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
Showing posts with label Catholic Doctrine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catholic Doctrine. Show all posts
16 November, 2010
26 September, 2010
Discussion of Limbo and Changing Doctrines with JoeBama
(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
(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
30 August, 2010
Continuing discussion with Hoyt Sparks about Baptism
(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
(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
28 August, 2010
Baptism discussed with Hoyt Sparks
(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
(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
18 July, 2010
The Baptism of Jesus
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
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
15 July, 2009
Confession to a priest
(Kristevon) "Do you believe you have to confess your sins to a priest to be forgiven? Do priests have to confess their sins to another priest to be forgiven??"
(Cristoiglesia) 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 in John 20: 22-23. 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. God bless!
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
(Cristoiglesia) 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 in John 20: 22-23. 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. God bless!
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
09 June, 2009
What can we do about original sin?
It was the first man and woman who brought sin into the world, Adam and Eve. The result of this original sin is that man is no longer immortal in the flesh but only the soul of man is immortal. It is because of this first sin that we may also sin for because of the sin of our original ancestor God’s plan has been circumvented and we no longer have the power over sin within ourselves. Because of this loss we are subject to the temptations of the flesh and have lost the intellectual ability to know God’s will or to receive His grace unless drawn to it by His Spirit.
Scripture is very plain as to the great loss this was to humanity and to God’s design for His creation:
(Psa 51:5 DRB) (51:7) For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.
(Wis 2:23 DRB) For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him.
(Wis 2:24 DRB) But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world:
(Rom 5:12 DRB) Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death: and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.
(1Co 15:21 DRB) For by a man came death: and by a man the resurrection of the dead.
(1Co 15:22 DRB) And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.
We also see from St. Paul’s writing that it is through the transgression of Adam that brings us “death through sin”. God also spoke through Isaiah:
(Isa 43:27 DRB) Thy first father sinned, and thy teachers have transgressed against me.
It is through the Gospel of Jesus Christ that we are saved through the Sacrament of Baptism from original sin.
(Act 2:37 DRB) Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren?
(Act 2:38 DRB) But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
(Act 2:39 DRB) For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.
(Act 2:40 DRB) And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.
(Act 2:41 DRB) They therefore that received his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.
(1Pe 3:21 DRB) Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but, the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
Scripture is very plain as to the great loss this was to humanity and to God’s design for His creation:
(Psa 51:5 DRB) (51:7) For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.
(Wis 2:23 DRB) For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him.
(Wis 2:24 DRB) But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world:
(Rom 5:12 DRB) Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death: and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.
(1Co 15:21 DRB) For by a man came death: and by a man the resurrection of the dead.
(1Co 15:22 DRB) And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.
We also see from St. Paul’s writing that it is through the transgression of Adam that brings us “death through sin”. God also spoke through Isaiah:
(Isa 43:27 DRB) Thy first father sinned, and thy teachers have transgressed against me.
It is through the Gospel of Jesus Christ that we are saved through the Sacrament of Baptism from original sin.
(Act 2:37 DRB) Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren?
(Act 2:38 DRB) But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
(Act 2:39 DRB) For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.
(Act 2:40 DRB) And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.
(Act 2:41 DRB) They therefore that received his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.
(1Pe 3:21 DRB) Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but, the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
Is the doctrine of original sin taught in the Bible?
The doctrine of original sin is taught in the Scriptures; the terminology was coined by St. Augustine. The Bible teaches that we all suffer from the stain and consequences of original sin. (See Genesis chapters 2-3) Because of original sin we are now all sinners and have lost all the things that God had intended for mankind against sin such as an enlightened intellect and the grace to control human passions. Scripture talks about the loss to humanity by original sin in the following verses:
(Psa 51:5 DRB) (51:7) For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.
(Wis 2:23 DRB) For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him.
(Wis 2:24 DRB) But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world:
(Rom 5:12 DRB) Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death: and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.
(1Co 15:21 DRB) For by a man came death: and by a man the resurrection of the dead.
(1Co 15:22 DRB) And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.
(Isa 43:27 DRB) Thy first father sinned, and thy teachers have transgressed against me.
What St. Augustine recognized and others is, that sin and death came into the world through Adam. Sin is a reality we cannot escape except by the saving grace of Christ through the Sacrament of baptism:
(Act 2:37 DRB) Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren?
(Act 2:38 DRB) But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
(Act 2:39 DRB) For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.
(Act 2:40 DRB) And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.
(Act 2:41 DRB) They therefore that received his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.
(1Pe 3:21 DRB) Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but, the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Truly the Scriptures teach the doctrine of original sin as well as the solution provided through God's grace with the Sacrament of baptism.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
(Psa 51:5 DRB) (51:7) For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.
(Wis 2:23 DRB) For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him.
(Wis 2:24 DRB) But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world:
(Rom 5:12 DRB) Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death: and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.
(1Co 15:21 DRB) For by a man came death: and by a man the resurrection of the dead.
(1Co 15:22 DRB) And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.
(Isa 43:27 DRB) Thy first father sinned, and thy teachers have transgressed against me.
What St. Augustine recognized and others is, that sin and death came into the world through Adam. Sin is a reality we cannot escape except by the saving grace of Christ through the Sacrament of baptism:
(Act 2:37 DRB) Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren?
(Act 2:38 DRB) But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
(Act 2:39 DRB) For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.
(Act 2:40 DRB) And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation.
(Act 2:41 DRB) They therefore that received his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls.
(1Pe 3:21 DRB) Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but, the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Truly the Scriptures teach the doctrine of original sin as well as the solution provided through God's grace with the Sacrament of baptism.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
What should we understand about 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)
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
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)
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)