[HarleyD]

Where in the article does it deny that the Holy Spirit indwells a person? And where does the Catholic Church deny the "blood atonement of Christ"?

The Holy Spirit, according to Catholic definition, is nothing more that the Word, and wisdom, of God.

Holy Spirit But though we distinguish absolutely and essentially between generation and spiration, it is a very delicate and difficult task to say what the difference is. St. Thomas (I, Q. xxvii), following St. Augustine (Do Trin., XV, xxvii), finds the explanation and, as it the were, the epitome, of the doctrine in principle that, in God, the Son proceeds through the Intellect and the Holy Ghost through the Will. The Son is, in the language of Scripture, the image of the Invisible God, His Word, His uncreated wisdom. God contemplates Himself and knows Himself from all eternity, and, knowing Himself, He forms within Himself a substantial idea of Himself, and this substantial thought is His Word. ...

The Holy Spirit, as His name indicates, is Holy in virtue of His origin, His spiration; He comes therefore from a holy principle; now holiness resides in the will, as wisdom is in the intellect. Holy Spirit

Now I will confess the article is extremely unclear on the precise doctrine of the Holy Spirit. I've read the article four times now and can't make heads or tails out of it. FK could be right that the Catholic belief is that He pops in from time to time. However this isn't the way I read the article nor is it what I've been told by some Catholics. I read the doctrine of the Church and have been told by Catholics that the Holy Spirit is nothing more than the wisdom of God coming from His word (oops).

All this makes me wonder what do the Catholics believe on the Holy Spirit? It is confusing because different Catholics denominations as noted in the article (another oops) hold all sorts of differing opinions on the matter. If you so believe in the Holy Spirit, how do you know that you have Him? Isn't that all part of our faith discussion? Do you believe in the Holy Spirit and does He guide you? How do you know?

Atonement - As far as atonement, get with the times. The blood atonement was sooooooo 15th century. You need to update your theology with the latest thought coming out of the Vatican for the last 500 years. I would suggest reading up on the Atonement

More than twelve centuries before this, the same dogma was proclaimed in the words of the Nicene Creed, "who for us men and for our salvation, came down, took flesh, was made man; and suffered. "And all that is thus taught in the decrees of the councils may be read in the pages of the New Testament. ...The great doctrine thus laid down in the beginning was further unfolded and brought out into clearer light by the work of the Fathers and theologians. And it may be noted that in this instance the development is chiefly due to Catholic speculation on the mystery, and not, as in the case of other doctrines, to controversy with heretics.

(d) These ideas retained their force well into the Middle Ages. But the appearance of St. Anselm's "Cur Deus Homo?" made a new epoch in the theology of the Atonement. It may be said, indeed, that this book marks an epoch in theological literature and doctrinal development.

A debt to Divine justice has been incurred; and that debt must needs be paid. But man could not make this satisfaction for himself; the debt is something far greater than he can pay; and, moreover, all the service that he can offer to God is already due on other titles. The suggestion that some innocent man, or angel, might possibly pay the debt incurred by sinners is rejected

the views of St. Anselm and Abelard, the two men who in different ways were the fathers of Scholasticism, shaped the course of later medieval theology. The strange notion of the rights of Satan, against which they had both protested, now disappears from the pages of our theologians.

As both Abelard and Bernard remind us, the Atonement is the work of love. It is essentially a sacrifice, the one supreme sacrifice of which the rest were but types and figures. And, as St. Augustine teaches us, the outward rite of Sacrifice is the sacrament, or sacred sign, of the invisible sacrifice of the heart.

According to Catholic theology for the last 500 years, Christ did not pay any penalty for our sins. It was only a sacrafice of love. Christ set the example of love. The first 1500 years the Church fathers were just barbaric savages to believe Christ ACTUALLY paid our sinful debt. I would have expected that they taught you this in Cathecism.

[adiaireton8]

Regarding the New Advent article on the Holy Spirit, nowhere does it deny that the Holy Spirit indwells believers. Nor does the Catholic Church. So, your charge in posts #405 and #427 that the Catholic Church does not believe in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit was incorrect.

Regarding the atonement, I've read St. Anselm's Cur Deus Homo, and you are misunderstanding the line in the New Advent article that you underlined. In the New Advent article on the atonement, by "innocent man", it is referring to a mere man, not the incarnate Christ. That can be seen if you read the end of the sentence (which you failed to include in your quotation). That ending reads: "on the ground that in any case this would put the sinner under obligation to his deliverer, and he would thus become the servant of a mere creature." But Christ is not a mere creature.

The Catholic Church nowhere denies the "blood atonement of Christ". Catholics believe that we are reconciled to God through the blood of Christ.

But how about focusing on one thing at a time? Let's resolve this question of how you know now with certainty that you are elect for glory.

-A8