Cristoiglesia) This metaphor compares Jesus to life giving water.

Clearly the preceding statements are metaphor but there is no parallel between Jesus saying “this is my Body, this is my Blood” because with the metaphors it is possible that they can have a symbolic sense. His Body and His Blood have no symbolic sense because Flesh is nothing like the bread and the wine is nothing like His blood in a metaphorical sense.

(Frank)This is the most obvious example that Jesus was talking about the same thing in John 4 as John 6. In both instances, He used the term "living." Jesus is the "living bread" and the "living water." Neither example was referring to a physical reality, but to spiritual truth. Like the Jews in John 6, this Samaritan woman had no clue about what Jesus was talking about. As bread is required for physical life, so water is also required for physical life. Jesus provides the living (spiritual) water that is required for eternal life:

Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." (John 4:13-14)

Jesus used many different physical, earthly examples of physical life in order to convey the reality of how to achieve spiritual (eternal) life. The bread, given in John 6, is just one of those examples of using an earthly example to convey spiritual truth. Jesus Himself defined His terms quite clearly as symbolic spiritual truth.

(Cristoiglesia) While His metaphorical teaching illustrates the spiritual aspects of His teaching He was not speaking of only the spiritual aspects of our beliefs but also instituted His great feast for eternal life. Just as His literal flesh and His literal blood is the food of eternal life so too was the literal manna eaten in the wilderness by the Israelites. As I said previously in parallel to the exodus it is necessary to eat the truly real and substantial Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of our Lord to be saved. A symbolic eating will not save anyone.

(Frank) Church Fathers regarding the church fathers, Roman Catholics have also stated that all of them believed that the Eucharist is the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. However, this is not true. Augustine, in commenting on this very passage said:

Let them then who eat, eat on, and them that drink, drink; let them hunger and thirst; eat Life, drink Life. That eating is to be refreshed; but you are in such wise refreshed, as that that whereby you are refreshed, does not fail. That drinking, what is it but to live? Eat Life, drink Life; you will have life, and the Life is Entire. But then this shall be, that is, the Body and Blood of Christ shall be each man's Life; if what is taken in the Sacrament visibly is in truth itself eaten spiritually, drunk spiritually. For we have heard the Lord Himself saying, It is the Spirit that gives life, but the flesh profits nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are Spirit and Life."

(Cristoiglesia) What the great doctor of the Church is saying is that we must discern the Body and Blood of our Lord with our spiritual senses as the miracle cannot be understood in the fleshly or carnal intellect unless convicted by the Holy Spirit. He is speaking of an openness of each individual to the Spirit of God.

(Frank) Augustine also indicated that the sacrament was to be commemorated, but not relived:

Augustine (Faustus 20.18, 20): "Before the coming of Christ, the flesh and blood of this sacrifice were foreshadowed in the animals slain; in the passion of Christ the types were fulfilled by the true sacrifice; after the ascension of Christ, this sacrifice is commemorated in the sacrament.

(Cristoiglesia) Commemorated does not mean that what we receive is not real nor does it mean that the Mass is not the actual one Sacrifice on Calvary represented by Christ’s miracle of anamnesis.

St. Ignatius in His letter to the Smyrnaeans in 107AD said, “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again.”

Around the year 150 AD Justyn Martyr said, “We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to take of it, except one who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration and is thereby living as Christ has enjoined. For not for common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the Word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished is both the flesh and the blood of the incarnate Jesus.” (Apologia prima pro Christianis)

St. Irenaeus in “Against Heresies” said the following at the end of the 2nd century said of Christ: “has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be His own Blood, from which He causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, He has established as His own Body, from which He gives increase to our own bodies.” He goes on to say, “If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could He rightly take bread, which is the same creation as our own, and confess it to be His Body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is His blood?”

St. Athanasius the Bishop of Alexandria said in 373 AD, “But after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed, then the bread is become the Body, and the wine the Blood, of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Sermo ad nuper baptizatos)

St. Ambrose makes it clear the understanding as literal in “The Sacraments” at the end of the 4th century, “You may perhaps say: My bread is ordinary. But that bread is bread before the words of the Sacraments; where the consecration has entered in, the bread becomes the flesh of Christ. And let us add this: How can that what is bread be the Body of Christ? By the consecration. The consecration takes place by certain words, but those words? By the Lord Jesus…. Therefore it is the words of Christ that confects the Sacrament. Nothing vague about that.”

There is no teaching of the early Church fathers of anyone not understanding Jesus’ words literally in John 6 and at the last supper.

(Frank) Real Presence only at communion? Roman Catholics take comfort in the idea that Jesus is with them at communion. However, before He left Earth, Jesus promised to be with us always, until He returns in glory:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (Matthew 28:19-20)

Jesus is with each believer at all times, not just when we take communion. I find that very reassuring and trust that it is true.

(Cristoiglesia) Nothing is as reassuring to the faithful as really and truly having His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity within us as He commanded us to do and as Christians who are in Christ have been doing for 2000 years. But you and others trust is a symbolic representation of His Body and Blood and refuse His great feast provided for all even though He told us that unless we eat His Body and drink His Blood we have no life in us. Indeed you have a false assurance. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

False teaching and discerning the Body of our Lord

2010-12-02T22:54:00.000+08:00

So many people do not question what is told to them by these false teachers that have no fear of God and have not even begun to have knowledge of God's desires for the faith of man. They just do not care because they are not afraid of what the consequences are for their lies. They are either Calvinists who believe that they can sin and that the sin has no effect on their souls or their eternal destination or they are atheists pretending to be men of God. Some are delusional or are consumed by pride and are desperately trying to justify their disobedience to our Lord.

Not everyone has a Berean spirit where they verify what is told to them. Most times they trust the person who tells them the lies instead of verifying them from their source which for Catholics is the Catechism. They do not realize that there is nothing in the Bible that can be contradicted by the Catechism. They must be in perfect harmony and by the guidance of the Paraclete they are perfectly aligned with each other. If it is not in the Catechism it is not taught by the Church. One would think that this fact would discourage people from bearing false witness against the Church since the lie can be revealed so easily with very little research. But, the ravening wolves that teach these things depend on the trust of the lemmings that follow them that keep them in darkness and the bondage of their misguided trust.

What happens is that it creates people that have developed a hatred for the caricature of the Catholic Church that has been created by these ravening wolves. The truth is that if the Catholic Church actually taught what they think it does there would be no Catholics. We would be the first to condemn it and depart. Even those who have been exposed to outstanding theological training at some of the best schools available can be deceived. I accepted so many things that I thought was the teaching of the Church which is not and never was.

My whole life I was a seeker of the first century faith of the disciples and the first followers of Christ who had to face so much persecution for their beliefs. I studied the New Testament for insight as to why they left the familial relationship with God under the Old Covenant for the teaching of Christ and the New Covenant and a new familial relationship with God which is a perfected one from the old in Christ. Certainly even those who had just observed the feeding of the 5000 could not continue to follow Him after His colloquy at Capernaum because they feared the loss of the familial relationship that they were promised and enjoyed as obedient Jews. It is significant that the discourse at Capernaum occurred just a year before the reality of Jesus' teaching would be realized from the cross on Golgotha. Both occurred at Passover and Jesus was slain at the same time as the lambs were being slain for Passover in the Temple fulfilling the prophecy of being the Lamb of God, the perfect sacrifice that only God could fulfill. To the disciples there was finally a full understanding of what Jesus was saying at Capernaum which was impossible to be understood with reason but only through the surrender to the Spirit through the humbling of seeing their rabbi slain. They understood the sacrifice in view of the Passover and saw the parallels.

The timing was one as I just mentioned where on the first day of Passover Jesus said that He would not drink of the cup of consummation but stopped the Passover celebration short of completion in the Upper Room after the cup of blessing and then they sang the Great Hillel and went to the Garden of Gethsemane at the base of the Mount of Olives. While in great agony, there Jesus prayed to the Father to take the cup of consummation from Him that He would receive on the cross. He prayed His prayer of surrender saying to His Father, "let them be one as you and I are one". He was arrested and the disciples except St. John and His female followers went into hiding. Only St. John of the twelve was witness to the consummation of what had begun the night before and he recorded the events in his Gospel. We know that Jesus cried "I thirst" and that a sponge was dipped into sour wine and brought to His lips with a hyssop branch. This was the cup of consummation that Jesus said He would not drink of until His kingdom come and that it would be shared with them in the kingdom He established by His sacrifice. It is significant that it was a hyssop branch which was the same that the blood of the Paschal Lamb was spread on the doorposts to protect the first born of Israel. Just as this act gave them life so too does the blood of Christ from the cross for humanity past, present and future. It is a timeless promise to humanity fulfilled by a perfect man and a perfect act of atonement. Jesus then said, It is consummated ending the Passover and beginning the redemptive work through Him. He bowed His head and gave up His spirit.

Imagine the impact when the disciples heard from St. John, the blessed mother and the other ladies present. They knew what they must do as well as what Christ had provided for them from the cross which is eternal life but for this life just like the Israelites they were required to eat the Lamb but not one of their own choosing which was a perfect male lamb but the Lamb of God. It could not be a substitute or a facsimile as that would not have saved the first born sons of Israel but the actual flesh of the Lamb as they had done. Now all of the teaching over the last year came into focus and was understood from Capernaum to the cross. Jesus Words came into real meaning and dwelled in their spirit when He said to them, he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood will abide in me and I in him. (John 6:56) He even said to gnaw on His flesh. These were not the words of metaphor but the plainest of teaching that was no longer the hard teaching of Synagogue in Capernaum but opened their eyes just clearly as St. Paul's eyes were opened after his experience on the road to Damascus. The followers of our Lord thereafter have hungered for His flesh and His Blood and realized that there is no substitute for this great feast He has provided of His truly real and substantial, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity that our Lord died to give us.

It is this reality and daily reminder through the Mass and continuing sacrifice from the rising sun to another that we join Him as we offer this sacrifice to the Father for all time. This is what gave the followers of Christ through those first three centuries of intense persecution the fortitude to endure. This is the same source of strength that gave the martyrs the the desire to be honored to be among those who were martyred before them. It is said that St. Ignatius cried out joyfully when the beasts consumed him and St. Peter begged to be crucified upside down so not to lessen the unique suffering that His Lord had endured.

Reflecting on these things makes the eisegesis that some will do of St. Paul's teaching that we MUST discern the Body and the Blood of our Lord and the condemnation he speaks of as ridiculous. He surely was not speaking of the "Body" represented by the invisible Church as reason for condemnation but by receiving the Body, the living flesh of our Lord unworthily as a non-believer in His miracle and His great feast for eternal life. One does not receive condemnation for not discerning the invisible Church which is only known to God. God would not allow us to be taught that which is impossible for us to discern but instead teaches us through the ultimate test of faith which is to accept His unambiguous teaching to eat His truly real and substantial Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity which is only discerned in the spirit of one abiding in Him and He in us. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

The Church is the fountain of truth and not Sola Scriptura

2010-11-27T01:12:00.001+08:00

Our Lord after his resurrection and before He ascended to heaven called together the disciples on a hill in Galilee and told them to teach all nations. Christ instructed them to teach all the doctrines, commandments and laws that He had taught to them. It is significant to note that these instructions are not constricted by the lifetimes of the disciples but was to be taught for all times which would be completed at the Parousia. This meant that the disciples were to have successors and that their oral teaching would be for all times protected by Christ which extended to their successors. In this way Christ assured that truth would be taught for all time to humanity. This was the great commission.

To those deep in Scriptures it seems quite odd that there are some who think that the disciples fulfilled their commission given to all by writing Scriptures and that they left no successors to continue the fullness of truth and the authority given by Christ in that commission. If this was the intent of our Lord it is odd that not all the disciples did what some suppose our Lord commanded which is to write Scriptures. In fact, only five disciples continued their teaching by writing Scripture. To those who believe that it is the Scriptures that continue the great commission then it is difficult to ignore that less than half of the disciples followed Christ’s commission. The disciple Matthew wrote a Gospel. John wrote a Gospel and three epistles. Peter wrote two epistles and James and Jude wrote one apiece. If the written Word was so important in Christ’s structure of the Church then it would be logical that there would be at least one epistle from Jesus; perhaps in which He would instruct us to give the written Word His only authority and not the 12 disciples as was His instructions in the great commission. But of course, it was obviously not His intent for His teaching to be spread only from written means but instead through the solid foundation He had built on which the disciples would continue to build with their successors which passed on the chrism from Christ through the disciples and their successors which has resulted in infallible truth for all times.

Another oddity for those who believe only in the written Word is why the Church founded by Christ existed for only a half century as a teaching Church and then is replaced by inspired books alone?

With changing circumstances it would seem reasonable that there be someone or some authority that can apply the apostolic teaching to the change of circumstances lest there be chaotic frustration instead of the application of truth. Take for example the doctrines; these doctrines may be studied with an almost equal danger of error as truth if there is no infallible teacher. An infallible authority would not restrict an enlightened development of truth for those who are seeking the question of what Christ meant in His teaching. Without it there is great possibility and indeed a certainty of error because there is not a word of Christ’s teaching that has not been subject to diverse interpretations. Many of these interpretations are compelling either by their scholarship or their application but are in contradiction of one another. Consequently the following question is illustrated by these facts; how are we to know the truth as these words surly are not enough for the truth to be known? Therefore it is necessary to have an infallible teacher to separate the diversity of opinions into the truth of Christ’s teaching. There must be revelation to satisfy the seeking soul instead of a growing set of diverse opinions and confusion. So, there must be an infallible teacher with the authority from Christ and of Christ as were the disciples for the truth to be known. The question is to those following Sola Scripture is whether the truth is essential or does it remain forever elusive depending on individual interpretation?

I believe the Scriptures demonstrate just how essential Jesus believed the truth to be. Before His death He gave certain men the authority to teach. He sent out the 72 disciples to teach with His authority. He said to them as well as the original 12, “He that hears you, hears me” which illustrates a transfer of the teaching by oral means to the Church across time to ensure the truth to all generations. It is through the oral teaching that the truth is found by the authority of Christ for truth. That truth is contained within the leadership of the Church and is today the Magisterium which is made up of the successors of those original disciples continuing the chrism given to them by Christ. God bless!

Fr. Joseph

Origin of the Catholic Priesthood

2010-11-16T11:10:00.000+08:00

There can be no doubt in studying the primitive Church that the priesthood developed from this origin. The proof of the distinct priesthood rests upon the cross of Calvary. If what Jesus did from the Cross was an atoning sacrifice for mankind and if the Eucharist is the ongoing sacrifice of the Mass then it is necessary for a sacerdotal ecclesiastical priesthood as sacrifice and priesthood are terms that depend on one another throughout the Scriptures. The priesthood gains its veracity from the fact that the Eucharist is a part of the Church from the beginning making it a necessary part of the Church.

We can see the prophecy of the sacerdotal priesthood of the New Covenant in the writings of the prophet Isaiah. He teaches that in the Messianic Kingdom that priests will be called even from among the non-Jews which sets apart the New Covenant Church from the Old Covenant priesthood.

Isaiah 66:21 (King James Version)
21And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD.

This priesthood is to fulfill the prophesy of Malachi for a permanent and continuous sacrifice:

Malachi 1:11 (King James Version)
11For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.

The following verses refer to the sacrifice of the bread and the wine by Melchisedec which scholars agree is the prototype of Christ. This also refers to the last supper where Jesus orders the repetition of the Mass.

Genesis 14:18 (New King James Version)
18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High.

Hebrews 5:5-10 (King James Version)
5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
6As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
7Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
8Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
10Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

So, it can be and has been said that the Church has received the ongoing sacrifice of our Lord and that as a result there is a sacerdotal priesthood necessarily separate from the priesthood of all believers that offers this continuous sacrifice to the Father of the Eucharist. As a result the priesthood has been changed by Christ and His sacrifice from the Old Covenant priesthood into the one prophesied in Scriptures by the prophets Isaiah and Malachi. So, in conclusion, if the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross was a atoning sacrifice for mankind then the priesthood is undeniable the priesthood prophesied and made necessary by Christ. We find this evidence in the colloquy of Capernaum and in the Gospel accounts of the last Supper. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Response to "Got Questions" about Sola Scriptura

2010-11-09T11:42:00.000+08:00

http://www.gotquestions.org/sola-scriptura.html

“Sola scriptura does not nullify the concept of church traditions.”

I would think not since this concept was foreign to the early Church. We do not see this concept at all in the early liturgical practice of the Church. Search as one might among the records of the Councils and Synods and even the writings of the Fathers and we find that an early origin of such a belief or practice is absent. Surely we do see the Scriptures being quoted to lend support to teachings found in pastoral letters or doctrinal directives but never independent of Sacred Tradition or the authority of the Magisterium.

“Rather, sola scriptura gives us a solid foundation on which to base church traditions.”

To the early Church they were only used as subsequent evidence of doctrines or teaching but never as the sole source of doctrine or pastoral teaching but instead in conjunction with the Magisterium and Sacred Tradition. So historically the concept of Sola Scriptura is a modernist idea based on the lack of any other authority like the Church which Protestants rejected; even though the Bible speaks to the Church as having all authority including even the power to bind and to loose. This is taught among them even apart from the Magisterium and the apostolic deposit of Sacred Tradition even though the Bible clearly contradicts such a departure from biblical truth. Sola Scriptura is thus not a “solid foundation” but instead a weakened foundation having been removed from the whole of the Church, the Scriptures, the Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium which describes a solid foundation of rock instead of a weakened foundation of sand that can be blown about by the whims of the reader in his eisegetical fanciful imagination. Wrested from the whole of the foundation of truth the truth becomes what ever one can imagine and the Bible becomes a collection of proof texts to guide the reader to destruction or to be used by the heretics to separate the seeking or the faithful from the truth.

“There are many practices, in both Catholic and Protestant churches, that are the result of traditions, not the explicit teaching of Scripture. It is good, and even necessary, for the church to have traditions. Traditions play an important role in clarifying and organizing Christian practice. At the same time, in order for these traditions to be valid, they must not be in disagreement with Gods Word. They must be based on the solid foundation of the teaching of Scripture.”

The Church agrees that the teaching of the Church must not disagree with Scriptures. We further would agree that not all teaching of the Church needs to be explicitly gleaned from Scriptures. Where we would strongly disagree would be in the assumption that the solid foundation for practices and doctrine comes solely from Scriptures independent of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium.

“The problem with the Roman Catholic Church, and many other churches, is that they base traditions on traditions which are based on traditions which are based on traditions, often with the initial tradition not being in full harmony with the Scriptures.”

I do not know about the many other churches but I do know that this statement is totally false when speaking of Christ’s Church the Catholic Church. There is no doctrine or teaching of the Church that is not in complete harmony with Scriptures whether implicitly or explicitly.

“That is why Christians must always go back to sola scriptura, the authoritative Word of God, as the only solid basis for faith and practice.”

Of course this defense of Sola Scriptura as not made the case for the conclusion it reaches. The Word of God is not expressed solely in its written form but also in its oral form which is the apostolic deposit of Sacred Tradition. But even this is not sufficient because for an infallible understanding of Scriptures there must be an infallible interpreter with the authority from God Himself to teach and that is the Catholic Church represented by the foundation of the bishops who are the successors of the original twelve disciples and also of the leadership of Christ’s prime minister which is the successor of St. Peter and sit in his seat of authority presiding over and in accordance with the Magisterium. It is the Holy Spirit that ensures that the infallible truth in matters of faith and morals are fully contained in the teaching and doctrines of the Church. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

How can the Son be less than the Father and still be God

2010-11-04T01:50:00.002+08:00

Let us endeavor to discern from the Scriptures and from reason the equality of the first and second persons of the Holy Trinity and examine how Jesus can be both equal to the Father and lesser than the Father in the oneness of the Trinity. There are many errors by the heretics in the understanding of Jesus as He related to His divine atoning work of salvation. Man’s desire to be exalted to being divine prompts many to try to explain in terms understood within the limits of our intellect the mysterious aspects of God. Most often man fails in this endeavor and concludes errors to be fact by failing to recognize his intellectual inferiority to the mind of God.

The incarnation being for the purpose of working out the salvation of humanity required Jesus to be the one mediator between God and man and in Scriptures there are indications that the Father is greater than the Son. This must be balanced with the fact that Jesus is also less than himself after the incarnation as is the nature of the flesh but the Scriptures clearly tell us of the fact that before the incarnation that He was eternal and after His atoning work His eternal substance remains. Jesus himself reveals and is quoted as saying that the Father is greater than I. Jesus at the incarnation was made less than Himself as being a servant instead of one who is served as is God. We find by Scriptures that Jesus is greater than Himself as God and lesser than Himself as a servant. Neither of these two roles as servant or as God are denied in Scriptures instead they reveal that Jesus is equal to the Father and also that the Father is greater than the Son.

Philippians 2:7 (King James Version)
7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

In the form of God Jesus is the Word made flesh but in the form of the servant He came forth from a woman under the same law as man to fulfill the law and serving within the law to redeem mankind from the law. He is the only perfect sacrifice that could accomplish the atoning work in that His perfection was not from being under the law but by being truly God. Just as God was not changed to be the servant so too the servant was not changed to be God. Man was not made without the Son and to say differently is to deny Scriptures that say:

Genesis 1:26 (King James Version)
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

It is clear that in the form of the servant of man Jesus was fully God in every sense. As the servant He was fully man in every sense. Neither the servant nor God changed into the other but both remained fully God and fully man in every aspect of reason. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Refuting criticisms of the Church with one claiming to have been a Catholic Catechist

2010-10-08T12:20:00.003+08:00

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “The New Testament was not penned by any Catholic. All of the writers of the New Testament were Jews, apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ, who never converted to the religion of Roman Catholicism.”

(Cristoiglesia) The New Testament writers were all Christians and followers of Christ. They were a part of the Church formed at Pentecost which was the Catholic Church. You would be correct if you stated that they were Jewish and Gentile converts; all biblical, historical and patristic evidence point to this fact. Jesus and the disciples founded only one Church and that is the Catholic Church which is the enduring Church promised by our Lord. The Bible says of the Church that it is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”. When they were baptized at Pentecost they became Catholic Christians.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “In fact, how could they as Roman Catholicism was never officiated as the recognized Christian religion of the Roman Empire until 380 AD when Theodosius I, Gratian, and Valentinian II issued the Edict of Thessalonica?”

(Cristoiglesia) This is a very strange leap of 300+ years from the beginning of the Church at Pentecost. We Christians believe that we began as the result of the teaching of Jesus and the disciples and were given the Paraclete at Pentecost which we attribute to the beginning of the Church. The fact that a Roman Emperor recognized the Church and made it the official religion of the Empire has nothing to do with the founding of the Church centuries earlier. Until that time the Church had been persecuted by the Romans and many of us were martyred in the Roman Arena for the entertainment of the populace. It is certainly a miracle from God that an Emperor of our persecutors would become a supporter of the Church. Praise God! But, this had nothing to do with the founding of the Church 300+ years earlier.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “We know that the Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in 312 AD, but the official State religion was still considerably pagan.”

(Cristoiglesia) No we do not, the evidence was that he remained a Pagan his entire life. Legend says that he was baptized on his death bed by two heretical Arian bishops. In the Edict of Milan he proclaimed freedom of religion in the Empire and the persecution of Christians ceased.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “Nevertheless, none of the Apostles could be considered "Catholic" and they died as Jewish followers of Christ.”

(Cristoiglesia) Are you aware that Christianity is perfected Judaism? They were certainly all Catholic Christians from Pentecost onward. There could be a cogent argument that they were Christian even before Pentecost.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “The last apostle to die was John around 120 AD, centuries before Roman Catholicism was instituted in 380 AD.”

(Cristoiglesia) Let us clear something up that seems to have you extremely confused. It was the Protestants of the 16th century that coined the name “Roman” Catholic as a pejorative name. Before then we were known only as Catholic and there were no others claiming to be Christians except the Orthodox.

If any denomination is guilty of practicing man-made traditions that have no Biblical basis, it would be Roman Catholics.
Really, I am a former Protestant and anti-Catholic like you and after 50 years of trying to prove the Church wrong I have been impotent in finding any error. I really tried but every time the veracity of Catholic teaching was impossible to deny. There is not a single man-made tradition that is contrary in any way to Scriptures. In fact the Church is the personification of those Scriptures.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “A few that come to mind, as I am a former Roman Catholic taught the Catechism and having gone through several "sacraments" myself,”

(Cristoiglesia) Well, we shall see if you learned anything as a Catholic.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “include (1) kneeling and worshipping before statues of Mary, dead saints, and Jesus, which is in direct violation of God's second commandment (Exodus 20:4) against making or bowing before graven images and idols;”

(Cristoiglesia) Well your first citation belies your statement of having been a Catechist. If you had been a catechist you would know that there is no idolatry in the Catholic Church. The Catechism forbids the worship of anyone or anything but God. You would also know that it is impossible for saints to be dead but are actually more alive than we are in the presence of our Lord. You would also learn that when praying to saints it is not a form of worship but is instead a request for them to pray for us just as we ask others to pray for us and us for them out of Christian love for one another. There is no biblical prohibition for praying in the presence of religious art such as a statue or praying anywhere else for that matter. An idol is something that is worshiped and Catholics only worship God. If you had indeed been a catechist you would not have embarrassed yourself with such a nonsensical accusation.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “(2) praying the Rosary, which contradicts what Jesus Himself instructed His disciples (Matthew 6:7) not to pray using "vain repetitions"; there are 59 minor beads and 10 "decades" in the Catholic rosary, and for each bead you pray (RECITE) a "Hail Mary", the Apostles Creed, Glory Be, or an Our Father chant. This may be considered a form of witchcraft and neither honors nor impresses the Almighty God through empty incantations;”

(Cristoiglesia) Oh, so now you are being critical of Catholics for praying to God excessively and complaining that such constant prayer is sinful or prohibited in Scriptures. If you did not read the writing of St. Matthew with a prejudiced supposition you would see that Jesus was not saying that we can only say a prayer once but was instead warning against vain prayers. And in context He gave an example so that future readers like yourself would not make the error you have made in using eisegesis instead of coming to the Scriptures to learn. If you had been a Catholic and especially if you had been a catechist you would know that no Catholic prays the Rosary vainly. The truth is that the Rosary is a contemplation on Christ’s passion and mysteries which is completely Christocentric and the kind of prayers that our Lord and Savior would be most pleased to hear. Calling prayers to God empty incantations sounds like a statement coming from and Atheist and not one claiming Christianity.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “(3) the false doctrine of "Purgatory", which has no Biblical basis and is a heresy whose origin can be traced to pagan roots in Egypt. Purgatory claims that a soul that is "unfit for heaven" must first be purged to atone for venial sins that had not been properly cleansed while on earth. This teaching is in direct contradiction with what is taught about salvation and Jesus' work of atonement in the Bible, Hebrews 9:11-12 "When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained ETERNAL REDEMPTION." Hebrews 10:10 "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ ONCE FOR ALL." Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved." Roman Catholics teach that we must add to Jesus' work of Atonement on the Cross, that Christ's blood was insufficient to save us from our sins. This is unbiblical and dishonors Christ's sacrifice. Jesus saved us from our sins, once for all time, on the Cross at Calvary. There are no more "works" that a person can add towards salvation for Jesus paid the price of sin in full.”

(Cristoiglesia) I guess you never read the fact that a sinful soul cannot be in the presence of God:

Isaiah 59:1-2 (King James Version)

1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

Revelation 21:27 (King James Version)

27And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Are you saying that the prophet Isaiah or St. John are contradicting God? I really don’t think you want to give that impression but your use of proof texts to contradict this prophetic teaching is suspect in its face.
As for your claim that the doctrine of Purgatory is not biblical the fact is that it is one of the most biblical of Christian doctrines.
There is a common Protestant misunderstanding of purgatory. At least one protestant minister, John Wesley, spoke of perfectionism in this life, possible but rare. He is one of the few to proclaim that one can be sanctified in this life and he left the Moravian Church over this issue after a rebuke by Count Zinzendorf for this teaching.

People in purgatory are already justified by receiving the supernatural eternal life into our souls through Baptism making us a part of the Body of Christ. Those in purgatory have accepted Christ by faith and have not rejected Him by unrepentant mortal sin. It is a place where one is purified by fire (Mal 3:2). Imagine the joy of being in purgatory and knowing that you are there because you have passed judgment and are assured of being in the presence of God in heaven. Purgatory is not an eternal destination, there are only two, heaven or hell.

We should not think of purgatory as some kind of legal punishment for past sins as it would be under the old law. Those in purgatory are already new creatures changed by Christ’s grace, they are the adopted children and part of God’s family in purgatory one receives final discipline and cleansing preparing one for the perfection of heaven. Catholics believe that sanctification is a process and is not completed when one comes to belief. So purgatory is not a suggestion that Christ’s atonement is insufficient but that we have not yet completed our sanctification through the grace of Christ.

Cleansing or sanctification is a gradual process and we must endure to the end to be saved.

(Mat 10:22 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.

(Mat 24:13 DRB) But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.

(Mar 13:13 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved.

Catholic soteriology recognizes that for some of us the process was not completed at death or that we died with unrepentant sin.

(Heb 9:27 DRB) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment:

The judgment is our eternal destiny and for those whose name is in the Lamb’s Book of Life, heaven is assured. But we know that one must be free of sin to be in God’s presence.

(1Ti 6:14 DRB) That thou keep the commandment without spot, blameless, unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

It may be that one is not prepared to be in our Lord’s presence as we may still be with spiritual shortcomings or temporal effects of forgiven sins on our soul making it necessary for some form of purification to enter heaven in God’s presence. Since this is a process of purgation it is called purgatory and it is in keeping with prophecy of the prophet Habakkuk who said that only that which is holy may enter heaven.

(Hab 1:13 DRB) Thy eyes are too pure to behold evil, and thou canst not look on iniquity. Why lookest thou upon them that do unjust things, and holdest thy peace when the wicked devoureth the man that is more just than himself?

St. Paul also taught of a process of purgation which may involve suffering on the soul of Christians and in his first letter to the Corinthian Church he describes the process of purgation after death.

(1Co 3:10 DRB) According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation: and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

(1Co 3:11 DRB) For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid: which is Christ Jesus.

(1Co 3:12 DRB) Now, if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble:

(1Co 3:13 DRB) Every man's work shall be manifest. For the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire. And the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is.

(1Co 3:14 DRB) If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

(1Co 3:15 DRB) If any mans work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

St. Paul speaks metaphorically that the results of sin that remain on one’s soul is like “wood, hay and straw” and are burned away in the process of final purification to be received in the presence of the Lord. St. Paul also speaks of one’s works as “gold, silver and precious stones” which are refined and retained.

This passage reminds me of what Christ said in the following indicating that some sins may be forgiven after death.

(Mat 12:32 DRB) And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

Purgatory is also related to the parable of the unforgiving servant which is as follows…

(Mat 18:32 DRB) Then his lord called him: and said to him: Thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all the debt, because thou besoughtest me:

(Mat 18:33 DRB) Shouldst not thou then have had compassion also on thy fellow servant, even as I had compassion on thee?

(Mat 18:34 DRB) And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt.

After telling the parable Christ emphasizes His message lest it be misunderstood with this warning……..

(Mat 18:35 DRB) So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

Christ was warning us of the danger of a hard heart or anger making us unwilling to forgive others. We should acknowledge that these are the signs and example of a defective soul in need of purgation so that he that is imperfect may be in the presence of God and dwell in glory. (See CCC 1030-1032)

Now if you had been a catechist as you claimed you would know that the Church has condemned the heresy of Pelagianism that you accuse us of. The Church does not in any way teach that works of the law, which is the biblical condemnation, should be added to merit salvation. We unequivocally deny that works merit salvation. What we do not teach is the Protestant heresy of faith alone which teaching is condemned in the book of James and is truly not biblical. There is no teaching in all of Catholic theology that says that Christ’s atoning sacrifice was insufficient for salvation. The Church teaches the antithesis of this.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “This is a small list of heresies which the Catholic church professes, but do not have any Biblical basis, and which were added several centuries after Christ and the Apostles began to spread the Gospel of salvation:
(1) Veneration and worship of Mary as Co-Redemptrix with Jesus (431 AD). Compare with Paul's teaching in 1 Timothy 2:5, "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,"”

(Cristoiglesia) There is no worship of the blessed mother or anyone else. The faithful under Catholic teaching are forbidden from such worship and to do so would be to sin and cease to be a Catholic Christian. There was never a teaching that you suggest citing 431AD or any other time. There is nothing in Catholic teaching that contradicts in any was 1Tim 2:5. The following will instruct you of the truth:
Jesus Christ is our Redeemer, Mediator, Advocate. Christ is assisted by the Virgin Mary in her triune role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix. The following 13 points are an important part of a correct understanding of this doctrine.

1. Mary's triune role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix is a reflection of the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity.

2. All three aspects of this one role are substantially different from, and wholly subordinate to, Christ's triune role as Redeemer, Mediator, Advocate.

3. Mary's role is different from, and subordinate to, Christ's role because, in God's plan for Creation, the role given to women is different from, and subordinate to, the role given to men.

4. The "co-" prefix in co-Redemptrix refers to Mary's cooperation with us; it does not mean that Mary is co-Redeemer, not even with and under Christ. (The "co-" prefix should not be capitalized, since it refers to our mere human efforts towards our salvation; the "R" in co-Redemptrix should be capitalized since it refers to Divine efforts towards our salvation.)

5. Mary is not a co-Redeemer and is not able to save anyone, not even with and under Christ. Christ alone redeems; Mary merely immerses herself in all that Christ does toward our redemption. Her role is not co-redemptive.

6. Mary is Mediatrix of Grace, but not of all graces. She is not Mediatrix of the graces that flows from Christ's Divine nature to His human nature; there is no mediation within the hypostatic union of the Divine and human natures of Christ. She is not the Mediatrix of the graces that she herself receives from Christ; in that case, she is the recipient, not the Mediatrix. In all other cases, Mary is the Mediatrix of Grace.
Our Lady of Medjugorje, message of August 31, 1982: "I do not dispose all graces. I receive from God what I obtain through prayer. God has placed His complete trust in me. I particularly protect those who have been consecrated to me."
7. Mary is also Mediatrix of Divine Providence and of mercy and of all that God does within Creation, except with respect to Christ and herself.

8. Mary is Advocatrix. The term "Advocate," when applied to the Virgin Mary, is theologically deficient because it lacks the feminine form, which would distinguish Mary's different and subordinate role from Christ's role as Advocate. Use of the Latin form of the word allows a clear theological definition to be attached to the term, unfettered by the various connotations which the word "advocate" has when translated into various languages.

9. The expression "Advocate of the People of God" can only be used to refer to Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit. The Virgin Mary has no role of advocacy herself; instead, her role as Advocatrix is to immerse herself in Christ's role as our Advocate. Mary is not "Advocate of the People of God," but rather she is a humble assistant to Christ, the Advocate of the People of God.

10. Mary does not stand before God as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix. In truth, only Christ stands before God to redeem, mediate, and advocate. The Virgin Mary humbly kneels before Christ, in worship of Him, as she assists Christ fully in His work of redemption, mediation, advocacy.

11. Mary's role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix is not properly described as a role "with and under" Christ. The term "with and under" does indicate that her role is subordinate, but it also improperly describes that role as if it were a separate role. In truth, Mary completely immerses herself in all that Christ does for our salvation. She has no role of redemption, mediation, or advocacy of her own; all her acts toward our salvation occur in Christ, not "with and under" Christ.

12. Mary is truly co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix. But this true doctrine is neither the fifth Marian dogma, nor is it the final Marian dogma. The claim that this doctrine is "the fifth and final Marian dogma" is a serious theological error which contradicts the teaching of the Church. The further claim that the declaration of this dogma is necessary to usher in a time of peace, or even the last days, is a false claim.

13. Theological works about Mary's triune role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix should omit any and all references to various false private revelations, including those of Ida Peerdeman at Amsterdam and others. A number of false private revelations have preyed upon the faithful by using this doctrine, or their own distorted version of it, as bait to drag unsuspecting souls into a trap of false teachings and false worship. Any teachings or documents on this topic should either omit all mention of such private revelations, or should clearly condemn them and the false doctrines which they promote.

by Ronald L. Conte, Jr.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “(2) Celibacy of the priesthood (1079 AD) and the tradition of Lent (998 AD). Compare with Paul's admonition in 1 Timothy 4:1-5, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer."

(Cristoiglesia) If you had been a catechist you would have known the following:
This is a discipline for some Catholic priests but not for all. The majority of priests make a vow of chastity. There are 23 Rites in the Catholic Church. 22 of the 23 Rites do not have the discipline of chastity nor do they require that all priests are chosen from the chaste. Even in the Roman Rite that has the discipline it is a choice. The Church does not forbid anyone to marry as is the teaching of St. Paul in his epistle to St Timothy. However the Church does honor those who choose chastity and make their vow’s to God as is taught by St. Paul, St John and Jesus in Word and/or in practice. Both Jesus and St. Paul taught that the ideal state of clergy was chaste and not married. But you are correct that St. Paul taught against forbidding to marry as it is against God’s commandment to multiply.

St Paul- “I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs – how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world – how he can please his wife – and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs. Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world – how she can please her husband” (1 Corinthians 7: 32-34)

“He who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry he does even better (1 Corinthians 7: 38)

Jesus- “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of Heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it” (Matthew 19: 10-12).

St. John- “ There are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they kept themselves pure...purchased from among men and offered as first fruits to God and the Lamb (Revelation 14:4)
Fasting is a traditional doctrine of Christian spirituality that a constituent part of repentance, of turning away from sin and back to God, includes some form of penance, without which the Christian is unlikely to remain on the narrow path and be saved (Jer. 18:11, 25:5; Ez. 18:30, 33:11-15; Joel 2:12; Mt. 3:2; Mt. 4:17; Acts 2:38). Christ Himself said that His disciples would fast once He had departed (Lk. 5:35). The general law of penance, therefore, is part of the law of God for man. (http://www.ewtn.com/faith/lent/fast.htm)

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “(3) Confession of sins to another sinful person, the priest, and the priest claiming to forgive sins (1215 AD). Compare with the Bible's instructions on how to confess sin directly to God in Psalm 51, Luke 7:48, Luke 15:21, and 1 John 1:8-9. God never transferred this power to forgive sins to anyone, contrary to what Catholic tradition and teaching hold. Only God forgives sins (Micah 7:18).”

(Cristoiglesia) I do not think that you do not believe that Jesus has the power to forgive sins. Certainly we both agree that He does. If Jesus has this power a God I am sure that you can agree that He has other Divine powers as well. He exercises this power in giving the apostles and the successors the authority to forgive sins acting in persona Christi for He knew that this continuing authority would be needed in the ministry of His Church. But when one hears the Words of the priest that they are forgiven it is the will of Jesus that does the forgiving.

Christ instituted the sacraments purposefully. The sacrament called reconciliation or penance is what we call our actions when we go to confession. Going to confession and confessing to a priest is the normative way of reconciling oneself back into God's family when we have committed a mortal sin. It is the biblical way corresponding to Jesus' teaching as recorded by the apostle John:
(Joh 20:22) when he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

(Joh 20:23) Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

What we learn from John is the authority given to the priests is not only to forgive sins but also to retain sins. Jesus commanded the authority to be used. It is the duty given by Jesus for the priest to measure the contrition of the penitent and act accordingly.

However, one must repent and pray sincerely to God as an act of contrition before one enters the confessional. The priest represents Jesus by acting in persona Christi and for the entire family of God represented by the Church militant who is harmed by the sin of another. No sin is private but all sin affects others. Jesus described this relationship as a vine with Him as the vine and we as the branches (John 15:5). If one member of the branch is sick then all
the branches are affected and suffer as a result. Because of our familial relationship with each other Jesus created a means of confession so that all those affected in His family are represented by the priest as is God. The acts of sin and forgiveness are not private matters.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “(4) Calling priests "father" and giving other sinful clergy titles of "spiritual authority." Compare with Jesus' teaching in Matthew 20:25-28 "Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" and in Matthew 23:9 "And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." This term "father" is indicative of an office of spiritual authority, not one of paternal descent.”

(Cristoiglesia) If you had been a catechist or a Catholic you would know the following:
From the early Church we find that clergy were addressed as father. There are those with little knowledge of history or hermeneutical discipline such as understanding Scriptures within context, who believe that the Bible prohibits one from calling a priest father. The words they rely on come directly from Christ:

(Mat 23:9 DRB) And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.

Keeping the verse in context let us look at the verse preceding this verse:

(Mat 23:8 DRB) But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your master: and all you are brethren.

Rabbi means teacher and the Latin word for teacher is doctor so anyone using these terms as well are violating the literal interpretation of the text.

Let us look at the verse after verse 9:

(Mat 23:10 DRB) Neither be ye called masters: for one is your master, Christ.

There is no way that the interpretation could be correct if one reads and understands the Matthew passage in context. He is clearly teaching that one should not look to any human authority as our teacher, father, master, doctor or other titles of respect but instead give to God those things that are reserved for Him. Do you also refuse to call people doctor, teacher, professor, mister, or master? All of these are forbidden as well if we are to accept a literal understanding.

Context also requires that we investigate what the other Scriptures say as well as the understanding of these words by those who followed Christ. There are many instances where the writers of the New Testament contradict a literal understanding of not calling a man father, teacher or master. Consider the following verses:

(Act 5:34 DRB) But one in the council rising up, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, respected by all the people, commanded the men to be put forth a little while.

(Col 4:1 DRB) Masters, do to your servants that which is just and equal: knowing that you also have a master in heaven.

(2Ti 1:11 DRB) Wherein I am appointed a preacher and an apostle and teacher of the Gentiles.

Let us examine the statements of St. Stephen to see if he understood Christ to be speaking literally….In is soliloquy (Acts Chapter 7) before the Sanhedrin before his stoning to martyrdom he used the term father in referring to Abraham Isaac and Jacob as fathers and also to his Israelite ancestors as fathers.

St. John the beloved disciple also did not understand Christ to be teaching literally as we can see in the following verses:

(1Jn 2:13 DRB) I write unto you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one.

(1Jn 2:14 DRB) I write unto you, babes, because you have known the Father. I write unto you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and you have overcome the wicked one.

(1Jn 2:15 DRB) Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him.

(1Jn 2:16 DRB) For all that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh and the concupiscence of the eyes and the pride of life, which is not of the Father but is of the world.

St. Paul also had a different understanding of Christ’s words than the literalists:

(1Co 4:14 DRB) I write not these things to confound you: but I admonish you as my dearest children.

(1Co 4:15 DRB) For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.

(1Co 4:16 DRB) Wherefore, I beseech you, be ye followers of me as I also am of Christ.

St. Paul was speaking of the fact that he is called to shepherd the flock as are all priests. We not only give birth to the Christian through Baptism but also nourish the faithful with the Holy Eucharist and God’s Word. We care for them and bind their spiritual wounds through the delivery of the Sacraments. It is no wonder that we are called father as we care for our Church family as a father cares for his own family.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “There are many other man-made traditions Roman Catholics profess, some as a dogmatic requirement for inclusion in their fold or else a person might face being branded a "heretic" and being excommunicated. Not that salvation can be obtained in any church; salvation comes by grace through faith in Christ Jesus' sacrifice, and that is all.”

(Cristoiglesia) Many others you claim yet you have been impotent to name just one. As for being branded a heretic that has to do with one teaching falsely and the title is earned. Certainly every Catholic would agree that salvation comes by grace through faith but the Catholic would argue cogently from Scriptures that this salvific grace comes through the Church.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “No church or man claiming priestly authority can absolve us of sin. Only God can forgive sins and our sins are cleansed by accepting Jesus' work of atonement on our behalf, the righteous for the unrighteous.”

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus gave authority to the priesthood to forgive sins so your argument against this normative way of forgiveness is with Jesus. Ones sins are not “cleansed” by accepting Jesus’ work of atonement. They are cleansed by repentance and absolution. The demons know and accept His atonement but are not saved. We are cleansed of sin by Baptism and reconciled back into the familial relationship with God when we fall into sin by repenting and seeking absolution.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “You claim that Protestant churches teach secular humanism; however, I would like to point out that it is the Roman Catholic Church that is leading the ecumenical charge to unite worldwide religions, even those staunchly opposed to Christianity. Considering this, it is crucial to examine Roman Catholics' stance on other religions in light of what we are warned in the Bible in James 4:4, "You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God." I urge you, heed the warning from God Himself: "Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues; for her sins are piled up to heaven, and God has remembered her crimes." Revelation 18:4-5.”

(Cristoiglesia) Did Jesus give the great commission to His Church to only preach to the choir? No, He said to preach the Gospel to all men and especially sinners or those who do not know Him. Who of humanity to you desire not be saved and where can you justify such a position from Scripture. Jesus reaches out to sinners and to the worldly to bring them into the familial relationship with Him in His Church. Christianity is not an exclusive club that forbids some to join because of their sinfulness. Do you really think that it is being an enemy of God to try to evangelize the world or the worldly? What you describe disdainfully and pride fully as worldly is exactly what Jesus commanded His Church to act. Every Catholic Christian at the end of Mass is reminded to go and preach the Gospel by word and by deed. We are to be an example to the world of righteousness and devotion and we are each reminded of our God given task. We are not to ignore the commission God gave us as a way of serving Him.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) “Recall the Roman Catholic Church's bloody Inquisition, persecution of early Protestant Christians.”

(Cristoiglesia) Your history is flawed in that the Inquisitions were secular in nature and the role the Church played in the Inquisitions was to end them. You are flawed also by thinking there were Protestant Christians who were targeted in the Inquisitions as there were no Protestants when the Inquisitions were in progress.

(Legal doesn’t make it right) ,” refusal to allow any "laity" the opportunity to learn about the Bible. The Roman Catholic Church is stained with the blood of Christ's martyrs and she will answer for them one day”

(Cristoiglesia) You are trying to come to conclusions without complete knowledge and with misunderstanding. The Church has the responsibility as the teaching authority given by Christ to protect the deposit of the Sacred Tradition, of which the Bible is a part. It has another responsibility to be the shepherd for those the Holy Spirit brings to faith. The quotes you have listed in your question illustrates the Church doing exactly what Christ commissioned the Church to do which is to halt the distribution and use of heretical interpretations. Authority for interpretation according to the Bible is the Church and not individuals.(2 Peter 1:20)

Another error you make is assuming that most people knew how to read an write in their vernacular language. The fact is that educated people knew how to read and write Latin and it was much more likely that if one read that it was Latin only. There are also great advantages for the Church to have a common language which is Latin. What that meant was that one could travel throughout the world and understand the Mass wherever they were. Today the use of vernacular language to the Church is similar to what happened at the Tower of Babel. It is a hindrance to theological understanding instead of being helpful.

Another error you make is assuming that the vernacular translations that were banned were accurate to the original texts. They were not and many lacked acceptable scholarship. Such heretical texts were sure to cause misunderstandings and cause people to understand the Scriptures incorrectly.

Another error you make is assuming that the culture then is the same as today. There was little difference between Church and state and the lines continued to be blurred. The harsh methods that were used in those days were common place if if we can find the horrendous today. If you remember Calvin murdered so many in Geneva that he got the name the butcher of Geneva. They were murdered for opposing His teachings. Looking back this treatment was wrong even though it was for the right intentions. BTW, the quotes were taken out of context in that you failed to take into account the culture of the era when coming to your conclusions.

Your errors continue in presuming that the Church would forbid anyone from reading the Bible because Catholic doctrines and dogma are contrary to the Church. This is impossible if one trusts and believes in Jesus' teaching. Jesus said that His Church is the enduring Church that is the "pillar and ground of the truth". It was Catholic Christians who wrote the New Testament and the Church that canonized those books that they judged inspired all under the authority given to the Church by Jesus. Since the Church wrote the Bible and canonized it, is it not logical that the Church would, in fact encourage people to read it? Of course and the Church always has; just not heretical interpretations. So, if you really believe that the Church has doctrines and dogmas contrary to the Bible you are in need of further study and the grace of the Holy Spirit to recognize His Church from the book about His Church. Truly the Catholic Church is the only Church with a legitimate claim of being a Bible Church since the NT is about the Church.

As a Catholic, I see the testimony of the Church in being responsible in its commission by Christ to His Church. The Church is protecting God's Word and shepherding His faithful. We can be further encouraged to know that His Church, the ark for humanity from an evil world, will be the enduring pillar and ground of the truth until He comes again.

The Catholic Church through history did not kill martyrs but were instead the martyrs and victims. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion of Limbo and Changing Doctrines with JoeBama

2010-09-26T09:58:00.002+08:00

(JoeBama) “The word "doctrine" means "teaching". When I said that the Catholic Church has changes its doctrine, I could have also said they changed their teaching. Both these statements say the same thing. The fact that the Catholic Church considers some teaching (or doctrine) essential and unchangeable and they consider other doctrine changeable does not alter the fact they have changed their teaching on many points”.

(Cristoiglesia) The Church through the centuries has discussed many speculations as to what happens to infants who have not been baptized if they die. Two doctors of the Church St. Agustine and St. Aquinas each had different ideas on this. In order for there to have been a change there would have had to be a dogmatic teaching on Limbo but there was not. Instead there were many very different speculations not only held by Augustine and Aquinas but others as well. There is no change in the teaching of “limbo” or any other teaching. It has always been a question open to speculation. So, the doctrinal teaching on Limbo is that there is no dogmatic belief in regards to what happens to infants when they die without baptism. The Magisterium has never officially taught limbo. It is the teaching of the Magisterium that is binding on the Church and never the opinions of individual scholars on any teaching of which there are many opinions on a host of similar speculations. If a teaching is not dogmatic as defined by the Magisterium individual Catholics as well as scholars are free to have divergent opinions and agreements. No change has occurred because the Magisterium has never declared dogmatic doctrine.

(JoeBama) “You said, "Catholics are free to believe it, not believe it or have no opinion." Isn't this true of any teaching? Don't people of many religions have the freedom to reject things their church teach? In fact, many freely rejected the words of Jesus.”

(Cristoiglesia) Personal interpretation and conclusions is a Protestant concept that is not a part of Catholic Christianity. We do not believe nor teach that each individual is their own theologian. We follow the biblical teaching closely that teaches that it is the Church and not private interpretation of Scriptures that has the chrism and the authority to discern the interpretation of Scripture and to come to dogmatic theological teaching. The Magisterium is the final word on doctrine and it cannot ever change. What ever the Magisterium teaches is binding on Catholic Christians for all times. To reject Church teaching is to depart from the familial relationship that Christ desires in His Church.

What Pope Benedict XVI was speaking to was really a moral question. Some people believed that aborted babies were excluded from heaven for eternity which would be a victory for Satan and against the hope that we all have in Christ. The Pope was removing that speculation by some with a more charitable belief that by some means God will provide salvation even though they have not been exposed to the laver. This is in line with Catholic teaching that God will provide for the salvation of those by some means unknown because of his divine mercy for those without actual sin. The Church is open to a path to salvation that is not normative as is Baptism but charitable through divine mercy and justice.
We know from Scriptures efficacy of Baptism for infants as it related to the circumcision of the Old Covenant being the circumcision of the New Covenant.. Of course, in the New Covenant circumcision both male and females are baptized which denotes the change in the familial relationship between God and man. In Old Covenant Judaism the familial relationship is passed to a child from its mother where in the New Covenant of the perfected Jews represented by Christians the familial relationship is passed on through the father and the mother as God the Father is the cause of our salvation through His Son so that the replacement of circumcision with Baptism has the same efficacy for males and for females. As circumcision was not necessary for the salvation of a female as she carried the bloodline of Judaism instead under the New Covenant the familial relationship is passed to both through Baptism.

(JoeBama) “If "Limbo" was not a doctrine of the Catholic Church, where did this teaching come from?”

(Cristoiglesia) From the beginning of the Church the subject of Limbo was not a common one among the fathers. The prevailing opinion was that dying with original sin was not punished until the teaching of St. Augustin who first agreed with the majority of the fathers that preceded him but later changed his teaching when he was confronting Pelagianism at the Council of Carthage. He said that there is not a “middle state” for unbaptized infants and that they were undeserving of the familial relationship enjoyed with the baptized in heaven. Later others supported this view such as Anselm. Abelard and Aquinas took a different view saying there was no punishment for these infants. Others, like Savonarola, Catharinus and Suarez taught that they would be with God in the general resurrection which is close to the prevailing Protestant view. So as you can see some of the best minds that the Church has ever produced, which I include the brilliant theologian Pope Benedict XVI, do not agree on this teaching. You can also see from the evidence that this teaching never reached the level of dogma but has remained as theological speculation which clearly shows there is no change in the Church’s position and the open speculation persists. Except that with the Statements of Pope Benedict XVI we should remain in hope for divine mercy.

(JoeBama) “Likewise the doctrine that priests should not marry which changed in 1079 AD. I read one article that calls this a "disciplines" and not a "doctrine". 1 Timothy 4, however, calls it a "doctrine" and a departure from "the faith".”

(Cristoiglesia) This is a discipline for some Catholic priests but not for all. The majority of priests make a vow of chastity. There are 23 Rites in the Catholic Church. 22 of the 23 Rites do not have the discipline of chastity nor do they require that all priests are chosen from the chaste. Even in the Roman Rite that has the discipline it is a choice. The Church does not forbid anyone to marry as is the teaching of St. Paul in his epistle to St Timothy. However the Church does honor those who choose chastity and make their vow’s to God as is taught by St. Paul, St John and Jesus in Word and/or in practice. Both Jesus and St. Paul taught that the ideal state of clergy was chaste and not married. But you are correct that St. Paul taught against forbidding to marry as it is against God’s commandment to multiply.

St Paul- “I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs – how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world – how he can please his wife – and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs. Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world – how she can please her husband” (1 Corinthians 7: 32-34)

“He who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry he does even better (1 Corinthians 7: 38)

Jesus- “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of Heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it” (Matthew 19: 10-12).

St. John- “ There are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they kept themselves pure...purchased from among men and offered as first fruits to God and the Lamb (Revelation 14:4)

(JoeBama)“I never said every doctrine of the Catholic Church has changed, but many have. The fact that when changed they no longer call that point of teaching "a doctrine" does not change the fact.”

(Cristoiglesia) The fact is that the dogmatic teaching of the Church has never changed in the 2000 year history of the Church. Doctrine is not the teaching of each individual theologian but instead the teaching of the Magisterium which is the binding doctrine of the Church. Theological speculation on those things that are not dogmatic doctrine as taught by the Magisterium are simply opinions without the charism of the teaching authority of the Church which is the Magisterium of which all Catholics are bound to recognize as the truth. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion of Catholic Criticisms with Matthew D

2010-09-08T02:30:00.001+08:00

(Matthew D) “How come many people say that Catholicism is one of the man made sects just like protestantism is ?”

(Cristoiglesia) They are ignorant of the history of the Church or they are intentionally lying to justify their disobedience to the only Church founded by Jesus.

(Matthew D) “Most people on here tell me that the only proper way to follow God is to follow the bible and that one does not need a priest to talk to God and does not need a priest to confess to , because just following God alone is enough and havin a direct connection with him”

(Cristoiglesia) I am pleased that they say to follow the Bible as the NT is written by Catholic Christians and is about the Catholic Church. The best way to follow the Bible is to be taught by the only authority of teaching authorized by Jesus which is His Church the Catholic Church. (Mat 16:19) Protestants have no choice but to say they do not need a priest as it is impossible for them to have priests in their rebellious state against the Church. However, it is Jesus who established the priesthood as an enduring leadership and teaching authority for the Church. The Church does not teach that one cannot talk to God themselves but the Church does teach that Jesus established priestly confession giving the priesthood the authority to forgive sins acting in persona Christi.( John 20:23) Since Jesus clearly gave the authority, which the Scriptures confirm, it seems reasonable to use that authority as the normative way of repentance and forgiveness.

We come into the familial relationship with Christ through Baptism. We lose that familial relationship through sin thus the need for reconciliation through confession. Even the demons believe so this is clearly not a sole criteria to be in the familial relationship Christ’s desires.(Jam 2:19)

(Matthew D) “Many also say that there is no pope in the bible or no mention of Catholics”

(Cristoiglesia) It does seem as if Protestants are missing vast sections of the Bible with these kinds of criticisms. I believe they just ignore any parts of Scripture that contradicts their prejudices. The Bible clearly states that St. Peter was chosen as the prime minister of the Church fulfilling the prophecies of an ongoing leadership found in prophecies of Ezekiel. (Matthew 16:13-19) We call him the Pope from the Latin for Papa.

The entire New Testament is about the Catholic Church. The book of Acts emphasizes the formation of the Church. All of the authors of the New Testament were Catholic Christians.

(Matthew D) “And also the fact that the catholic church has turned a blind eye to a lot of child abuse cases .”

(Cristoiglesia) Nothing could be further from the truth. The Church has been very proactive in ensuring that the Church is the safest place for children with in depth programs. Even though the cases that have been in the press allegedly occurred several decades ago and the alleged perpetrators are dead or elderly, the Church investigates each case and pays restitution if it is merited. The Protestants that gloat at the press these evil priests have received do not even think about the fact that their pastors are 30 times more likely to be child abusers than a priest. They live in glass houses but love to throw stones. They need to take charge of their own problem before deflecting their own problems on Catholic clergy. In fact, priests are the least likely to be child abusers of any identifiable adult group. The Church has been extremely open about these incidences.

(Matthew D) “What do you say to these people?”

(Cristoiglesia) To the liars about the Church I say: (Proverbs 1:7) “The fear of God is the beginning of knowledge.” They should be more careful before bearing false witness against the bride of Christ.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with Hoyt Sparks

2010-09-02T05:20:00.002+08:00

(HOYT SPARKS) “It amazes me how you ignore what I have written, in plain English, and distort with your RC freewillism.”

(Cristoiglesia) I would never ignore what you write. I have not distorted anything that you have said but simply responded with the biblical and orthodox Christian teaching. The Catholic Church does not teach “freewillism” or Arminianism which is a Protestant doctrine. What the Catholic Church teaches in regards to soteriology is Thomism or Molinism. I am personally a Molinist.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Example: I wrote clearly that I did not believe John Calvin, but you insist that I believe John Calvin. If there are things that John Calvin believed and I believe also, it is because I find mine in KJV.
Also, you are using a different rule book, while I use only the KJV.”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, you said that and then went and started pontificating Calvinist doctrine. I think that the way you said you came to believe Calvinist theology is by using the Bible. You said ”I find mine in the KJV” which suggests classic eisegesis. Instead of coming to the Bible to learn you came to the Bible to support your own doctrines and in this case those doctrines originate with Calvin. The Bible is not simply a “rule book” or using your writings as an example, a place that one goes to prove their own personal theology. Instead the Bible is Canon or a source where orthodoxy may be measured. The KJ translation is by today's standards a very unscholarly translation that is difficult to read and understand. It is also not very close to the original language as are translations like the RSV. A serious Bible student would never use the KJV as a sole authoritative source of truth.

The misuse of Scripture does not help credibility for one may encounter those knowledgeable in Scriptures like those encountered by St. Paul and St. Silas in Acts 17:11. When one practices this kind of deception it makes them appear as a demagogue instead of one being a teacher in truth. It would be better if one simply stated one’s opinion without the “proof text”, which with proper exegesis does not prove or support one’s opinions. Certainly, the Bereans would have been even more skeptical if St. Paul and St. Silas had used improper hermeneutical methods in spreading the Gospel and would have had little success. The Bereans would have noticed that the use of Scriptures did not support the claims when understood using proper methodology. In fact, proper understanding of the Scriptures often illustrates the opposite of what is claimed. Much too often those attempting to convince others of their views are those that are predisposed to hate others and find it necessary to justify their own beliefs while demagoging those beliefs held by others.

Before one uses “proof texts” to support one’s position, one should be aware that the scriptures they are using are a translation from another language that most often does not allow a word for word translation but instead the translator must seek equivalence in meaning rather than it being an exact word for word translation. Today we are two thousand years removed from the writing of the NT Scriptures, are in a different place and a different culture. For proper exegesis these things must be taken into consideration. This is why the Reformers, especially Martin Luther, were frightened and feared damnation by the misunderstanding of the new theory of “sola Scriptura”. This theory was meant to be a partnership between the layman and the scholar and not a license for each individual to become their own theologian. This is how false teaching propagates itself and is responsible for thousands of exponentially increasing schisms within the body of Christ.

This is why many of us (conservative, traditional and orthodox) in the Christian academic community use the interpretation theory of grammatico-historical exegesis. This method dictates that one coming to understanding of Scripture take into consideration the language , history and culture in which it is written or the context of the time, culture and history. To do otherwise is to allow our preconceptions to determine the meaning causing great error. We must learn and to strive to turn off our mental filter and allow the Scriptures to instruct instead of allowing our preconceptions to obscure what the Scriptures teach. When doing apologetics it is better to use “proof texts carefully as not to misuse them to spread false teaching and doctrine.

The proof text methodology of understanding Scripture meaning puts too much emphasis on the practical side of understanding. Typically the interpreter searches for topical texts to support their preconceptions. For instance, if one begins with a preconception that the Catholic Church is apostate, and that it’s various teaching and doctrines are false; one finds value in these texts and use them for their short, epigrammatic use of several key words that coincide with your presuppositional theme or topic rather than the evidence or support they actually bring from their own context. It is the ignoring of the context that makes this methodology wrong and, in fact, useless. This methodology treats the Bible as some sort of magical, mythological book where one can choose from its anthology of sayings for every occasion to support ones worldly views or fleshly desires. This is no different from the liberals or progressive Christians who use the Scriptures as a menu for creating their own personal theology and god, picking and using Scriptures without understanding. Scriptural texts always belong to larger units and address specific situations, coming out of historical purposes for which they were written and contexts for which they are now relevant. Most often, interpretation using this method shows a naïve reading of the text and disregards the purpose for which the text was written. There is no regard for the historical context which is relevant for understanding or the genre conventions which shape the understanding. What many have engaged in when using these texts is allegorization and other forms of reckless use of Scripture texts to support one’s prejudices against those whom they disagree, such as the Catholic Church, and have ignored their intended purpose and usage as determined by context, grammar and history. I cannot over emphasize the importance of context.

(HOYT SPARKS) “You insist you are correct, I insist I am correct. Your thrust is to gain as many converts as human nature will allow, in order to bolster opportunity for more money to be cast into the RC coffers. While I entrust what I know and believe for myself, I am made to know and believe that only those of HIS HE will call and add to HIS visible congregants here on earth, and not for filthy cash, and that I can do nothing to bring about the making of one of HIS nor lead them to Christ.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, I do believe that Christ’s own Church whom Christ taught would never fall into apostasy and the Bible says is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” is truly the fullness of God’s divine revelation to humanity.

It is the Holy Spirit that brings people home to Christ’s Church and into the fullness of the familial relationship God desires. It is His Church that is the symbol of unity which is His will as He prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane before His arrest that He desired that we all be one in his Church as he ant the Father are one. We shepherd those who the Holy Spirit sends us to be in the ark of the Church through which all people are saved. Unlike the Protestant churches, of which you belong, we do not beg for money and falsely promise monetary prosperity for obedience but accept all people who have responded to the call of the Holy Spirit through the appealing to the law written on everyone’s heart. With the Catholic Church it is not about money but is about providing refuge to souls from a sinful and seductive world. God does not call people to be outside of His visible Church but to be within the ark represented by the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. You are correct in suggesting that all salvation is by His grace. You are wrong in suggesting that this gift is offered to some while condemning the rest to hell. Where can we find the loving and just God in Calvinist soteriology? We cannot. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Continuing discussion with Hoyt Sparks about Baptism

2010-08-30T12:07:00.005+08:00

(HOYT Sparks) “Before my first response to you I was aware that the twain shall not meet. You being a freewiller and I am a Predestinarian.”

(Cristoiglesia) I am not a “Predestinarian” in the Calvinist sense as are you. I do believe in the middle knowledge of God concerning our path to salvation.

Now I have no trouble in accepting God’s sovereignty but could not understand why God would predestine some to salvation and others as reprobate, all this by some mysterious selection when we were created. To me, it was impossible to ignore that God was creating some for righteousness and others to evil, some to eternity and others into the lake of fire and damnation if Calvin was correct. In a real sense, God was creating evil and goodness if Calvinist theology is to be considered consistent. This created great difficulty because I saw the consistent message in the Bible that God was just and loving. I just could not see the love and the justice in the Calvinist God creating those condemned as reprobate. In addition, this doctrine of Calvin was not consistent with my life experience where I had served in the military with many who had not accepted God’s saving grace but I saw the goodness of love in these people. With the presence of love how could they be the victims of the divine lottery of total depravity? Where there is love can there be total depravity? This seems inconsistent.

Calvinist doctrine continued to fall apart in my mind when considering why some are saved and some are reprobate. Calvin suggested that God chose who would be saved and who would be damned based not on any free will or choice of the individual but simply on God’s will through his declarative sovereignty, He wills it therefore it happens. But, I kept seeing in Scriptures that Jesus came to save all of humanity. I even thought for a time that Calvin might be right and the Scriptures that speak of salvific opportunity for all men may be a mistranslation from the Greek to the English or even the Latin as I was already a Latin scholar. Eventually, when I learned Greek, I found that the Scriptures do speak quite adamantly about the inclusive opportunity of all to receive the saving grace of God by our believing in Christ and through Him all salvation may be realized. Christ coming for salvation of the whole world certainly conflicted with predestination and with total depravity and try as I might I could not reconcile these Scriptures with Calvinist doctrine. This is especially clear in the writings of St. John the beloved disciple. No, Calvin must be wrong, the Scriptures do not talk of salvation for only the elect unless we would assume that the whole world is only the elect which Scriptures would also contradict. If the elect are drawn by irresistible grace why is this irresistible grace given to all and not just the elect? The Scriptures are not supposed to create more questions than they answer and in this doctrine leave so much ambiguity as to who will be saved and /or why some are elect and others are damned. Surely there must be some element of free will and not just irresistible grace. One thing in Scriptures that really jumped out at me was learning from Scriptures that God did not create the everlasting fire for mankind but for Satan and his minions (Mat 25:41). If He created the everlasting fire as punishment for them only as Scriptures teach, then why does He also create some of humanity for the everlasting fire?

Then there is the issue of original sin. We see the sin of Adam and Eve which we inherit but it is clear from Scriptures that they did not sin because of a depraved state. In the Garden there obviously was not irresistible grace that would prevent them from sinning. Had there been irresistible grace death would not have entered the world. It seems to me that they sinned from their choices made within their free will. Where in Scriptures does it suggest that as a result of original sin that we no longer have choice or free will but are subject to election through irresistible grace. Why, if God chooses us with irresistible grace as the elect, are we not regenerated into perfection, immune to sin? Where is man’s responsibility in Calvin’s theology?

(1Jo 2:2) And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

Are these words not true? John Calvin brings them into doubt.

(HOYT SPARKS) “You using your man-made writings and dogma, while it is clear to me the KJV sets forth dipping.”

(Cristoiglesia) You should have known that one cannot be a Catholic Christian and believe in the man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Truth can be found outside of the covers of the Bible. I am assuming you are referring to the “Didache” which was written in the first century and is called the training of the 12. It gives us great insight into the practices of the first century Christians. Furthermore it is the only writing in the first century that speaks of the methodology of Baptism. The Bible is entirely silent on this issue. You are trying desperately to justify your prejudice for immersion or dipping only but there is absolutely no support from the Bible for this belief. Actually, I prefer this method as well for the symbolism of being buried and then raised but I am not so foolish or arrogant as to add to the teaching of the Bible to try to support my preference. Let us see if you can make your case from Scriptures.

(HOYT SPARKS) “I am not a follower of John Calvin, nor do I believe in how he practiced or carried out what he declared to be of a "religious" nature. Neither do I need to be adivsed by anyone of what and how I should believe and practice what I see as the truth, as it is in Christ Jesus.”

(Cristoiglesia) I am of the opinion that if you believe and teach the heterodoxy of John Calvin then you are a follower of Calvin. Surely what you teach is not the teaching of the disciples or our Lord nor can such a teaching be found in Scriptures without contradiction. Your view on soteriology is clearly Calvinist in nature and can be described theologically as eisegesis. You are making the same error on the Doctrine of Baptism.

Now, I do understand that what you see as truth but what you see as truth is nowhere to be found in God’s written Word the Bible. It is truthful to you because of your eisegesis. The truth is that the Bible does not say how anyone is baptized in regards to the particulars of the methods. What the Bible does tell us is that it was in living waters (rivers) but it does not state the method. Again, any supposition to the methodology is adding to the teaching of Scriptures one’s own prejudice. Instead of coming to Scriptures to learn about the method of Baptism one is forced to add to what they say to conclude that it was by immersion or dipping. Obviously you do need to be advised that what you believe is truth is not biblical in nature and is the truth in your mind without biblical citation. Which I might add is a odd approach for a Fundamentalist Baptist. Such prejudiced suppositions are not in Christ Jesus.

(Hoyt Sparks) “Why do the Greeks dip? Is it because they understand Greek better than the Latins?”

(Cristoiglesia) I am not an expert on Greek Orthodox practices but I have observed that in all the Greek Churches that they have a Baptismal font where one stands as the priest pours water over the persons head. This would be accurate with the art in the Catacombs of Rome where Jesus is depicted as standing in the Jordan River in water below His knees while John the Baptist pours water from a pitcher over His head. I understand Greek very well and in the context of Baptism it means to cleanse or to wash and not necessarily immersion or dipping. Actually immersion would be the least likely meaning in relation to Baptism.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Rome dipped until they went the way of the world by devising and following man-made practices, thus they departed from orthodoxy.

(Cristoiglesia) There is no evidence of what you surmise from Scriptures, history or patristic evidence. Surely the early Church used all three methods, immersion, pouring and sprinkling. I think the historical evidence shows that it was most often by pouring which is the most common Catholic and Orthodox Baptism even today. I was Baptized by immersion but I do not feel as if I have a greater efficacy than would occur if I had been baptized by pouring or sprinkling. Since all methods were used in the early Church it is ridiculous and unscholarly to claim that there is a departure from orthodoxy in regards to the methodology of Baptism.

(HOYT SPARKS) “It is possible that your steepness in Greek prevents you from understanding English in the KJV. Matt 3:16 indicates Christ went UP straighway OUT OF THE WATER. Jesus was DOWN IN the water, and He was not taking a bath.

Mark 1:9-10. John the dipper was IN Jordan. If John sprikled or pured water on Jesus, it was not necesary to be IN Jordan. John could have filled a pitcher with water, sprikled or poured it upon Christ, and saved all the trouble wading around IN Jordan. Also, John could have sprinkled or pured water on those he baptized by staying in town and catching water from the cistern.”

(Cristoiglesia) Actually, I believe that having an understanding of the original language of the Bible and having experience in translation makes it easier and with more veracity in understanding than reading only from a mediocre English translation in archaic language as is the KJV. It makes me appreciate the original language of the Bible even more. I also believe that being trained in biblical hermeneutics and exegesis aids in my understanding of Scriptures.

Now let us look at Matt 3:16 from an unprejudiced eye and without and attempt at eisegesis. What we can read here regardless of translation or the original language is that after being Baptized that Jesus came straightway out of the water as the Bible says. The most logical interpretation is that He simply walked out of the water after he was Baptized. He certainly was formerly in the water and was cleansed. The verse is silent on whether he was immersed, poured upon or sprinkled. He actually could have been baptized by any of these three methods. It is not necessary to add to what the Scriptures say which is very poor hermeneutical practice.

From the Didache we find the explanation as to why the river was chosen as the Didache says that it is best to be baptized in living water, if possible, which simply means running water. The Jordan river made baptizing in living water possible. Also, when the people came to faith at Pentecost they were likely baptized from a cistern.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Peter, who you claim was your first pope(I deny such), stated that baptism does not put away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward GOD, 1 Peter 3:21.”

(Cristoiglesia) If you deny St. Peter was the first Pope then you not only deny the authority of our Lord to appoint him but also deny the prophesy of Isaiah that was fulfilled in Christ. If Jesus did not fulfill all the prophesies about the Messiah then He cannot be the Savior and is a pretender to being the Messiah. Are you really wanting to make such an assumption about the veracity of our Lord in fulfilling prophesy or having the authority to appoint a prime minister to fulfill the biblical promise and sign? I would be very careful going there.

Now let us examine 1 Pet 3:21…
The ark of Noah was a figure of Baptism but instead of saving one from the death of the soul as does Baptism the ark saved Noah’s family from physical death. No one lived outside of the ark and no one lives as an eternal soul without Baptism or at least a desire for it as prompted by reason and the Holy Spirit. Those persons who are capable of sufficient age, reason and repentance to know what they receive at Baptism are interrogated as to a good conscience whether they indeed believe in God in the Trinity.

This understanding is that one is saved as Noah was saved by water as both are a figure of the other. Baptism is not about washing away the dirt or filth but instead it purifies, cleanses or purges the conscience from sin when one is properly disposed in answering the questions asked in relation to the faith of the individual including the renouncing of Satan and his works with an accompanying obedience to God’s commands.

(HOYT SPARKS) “You wrote: "Thank you for the inspiration and the opportunity to contend for the faith delivered once for all". This is not true: Jude 1:3 indicates it is of the faith delivered to the saints, not to everyone.”

(Cristoiglesia) First of all, this points out a fundamental differenced in our beliefs. While I follow a systematic and non-contradictory view that salvation is available for all through the sacrifice of our Lord on Golgotha and not just the elect as you surmise by a cursory understanding of Scripture and theology. Jesus wrote the law on everyone’s hearts so that the Holy Spirit can appeal to that law and bring individuals to faith. No one lacks this Rosetta stone of understanding of he call of the Spirit. Thus for what purpose did our Lord give us this inherent knowledge. So, it is delivered to everyone even if some will not receive it and humbly become obedient.

I would be shirking my duty to my calling as a priest if I did not instruct you in the common concern and hope of our salvation. Therefore it is necessary as it was for Jude to encourage you to stand firm in the Christian faith. Are not believers all saints of the Church militant?

(HOYT SPARKS) “So you see, your freewillism demands that you distort scripture to deceive many.”

(Cristoiglesia) Please excuse me for pointing out the obvious but it is you that is using eisegesis and not I and quite awkwardly I might add.

(HOYT SPARKS) “There are many, many things that I could respond to from your latest post, but I'm certain the result will be the same, of no avail or benefit for you or me. And it is of a disadvantage for me to be restricted to the limits of your blog, rather than direct emails.”

(Cristoiglesia) The truth will always prevail and such exercises are fruitful in that iron sharpens iron which is a benefit to each of us. Our conversations may also benefit others who struggle with these issues as well.

(HOYT SPARKS) ” I sincerely hope that you do not dupe anyone with your false doctrine and practice, but that is not in my hands, GOD only will do as HE sees fit: He saw the end before the foundation of the world and will do HIS pleasure. Hoyt Sparks"

(Cristoiglesia) I do not subscribe to any false doctrines or practices to dupe anyone with but instead teach the original teaching of Jesus and the disciples in the only Church that He ever founded. It is the same Church that He prayed that we be one within as He and the Father are one. He prayed for unity and I am obedient to His will. I left Protestantism which you are still deceived within by the heretical Calvinist teaching and other doctrines of men being spread by false teachers lacking any authority to teach by our Lord. Your pride prevents you from hearing the Word and it falling on fertile ground. I can only pray that you receive the same grace as I to turn from your man-made church to Christ’s own Church where the fullness of truth is found. May His will be done. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Baptism discussed with Hoyt Sparks

2010-08-28T10:45:00.004+08:00

(HOYT SPARKS) ” It is your assumption, and that of any man-made writings, that Jesus Christ was not immersed/dipped in Jordan. The Bible refutes your false contention.”

(Cristoiglesia) No, I do not make assumptions on theological issues without considering the entirety of biblical teaching on the issue or in this case the absence of biblical teaching on this issue. The Bible is entirely silent on the method of Baptism. I am sure that if you knew of any proof from Scriptures that you would have provided them but you cannot because they do not exist. Certainly there is no biblical evidence of Jesus or anyone else being immersed or dipped in the Jordan as the methodology of Baptism. So your accusation that the Bible refutes my contention is without any merit and is only wishful prejudiced assumption on your part lacking scholarly evidence.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Water baptism does not wash or cleans the soul of sin; and does not in any way prepare, or help prepare, anyone for eternal peace and happiness in Heaven and immortal glory.”

(Cristoiglesia) I truly understand your opinion on Baptism but I must advise you that your understanding of Baptism is contrary to the teaching of Scriptures. The Bible also speaks of the necessity of Baptism.

Acts 2:38 (King James Version)

38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.

Here you see St. Paul teaching that Baptism is a necessity after one has repented for the remission of sins and for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. He then goes on to say that this Sacrament and the grace it provides is necessary for everyone whom the Lord has called. St. Paul also teaches of the urgency of Baptism in the following:

Acts 22:16 (King James Version)

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Here we see that indeed Baptism washes away sins which indeed purifies the soul in preparation for heaven where no sin shall enter.

As you can see from Scriptures, your assumption that Baptism has no efficacy in preparing one for their eternal promise is a false assumption contradicted by God’s Holy Word. Certainly a purified soul is necessary for heaven and immortality. Baptism is the fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel which states the following:

Ezekiel 36:25-27 (New International Version)

25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols.

26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Question: How could one read Strong's and then ask WHERE do we get the word "immersion, or submersion, or whelmed (overwhelmed) as a meaning for the word "Baptizo" or those who are "Baptized" by a Baptizer ?”

(Cristoiglesia) Well, I am a Greek scholar and rarely use Strong’s as a source for understanding Greek. Let me lay it out for you…. Strong’s makes the reference of baptizo meaning submersion, what you failed to research is that there is only one source for such an assumption as to apply this meaning to baptizo and that is contained in Attic Greek instead of the first century Koine Greek. The problem you have created is why would one apply this meaning since the language was dead for hundreds of years before Christ and this meaning is found in only one place and that is ancient Greek literature in describing a ship being sunk or submerged. The author was probably trying to be poetic in describing the sinking of the ship in this way. Certainly we find this word describing an object being dipped. In Fact we have only one instance of this and that is in an ancient pickle recipe describing them as being dipped in the vinegar solution. All other instances of this word it is used to describe washing which is the only appropriate definition to match Scripture and the teaching of Christ and St. Paul on Baptism.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Note: To say that "water baptism" is a washing that does not require "immersion, submersion, dipped, or to be completely covered with water" is contrary to sound doctrine and practice, and contrary to what millions and millions of professing Christians have believed for over 2000 years.

(Cristoiglesia) Immersion only Baptism is only a couple of hundred years old and is a Protestant doctrine introduced by the Anabaptists. Prior to that and continuing for 2000 years was the practice of immersion or of pouring three times in the name of the Trinity. Sprinkling was rarely used and today used only by some Protestants. The modernist doctrine of the Anabaptists has no Scriptural support and is contrary to the teaching of the Church for 2000 years. Personally I prefer immersion for its symbolism but it has no more efficacy than pouring or sprinkling according to the earliest teaching of the Apostles recorded in the Didache.

(HOYT SPARKS) “Today, Water Baptism by immersion is the doctrine and practice of the Old School Primitive Baptists, but they are not the only ones to still insist in correctly following the precepts set forth by Jesus Christ on this subject.

(Cristoiglesia) Well sir, if you think it is the teaching of Jesus then it must be from personal revelation because it is NOT in Scriptures. I thought Baptists were sola Scriptura advocates and do not believe in this type of personal revelation. If what you say is so then why can it not be found anywhere in Scriptures?

(HOYT SPARKS) “ROMANS 6:3-7 speaks of BOTH our "spiritual baptism" INTO Christ AND water baptism as a "likeness" and testimony of that which God has performed in our hearts. By no means does it teach that one is "baptized INTO Christ" by water baptism”

(Cristoiglesia) Baptism results in a justification of the spirit in which the old man is dead and a new man is born. The old man is dead and we are grafted branches into Christ so that we can bear fruit through a virtuous life. We come into a familial relationship with God as our souls are cleansed as we are justified from sin. Our sinful bodies are destroyed by Baptism and we become dead to sin and we must sin no more just as Christ dies no more. Christ in his establishment of Baptism as a means of Grace by water is indisputable as the graced bestowed is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

(HOYT SPARKS) “ Such a doctrine would be the false doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. MARK 16:15-16 verse 16 is a continuation of verse 15. To teach that the Gospel must be preached and that the hearers MUST believe and be baptized, is the same as teaching "Gospel Regeneration", and fails to take into account the Doctrines of Election, Predestination, Calling and Justification - which is done by God alone. IF one MUST do something in order to have eternal life - then it is by works and not by Grace.

(Cristoiglesia) Baptism is not a work of the law as are forbidden in Scriptures but instead an act of obedience to Christ who taught of the necessity of Baptism by water. Why would Christ teach a false doctrine as the Bible clearly teaches of our justification through Baptism? Jesus personally said to Nicodemus that we must be baptized.

Higher Calvinist heresy should not be applied in understanding Scriptures as Calvinist teaching and doctrine are the doctrines of devils and results in a misunderstanding of the fundamental characteristics of God’s grace and the opportunity for mankind to have an equal opportunity of receiving the efficacy of that grace.

What is “done by God alone” in a soteriological perspective is that God writes the law on everyone’s heart so that we can respond to the Holy Spirit when it appeals to that law. Our response in this way brings us to faith and not by divine lottery as Calvin surmised. We all have an equality of free will to respond to God’s grace. The Gospel is but one means that the Holy Spirit appeals to the law but Gospel alone for regeneration is truly not sustainable as a doctrine from Scriptures but neither is predestination except in the understanding of God’s middle knowledge. All salvation is by God’s grace regardless of works.

(HOYT SPARKS) “For someone to take the FOUR times "baptismos" is translated into the English word Wash or Washings - and try to Change the PRECEPTS taught in the Scriptures about Water Baptism being by Immersion and a picture of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ - can be compared to what Jesus said to the Pharisees: "Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." (Matthew 23:24).

(Cristoiglesia) I agree with you about the symbolism of immersion Baptism. But, again this is nowhere taught in Scriptures nor is there any evidence of anyone being baptized by immersion. Therefore, Matthew 23:24 seems to apply to you rather than my contention that there is no biblical reason to insist on immersion alone. You have confirmed this fact from your failure to connect the Scriptures to immersion only. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion with one calling himself "The Beloved Apostle Paul"

2010-08-20T00:20:00.001+08:00

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “First, the roman church is NOT God's church.”

(Cristoiglesia) First of all the Catholic Church is not the “roman church” but instead it is the universal Church of Christ. It is the only Church founded by Jesus and the disciples. Jesus used construction vernacular saying the He is the cornerstone of the Church and the High Priest. The Bible tells us that it is built on the 12 foundation stones of the disciples laid by Christ with Him choosing these men and training them to lead his Church in perpetuity through apostolic succession. He chose Simon and renamed Him the Rock (Petros in Greek or Peter in English) to be the prime minister of the Church fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah. This is the Church that exists today as the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church who maintains this leadership and fit the definition of the visible Church given by St. Ignatius in his letters to the Trallians and the Smyrnaeans in the year 107 AD. Jesus said that His Church would endure for all times and the Catholic Church is that church that has endured now for 2000 years. No other Church can make this claim. Without exception all biblical, historical and patristic evidence point to the fact that the Church is the Church spoken of in the New Testament of the Holy Scriptures.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “The only church today is the Body of Christ.”

(Cristoiglesia) I guess that can be determine how one defines the “Body of Christ”. A very strong argument can be made that the Protestant sects are outside of the Body of Christ. Even the Bible contributes to this argument saying the following about the Protestant rebellion against the Church in a most prophetic way. This is what the Bible says about those who depart from the doctrines of the Church.

2 Timothy 4:3-4 (King James Version)
3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

The invisible Church are those who have faith in our Lord but one cannot discern who are a part of His invisible Church. However, Jesus and the disciples founded a visible Church and we see the formation of that Church in the book of Acts. This Church is the Catholic Church and is the self-same Church that Jesus prayed that we would all be one within. Otherwise as professed Christians and not being obedient to His Church would place us outside of His will, blessings, promises and grace; if not fully but in great measure. Those outside of His will would be those that some describe as "playing" at Christianity and not following Jesus.

There are some outside of the visible Church which some call a "remnant" that are not be on the path to the narrow gate but may be saved by God's mercy. These are those who seek God but are deceived into being outside of His visible Church by no fault of their own. While not a part of the visible Church they can be considered a part of the invisible Church. So, Jesus and the disciples formed a visible Church as we see after Pentecost recorded in the book of Acts and it could be said that there are those known only to God who are a part of that visible Church against their will or knowledge that will be received in Glory to be a part of the Church Triumphant. But, as one can see in Scripture this is not the ordinary way to be saved through His Church but as an extraordinary example of His mercy.

The gates of hell will never prevail against His visible Church because of the protection of the Church by the Holy Spirit given at Pentecost. The Church is other worldly and heavenly in its nature and is endowed with its holiness and veracity from its founder Jesus. Jesus gave His promises to His visible Church so that the world could see the testimony of His Church as the pillar and ground of the truth and a shining city on a hill (Mat 5:14) It is the will of God that all should be saved by and through His Church as it is the Church that was commissioned to spread the Gospel throughout the world both corporeally and individually. The Church is a refuge and the Ark from the sins and temptations of the world. It is heaven on earth where Christ dwells in the Tabernacles and is worshipped. So if the visible Church ceased to exist it would make Jesus a liar and a pretender as the Messiah and Savior of the world because all of His promises would be proven false.

Unity requires that there be a knowledge and physical manifestation of that unity. That is the Catholic Church which is the visible Church. The invisible Church does not represent unity because it is known only to God which may be unified in faith but not in purpose.

The purpose of the Church is its testimony in spreading the "good news" to the world. That requires a visible unity. The world will never know if those who are in the invisible Church are preserved but the visible Church will always be the witness to the world that it remains after empires and governments have fallen, political ideologies have been born and died and false and counterfeit religions have come and gone. It is a testimony that Jesus is God of the Trinity and that His will be done on earth as well as in heaven regardless of the snares of Satan and His lies against humanity.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “Your church draws on JEWISH scripture, as does any other church that professes Christ. I have no hatred for your church, I simply know false doctrine when I hear it.”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes we do draw on the Jewish Scriptures and it is the Church through the authority given to the Church by Christ that we have canonized those Scriptures as part of the Christian Bible. I also agree that all Christian sects should use those same Scriptures as does Christ’s Church. It is very good for one claiming to be Christian not to have hatred for Christ’s Church. It is enough of a sin to place oneself outside of that community in direct opposition to Jesus who prayed to the Father that we all be one in unity of faith and practice without having hatred for the Holy institution Christ Himself founded.

I am not so sure that you do know what false doctrine is being outside of the authority of teaching of Christ’s own Church. I think what you are describing is what St. Paul said in His letter to Timothy about not being able to endure sound doctrine.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “The ONLY source of information we have about all things concerning God is the Holy Scriptures of the JEWS.” That goes for you, as well as for me.

(Cristoiglesia) Well no, Christians have the New Testament as well. We also have the teaching of Jesus passed down through apostolic tradition in the writings of the Church fathers and the leadership of the Church by the Holy Spirit which prohibits doctrinal error. The Bible itself teaches the following:

John 21:25 (King James Version)
25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “You SHOW me where the BIBLE tells us to pray to MARY! You SHOW me where the BIBLE tells us to pray to SAINTS!”

(Cristoiglesia) Where so many Protestants in their doctrinal ignorance ere is in assuming that praying is always associated with worship. Actually the word pray means simply to ask and in the case of the blessed mother of God and other saints whether in the Church militant, suffering or triumphant this is all we are doing when we ask them to pray for us. We are petitioning them to be prayer partners. It is no different than me asking you to pray for me or me for you.

First of all it is disingenuous to state that the practice of praying for each other has no biblical foundation, we are instructed in Scripture to have a prayer life for others as it is part of God’s commandment to love one another.

(2Co 5:8 DRB) But we are confident and have a good will to be absent rather from the body and to be present with the Lord.

The Catholic Church does not teach that it is absolutely necessary for one to ask for the intercession of saints for salvation. The Church does teach that prayer to God is necessary for salvation for all believers. For a Catholic it would be wrong to ignore the liturgical worship offered to God at feast days for the saints and the prayers asking for their intercession.

The Communion of Saints is a dogma of the ancient Church and is recorded in the apostles Creed. It simply states that the faithful because of their relationship with Christ are alive even after the death of their flesh and worship with us. To us the Church is made up of the Church militant who represents all those believers living out their hope in the flesh.

(Phi 2:12 DRB) Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

(Phi 2:13 DRB) For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and to accomplish, according to his good will.

It consists of the Church Suffering who are those who are temporarily in need of further purgation from sin so that they may enjoy the presence of God.

(2Ma 12:46 DRB) It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Lastly, the Communion of the Saints consists of those who have won the race:

(Phi 3:14 DRB) I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ Jesus.

Their immortal souls are in heaven in God’s presence:

(Rev 5:8 DRB) And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

The universal stream connecting all of God’s creation is His love, which we take on in our baptism into our journey towards sanctification. This is not an emotional but a desire placed in us by the Spirit of God that endures as a desire for those other than ourselves and this love extends even to our enemies. This is truly a love that comes only from God and is a foreign concept and nonsense to those who have not received God’s salvific grace. This desire within our souls does not end with the death of our flesh but continues into eternity where the saints through their intercession in prayer encourage us in our race and assist us to endure unto our union with God.

I think that some people of faith, who do not understand the Communion of Saints, somehow believe that asking saints to pray for us is detracting from our love or our trust in God. In truth it is impossible, if we truly love as God commands and has given us the grace to understand, not to pray to those whom we love and in turn we expect them to return that same love to us by praying for us and presenting our prayers to God.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “You SHOW me where the Word of God speaks of purgatory, sir.”

(Cristoiglesia) That is very easy in that the doctrine of Purgatory is one of the most biblically supported of all Christian doctrines. If there is not a process of purgation then heaven will be an empty place and the Scriptures regarding soteriology cannot be reconciled with each other. Either a sinful soul may enter heaven or it can not. The Catholic position is that it cannot but must be pure and sanctified by Christ.

There is a common Protestant misunderstanding of purgatory. At least one protestant minister, John Wesley, spoke of perfectionism in this life, possible but rare. He is one of the few to proclaim that one can be sanctified in this life and he left the Moravian Church over this issue after a rebuke by Count Zinzendorf for this teaching.

People in purgatory are already justified by receiving the supernatural eternal life into our souls through Baptism making us a part of the Body of Christ. Those in purgatory have accepted Christ by faith and have not rejected Him by unrepentant mortal sin. It is a place where one is purified by fire (Mal 3:2). Imagine the joy of being in purgatory and knowing that you are there because you have passed judgment and are assured of being in the presence of God in heaven. Purgatory is not an eternal destination, there are only two, heaven or hell.

We should not think of purgatory as some kind of legal punishment for past sins as it would be under the old law. Those in purgatory are already new creatures changed by Christ’s grace, they are the adopted children and part of God’s family in purgatory one receives final discipline and cleansing preparing one for the perfection of heaven. Catholics believe that sanctification is a process and is not completed when one comes to belief. So purgatory is not a suggestion that Christ’s atonement is insufficient but that we have not yet completed our sanctification through the grace of Christ.

Cleansing or sanctification is a gradual process and we must endure to the end to be saved.

(Mat 10:22 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.

(Mat 24:13 DRB) But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.

(Mar 13:13 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved.

Catholic soteriology recognizes that for some of us the process was not completed at death or that we died with unrepentant sin.

(Heb 9:27 DRB) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment:

The judgment is our eternal destiny and for those whose name is in the Lamb’s Book of Life, heaven is assured. But we know that one must be free of sin to be in God’s presence.

(1Ti 6:14 DRB) That thou keep the commandment without spot, blameless, unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

It may be that one is not prepared to be in our Lord’s presence as we may still be with spiritual shortcomings or temporal effects of forgiven sins on our soul making it necessary for some form of purification to enter heaven in God’s presence. Since this is a process of purgation it is called purgatory and it is in keeping with prophecy of the prophet Habakkuk who said that only that which is holy may enter heaven.

(Hab 1:13 DRB) Thy eyes are too pure to behold evil, and thou canst not look on iniquity. Why lookest thou upon them that do unjust things, and holdest thy peace when the wicked devoureth the man that is more just than himself?

St. Paul also taught of a process of purgation which may involve suffering on the soul of Christians and in his first letter to the Corinthian Church he describes the process of purgation after death.

(1Co 3:10 DRB) According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation: and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

(1Co 3:11 DRB) For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid: which is Christ Jesus.

(1Co 3:12 DRB) Now, if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble:

(1Co 3:13 DRB) Every man's work shall be manifest. For the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire. And the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is.

(1Co 3:14 DRB) If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

(1Co 3:15 DRB) If any mans work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

St. Paul speaks metaphorically that the results of sin that remain on one’s soul is like “wood, hay and straw” and are burned away in the process of final purification to be received in the presence of the Lord. St. Paul also speaks of one’s works as “gold, silver and precious stones” which are refined and retained.

This passage reminds me of what Christ said in the following indicating that some sins may be forgiven after death.

(Mat 12:32 DRB) And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

Purgatory is also related to the parable of the unforgiving servant which is as follows…

(Mat 18:32 DRB) Then his lord called him: and said to him: Thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all the debt, because thou besoughtest me:

(Mat 18:33 DRB) Shouldst not thou then have had compassion also on thy fellow servant, even as I had compassion on thee?

(Mat 18:34 DRB) And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt.

After telling the parable Christ emphasizes His message lest it be misunderstood with this warning……..

(Mat 18:35 DRB) So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

Christ was warning us of the danger of a hard heart or anger making us unwilling to forgive others. We should acknowledge that these are the signs and example of a defective soul in need of purgation so that he that is imperfect may be in the presence of God and dwell in glory. (See CCC 1030-1032)

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “Do NOT cite words from the apocryphal books, as they are NOT the word of God. Those books were written during the 400 year silence from heaven between Malachi and the Gospels. Heaven was silent. There were no prophets. God was not speaking to men, and so those books are NOT the word of God.”

(Cristoiglesia) First let me teach you that there is a difference between books called apocrypha and the biblical books of the Old Testament that are properly called the Deuterocanonicals. The apocryphal books are those banned by Pope St. Gelasius in the fifth century and were never a part of the canon approved by the Church. The seven books of the Old Testament or the Septuagint are canonical and they are the Word of God approved by the authority of the Church given by Christ and inspired by the Holy Spirit.

All of the books of the Old Testament were not written by prophets yet the writings are still considered canonical. There has never been a 400 year period when God failed to inspire men.

In first century Jerusalem there were at least four OT Canons in use by different Jewish Groups. There was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Ethiopian Jews and the Diaspora/Essene Jews. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 200 years ago when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon eliminating the Deuterocanonicals from their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of Christ’s Church that the Deuterocanonicals were never believed to be inspired and just the opposite is true. The decision by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never a question about their inspiration.

The OT Canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish Canon not chosen by the Jews until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the new group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. Until then as I said previously there were many Canons in use. The adoption of the Canon missing the Deuterocanonicals united the Jews against the Christians was decided in the Jewish Council of Jamnia because the Deuterocanonicals referred too strongly to the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.

Some Protestants will claim that only the Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church deferred that decision to Christ and the disciples and it is clear through biblical research, that the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon that was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that resulted in His crucifixion suggests the source of this confusion as from the father of lies who led the Pharisees to accuse Christ and petition for His punishment. It is another way that Satan divides the body of Christ and separates the faithful denying Christ’s prayer that we all be one in Christ through His Church. The Christian Church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.

Some Protestants erroneously believe that Catholics added to the Bible with the Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as witnessed by Christ’s Church. The facts are that the Protestants removed the Deuterocanonicals and even considered strongly to remove some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr. Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with His heretical man made doctrines of the “Solas”, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John because of its teaching of the commandment to Eat Christ’s Body and drink His Blood which contradicted his view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even Fr. Martin Luther could not endorse such a departure from Scriptures and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “The FACT, sir, is that your church does NOT preach the Lord Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery, which IS exactly what the apostle Paul DID preach, sir.”

(Cristoiglesia) You could not be more inaccurate as the Church has not departed one iota from the teaching of the apostles of our Lord. Christ’s Church is still true to the promise in Scriptures that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth”.

(The Beloved Apostle Paul) “All else aside, you had better hope that you are counting on the perfect and completed work of Christ on the cross for your salvation. Without THAT, you are lost.”

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus did not complete His redemptive work on the cross. What was finished were the Old Covenant and the Passover. We are saved by His grace which continues His redemptive work through His Church. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Clarifying Jesus' teaching on the law and the misconceptions of the teaching of the Church

2010-07-26T10:00:00.003+08:00

(geessewereabove) “The Catholic church will not even admit when it was made!”

(Cristoiglesia) Sure we do, it was founded by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

(Geessewereabove) “Rabi Jesus says in Matthew 5:17-20 That he is not here to start a new religuen; but to fix the Jewish one.”

(Cristoiglesia) I agree that Christianity is perfected Judaism as it was perfected by Christ. The coming of Christ ended such practices as circumcision and the animal sacrifices. However, even though these ceremonies were to cease the foundational morality that these things represented remained the same but representing greater perfection. Jesus fulfilled the law by representing all the figures and prophecies and correcting that which was imperfect. Jesus spoke as He did in verse 17 to prepare the Jews for the new instructions to come. The Jews of the time were not very concerned about fulfilling the law but at the same time they had anxiety and jealousy of departing from the letter of the law and especially if the change perfected morality.

Jesus fulfilled the law by obedience to the rites so as to be innocent of sin. Not only did observe and fulfill the law but also by His actions He allows us to fulfill it as well. Man was too weak to fulfill the law necessitating Christ to justify humanity and thus accomplishing the will of the law. As St. John Chrysostom said, “He fulfilled the old law to a more strict and powerful morality.”

In verse 18 Jesus says “Amen” to emphasize the importance of the truth He is about to share saying the following:

Every jot or tittle meaning the smallest moral precept and every type and figure of the former law shall be fulfilled by His coming.

In verse 19 Jesus speaks of the least of the kingdom of heaven which is one that is not in heaven at all reserving heaven for those who are sanctified and of great virtue. He warns not to follow the Scribes and the Pharisees who instruct others but do not follow or practice what they teach in the law even neglecting the spirit of the law. They do not teach to please and honor God but to build up their own pride.

Verse 20 speaks of the Scribes being the doctors of the Mosaic law and the Pharisees being certain men who profess a exacting observance of the law and were honored by the people. Jesus promises to show us the level of perfection of our calling. When Jesus says “your justice” He is speaking of the justice He gives us so that we are truly just and have inherent justice by observing the commandments of God. Without this gift there is no justice of works and one cannot be saved. We must conclude that salvation, justice and justification is not the result of faith alone or by imputation of Christ’s justice.

(geessewereabove) “In Acts The Christians met in the Synagogs, in the Evenings. While those that do not believe Jesus is the Christ still meet in the mornings.”

(Cristoiglesia) The Christians did continue meeting in the synagogues for a short while.

(geessewereabove) “The Catholic church was started by 29 men in 305/6 A.D., that did not like all the effort/work it took/takes to obey all we are taught. Again in Matt. 5:17-20 we are required to remember all 613 of the commandments in the Old Testimant, even if we do not have to obey them all, like eating koser. So they started their new one.”

(Cristoiglesia) No, the Catholic Church was founded by Jesus and the disciples at Pentecost in 33AD. This is clearly taught in the book of Acts and is supported by historical and patristic evidence. The Bible tells us it was founded by Jesus being the cornerstone and the high priest and the disciples the 12 foundation stones with St. Peter as the prime minister fulfilling the figure in the prophecy of Isaiah. They as all Catholic Christians were faithful to the teaching of Jesus.

(geessewereabove) “A Catholic friend of mine bought herself a new Catholic Bible in 2001. It had it's nine Commandments up with a slate style background, with the tenth split into two commandments! Second removed!”

(Cristoiglesia) There are Ten Commandments and that is why they are called the Decalogue. In the original Hebrew there were no numbers or even punctuation. Different translators place the punctuation and numbers in different places but the fact is that in all translations there are ten commandments. No commandments have been removed in any translation I have seen and certainly not in any Catholic approved translation.

(geessewereabove) “The Catholic church tells its people to pray to Jesus (son of God), Mary, anyone they have named as a saint, and even dead parents. Where we are all required to pray ONLY to God. that is why it keeps getting smaller and smaller. More and more people do read the Bible, see truth they are not being taught.”

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, the Church teaches all Catholic Christians that it is important to pray to God for ourselves and for others. It is by praying for others that we fulfill the commandment of our Lord to love one another. The Church also teaches the truth from Scriptures that we do not cease to be a part of His Church upon our physical death but that we are instantly with God in heaven following the Scriptures that says that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord for those In Christ. As part of that communion of saints their ministry is no different than ours and that is to show our love by praying for one another. We ask the righteous in heaven to pray for us as the Bible instructs saying that the prayers of the righteous are of great benefit. When we ask the saints in heaven to pray for us we are fulfilling Christ’s commandment. No where in all of Scriptures does it instruct us not to pray for others or for others not to pray for us as you claim. Please research the communion of saints to get a better understanding of the Christian prayer life. Since we teach the fullness of truth the Church continues to grow as it has for 2000 years as the Holy Spirit draws more and more of His home to His Church. I am a former Protestant for 50 years and it is the Bible that brought me home to the fullness of truth. To be deep in Scriptures is to become a Catholic Christian.

(geessewereabove) In Matthew 23 :8-10, we are required by Jesus, never to have a title before ones name like Rabi. That "Father" is to used ONLY FOR GOD; no humans to be called that. And Teacher is for Jesus. I went to a Catholic priest on this and he claimed "All catholic priests are above Jesus and equal to God. So that dose not include us." So self centered!”

(Cristoiglesia) No Catholic priest ever told you that priests are above Jesus and equal to God. The teaching of the Church is just the opposite. The priests are a servant class. The Pope is the servant of the servants of God and holds the lowest position of all humanity. Above him is the Bishops who are the successors of the apostles, then the priests, deacons and the laity with Jesus being the high priest, respectfully.

You have not come to a proper understanding of Matthew 23:8-10 perhaps because your prejudice against Christ’s Church has prevented you from being taught.

From the early Church we find that clergy were addressed as father. There are those with little knowledge of history or hermeneutical discipline such as understanding Scriptures within context, who believe that the Bible prohibits one from calling a priest father. The words they rely on come directly from Christ:

(Mat 23:9 DRB) And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.

Keeping the verse in context let us look at the verse preceding this verse:

(Mat 23:8 DRB) But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your master: and all you are brethren.

Rabbi means teacher and the Latin word for teacher is doctor so anyone using these terms as well are violating the literal interpretation of the text.

Let us look at the verse after verse 9:

(Mat 23:10 DRB) Neither be ye called masters: for one is your master, Christ.

There is no way that the interpretation could be correct if one reads and understands the Matthew passage in context. He is clearly teaching that one should not look to any human authority as our teacher, father, master, doctor or other titles of respect but instead give to God those things that are reserved for Him. Do you also refuse to call people doctor, teacher, professor, mister, or master? All of these are forbidden as well if we are to accept a literal understanding.

Context also requires that we investigate what the other Scriptures say as well as the understanding of these words by those who followed Christ. There are many instances where the writers of the New Testament contradict a literal understanding of not calling a man father, teacher or master. Consider the following verses:

(Act 5:34 DRB) But one in the council rising up, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, respected by all the people, commanded the men to be put forth a little while.

(Col 4:1 DRB) Masters, do to your servants that which is just and equal: knowing that you also have a master in heaven.

(2Ti 1:11 DRB) Wherein I am appointed a preacher and an apostle and teacher of the Gentiles.

Let us examine the statements of St. Stephen to see if he understood Christ to be speaking literally….In is soliloquy (Acts Chapter 7) before the Sanhedrin before his stoning to martyrdom he used the term father in referring to Abraham Isaac and Jacob as fathers and also to his Israelite ancestors as fathers.

St. John the beloved disciple also did not understand Christ to be teaching literally as we can see in the following verses:

(1Jn 2:13 DRB) I write unto you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one.

(1Jn 2:14 DRB) I write unto you, babes, because you have known the Father. I write unto you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and you have overcome the wicked one.

(1Jn 2:15 DRB) Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him.

(1Jn 2:16 DRB) For all that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh and the concupiscence of the eyes and the pride of life, which is not of the Father but is of the world.

St. Paul also had a different understanding of Christ’s words than the literalists:

(1Co 4:14 DRB) I write not these things to confound you: but I admonish you as my dearest children.

(1Co 4:15 DRB) For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.

(1Co 4:16 DRB) Wherefore, I beseech you, be ye followers of me as I also am of Christ.

St. Paul was speaking of the fact that he is called to shepherd the flock as are all priests. We not only give birth to the Christian through Baptism but also nourish the faithful with the Holy Eucharist and God’s Word. We care for them and bind their spiritual wounds through the delivery of the Sacraments. It is no wonder that we are called father as we care for our Church family as a father cares for his own family.
I am very pleased to help you with your misconceptions so that you will not continue to break one of God’s commandments not to bear false witness. As you have already stated the laws of God are of great importance and are worthy of our obedience.

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

The Baptism of Jesus

2010-07-18T23:12:00.000+08:00

Jesus Himself tells us that His Baptism was necessary to fulfill all justice. Clearly the purpose of His Baptism was that He has an obligation to do first what will be required of others. As St. Ambrose said, that we should not refuse the grace delivered by Baptism as Jesus did not refuse penance of mankind.

Surely our sins are forgiven by Baptism but this is the beginning of our sanctification preparing the flesh and the spirit to receive the ongoing grace of our Lord. The flesh remains after Baptism to be vulnerable to the seduction and temptation of the flesh. We are instead prepared and strengthened with the assurance of grace to withstand the enemies of God who try to separate us from the familial relationship we have entered with Christ and His Church. We continue in grace to fight for our faith as we approach our salvation with fear and trembling.

When Jesus was Baptized a miracle occurred that blessed all of humanity. The heavens were opened and joined with the earth in preparation for the Church being one militant, suffering and triumphant. under the one shepherd Jesus. According to St. John Chrysostom, we of His Church are exalted into the company of the angels.

At the Baptism of Jesus we see the Holy Spirit descending as a dove for He could not be seen by men in His glorious divinity. The dove expressed the simplicity of character given at Baptism (Mat 10:16-23). This was , of course prefigured by the olive branch carried back to the Ark by the dove which was a figure of the Church which like the Ark protects mankind from the deluge of sin from the world.

Why was Jesus an adult when He was Baptized and then the Church teaches Baptism to be done as soon as possible one might ask.....Jesus was brought into the family of man as one who was not stained by sin in any way due to God's preparation for His birth with the miraculous conception keeping Him from even having contact with the original sin of man. Because of this there was no urgency or danger necessitating Jesus to be baptized sooner. However, humanity which is born in corruption will be judged when we pass out of this world and without the garment of incorruption given by Baptism, the Bible tells us that our salvation is in great doubt.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Misunderstandings of Church teaching discussed with Tristen

2010-06-21T00:45:00.003+08:00

(Tristen) “Purgatory - implies that the sacrifice of Christ was insufficient to deal with my sins.”

(Cristoiglesia) Really? I see that you did not explain such a bazaar conclusion or provide a basis for such a conclusion. It appears that you are quite confused as to what the Church teaches about Purgatory. The following may help you to put the Doctrine of Purgatory into perspective by studying the biblical teaching on Purgatory:

There is a common Protestant misunderstanding of purgatory. At least one protestant minister, John Wesley, spoke of perfectionism in this life, possible but rare. He is one of the few to proclaim that one can be sanctified in this life and he left the Moravian Church over this issue after a rebuke by Count Zinzendorf for this teaching.

People in purgatory are already justified by receiving the supernatural eternal life into our souls through Baptism making us a part of the Body of Christ. Those in purgatory have accepted Christ by faith and have not rejected Him by unrepentant mortal sin. It is a place where one is purified by fire (Mal 3:2). Imagine the joy of being in purgatory and knowing that you are there because you have passed judgment and are assured of being in the presence of God in heaven. Purgatory is not an eternal destination, there are only two, heaven or hell.

We should not think of purgatory as some kind of legal punishment for past sins as it would be under the old law. Those in purgatory are already new creatures changed by Christ’s grace, they are the adopted children and part of God’s family in purgatory one receives final discipline and cleansing preparing one for the perfection of heaven. Catholics believe that sanctification is a process and is not completed when one comes to belief. So purgatory is not a suggestion that Christ’s atonement is insufficient but that we have not yet completed our sanctification through the grace of Christ.

Cleansing or sanctification is a gradual process and we must endure to the end to be saved.

(Mat 10:22 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.

(Mat 24:13 DRB) But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.

(Mar 13:13 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved.

Catholic soteriology recognizes that for some of us the process was not completed at death or that we died with unrepentant sin.

(Heb 9:27 DRB) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment:

The judgment is our eternal destiny and for those whose name is in the Lamb’s Book of Life, heaven is assured. But we know that one must be free of sin to be in God’s presence.

(1Ti 6:14 DRB) That thou keep the commandment without spot, blameless, unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

It may be that one is not prepared to be in our Lord’s presence as we may still be with spiritual shortcomings or temporal effects of forgiven sins on our soul making it necessary for some form of purification to enter heaven in God’s presence. Since this is a process of purgation it is called purgatory and it is in keeping with prophecy of the prophet Habakkuk who said that only that which is holy may enter heaven.

(Hab 1:13 DRB) Thy eyes are too pure to behold evil, and thou canst not look on iniquity. Why lookest thou upon them that do unjust things, and holdest thy peace when the wicked devoureth the man that is more just than himself?

St. Paul also taught of a process of purgation which may involve suffering on the soul of Christians and in his first letter to the Corinthian Church he describes the process of purgation after death.

(1Co 3:10 DRB) According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation: and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

(1Co 3:11 DRB) For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid: which is Christ Jesus.

(1Co 3:12 DRB) Now, if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble:

(1Co 3:13 DRB) Every man's work shall be manifest. For the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire. And the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is.

(1Co 3:14 DRB) If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

(1Co 3:15 DRB) If any mans work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

St. Paul speaks metaphorically that the results of sin that remain on one’s soul is like “wood, hay and straw” and are burned away in the process of final purification to be received in the presence of the Lord. St. Paul also speaks of one’s works as “gold, silver and precious stones” which are refined and retained.

This passage reminds me of what Christ said in the following indicating that some sins may be forgiven after death.

(Mat 12:32 DRB) And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

Purgatory is also related to the parable of the unforgiving servant which is as follows…

(Mat 18:32 DRB) Then his lord called him: and said to him: Thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all the debt, because thou besoughtest me:

(Mat 18:33 DRB) Shouldst not thou then have had compassion also on thy fellow servant, even as I had compassion on thee?

(Mat 18:34 DRB) And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt.

After telling the parable Christ emphasizes His message lest it be misunderstood with this warning……..

(Mat 18:35 DRB) So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

Christ was warning us of the danger of a hard heart or anger making us unwilling to forgive others. We should acknowledge that these are the signs and example of a defective soul in need of purgation so that he that is imperfect may be in the presence of God and dwell in glory. (See CCC 1030-1032)

(Tristen) Deification and prayer to Mary - is unsupported in scripture. Jesus went out of His way to ensure that Mary would not be venerated.

(Cristoiglesia) The Church does not deify the blessed mother of God in any way. Such a claim is an outright prevarification of Catholic teaching. In fact the Church teaches the exact opposite of such an accusation.

THE PROFESSION OF FAITH
SECTION TWO
THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH
CHAPTER THREE
I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT
ARTICLE 9
"I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH"
Paragraph 6. Mary - Mother of Christ, Mother of the Church
963 Since the Virgin Mary's role in the mystery of Christ and the Spirit has been treated, it is fitting now to consider her place in the mystery of the Church. "The Virgin Mary . . . is acknowledged and honored as being truly the Mother of God and of the redeemer.... She is 'clearly the mother of the members of Christ' . . . since she has by her charity joined in bringing about the birth of believers in the Church, who are members of its head."500 "Mary, Mother of Christ, Mother of the Church."501
I. MARY'S MOTHERHOOD WITH REGARD TO THE CHURCH
Wholly united with her Son . . .
964 Mary's role in the Church is inseparable from her union with Christ and flows directly from it. "This union of the mother with the Son in the work of salvation is made manifest from the time of Christ's virginal conception up to his death";502 it is made manifest above all at the hour of his Passion:
Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the cross. There she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, enduring with her only begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, joining herself with his sacrifice in her mother's heart, and lovingly consenting to the immolation of this victim, born of her: to be given, by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross, as a mother to his disciple, with these words: "Woman, behold your son."503
965 After her Son's Ascension, Mary "aided the beginnings of the Church by her prayers."504 In her association with the apostles and several women, "we also see Mary by her prayers imploring the gift of the Spirit, who had already overshadowed her in the Annunciation."505
. . . also in her Assumption
966 "Finally the Immaculate Virgin, preserved free from all stain of original sin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things, so that she might be the more fully conformed to her Son, the Lord of lords and conqueror of sin and death."506 The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is a singular participation in her Son's Resurrection and an anticipation of the resurrection of other Christians:
In giving birth you kept your virginity; in your Dormition you did not leave the world, O Mother of God, but were joined to the source of Life. You conceived the living God and, by your prayers, will deliver our souls from death.507
. . . she is our Mother in the order of grace
967 By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus)508 of the Church.
968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace."509
969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."510
970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it."511 "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."512
II. DEVOTION TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN
971 "All generations will call me blessed": "The Church's devotion to the Blessed Virgin is intrinsic to Christian worship."513 The Church rightly honors "the Blessed Virgin with special devotion. From the most ancient times the Blessed Virgin has been honored with the title of 'Mother of God,' to whose protection the faithful fly in all their dangers and needs. . . . This very special devotion . . . differs essentially from the adoration which is given to the incarnate Word and equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this adoration."514 The liturgical feasts dedicated to the Mother of God and Marian prayer, such as the rosary, an "epitome of the whole Gospel," express this devotion to the Virgin Mary.515
III. MARY - ESCHATOLOGICAL ICON OF THE CHURCH
972 After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own "pilgrimage of faith," and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey. There, "in the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity," "in the communion of all the saints,"516 the Church is awaited by the one she venerates as Mother of her Lord and as her own mother.
In the meantime the Mother of Jesus, in the glory which she possesses in body and soul in heaven, is the image and beginning of the Church as it is to be perfected in the world to come. Likewise she shines forth on earth until the day of the Lord shall come, a sign of certain hope and comfort to the pilgrim People of God.517
IN BRIEF
973 By pronouncing her "fiat" at the Annunciation and giving her consent to the Incarnation, Mary was already collaborating with the whole work her Son was to accomplish. She is mother wherever he is Savior and head of the Mystical Body.
974 The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up body and soul into the glory of heaven, where she already shares in the glory of her Son's Resurrection, anticipating the resurrection of all members of his Body.
975 "We believe that the Holy Mother of God, the new Eve, Mother of the Church, continues in heaven to exercise her maternal role on behalf of the members of Christ" (Paul VI, CPG # 15).
________________________________________
500 LG 53; cf. St. Augustine, De virg. 6: PL 40,399.
501 Paul VI, Discourse, November 21,1964.
502 LG 57.
503 LG 58; cf. Jn 19:26-27.
504 LG 69.
505 LG 59.
506 LG 59; cf. Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus (1950): DS 3903; cf. Rev 19:16.
507 Byzantine Liturgy, Troparion, Feast of the Dormition, August 15th.
508 LG 53; 63.
509 LG 61.
510 LG 62.
511 LG 60.
512 LG 62.
513 Lk 1:48; Paul VI, MC 56.
514 LG 66.
515 Cf. Paul VI, MC 42; SC 103.
516 LG 69.
517 LG 68; Cf. 2 Pet 3 10.

Your suggestion that Jesus broke the Commandment to not honor His mother is quite offensive to the Christian conscience. He never did such a thing. In fact the Bible tells us that Jesus forbid just the actions you profess of our Lord in the following:

Mark 7:9-13 (King James Version)
9And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Jesus rejected the teaching of the Pharisees that allowed one to dedicate something to the Temple against the benefit of his parents. Jesus followed and taught as the Essenes and not the Pharisees as you seem to support in your accusation against Jesus. By not honoring His mother Jesus would be committing an evil act by His own teaching.

(Tristen) “The scripture is also clear that Mary had other children and spoke in tongues.”

(Cristoiglesia) Since the blessed mother of God was present in the “Upper Room” at Pentecost it is reasonable to assume that she spoke in tongues as the others who were also present.

However, there is absolutely no evidence biblically, historically or patristically that Jesus had any siblings.

From a historical standpoint, in regards to the perpetual virginity of the blessed mother, no one believed that she had other children until the last two hundred years or so due to widespread mistranslation of Scripture and the non-scriptural practice of Sola Scriptura using improper hermeneutics.

When studying Scriptures as a body of work, in context pointing towards the atonement of humanity there is no other reasonable conclusion that one can come to other than the fact that St. Mary had no other children than Jesus. Also the historical and the Biblical accounts confirm that the blessed mother was forever virgin. St. Joseph was not chosen as a husband in the normal sense but as the protector of the blessed mother's virginity. He was a much older man, likely a widower, chosen by God for this purpose. Let us look at the verses in question....

(Mat 12:46 DRB) As he was yet speaking to the multitudes, behold his mother and his brethren stood without, seeking to speak to him.

(Mat 12:47 DRB) And one said unto him: Behold thy mother and thy brethren stand without, seeking thee.

(Mat 12:48 DRB) But he answering him that told him, said: Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?

(Mat 12:49 DRB) And stretching forth his hand towards his disciples, he said: Behold my mother and my brethren.

(Mat 12:50 DRB) For whosoever shall do the will of my Father, that is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother.

The Greek noun used here is adelphoi which means brother and it is spelled exactly the same way both times it occurs in these Scriptures. One should note also that there is no such thing in Koine Greek grammar as a familial form of adelphoi. Now it is important to note that the language used here is in itself a translation from Aramaic for adelphoi used in the familiar way. In Aramaic there is no word which would distinguish ones biological brothers from other relatives such as cousins or even step brothers or sisters. The more acceptable term in proper translation would probably be something like brethren instead of brother. When Christ spoke he also used the Aramaic equivalent to adelphoi in the Greek, in a non-familiar sense when he said the following in verse 50, “he is my brother”.

As you can see with proper exegesis there is nothing in these verses to support the theory that St. Mary was not forever virgin and that she had other children besides Jesus. Please note that in all of Scriptures, no one is specifically called a child of the blessed mother other than Jesus.

Please note the following:

(Mat 1:20 DRB) But while he thought on these things, behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost.

(Mat 1:21 DRB) And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins.

(Mat 1:22 DRB) Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying:

(Mat 1:23 DRB) Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

The blessed mother was a virgin when she conceived and was a virgin after giving birth.

(Luk 1:26 DRB) And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth,

(Luk 1:27 DRB) To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David: and the virgin's name was Mary.

(Luk 1:28 DRB) And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

(Luk 1:29 DRB) Who having heard, was troubled at his saying and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be.

(Luk 1:30 DRB) And the angel said to her: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God.

(Luk 1:31 DRB) Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb and shalt bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus.

(Luk 1:32 DRB) He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father: and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever.

(Luk 1:33 DRB) And of his kingdom there shall be no end.

(Luk 1:34 DRB) And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?

(Luk 1:35 DRB) And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

The verses preceding show that she intended to remain a virgin when she said to the angel Gabriel, “I know not man”. Please notice in the following verses in St. John’s account of the crucifixion of the blessed mother being put into the care of St. John. If she had other children and especially other male children the Jewish tradition would be that she would have been cared for by them. Jesus knowing the hardship of a childless widow placed her in good hands with St. John.

(Joh 19:26 DRB) When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son.

(Joh 19:27 DRB) After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.

Last of all there is the difficulty of history and Sacred Tradition to overcome, which has always, without exception, called her the Blessed Virgin.

(Tristen) Forbidding ministers to marry. Paul equates forbidding to marry with "doctrines of demons".

Certainly you are correct that St. Paul spoke of forbidding to marry is a doctrine of demons. Catholics agree and that is why the Church does not forbid anyone to marry. Celibacy is a self imposed discipline and those who choose celibacy take a vow to God to remain celibate. The Church chooses from those who have made this vow to be among the priesthood. The Church also allows married men to be priests when they convert from Protestant faiths as ministers to the Catholic Roman Rite. The Roman Rite is just one of 23 Rites in the Catholic Church and the only one that the discipline of celibacy.

There is no where in the Scriptures that it says not to tell clergy to marry. What it does say is not to forbid marriage. In fact, both St. Paul and Jesus recommend celibacy for clergy. Both of them gave testimony by their actions of being celibate. Neither does this say that they must marry but if they are married that they should be men of good moral character. So the Church teaches nothing against the teaching of Scriptures by allowing clergy to swear a vow of celibacy and emulate Jesus and St. Paul.

(Tristen) “Prayer to the saints. The Bible says we should pray to God, in the Name of Jesus. And that when we need grace we should boldly approach God's throne directly. Jesus died to reconcile me to God through Christ - not the saints.”

(Cristoiglesia) Certainly we should pray to God but it does not say that we should not ask others to pray for us or for us to pray for them. Prayer is a part of the great commission and it is every Christian’s ministry that we all as Christians share and we pray for each other out of love for one another. The Bible teaches that our physical death does not separate us from the Church or from God’s love. Nor does our status as part of the Church Triumphant release us of our responsibility of ministry to assist others in what we have attained. Those of us in the Church militant are encouraged to call on those who have won the race for which we have hope pray for us out of love and present those prayers before the throne of God. It is natural for a Christian filled with God’s love and indwelled by the Holy Spirit to desire both the prayers of others and to pray for others as part of our own personal ministry. This does not end until the Parousia where all are reconciled to the Father. Jesus did not remove the love for one another but is instead an example of that love that we should follow and emulate. This explains it in more detail from elsewhere in my blog:

First of all it is disingenuous to state that the practice of praying for each other has no biblical foundation, we are instructed in Scripture to have a prayer life for others as it is part of God’s commandment to love one another.

(2Co 5:8 DRB) But we are confident and have a good will to be absent rather from the body and to be present with the Lord.

The Catholic Church does not teach that it is absolutely necessary for one to ask for the intercession of saints for salvation. The Church does teach that prayer to God is necessary for salvation for all believers. For a Catholic it would be wrong to ignore the liturgical worship offered to God at feast days for the saints and the prayers asking for their intercession.

The Communion of Saints is a dogma of the ancient Church and is recorded in the apostles Creed. It simply states that the faithful because of their relationship with Christ are alive even after the death of their flesh and worship with us. To us the Church is made up of the Church militant who represents all those believers living out their hope in the flesh.

(Phi 2:12 DRB) Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

(Phi 2:13 DRB) For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and to accomplish, according to his good will.

It consists of the Church Suffering who are those who are temporarily in need of further purgation from sin so that they may enjoy the presence of God.

(2Ma 12:46 DRB) It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

Lastly, the Communion of the Saints consists of those who have won the race:

(Phi 3:14 DRB) I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ Jesus.

Their immortal souls are in heaven in God’s presence:

(Rev 5:8 DRB) And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

The universal stream connecting all of God’s creation is His love, which we take on in our baptism into our journey towards sanctification. This is not an emotional but a desire placed in us by the Spirit of God that endures as a desire for those other than ourselves and this love extends even to our enemies. This is truly a love that comes only from God and is a foreign concept and nonsense to those who have not received God’s salvific grace. This desire within our souls does not end with the death of our flesh but continues into eternity where the saints through their intercession in prayer encourage us in our race and assist us to endure unto our union with God.

I think that some people of faith, who do not understand the Communion of Saints, somehow believe that asking saints to pray for us is detracting from our love or our trust in God. In truth it is impossible, if we truly love as God commands and has given us the grace to understand, not to pray to those whom we love and in turn we expect them to return that same love to us by praying for us and presenting our prayers to God.

(Kristen) Changing the definition of saint to mean, 'a special kind of Christian' - rather than all who are sanctified (Christians). God is no respecter of persons. Any virtue found in a Christian is the result of the work of Christ - not their own righteousness. There is no such thing as a Christian who is more 'special' to God then other Christians. Certainly, acts of faithfulness deserve our respect, but that's all.

(Cristoiglesia) No one has changed the definition of “saint” but it is you that is limiting the definition. Saints are not just those in the invisible Church militant here on earth but also the Church suffering through purgation and those triumphant in heaven who have received the heavenly promise. The Bible does not limit sainthood as you labor to do out of your prejudice against all things taught in Christ’s own Church. We honor saints as an inspiration as those who have received our hope.

(Tristen) “Making the authority of the church equal to that of the Bible (or at least making the church the only authoritative interpreter of doctrine). All doctrine should be submitted to the authority of God's word. No doctrine which is unsupported by scripture should be adhered to dogmatically.”

(Cristoiglesia)By the end of the first century the Church was formed around the bishop who represented the Church in apostolic succession. The great commission was well underway and had extended to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. In scriptures we see St. Paul in his epistles telling the Church to respect the Sacred Traditions handed to them coming from both written sources and oral ones. Even the written sources were delivered orally as transcripts were very rare and few people were literate. There was not widespread distribution of what we consider today to be inspired Scripture as decided at the African Synods by the Church in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. Throughout the first sixteen centuries of the Church there was never any question that the authority of truth rested in the Church as the “regula fidei” where all teaching was and is measured by Sacred Tradition not by the Bible alone, especially when interpreted outside of its source the Church. To orthodox Christians this would be considered ridiculous as well as arrogant considering the church never wrote the Bible to be a sole source of faith, morals and practice and one author even reminded those who would approach its use in such a way as to consider it the only source that it is incomplete as far as teaching and that Christ taught much more than what it contained. In fact, it warns that it contains only a small part of Christ’s teaching, but the faithful need not fear because the Church was sent the Holy Spirit that leads the Church to all truths.

Obviously, because there are those who have rejected orthodox Christianity some lack the fullness of truth that is contained in the Episcopal structure of Christ’s Church. They lack the fullness of worship by not having the corporeal Christ present in their worship. They lack the fullness of faith by not receiving His Body and Blood that the Bible and Sacred Tradition say is necessary for eternal life. The Church is led by men as the enduring Church and not by a book easily misinterpreted and its teaching turned into the traditions and doctrines of men by those through eisegesis use it to support their desires of the flesh very often exhibited by their hatred for the Church and hatred for the most sacred of gifts to humanity His Body and Blood of the Eucharist. These misinterpretations also cause them to have animosity for each other with the same source, the Bible being used to justify schisms which are usually not so much the result of theological disagreements so much as pridefulness and deceit which are no gifts of the Spirit but attributes of the flesh that inhibit our process of sanctification that leads to final salvation. Perhaps this is why Jesus said as a prophetic statement, that unless we eat of His Body and drink His blood we have no life in us. Perhaps this is why the Bible teaches that it is not enough to cry “Lord, Lord” as some of those who do will hear at their judgment that Christ never knew them and be thrown into the lake of fire.

Christ did not teach that we are to gather around a book of Scriptures to find the truth but that the truth is found in the Church that gathers around the bishop. God was not the author of division as has occurred with those who have abandoned the Church for their private interpretations of Scripture into tens of thousands of exponentially increasing schisms without end. God is a God of unity where He prayed His prayer before His arrest and crucifixion that we all be one. He is not a God that can only be found in the pages of a Book but who is found in His Church and where His corporeal presence is given to His Church as He promised so that we may endure to eternal life and His Church may endure until He comes again. It is His Church where the truth resides and it is the place where we find the ”bulwark and ground of the truth”, there is no other.

(Tristen) These are the main reasons that I do not respect the authority of the Catholic church. I am not, however, anti-Catholic. I do believe that Catholics can be Christians. But I don't believe that someone is necessarily a Christian, just because they are a member of the Catholic church (yet another doctrine I disagree with).

(Cristoiglesia) Respectfully the only reason that a professed Christian would not accept the authority of Christ’s Church is because they are influenced by false teachers doing the will of Satan instead of Christ. Jesus gave all authority on earth to His Church and they exercised that authority by giving you and other Protestants the Bible that you use through eisegesis to create your doctrines of men and support your heresies. After all, Jesus prayed that we all be one in His Church as He and the Father are one. I believe that Protestants may be Christians as well but they are approaching the throne of God through the back door when the front door of His Church is wide open. I am unfamiliar with the doctrine you speak of saying that membership in the Church alone makes one a Christian. A Christian is one who does God’s will and not one’s own. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Arianism vs Christianity discussion with the Jehovah Witness "Mindy"

2010-06-13T09:27:00.002+08:00

(Cristoiglesia) You call yourself Christians yet do not even believe in the most fundamental beliefs of Christians which is that Jesus is God.

(Mindy) “What God's Word THE BIBLE says and teaches:
"But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ THE SON OF GOD, and that, because of believing, YOU may have LIFE by means of his name."
~John 20:31”

(Cristoiglesia) OK and how does this teach Arianism? Yes, He is the Son of God and the second person in the Trinity of one God in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

(Mindy) “THAT'S what I and over 7 MILLION of my fellow CHRISTIAN Witnesses of Jehovah worldwide fully believe and trust in.”

(Cristoiglesia) I am well aware of what you and the other schismatic sects of the Jehovah Witness sects believe. However this places you outside of Christianity as Christianity universally teaches the Trinity. You trust in a doctrine of men first promoted by the heretical bishop Arius. Arius was found in anathema at the Council of Nicaea. Even though He was supported by the powerful Emperor Constantine he lost the debate to the Holy Spirit who led the lowly deacon Athanasius to defeat the powerful bishop Arius. The teaching of Christ and the disciples triumphed over the heresy taught by Arius. Those who believe and follow the teaching of Arius are called Arians and not Christian. The belief in the Trinity is the fundamental belief for one to call oneself Christian. Jehovah Witnesses, Ang Dating Daan and Iglesia ni Cristo all are Arians. You deny the Church in whom Jesus placed all authority on earth. The Jehovah Witnesses have no authority to teach or to promote doctrines.

(Mindy) “Unless YOU or anyone else can show us by scripture exactly WHERE in the Bible (Bible book, chapter and verse) that it says anything even remotely close to "Unless we believe that Jesus Christ IS God Almighty we are doomed", we will go by what is specifically written at John 20:31 about our Lord.”

(Cristoiglesia) The Bible is the product of the Church. The Church wrote the New Testament and all the authors were Catholic Christians who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is the Church that decided the Christian Canon at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth centuries under the supervision of St. Augustin. The Bible has no teaching authority outside the Church. It is interesting and shows gross inconsistency that the Jehovah Witnesses accept their modified and truncated version of Scriptures that was produced by the Catholic Church but then deny the doctrines from that same source. Your proof text understanding of Scriptures is called eisegesis and almost always results in error as it does in this instance.

I do not believe that I have called you doomed as our sovereign Lord can save whom He wishes but the abandonment of His Church, ignorance of His nature and denial of His will by Jehovah Witnesses puts them into serious risk of the salvific promise. Certainly their rejection of the fullness of truth available in His Church and the Sacraments that provide this salvific grace opens them to all sorts of heretical lies and a questionable eternal destiny. But it also proves the satanic seduction of one following their own path instead of the narrow way which our Lord has taught that is necessary for eternal life.

(Mindy) “Jesus IS NOT God Almighty, he is THE SON of God Almighty, CREATED by God Almighty before all the other creations of God and was the only being and thing in existence that was created DIRECTLY by God whereas all other things where created by God but THROUGH the Word (Pre-human) Jesus as is testified IN SCRIPTURE.”

(Cristoiglesia) This is not the teaching of the Church either through the Bible, the apostolic witness or the Church. Yours is a heretical doctrine of men. It is the doctrine of men and in particular the teaching of Charles Taze Russell who was inspired by the Stone-Campbell-Millerite restorationist movement of the 19th century of which the Jehovah Witness, Mormons, Christodelphians and Seventh Day Adventists are some of the larger of the schisms. Your cousin faiths are almost as far from the truth as you are as well. Not surprising as you come from the same source.

No, Jesus is not a created being nor is He the human incarnation of Michael the Archangel. He is truly as the Bible teaches through the Church the second person of the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Please read the Nicene Creed which settled this controversy or the Athanasius Creed which also explains the orthodox Christian understanding of the nature of God in the Trinity.

(Mindy) “I feel so very sorry for you dude, but there is still yet time for YOU to see the light, but that time is RAPIDLY running out. Wait until Jehovah God puts the thought of getting rid of religion into the hearts of the political powers within the U.N and the Catholic Church (and all other false religion) becomes no more. God's wrath is coming on Catholicism and her members.”

(Cristoiglesia) I saw the light ten years ago when I converted to Catholic Christianity and left the worldly, fluid and ever changing doctrines and heresies of Protestantism of which your restorationist sect is an extremely heterodox example. I came home to
Christ’s Church and into His will as He prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane that we all be one in His Church as He and the Father are one. It is this familial relationship and communion that He desires.

The worldly have tried to destroy Christ’s Church before but it remains as a witness to the veracity of Christ’s promise to humanity as the Church which will endure for all times and that it is the Church that the gates of hell will not prevail against. There can be no other. The Church is the bride of Christ and will not suffer His wrath but perhaps the wrath of the world. We know from Christ’s teaching that the Church will survive and prosper despite the attacks from within and without. After all, Jesus taught us that the world would hate us as it hated Him and we know that He is victorious over the prince of darkness and father of lies. We put our trust in Him and not in a man-made sect full of false teaching and prophecy.

May our Lord have mercy on the enemies of His Church.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph