THE Divine Sacrifice

On his own blog, Jesse claimed that the Eucharist is a re-sacrificing of Christ because it is offered repeatedly.

You said, The Eucharist is called a divine sacrifice (CCC, 1068),

Get it right.  It's called THE Divine Sacrifice.

1068 It is this mystery of Christ that the Church proclaims and celebrates in her liturgy so that the faithful may live from it and bear witness to it in the world:
For it is in the liturgy, especially in THE divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, that "the work of our redemption is accomplished," and it is through the liturgy especially that the faithful are enabled to express in their lives and manifest to others the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church.

 and is done repeatedly.

It's offered repeatedly.  But Jesus Christ did His part only once.  What was His part?  He sacrificed Himself upon the Cross.

Have you never wondered why Scripture calls Jesus, the Lamb of God?  By the way, Protestants claim to wash themselves in the Blood of Christ.  Where do they get that Precious Blood?  They can't and don't.  But Catholics are washed in the Precious Blood of Christ every time we partake of the Eucharist.

Catholic and Protestant presuppositions are different

So, then, it is paramount to discover which presupposition is true. Does that sound logical?

My fellow Catholics can correct me if I’m wrong. But I believe the Catholic Church teaches us the following.

1. Jesus Christ did not write any Scripture.
2. Jesus Christ established a Church.
3. Jesus Christ commanded the Church to teach all which He commanded.

Do you deny any of these three?

Those are the basis of our presupposition which can be found in CCC #113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“. . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”).

We can also see this presupposition confirmed in Scripture and how the Apostles applied it:

Matthew 28:19-20

King James Version (KJV)

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Luke 24:44-46
44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

Acts 17:1-3
1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews:
2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.

So, to summarize, we believe that Jesus Christ established a Church and commanded that Church to pass on His Sacred Tradition. That Sacred Tradition includes the knowledge that the Old Testament Scriptures reveal Christ. In other words, the Sacred Tradition of Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the Old Testament in the sense that it contains and explains how Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophecies.

But that is not all. Sacred Tradition is the basis of the New Testament. Jesus Christ did not write it. His followers wrote it based upon His life, deeds and Teachings.

Therefore, one must know and understand Sacred Tradition in order to understand the Scriptures. And since the Church is the one which has maintained these Sacred Traditions, she is the one which best understands the Scriptures.

Basically, Protestants deny all of this.  They cast aside the authority of the Church, they cast aside the authority of Sacred Tradition.  They claim that all their authority is derived by their personal understanding of the Bible, in spite of the fact that the Bible nowhere authorizes such an attitude.

What say you?

Every one of the Sacraments is a bestowal and effusion of divine grace

Hi ya'll, 

I’m a latecomer to the discussion, but I saw the term, “Catholic point of view” bandied back and forth and the only point of view I saw was justification by faith and works ascribed to the Catholic paradigm..

Whereas, Trent says:
Trent VI
CHAPTER VIII
HOW THE GRATUITOUS JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER BY FAITH IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD

But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44] these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God[45] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.

For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.[46]

we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.

Therefore, the Catholic paradigm is twofold.

We inherited the Justification by faith and works from the Jews. Wherein, those who keep the Commandments are forensically justified by God at the Judgment Seat. We must all stand before that seat where we will be judged according to our works.

But Jesus Christ has received and established a New Dispensation, wherein we are now justified by our faith apart from any works, in the Sacraments of the Catholic Church. Especially and primarily in the Sacrament of Baptism.

However, everyone of the Sacraments is a bestowal and effusion of divine grace which washes away our sins and unites us to God. And we present ourselves to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit to the extent of our faith as long as we put no obstacles in the way of God’s outpouring of grace in our soul.

Luther’s sin was not in saying, “faith alone”.

With all due respect to PF, I think he missed the point.

Like the Council of Trent, PF sets out to compare Martin Luther's doctrine of faith alone with St. Paul's Doctrine of faith apart from works of the law.  Unlike Trent, however, he then compares Martin Luther's doctrine of faith alone with St. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith, hope and charity (probably because it agrees with St. James' justification by faith and works).

I know, I know.  You're asking, "And that is wrong, why?"

It is because Martin Luther's error does not lie in that he used the terminology, "faith alone" when talking about St. Paul's doctrine of justification.  It is because he denied the validity of the doctrine of justification by faith and works.   They are both correct.  We can look through the annals of Catholic history and find many Catholic Fathers who used the terminology "faith alone" in terms of justification, long before Martin Luther.  But none of them denied justification by faith and works.  This is where, in my opinion,  PF missed the point.  Do you see?

Let me try to explain a different way.

St. Paul’s teaching is precisely the teaching of the Catholic Church which is so beautifully expounded in the documents of the Council of Trent.

Lets go back.
1. The Council of Trent was gathered, in part, to respond to Luther’s errors. One of those errors was the doctrine of justification by faith alone. I think everyone here would agree with me on this point, right?
2. Luther’s doctrine of faith alone is based primarily upon a misunderstanding of St. Paul’s teaching that we are justified by faith without the deeds of the law (Rom 3:28). That is, in fact, why he added the word “alone” to that verse. I think the Catholics here would agree with me on that point also, right?

Notice that the Council did not respond by juxtaposing St. James teaching of justification by faith and works against St. Paul’s teaching. No. Its almost as though they forgot all about it. But they didn’t. They merely ignored it, initially. They realized that St. Paul was not here reiterating St. Jame’s teaching, which is also a valid teaching. The Council focused upon justification which occurs in Baptism (Trent 6, Ch. IV).

Why?

Because they realized that St. Paul was not talking about justification by faith and works, but about justification that occurs in the Sacraments. The washing of regeneration of the Holy Spirit. Here is the teaching of the Catechism on the Sacraments:

740 These “mighty works of God,” offered to believers in the sacraments of the Church, bear their fruit in the new life in Christ, according to the Spirit. (This will be the topic of Part Three.)

1127 Celebrated worthily in faith, the sacraments confer the grace that they signify. They are efficacious because in them Christ himself is at work: it is he who baptizes, he who acts in his sacraments in order to communicate the grace that each sacrament signifies. The Father always hears the prayer of his Son’s Church which, in the epiclesis of each sacrament, expresses her faith in the power of the Spirit. As fire transforms into itself everything it touches, so the Holy Spirit transforms into the divine life whatever is subjected to his power.

This is why later, the Council also says:

CHAPTER VII
IN WHAT THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER CONSISTS, AND WHAT ARE ITS CAUSES
This disposition or preparation is followed by justification itself, which is not only a remission of sins but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts whereby an unjust man becomes just and from being an enemy becomes a friend, that he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.[30]
The causes of this justification are:
the final cause is the glory of God and of Christ and life everlasting; the efficient cause is the merciful God who washes and sanctifies[31] gratuitously, signing and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance,[32] the meritorious cause is His most beloved only begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies,[33] for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us,[34] merited for us justification by His most holy passion on the wood of the cross and made satisfaction for us to God the Father, the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith,[35] without which no man was ever justified finally, the single formal cause is the justice of God, not that by which He Himself is just, but that by which He makes us just, ….

Luther’s sin was not in saying, “faith alone”. Many Catholics before him used that terminology, but they used it correctly. Realizing that we are justified by God in the Sacraments. Not by any work in our part.

Luther’s error was confusing the justification which occurs in the Sacraments by faith apart from works, with the forensic justification by faith and works to which we will all be subject when we stand before the Judgment seat of Christ. He concluded, in error, that the new dispensation of Jesus Christ, by grace, eliminated the need to keep the Commandments in order to be just in the eyes of God. I know its a bit more complicated than that, but that is the way I summarize it.

However, that is not what St. Paul meant as we can see, since he teaches that only they who do the law will be justified (Rom 2:13). He understands that God only sheds His mercy upon the righteous (Ex 20:6; Tit 3:5; Rev 22:12-15).

To summarize.
St. Paul is right.  In the Sacraments, we are not justified by our works, in the Sacraments. This is what, in my opinion,  St. Paul meant, the faithful man is justified by the mercy of God in the washing of regeneration which is the Sacrament of Baptism (Titus 3:5; Trent VI, Ch. VIII).

Martin Luther is wrong.  We are justified by faith and works, when we meet our Maker at the Judgment Seat of Christ (Rev 22:12-15; St. James 2:24; Trent VI, Chapter X).

For those who converted to Roman Catholicism, how did you test the veracity of the Marian dogmas?

Lolo asks:

For those who converted to Roman Catholicism, how did you test the veracity of the Marian dogmas?

I'm a revert from atheism. I became convinced of the truth of the Marian Dogmas in two ways.

1st. I was first convinced of the Doctrine of the Mother of God. I did not even consult Scripture for that one. I used what I later learned was Luther's syllogism.

Mary is the Mother of Jesus.
Jesus is God.
Therefore, Mary is the Mother of God.

Later, I noticed that although the terms, Assumption and Queen of Heaven are not used explicitly in reference to Mary, she is described as being in heaven and wearing a crown of twelve stars in Rev 12:1.

Revelation 12:1
King James Version (KJV)
1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

Then someone pointed out to me that one verse earlier St. John described seeing the Ark of the Covenant, but suddenly he started speaking about a Woman in heaven. This, of course, relates to the Doctrine of the Ark of the New Covenant:

Revelation 11:19
King James Version (KJV)
19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

Then, I noticed that Rev 12:17, speaks of Mary as mother of all who keep the Commandments and hold the Testimony of Christ:
Revelation 12:17
King James Version (KJV)
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

As I studied Scripture further, I noticed that the Word of God speaks of her in the highest praise. 

Luke 1:26-28King James Version (KJV)
26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.


Let's break this down:
ANGEL GABRIEL
1. an angel is a messenger of God. That is what the word, angel, means.
2. this angel, Gabriel, is one of the four angels that stands before the throne of God.


WAS SENT FROM GOD
1. God sent this angel to Mary.
2. Since this angel is a messenger of God's, God sent Him to deliver a message.
3. Therefore, the angel was not speaking on his own, but was communicating God's message to Mary.
4. If we skip down to verse 28, we see that this was a message of praise (i.e. blessed art thou).
5. Therefore God praised Mary through His Angel.


That is great praise indeed. Do you know of any man whose praise is worth more than God's? In other words, what do you value more highly, the praise of man or the praise of God?
But, there's more. God sent the Angel to do His Will. What is His Will. Obviously, God sent the Angel to deliver a message of praise. Therefore it is God's will that the Angels praise Mary.


And there's yet more. Because the Holy Spirit inspired a holy woman to exclaim, ""Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! "
still in:
Luke 1:41-45
King James Version (KJV)
41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
Should we break this down?
1. The Holy Spirit is God the Third Person of the Holy Trinity.
2. Therefore, God inspired Elisabeth to praise Mary.
3. This praise is inscribed in the Word of God for all generations.
4. Since Elisabeth is a member of the human race, then it is safe to conclude that God wills that men praise Mary.
5. And we find, again, that God praised Mary through His Saint. Saint Elisabeth praised Mary when she was inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so. That means that it is the Holy Spirit's praise which she passed on. That is why Scripture is called the Word of God. Because it is inspired by the Holy Spirit.


Need we say more? Let's do it anyway.
Mother of God
Luke 1:43-45
New International Version (NIV)
43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.45 Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!” 

Lets break this down:
1. The word "Lord" is here mentioned two times.
2. In the second instance, it is an obvious reference to God. "Blessed is she who believes that the LORD would fulfill His promises." That is an obvious reference to God.
3. Therefore, then, what could she possibly have meant when she said, "mother of my LORD"?
4. Since she was inspired by the Holy Spirit to utter these words, she must have meant what is most obvious. Is Jesus, God? Yes. Therefore, the words she uttered could also be translated, "mother of my GOD".
5. So, God explicitly teaches us, in His Word, that Mary is the Mother of God.


Is there any higher praise than that?


And so, I became convinced by the reading of Scripture, that all the Catholic Dogmas about Mary are true.

Sincerely,

De Maria

God is the authority over the Catholic Church.

De Maria March 30th, 2013 10:06 pm :

Hi Jonathan,

I’m responding to your comment #97.

I left out most of the discussion and only addressed the point of authority because the rest seemed to be about ad hominems. I didn’t see any point in entering that part of the discussion. Perhaps you and I can come to a better understanding.

You said on
March 9th, 2013 3:27 am 

I must admit, I on’t think I could have possibly asked for a better response to my posts….. We’re talking about what is the ultimate standard, and as such, there can only possibly be circular reasoning on the issue! I will freely admit that I start with God and his word as my foundation, and I end with God and his word as my foundation. Completely circular, and happily accepted as such.

I’ll have to challenge you on two points you made there.

1. That appealing to an ultimate standard must be by way of circular reasoning.

There is more than one way to appeal to an ultimate authority.

a. The Protestant methodology is circular. It is me and my Bible. If a Protestant is asked a question, the answer is invariably, “The Bible tells me so.”

b. Whereas Catholic methodology is many and varied. It can be circular, inductive or deductive, depending upon the situation.

i. Circular reasoning is not necessarily wrong. It is simply not persuasive when it is the only type of reasoning employed.
ii. Inductive reasoning is reasoning from the specific to the general.
iii. While deductive reasoning is reasoning from the general to the specific.

The Catholic methodology is more robust and persuasive than the Protestant methodology because we don’t rely upon Scripture alone. But upon Sacred Tradition, Scripture and Magisterium.

So, to contrast the Catholic situation with the Protestant. A Protestant will say, “the Bible tells me so.” Whereas a Catholic will say, “The Bible tells me so and that is confirmed in Sacred Tradition and in the Teaching of the Church (Magisterium). In addition, the Catholic methodology also admits historical and archaeological evidence. In fact, all branches of science are admissible in the Catholic court.

2. That you begin with God and his word as your foundation, and end with God and his word as your foundation.

In practice, you don’t. You begin with your own understanding and end with your own understanding as your foundation. That is why Protestants accuse Catholics of checking their brain at the door of the Catholic Church.

Let’s compare the Protestant and Catholic methodology again.

Say two Christians have a dispute upon what it says in Scripture. If they are Protestant, they debate. If neither is persuaded by the other, they simply go their way.

If two Catholics dispute about Scripture, they go to the Church for an authoritative decision. The Church tells them which is right and which is wrong. This is confirmed historically. See the debates between St. Athanasius vs Arius; and St. Augustine vs the Pelagians.

You also said:

As I mentioned last time, the Roman Catholic Church states that it’s ultimate authority is God. But in actuality, it is not God, but the Roman Catholic Church itself. So I’m starting to see that this is what I need to show my Roman Catholic friend – the Roman Catholic Church makes a subtle authority swap and slips itself into the place of God as the ultimate authority. Hopefully, he’ll be able to see it, and hopefully some of your comments here will help him. They really are quite good at exposing the ultimacy of the Roman Catholic Church in its own beliefs.

I’ll have to dispute that one also.

The authority over the Catholic Church is God. Jesus Christ established the Catholic Church and Jesus Christ is God. And it is Jesus Christ who empowered the Catholic Church to be the authority over His flock.

This is based upon the principle established by Jesus Christ:
Luke 10:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

Jesus Christ was sent by the Father:
John 20:21-23
King James Version (KJV)
21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me,…

And He sent the Church:
… even so send I you.

Again, Jesus was sent by the Father:
Matthew 28:18-20
King James Version (KJV)
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

And He sent the Church.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

And that Church is the Catholic Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

St. Paul was talking about the Sacraments

1. St. Paul’s teaching is precisely the teaching of the Catholic Church which is so beautifully expounded in the documents of the Council of Trent.
   Lets go back.
   1. The Council of Trent was gathered, in part, to respond to Luther’s errors. One of those errors was the doctrine of justification by faith alone. I think everyone here would agree with me on this point, right?
   2. Luther’s doctrine of faith alone is based primarily upon a misunderstanding of St. Paul’s teaching that we are justified by faith without the deeds of the law (Rom 3:28). That is, in fact, why he added the word “alone” to that verse. I think the Catholics here would agree with me on that point also, right?
   Notice that the Council did not respond by juxtaposing St. James teaching of justification by faith and works against St. Paul’s teaching. No. Its almost as though they forgot all about it. But they didn’t. They merely ignored it. They realized that St. Paul was not here reiterating St. Jame’s teaching, which is also a valid teaching. The Council focused upon justification which occurs in Baptism (Trent 6, Ch. IV).
   Why?
   Because they realized that St. Paul was not talking about justification by faith and works, but about justification that occurs in the Sacraments. The washing of regeneration of the Holy Spirit. Here is the teaching of the Catechism on the Sacraments:
   740 These “mighty works of God,” offered to believers in the sacraments of the Church, bear their fruit in the new life in Christ, according to the Spirit. (This will be the topic of Part Three.)
   1127 Celebrated worthily in faith, the sacraments confer the grace that they signify. They are efficacious because in them Christ himself is at work: it is he who baptizes, he who acts in his sacraments in order to communicate the grace that each sacrament signifies. The Father always hears the prayer of his Son’s Church which, in the epiclesis of each sacrament, expresses her faith in the power of the Spirit. As fire transforms into itself everything it touches, so the Holy Spirit transforms into the divine life whatever is subjected to his power.
   This is why later, the Council also says:

   CHAPTER VII
   IN WHAT THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER CONSISTS, AND WHAT ARE ITS CAUSES

   This disposition or preparation is followed by justification itself, which is not only a remission of sins but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts whereby an unjust man becomes just and from being an enemy becomes a friend, that he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.[30]

   The causes of this justification are:
   the final cause is the glory of God and of Christ and life everlasting; the efficient cause is the merciful God who washes and sanctifies[31] gratuitously, signing and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance,[32] the meritorious cause is His most beloved only begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies,[33] for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us,[34] merited for us justification by His most holy passion on the wood of the cross and made satisfaction for us to God the Father, the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith,[35] without which no man was ever justified finally, the single formal cause is the justice of God, not that by which He Himself is just, but that by which He makes us just, ….

   Luther’s sin was not in saying, “faith alone”. Many Catholics before him used that terminology, but they used it correctly. Realizing that we are justified by God in the Sacraments. Not by any work in our part.
   
   Luther’s error was confusing the justification which occurs in the Sacraments by faith apart from works, with the forensic justification by faith and works to which we will all be subject when we stand before the Judgment seat of Christ. He concluded that the new dispensation of Jesus Christ, by grace, eliminated the need to keep the Commandments in order to be just in the eyes of God.
   
   I know its a bit more complicated than that, but that is the way I summarize it.
   
   However, faith alone is not what St. Paul meant.  Since he teaches that only they who do the law will be justified (Rom 2:13). He understands that God only sheds His mercy upon the righteous, folks (Ex 20:6; Tit 3:5; Rev 22:12-15).
   
    To summarize. St. Paul is right. We are not justified by our works. This is what St. Paul meant. The faithful man, who does righteous works, is justified by the mercy of God in the washing of regeneration which is the Sacrament of Baptism (Titus 3:5; Trent VI, Ch. VIII).
   
   Those who do not do righteous works in accordance with God's will, are not included in the formula for salvation.  They are in the group headed for condemnation (Matt 25:31-46).
   
    Sincerely, De Maria

The Catholic Church is the religion which God organized in order that we might worship Him

de Maria March 28, 2013 at 12:00 AM

Peter Pereira March 25, 2013 at 1:03 PMA dictionary definition of “religion” would be something similar to “belief in God or gods to be worshipped, usually expressed in conduct and ritual; any specific system of belief, worship, etc., often involving a code of ethics.” In light of this definition, the Bible does speak of organized religion,

Agreed.

but in many cases the purpose and impact of “organized religion” are not something that God is pleased with.

The only organized religions to which God is opposed in Scripture, are those which worship other gods. Do you have any evidence that God opposes organized efforts to worship Him?

In Genesis chapter 11, perhaps the first instance of organized religion, the descendants of Noah organized themselves to build the tower of Babel instead of obeying God’s command to fill the entire earth. They believed that their unity was more important than their relationship with God. God stepped in and confused their languages, thus breaking up this organized religion.

Good example of what I’m talking about. You have also admitted that they “disobeyed” God. Therefore, God was opposed to this organization.

In Exodus chapter 6 and following, God “organized” a religion for the nation of Israel. The Ten Commandments, the laws regarding the tabernacle, and the sacrificial system were all instituted by God and were to be followed by the Israelites. Further study of the New Testament clarifies that the intent of this religion was to point to the need for a Savior-Messiah (Galatians 3; Romans 7). However, many have misunderstood this and have worshipped the rules and rituals rather than God.

I don’t know of any who worship the rules and rituals. The rules in the Catholic Church are to ensure obedience to God. And the rituals are to ensure proper worship of God.

Throughout Israel’s history, many of the conflicts experienced by the Israelites involved conflict with organized religions. Examples include the worship of Baal (Judges 6; 1 Kings 18), Dagon (1 Samuel 5), and Molech (2 Kings 23:10). God defeated the followers of these religions, displaying His sovereignty and omnipotence.

Exactly. God organized a true religion to oppose the world’s false religions.

In the Gospels, the Pharisees and Sadducees are depicted as the representatives of organized religion at the time of Christ. Jesus constantly confronted them about their false teachings and hypocritical lifestyles. In the Epistles, there were organized groups that mixed the gospel with certain lists of required works and rituals. They also sought to put pressure on believers to change and accept these “Christianity plus” religions.

Christianity plus? You mean like this one?
James 1:27
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Galatians and Colossians give warnings about such religions. In the book of Revelation, organized religion will have an impact on the world as the Antichrist sets up a one-world religion.

All the while, the Catholic Church which Jesus organized will oppose all those who worship the anti-Christ and all those who bring about heresies and errors. Scripture says:
Ephesians 3:10
King James Version (KJV)
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

In many cases, the end result of organized religion is a distraction from the intent of God.

On the contrary, the religion which God organized does not distract from but focus upon, God.

However, the Bible does speak of organized believers who are part of His plan. God calls these groups of organized believers “churches.” The descriptions from the book of Acts and the Epistles indicate that the church is to be organized and interdependent. The organization leads to protection, productivity, and outreach (Acts 2:41-47). In the case of the church, it could better be called an “organized relationship.”

Religion is a relationship with God.

Religion is man’s attempt to have communion with God.

True Religion is God’s revelation instructing man how to have communion with Him:
1 Corinthians 11:24
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

The Christian faith is a relationship with God because of what He has done for us through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. There is no plan to reach God (He has reached out to us—Romans 5:8). There is no pride (all is received by grace—Ephesians 2:8-9). There should be no conflict over leadership (Christ is the head—Colossians 1:18). There should be no prejudice (we are all one in Christ—Galatians 3:28). Being organized is not the problem. Focusing on the rules and rituals of a religion is the problem.

Disobedience is the problem. God made rules and established rituals. Obey Him:
Hebrews 5:9
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

Sincerely,

De Maria

Rebuttal to anti-Catholic article was not posted

A fellow who recently posted here, Glenn Chatfield, invited me to his blog to read some of his anti-Catholic articles.  He said:

Catholics do indeed worship Mary, and ascribe to her the characters of God, as I PROVE here: 

https://watchmansbagpipes.blogspot.com/2010/06/mary-mother-of-church-is-not-mary-of.html

Well, I went there and when I rebutted his claims, he refused to post them.  

Glenn E. Chatfield said...
To my readers:
I have received a 3-part comment from a Catholic apologist..... I will not be posting his comments.

I'm not surprised.  For those of you interested it is.  It only addresses one of his claims, the idea that Mary had several children and Jesus, many brothers.

On the contrary, Scripture is clear that the brothers and sisters of Jesus are actually His cousins. One of the problems with Sola Scriptura is that everyone interprets the Scriptures according to their own ability. Therefore, Sola Scripturists never consider cultural and historical circumstances in regards to translations. For a Sola Scripturist, a "brother" is always a "brother of the womb". Never mind that they, themselves, call each other "brothers in Christ" all the time. And they speak of "Brother Joe" and "Sister Jane" all the time.
Let us go examine the Scriptures on this matter. Are you game? Here we go:

Did Jesus have any brothers?
According to some, Scripture attests that Jesus had brothers, sons of Mary. They base their opinion on this verse:

Matthew 13
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Jude:

However, these brothers and sisters in Christ, fail to realize that the word "brother" has meant much more than "brothers of the womb" from time immemorial. Good friends call themselves "brothers" even today. And a closer examination of Scripture proves that James, Joseph, Simon and Jude are sons of another Mary, not Jesus' mother, but Jesus' aunt.

First, we see that Jesus' mother has a "sister". From Catholic Tradition, we know that Jesus' mother is an only child. So, her sister is really a cousin or other close kin:

John 19 25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.

We also note that this Mary is always mentioned with Mary Magdalen. The two must have been close friends:

Mark 16 1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought sweet spices, that coming, they might anoint Jesus.

Note that in this verse she is not called Mary of Cleophas, but Mary the mother of James.

Mark 15 40 And there were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joseph, and Salome:

Here she is the mother of James and Joseph and Salome. The mention of Salome explains the "sisters" of Jesus. Since Mary the sister of Mary His Mother is also His sister or kin.

Matthew 27 56 Among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

Luke 24 10 And it was Mary Magdalen, and Joanna, and Mary of James, and the other women that were with them, who told these things to the apostles.

Sometimes she is called "the other" Mary.

Matthew 27 61 And there was there Mary Magdalen, and the other Mary sitting over against the sepulchre.

OK, so far we've established that James and Joseph are the sons of the other Mary. Not of Jesus' mother. What about Simon and Jude?

Luke 6 16 And Jude, the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, who was the traitor.

Well, Jude is the brother of James. He says so himself:

Jude 1 1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James: to them that are beloved in God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called.

And, although Simon the Zealot is rarely mentioned, when he is mentioned, he is always grouped with either James or Jude.

Luke 6 15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who is called Zelotes,

Acts Of Apostles 1 13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James.

If we review the listing of Apostles, we will see that the Apostle mentioned as Thaddeus must be Jude and Simon the Zelotes must be Simon the Cananean:

Mark 3 16 And to Simon he gave the name Peter: 17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he named them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder: 18 And Andrew and Philip, and Bartholomew and Matthew, and Thomas and James of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, and Simon the Cananean:19 And Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Matthew 10 2 And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, 3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, 4 Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

Acts Of Apostles 1 13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James.

Luke 6 13 And when day was come, he called unto him his disciples; and he chose twelve of them (whom also he named apostles). 14 Simon, whom he surnamed Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, 15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who is called Zelotes, 16 And Jude, the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, who was the traitor.

So, we see that James, Joseph, Jude and Simon are related to Jesus. But they are not the sons of Mary, but her distant kin and thus also Jesus kin.

The necessity of good works for salvation - discussion with Jesse

To understand this discussion between Jesse and I, one must understand that Jesse is trying to refute Calvinism with Protestant doctrine.  Unfortunately for Jesse, he doesn't realize that Protestant doctrine logically leads to Calvinist thinking.  Calvin did not come up with these things in a vaccuum.  The groundwork was already laid down by Luther. If good works have nothing to do with salvation, then double predestination must be true.  Double predestination is the idea that God creates some people for hell and some for heaven.  And, according to that Protestant teaching, there's nothing people can do to change what God has ordained.  Ever heard of "irresistible grace"?  Note that both Calvin and Luther, deny free will.

But, I digress.  Let's move on to the ongoing discussion.

Hi Jesse,

In a recent discussion, on your blog you said to me.

June 26, 2018 at 8:07 PM
De Maria,
I'd love to respond thoroughly, but cannot. It is far beyond the scope of this article to refute your misinterpretations of Scripture. Also, much of what I
would have to say would be repetition from previous discussions. In short, the "doers" of the law are "justified" because their hearts have been changed (Romans 2:14-15). God looks at our works in judgement because they are the evidence of our faithfulness to Him. The conclusion of Paul's entire argument is that works cannot save us (Romans 3:27-28). So it is evident that you have misapplied Scripture.

To which I say:

I'd love to respond thoroughly, but cannot.

I know.  Because Scripture refutes you.

It is far beyond the scope of this article

No, it isn't.  Calvinists agree with you and their conclusion is a logical deduction of their false teachings.  They believe in double predestination.  Therefore, there is neither merit, nor value nor necessity of works.  

Your conclusion that salvation is not merit based is illogical since you believe that one must have faith in order to be saved.  Faith is a meritorious work in God's eyes.

to refute your misinterpretations of Scripture.

It is you who misunderstands and misinterprets Scripture.

Also, much of what I would have to say would be repetition from previous discussions.

Which previous discussions?  Provide a link so I can see what you said.

In short, the "doers" of the law are "justified" because their hearts have been changed (Romans 2:14-15). 

They were justified BY GOD because they did good deeds. Look at the previous 12 verses.

God looks at our works in judgement because they are the evidence of our faithfulness to Him. 

Exactly!  God looks at our works in judgment in order to determine if they are meritorious.  Look at what He says to Abraham.

Genesis 22:16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:

17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

BECAUSE YOU HAVE DONE THIS THING.

The conclusion of Paul's entire argument is that works cannot save us (Romans 3:27-28). 

Only if you take the verse out of context.  Do you really think that Scripture contradicts itself?  Do you really believe that St. Paul, who was inspired by the Holy Spirit, would say one thing in one verse and contradict himself a few paragraphs later?

Here is what St. Paul says over and over again:

Galatians 6:8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

1 Corinthians 6:8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.  9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,  10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

So it is evident that you have misapplied Scripture.

On the contrary, Scripture is clear that God requires us to do good works. The righteous, do good and God will save them.  The evil, commit evil and God will punish them.  It's that simple.  That is the Teaching of Scripture.  That is the Teaching of the Catholic Church in Scripture.

Will they be saved who do not do good works? #2

I'm having a friendly discussion with Jesse, a Protestant who frequently comments here.  It's taking place between his blog at Rational Christian and my last article, Will they be saved who do not do good works?

Anyway, in his rebuttal, Jesse neglects to answer the question I asked.  Will they be saved who do not do good works?  But he moves on to another objection.  He quotes me: 

"It is Catholics who say, "I don't know if I'm saved. I've done my best, it is God who will judge me."

then says:

But how could we possibly live a life of joy and peace, if we are not able to have assurance of eternal life? 

I don't know.  Since the Catholic Church Teaches that we have assurance of salvation, we live a life of joy and peace when we give ourselves to Christ.

What the Catholic Church does not teach is the ABSOLUTE assurance of salvation.  We don't claim, as the Pharisee did, that we know that we are saved.  We, like the Apostle, say:

1 Corinthians 4:3 It does not concern me in the least that I be judged by you or any human tribunal; I do not even pass judgment on myself; 4 I am not conscious of anything against me, but I do not thereby stand acquitted; the one who judges me is the Lord. 

Furthermore, it is precisely this self-righteous, pompous attitude (which is ironic since you claim to be humble) that is utterly incompatible with the biblical gospel (Galatians 1:6-12). 

On the contrary, the biblical gospel condemns those who judge themselves saved:

1.  First of all, if you judge yourself saved, you judge yourself righteous.

Luke 18:  The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. 9 He then addressed this parable to those who were convinced of their own righteousness and despised everyone else. ...

2.  But if you say, "I am saved because of the righteousness of Christ which He has credited to me."

Scripture doesn't say any such thing.  If you are not truly righteous, God will condemn you.  God does not acquit the wicked.  

Proverbs 17:15 Whoever acquits the wicked, whoever condemns the just—

    both are an abomination to the Lord.

Galatians 6:7 Make no mistake: God is not mocked, for a person will reap only what he sows,

Those who want to merit the kingdom of heaven absolutely need to recognize the vital spiritual truth that God demands perfect obedience, which is impossible since we have all sinned against Him.

That's another error passed on by Luther.  God forgives sins.

1 John 1:9 If we acknowledge our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from every wrongdoing.

That is precisely why He sent His only begotten Son Jesus Christ into the world to make atonement for the sins of mankind.

That doesn't mean what you think it means.

1.  Jesus Christ died for the sins of all men.  But, only those who amend their lives and live in accordance to His instructions, will be saved.

Hebrews 5:9 and when he was made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him,

2.  Those who continue to live wicked lives will not be saved no matter how many times they claim to believe in God:

Matthew 7:  The True Disciple.
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ 23 Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you.[b] Depart from me, you evildoers.’

It is strictly by God's grace that we are saved,

No doubt.

not by our own efforts.

Also true.  But God will not pour out His grace on those who do not obey His will.

Matthew 7:21The True Disciple. “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.

Our "work" is believing on the One whom He has sent (John 6:27-29).

Again, that doesn't mean what you think it means.  That doesn't say, "If you claim to believe in Jesus Christ, you will be saved.  Scripture is clear that those who do not do the righteous works of God, will be condemned to eternal punishment.

Romans 2:6 who will repay everyone according to his works: 7 eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, 8 but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness. 9 Yes, affliction and distress will come upon every human being who does evil, Jew first and then Greek. 10 But there will be glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, Jew first and then Greek. 11 There is no partiality with God.

Judgment by the Interior Law. 12 All who sin outside the law will also perish without reference to it, and all who sin under the law will be judged in accordance with it. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified.

He saves all who come to Him with a repentant heart through faith.

But not those who come with claims of a repentant heart through faith alone and no works to prove their faith.

James 2:17 So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.  18 Indeed someone may say, “You have faith and I have works.” Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. 19 You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble. 20 Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?

It is only by the blood of Jesus that we are saved from God's wrath and eternal condemnation (Hebrews 10:10-14).

This is true.  And where do you get this Blood?  We get it in the Holy Eucharist when we attend the Mass.  You reject this Sacrament.

Thus, Sola Fide simply gives all the credit to God alone.

On the contrary,  those who claim salvation by faith alone give themselves credit for salvation.  Essentially, judging themselves saved in the exclusion of God's judgment.

The fact of the matter is that the Council of Trent affirmed the heresy of semi-pelagianism."

Perfectly true.  But, also declared the heresy of faith alone.

P.S.  On second thought, maybe I misunderstood what you intended to say.  If by that, you mean that the Church practices the heresy of semi-pelagianism, I'll remind you that it was the Catholic Church which condemned that heresy in the 5th century.

And, if that is what you meant to say, then it is obvious that you don't understand the meaning of the term, "semi-pelagianism".  It means that someone thinks that he can save himself without God's grace, but only by his own efforts.  Whereas, the existence of the Sacraments puts the lie to that idea. Because it is in the Sacraments that God pours out His saving grace upon those who obey His will.

Which leads us back to the same question which you refuse to answer.  Will God save those who do not do good works?  Yes or no.