Protestant exclusion from RC communion

That is now. Things have changed. You don't accept that. There was no such thing as a "parish class" over 40 years ago, and where I lived. You just assume things exist during that period as they do today. Everything is static. You live in a vacuum. You don't know what you are talking about.

Being born again, according to the Bible is far different than according to the RCC. The RCC catechism defines it as baptism, infant baptism. That is heresy. You are forcing a Biblical/protestant definition into the heretical RCC definition obfuscating things even more than they are.

More heresy.

Catholics don't have a clue what it means to be "truly converted to Jesus Christ." I talk to them all the time. If you know anything about Canada, you might know that it is more than 50% Catholic. I often go from door to door evangelizing. Many of the people are Catholic. They don't know what it means to be born again, to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, or to be converted to Jesus Christ. All of the above terms are terms used by evangelical protestant denominations, not Catholics.

That just adds confusion. If you are a Catholic, use Catholic terminology. If you are a Baptist, use Baptist terminology. Don't obfuscate.

They do it just as you bow down before idols in your church but don't call it idolatry.

It is not my version vs. your version. It is factual that you don't accept change that has taken place in the RCC.

The only relationship he was speaking of was a relationship that comes through the superstitious mystical teaching of transubstantiation--a gross heresy. A relationship with Christ in the RCC comes from partaking in the bread of the communion. That is what he is talking about. Everything else is ritualism. The Mass is entirely liturgical. Yes I was properly educated. You do know how to take things out of context don't you.

 

think that you have to understand that when we are justified by god, we receive the Holy spirit, and that His power is ALL required to live for God... His grace is sufficient thru Christ/thru His Spirit , so since we can live in the power of his Spirit, what else can sacraments of "grace'[ add to that?

 

I'd like to flesh out TS's statement: "I have been saved, I am being saved, and (provided I persevere) I will be saved."

I have been saved
Ephesians 2:4-5:
"But God, who is rich in mercy, because of the great love he had for us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, brought us to life with Christ (by grace you have been saved)"

2 Cor 5:17
“So whoever is in Christ is a new creation”

I am being saved
1 Corinthians 1:18:
"The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

1 Cor 15:2
“Through it (the gospel) you are also being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you, unless you believed in vain”.

I will be saved
Mark 13:13:
"You will be hated by all because of my name. But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved."

Rom 5:9
“How much more then, since we are now justified by his blood, will we be saved through him from the wrath”.

Scripture makes it clear that salvation IS a process.

WM

 

sanctification is, NOT salvation, as once justified, we have been eternally secured and saved in him!

And WHEN/HOW is a catholic initially saved?

 

But the verses that I posted spoke specifically about salvation - not sanctification. Can you please address this dichotomy between your idea about sanctification versus what scripture actually says?

WM

 

If they are consistent with the "process" idea they are never "saved" until the process is completed.

What WM fails to explain is that the term "salvation" covers much more territory than he covered and that some aspects of "salvation" are not in process or progressive.

The term "savED" refers to a completed action not in process or progression which refers to gospel conversion (regeneration/justification).

The terms "being saved" refer to the incompleted action or progressive sanctification.

The terms "shall be saved" refers to the completed action that finalizes sanctification or glorification.

The Matthew 24 reference has no connection with anything but PHYSICAL salvation from the A.D. 70 destruction and/or the PHYSICAL tribulation at the end of the age. The Christians in Palestine followed these instructions and fled to Petra and were PHYSICALLY saved from the destruction at Jerusalem.

 

salvation in the bible refers to ALl aspects of it. justifiication/sacntification/glorification etc...

justification happens one time, start of process, one receives new nature/Holy spirit.. then come progressive sanctification, that is what those verses you listed referenced!

 

Well, I would disagree with your interpretation of those verses - especially in light of the fact that those verses never mention anything but salvation. There's no mentions of sanctification.

WM

 

progressive sanctification, as now saved, fully justified, becoming more like jesus in this life, finally at death gloried and fully as he is as regards to being 'spiritual!"

 

Bear in mind that I was born & raised as a RC & have seen both pre & post Vat 2. DHK is correct in his utterings about RC's I also have a library of Catholic Missals, Prayer Books etc prior to Vat 2 to reference & they are very telling....for example; the faithful who recite or perform other devout exercises in supplication for the faithful departed during the month of November, may gain: an indulgence of 3 years once on each day of the month: a plenary indulgence on the usual conditions, if they perform these devotions daily for the entire month.

Those who, during the aforesaid month, take part in public services held in a church or public oratory in intercession for the faithful departed may gain: an indulgence of 7 years on each day of the month: a plenary indulgence, if they attend these exercises on at least 15 days and, in addition, go to confession, receive Holy Communion, and pray for the intentions of the Sovereign Pontiff.

I will let that sink in before I begin on the RC Baptism.

 

So if you want to review the ..... er....Sacrament of Baptism in the RC Church Pre Vat 2. Surprisingly it is nothing more than an elaborate exorcism. Let me know as I have the whole service in one of my Catlik books.

 

Well, you are from Canada an 40 years ago the Canadian bishops were in big trouble with the Vatican as they

Basically saying the Canadian Bishops were being schismatic and not true to the Catholic Faith. So I understand if this is your experience as a Catholic where the bishops had gone astray from the proper teaching of the Church. Especially in Faith and Morals. And it is exactly this Catholic Liberalism and lack of real faith that leads to People like Nancy Pelosi who don't even know their own faith. But in all. You are wrong about the Catholic Faith.

Not true. You probably talk to what is properly termed Catholics in name only.

If their bishop leadership is any clue they're deep down shismatics and hold to the values of the Winipeg conference. I'm not suprised that 50% of Canadian Catholics are heretics.

This is actually funny coming from you because you said to me.

So you use baptist terms which they don't understand from your perspective and confuse them with terminology that they have a different application for and expect them to know what you are talking about? Too funny. By the way why can't I do exactly that. Paul did! Didn't he say he's all things to all men that some might be saved? Didn't he use Greek Philosiphers to get across his point? You're being too funny.

Niether did the Jews when they bow downed before statues of angels on the ark of the covenant and didn't call it Idolatry. Nor did they call it Idolatry when they bow down before the giant statues of Angels in the Temple. Idolatry doesn't involved bowing down necissarily. Japanese aren't Idolizing people when they bow. Idolization is making something God other than God. If you over eat and eat to deal with your emotional problems that's having food replace God in dealing with your issues in short you Idolize food. Bowing down isn't even done in that situation. If your value is money and everything comes second to it then you've idolized money. Bowing down is just an action. It doesn't mean it directed at worship.

It's your version verses the truth. Absolutely it is.

TOO funny I show you where the Pope himself is speaking about developing a personal relationship with God which proved my point btw and of course you won't believe the truth so you make up "its not really a personal relationship he's talking about!" Blah blah blah. It just shows your extreme bias.

 

Oh, so once we are justified I have all I need? So scripture reading is just a waste of time as is prayer. As is going to church because I have all I need. People who believe that tell me all the time that "I don't need to go to church, because I can commune with God in nature. I see a sun set and I worship God." I'm sorry that doesn't cut it.

 

You have read my responses and his responses long enough to know you are simply taking things to extreme nonsense!

You also know that scripture reading, praying, going to church, tithing, singing, etc. are all involved in that aspect of salvation we call progressive sanctification or the area of spiritual growth.

You also know we do not believe that anyone is justified who is not also regenerated or transformed into a new creature producing good works.

So why go on building these little straw men accusations of your own imagination?

 

Not at all but it certainly makes a point.

How do these things provide spiritual growth? Does God commune with you when you do so and isn't that a form of Grace? So in essense as you do each of these things you participate in grace and as you do so obtain more of it? Certainly you do. You just don't want to admit it.

Regeneration doesn't go against free will it just makes the will more free. How do I know this? Because you can sin even though you are regenerated. Regeneration doesn't guarantee sinlessness it gives you the ability to chose for God where as you never could before hand. So we must then in our regenerated newness come to God in obedience.

 

U

Think outside YOUR BOX for a change. We never have denied that ALL of salvation in every aspect is "by grace." However, we are "savED by grace" as a completed action ("ed" Aorist, perfect tenses) in regard to regeneration and justification which are NON-REPEATABLE actions by God in the experience of the elect. This is a non-repeatable action because it accomplishes what God has designed for it to accomplish. Justification is designed to accomplish the complete satisfaction of the Laws righteousness according to how the Law defines righteousness - SINLESS PERFECTION. This is obtained by Christ life and death imputed to the beleiver. This is obtained by CREATION of the inwardman in "TRUE holiness and righteousness" and thus complete glorification of what has been born of God within man. Neither his body or soul has been born of God but his "spirit" - Jn. 3:6

We are "BEING" saved "by grace" as an incompleted on going action which is the outworking of the inward new creation empowered by the indwelling Spirit of God in connection with means as they are made effectual in the life of the believer. It is in this progressive action that prayer, church, giving, and all other means that define and direct "good works" occur. This progressive aspect is necessary for what it is designed by God to accomplish. It is not designed by God to accomplish to satisfy the STANDARD OF RIGHTEOUSNESS defined by God's law so that not one point is violated. It is designed for the SPIRITUAL GROWTH, PRESENT FELLOWSHIP and FUTURE REWARDS.

We "SHALL BE" saved "by grace" as a completed irreversable action called glorification BEFORE we stand before Christ to be rewarded according to our works. God's design is to make us personal FIT for entrance into heaven and rewards in heaven.

NOTE: There is no such human being justified by grace that is not also regenerated and progressively sanctified by grace to the extent allowed by and determined ultimately by God "according to his purpose." Common sense and observation will tell you that it differs with each child of God and NONE ever reach perfect sanctification in this life and so every single one comes short of that and is thus on a scale as short and as incomplete as death bed conversions as the theif on the cross to the life of Paul or some other child of God that has progressed greatly in progressive sanctification or digressed as much as Lot to be called the "least" in the kingdom of heaven.

 

I left the RCC. You are in the RCC. Their history is now your problem. This is what you must defend. This is what you are advocating. I am against what they did, what they did believe, what they now believe, what their history was in the present past, and in the far past (Crusades and Inquisitions). It is your problem to defend their actions now. You are the Catholic apologist now. I have no reason to defend the stupidity of the actions of the RCC.

I am glad you see the error of their ways. Why don't you see that same error today. Do you know that there is a movement that is trying to make Mary a "fourth" member of the "trinity"? They don't seem to know math very well do they? Of course Benny Hinn believes there are 9 members in "his" trinity, so the RCC can alter it too. They both have a lot of quackery. You are just proving my point.

I rarely talk to a Catholic apologist, that which you are referring to. I talk to average Catholics. So what I say is true. Rarely do I ever encounter a Catholic that has any Biblical knowledge or if they do it is scant, very little.

You are so degrading of your northern neighbors. Is this a typical prejudicial attitude in everything you say about everything else as well. Is this why Canadians in the nations I go to are better received than the Americans?
Remember that I am speaking of both eras. I speak of an era many years ago when I was a Catholic. But I also speak of this era and the experiences I have in speaking to many of the present day Catholics who are very ignorant of their own religion. You can't blame that on something that happened in Winnipeg in the 60's.

Your lack of perception is not funny; it is sad. What do you think my goal is when I do go from door to door. It is to win them to Christ, to help them to know for sure that they can have eternal life in Christ, to show them from the Bible what it really means to be born again.
Of course I will use evangelical terminology and stay as far away from Catholic terminology as possible. I will show them what the Bible says, not what the Catechism says.

It is too sad that they are Biblically illiterate, like I once was. They need to know the truth, truth that the RCC doesn't teach. I must teach them, as the Great Commission commands me. These people are pagans, devoid of the truth of the gospel. The RCC does not teach the truth; it stands against it.

No, he didn't. But Mother Theresa did.
She said: If your a good Muslim then be a good Muslim; if you are a good Hindu then be a good Hindu, if you are a good Catholic then be a good Catholic, etc. In other words she said: "If you are on way to Hell, then go to Hell." I don't believe she was ever saved, and certainly never deserved a title of saint.

The only person that could ever enter the holy of holies was the high priest and that was only once a year. At that time it was to make a sacrifice for the nation. He didn't bow down before anything. The RCC doesn't know beans about Biblical exposition. You demonstrate their ignorance.

Chapter and verse please. Don't have a clue what you are talking about.

When Israel did commit idolatry, as in worshiping the golden calf, God killed them for it.

It is possible. It is possible to call it gluttony as well.

And there is worship involved at the stations of the cross. I have seen it; have been involved in it. I know what I am talking about.

Because you refuse to remain ignorant of the truth, that I cannot help.
The Bible says:
1 Corinthians 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

I don't believe the Pope has a personal relationship with Christ. You cannot believe what the RCC believes (especially in leadership) and have a personal relationship with Christ at the same time. He doesn't know how. He is a deceiver. Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing.

 

You are right. It has become my problem when I returned to the catholic faith. And one I fight very hard against. Fortunately, the bishop I'm under is orthdox in belief and one of the first things he's done in this diocese is begin a education program educating lay catholics as to the actual faith of the church. I myself have participated in this and begun scripture reading classes in my own parish. I'm currently working on a mens prayer group with faith sharing. When I come accross those type of liberal catholics I tell them where they err. Some don't like it. Others agree. So I'm taking on the fight. And the cry of be a real catholic or leave has been raised (not by me). As can be seen with a cannon legal battle to have Georgetown University loose its ability to call itself Catholic. But certainly there are struggles all over with the liberal catholics.

It is not what I advocate. The pope called them heretics.

Canada had Crusades and Inquisitions? :laugh: Kidding I know what you mean.

I'm busy converting liberal catholics to orthodoxy.

And they are heretics and the Catholic Church will never teach that. Do you know some baptist hold up signs at military funerals saying these men died because homosexual are culturally accepted? Does it really matter what the fringe say or do?

Nope. And they are both heretics.

Nope I'm refering to those catholics who 1) don't know their faith and 2) don't know scripture because to know the Catholic Faith is to know Scripture.

That is the direct result of their liberal bishops who have made Canadian Catholics what they are. However, I'm certain there are Catholics even in Canada who are Orthodox. Why don't you speak with them. If I come across any I'll let you know.

Its easy to do that with Canada :laugh: Just kidding again. I use to date a Canadian Girl many years ago. I wonder if that counts for anything? No. I guess not. She wasn't Catholic though. She was baptist. Canada is getting out of Hand Morally much like the US. I blame the Liberal bishops who need more orthodox in their ranks. Quebec is now passing a law saying even saying something negative about homosexuality is a crime. This goes directly against Catholic Teaching but many liberal Canadian bishops over look whats happening and I wonder if they even put up a fight.

I think its because of whats going on in the world stage. However, I am prejudice against liberal catholics who act as if their nonsense if the orthodox faith. And my main reason for that is exactly what you see where you live. Catholics who have no faith and can't be told apart from the secular world. This leads to beliefs that are heretical much like the Arians were in the 4 th century and were at one point the majority and out number the Catholics. You have to make a stand against that.

Things haven't changed that much with the canadian bishops which is why the Pope is currently working on puting in some Orthodox bishops there. Austria has the same issue.

You actually can. Just like I can say protestantism is directly related to what happened 500 years ago in Germany and France.

I think it to introduce them to Jesus so that you can get them "saved". I don't have a problem with that. In fact if what you do causes them to have real faith, I'd rather they leave the Catholic Church were they weren't listening anyway and go to a baptist church where they can have real faith even though they miss out on the benefits in being apart of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. At least that way they have some opportunity for salvation rather than being a pew sitter and (internally live and be a non converted catholic) be damned for eternity thought the truth had been taught to them.

Good. Because if they don't know that by listening in mass they aren't listening.

That is also good since the scriptures are Catholic teachings as well. I mean if they say they never heard the bible read to them you know they never listened at mass as in every mass a passage from the OT, an epistle, and the Gospel are read.

I agree with you.

They do need to know the truth and the RCC does teach it. They aren't listening. Or their leaders aren't educating them.

I would really like to know the full context of that statement. I won't believe it until I get the whole context of the statement. Because you are making your own implication about what she said and she may have meant something entirely different.

Wait, I thought you knew the bible. I'm talking about 1 Kings 6:23-28.

Yes because they made that their God.

At least we agree with this.

Darn tooting there's worship at the stations of the cross. Because the worship is directed at Jesus. The stations are about Jesus.

The Stations of the Cross is a form of prayer, discipline, and worship of Jesus Christ.

You don't really know that but he certainly expresses his relationship with Christ just like I don't know if you have a relationship with Jesus Christ but you certainly express it. It really doesn't matter what you believe about him but its clear what you believe about him is tempered by your bias

 

problem is that the Popecann see himself as being "saved", not based upon the bible criteria, but upon that if his own church!

 

Why do you say that. Do you know what Criteria the Pope Judges whether he's saved or not? Do you know that Catholics believe that not all popes have been saved?