12 Claims Every Catholic Should Be Able to Answer: Claim #5

CERC ^ | DEAL HUDSON

[metmom]

And I believe the Holy Spirit guides the teachings of the Catholic Churches, East and West.

Then why the differences? Does the Holy Spirit change?

The Eastern Orthodox differ with Roman Catholicism on these issues:

The Holy Spirit (the filioque)

In EO - The third person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father alone as in the original Nicene Creed. The Father sends the Spirit at the intercession of the Son. The Son is therefore an agent only in the procession of the Spirit.

In RC - 'When the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, He is not separated from the Father, He is not separated from the Son'.

Mary - Assumption and Immaculate conception of

EO - The Assumption is accepted and it is agreed that Mary experienced physical death, but the Immaculate conception is rejected. Orthodox belief is that the guilt of original sin is not transmitted from one generation to the next, thus obviating the need for Mary to be sinless.

RC - Both are dogmas of the church. The church has not as yet decided whether Mary actually experienced Physical death. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary, was at conception 'preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin' and should not be confused with the virgin birth.

Pope - Authority of

EO - As the Bishop of Rome, he has a primacy of honour when Orthodox, not of jurisdiction. At present, his primacy is not effective as the papacy needs to be reformed in accordance with Orthodoxy. His authority is thus no greater or lesser than any of his fellow Bishops in the church.

RC - The Pope is the 'Vicar of Christ' i.e. the visible head of the church on earth and spiritual successor of St. Peter. He has supreme authority (including that over church councils) within Christendom (The Power of the keys).

Pope - Infallibility of

EO - Papal Infallibility is rejected. The Holy Spirit acts to guide the church into truth through (for example) ecumenical councils. This Orthodoxy recognises the first seven ecumenical councils (325-787) as being infallible.

RC - The Pope is infallible when, through the Holy Spirit, he defines a doctrine on faith and morals that is to be held by the whole church. This is a dogma and is therefore a required belief within Catholicism.

Purgatory

EO - An intermediate state between earth and heaven is recognised, but cleansing and purification occur in this life, not the next.

RC - A place of cleansing and preparation for heaven. Also a place where the punishment due to unremitted venial sins may be expiated.

I'd say these were the "biggies", but other differences also exist. These are explained

HERE :http://christianityinview.com/comparison.html

[aMorePerfectUnion]

First, I credit you with a sincere post that attempts to be helpful.

Unfortunately, the post and the link are more of the poor use of the Scriptures we see on all these threads about Catholicism.

As an example, the Exodus passage is used as a faux fact, assumed as a foundation and then the article moves on with that presupposition - which is never taught in Scripture.

The foundation of the poor use of Scripture and hermeneutics in Catholicism is always extra-Biblical beliefs from syncretic paganism. These are incorporated historically into the RC church and they then feel compelled to “backfill them in the Scriptures”, attempting to form a Biblical foundation for pagan practice. And of course, the average RC is unfamiliar enough with the Scriptures and must toe the line with whatever Rome teaches.

For a very thoughtful discussion of the roles of Elders as taught in the New Testament, I commend this link to you. It is a good primer.

http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/christian-elders-in-the-new-testament

In short:

There are no priestly functions of sacrifice, alters, costumes, holy water, etc. in the New Testament Scriptures.

Peter and Paul provide a list of church offices. Priest is not found there.

No where in before 100 ad do we see an Elder perform a mass. All items above were added later.

I realize that to the average RC, this will not matter. They do not start with God’s revelation and see what it says. They start with Rome and try to justify it in the Scriptures.

I do thank you for furthering the discussion.

[FourtySeven]

Thanks for the (relatively more than others) civil response.

I think you’re missing a crucial point though of what Staples pointed out. Re-read it. The following is of particular importance that, I believe at least, fulfills the demands you make here namely:

“The foundation of the poor use of Scripture and hermeneutics in Catholicism is always extra-Biblical beliefs from syncretic paganism.”

This is patently false, as far as, at least, the post (of Staples) to which you refer. Read and reflect:

“We should not be surprised that the noun “priest” (Gk. hiereus) was not used as a title for New Covenant ministers: This same term was used by the more numerous Jewish and even pagan priests of the first century (cf. Lk 1:8-9, Acts 14:13). Using different titles for New Covenant priests would be one way of distinguishing them. However, the verb form of hiereus is used for New Testament ministers. It is found when Paul speaks specifically of his ministry as an apostle, referring to it as a “priestly service”: “. . . be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service (Gk. hierourgounta) of the gospel of God…” (Rom 15:15b-16a).”

Rom 15:15b-16a (really Rom 15:16 for simplicity sake) is in the Bible.

It states, “15:16 That I should be the minister of Christ Jesus among the Gentiles: sanctifying the gospel of God, that the oblation of the Gentiles may be made acceptable and sanctified in the Holy Ghost”

The term “minister” there is the word Staples said or “hierourgounta” which is Strong’s number G2418 which means “to minister in the manner of a priest, minister in priestly service”. It’s in the Blue Letter Bible look it up.

I realize Strong’s also says for this word “of the preaching of the gospel” but this is really forcing a meaning onto the word not there on Strong’s part why? Because:

This term (G2418) is only found one time in Scripture so there is no way to make such an extrapolation as to make it say “of the preaching of the gospel”. Indeed, the very term itself (G2418) is derived from the Greek NOUN for “priest” so it is more reasonable to translate it as Staples does, or “priestly service.”

Secondly, the entire context of the verse makes even more sense if read in this way, specifically because of the later phrase “the oblation of the Gentiles” (G4376, prosphora, which means “gift” or “sacrifice, either bloody or unbloody).

Given that information we can see that St Paul is actually mentioning (if only in passing) how he offers a sacrifice (in a priestly manner) for the Gentiles, in other words he’s talking about his he says Mass for his Gentile charges!

It’s only because of a Protestant corruption of that verse that many nkw read it today as St Paul “ministering to the Gentiles” as if he were only “preaching” to them.

You may disagree, if so fine. I’m not looking for a debate. I think though that (ironically) here the Scripture speaks for itself, for those who “have ears to hear”.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

FourtySeven,

There is no reason not to be civil in discussing God's Word. I certainly only have good wishes for you.

I found it ironic that your specific claim was that I was not correct in the description I gave of RC hermeneutics and poor use of Scripture to backfill pagan doctrines that crept into the RC denomination much later in history.

In closing you wrote, "Given that information we can see that St Paul is actually mentioning (if only in passing) how he offers a sacrifice (in a priestly manner) for the Gentiles, in other words he’s talking about his he says Mass for his Gentile charges!"

This was a PERFECT example of poor hermeneutics and poor use of Scripture to backfill a belief that did not originate in the Scriptures. It is an idea from outside revelation that is brought back to the Scritpures (eisogesis) and attempted to find a similar word. When the words are found that are similar, the full weight of your presumption - here that Paul ever said a "mass". This is never found in Scripture for any Apostle. Here, the passage never mentions Mass. It is an idea that was brought to the passage - in this case by you. This is why I wrote that RCs approach the Scripture to try to justify what Rome teaches instead of to discern what God wrote and what that means.

In this instance, Paul isn't conducting mass. His priestly duty is to offer up - not the body and blood of Chist - the Gentiles who have believed. He was the Apostle to the Gentiles. Nor does his use of this imagery justify a new Church Office, which is never listed in the lists of offices in the New Testament.

I am getting ready to travel outside of town today and must go get dressed, so the best I can do is post some exegetical commentary from others for your edification and thought.

"Paul was qualified to remind his readers of those points because he had his special position as a result of God’s grace (cf. Rom. 1:5). He was a minister (leitourgon, a “public servant”) to the Gentiles. This ministry was carried out as a priestly duty (the Gr. verb hierourgounta means “to work in sacred things”) and involved his proclaiming the gospel of God (cf. 1:2–4). Because of his sharing the good news with Gentiles (11:13; Gal. 1:16; 2:2, 7–9; Eph. 3:8; Col. 1:27; 2 Tim. 4:17) they became an offering acceptable (the words to God are not in the text but are obviously understood), sanctified (perf. tense, “having been sanctified” or “having been set apart”) by the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Peter 1:2). Like a priest, Paul introduced Gentiles to God, and then presented them like an offering to the Lord. God’s willingness to accept Gentiles, set apart by the work of the Holy Spirit, shows His plan in the Church Age is to unite Jews and Gentiles in one body (Eph. 3:6).

Witmer, J. A. (1985). Romans. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 2, pp. 496–497). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

.........................................

"Priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God. NIV Paul viewed his ministry to the Gentiles as a priestly duty. The Greek here is hierourgounta, meaning “to work in sacred things.” Paul’s ministry was a sacred task because he was proclaiming the gospel to the Gentiles.

"Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to Good, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. NIV Paul faithfully proclaimed the gospel to the Gentiles so that they would receive the Good News, and become acceptable to God, sanctified (literally “having been sanctified” or “having been set apart”) by the Holy Spirit. Paul’s missionary work was an act of worship. He viewed the Gentile church as a consecrated, sacrificial offering which he presented to God for his acceptance.

Barton, B. B., Veerman, D., & Wilson, N. S. (1992). Romans (pp. 278–279). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.

.........................................

"That I should be (εἰς το εἰναι με [eis to einai me]). The εἰς το [eis to] idiom with the infinitive again (verses 8, 13). Minister (λειτουργον [leitourgon]). Predicate accusative in apposition with με [me] and see 13:6 for the word. “The word here derives from the context the priestly associations which often attach to it in the LXX” (Denney). But this purely metaphorical use does not show that Paul attached a “sacerdotal” character to the ministry. Ministering (ἱερουργουντα [hierourgounta]). Present active participle of ἱερουργεω [hierourgeō], late verb from ἱερουργος [hierourgos] (ἱερος, ἐργω [hieros, ergō]), in LXX, Philo, and Josephus, only here in N. T. It means to work in sacred things, to minister as a priest. Paul had as high a conception of his work as a preacher of the gospel as any priest did. The offering up of the Gentiles (ἡ προσφορα των ἐθνων [hē prosphora tōn ethnōn]). Genitive of apposition, the Gentiles being the offering. They are Paul’s offering. See Acts 21:26. Acceptable (εὐπροσδεκτος [euprosdektos]). See 2 Cor. 6:2; 8:12. Because “sanctified in the Holy Spirit” (ἡγιασμενη ἐν πνευματι ἁγιῳ [hēgiasmenē en pneumati hagiōi], perfect passive participle of ἁγιαζω [hagiazō]).

Robertson, A. T. (1933). Word Pictures in the New Testament (Ro 15:16). Nashville, TN: Broadman Press.

best.

[FourtySeven]

Alright, I wish you Godspeed on your journey.

The sources you cite only help my claim though, why?

First they all confirm the correct interpretation of “minister” in Rom 15:16, which is not simply “to preach” but “to minister as a priest”.

Certainly the Gentiles were “a consecrated, sacrificial offering which he presented to God for his acceptance.”

The question begs to be answered though: how does a priest (who functions as a priest not a mere “minister” or “preacher” but someone who acts as a preist) “consecrate” a congregation (Gentiles) so that they themselves may be a “sacrificial offering”?

In other words I have (with Tim Staples’ help, and now with your own commentators) shown how St. Paul was not some mere preacher, but acted as a priest for the Gentiles and thus to the Gentiles. So we now know that it’s NOT true that the “Catholic priesthood is fabricated pagan extra biblical mumbo-jumbo” (or whatever other disparagement you of others say) but rather a man acting as a NT Priest IS found in the Bible.

This is uncontrovertable and should at least be acknowledged. But whatever if not fine....

...the main point is that a reasonable person (ie one who will acknowledge the fact above) must therefore ask themselves “how can one who acts as a priest ‘consecrate’ a congregation such that that congregstion themselves becomes a sacrifice to God?”

What does a priest do? Part of a priest’s function is to offer sacrifices. Certainly Rom 15:16 as read strictly says St Paul offers the consecrated Gentiles as sacrifices but AGAIN, one must ponder: how does a congregstion become so sanctified?

When a PRIEST is involved?

[FourtySeven]

Pure exegesis here no question (in case the last post isn't clear). Absolutely pure!

Rom 15:16

That I should be the "minister"

leitourgos - acting as a priest ("Paul likening himself to a priest" that's straight from Thayers Greek Lexicon)

of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles...

So St Paul is acting as a priest of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles..

"ministering"

hierourgeō - ministering as a priest

the gospel of God

...so St Paul is ministering the Gospel of God as a priest (that is, in a priestly way or "priestly service" as Staples put it)..

that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

[metmom]

There is no more need for the office of a priest here on earth because Jesus, our great High priest, FINISHED the work of redemption. There is no need to repeatedly offer sacrifices for sin as all sin was dealt with by Jesus death.

Hebrews 9:24-28 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world.

But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

Hebrews 10:11-18 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,

“This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,”

then he adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”

Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

Jesus offered HIMSELF up for our sins.

His death is not a sacrifice that WE are to offer to God for our sins. That would put it at the same level as what the Jews had with the continual sacrifice of an animal because it was never finished.

When Jesus died, He said *IT IS FINISHED*. There is no more sacrifice for sin because His did it all.

Nor is there anywhere in Scripture where we are commanded to offer Jesus up to God in our stead continually as if His dying once and rising again was of no effect.

When Jesus rose from the dead, His death was in effect sealed. It showed that it did what it was intended to do and there remains no need for any other sacrifice because His resurrection proved that it was effective.

[FourtySeven]

Dear metmom, I don’t know why you continue to insist that Catholics “re-sacrifice” Christ when I know for a fact that this has been explained to you (and others) numerous times.

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is NOT a “re-sacrifice” but a re-PRESENTING of the SAME “once and for all” Sacrifice of Calvary.

This is a subtle yet important difference you either refuse to acknowledge or can’t understand. I don’t know which. I leave it to God to judge which.

[Grateful2God]

The Russian Orthodox Church is not in communion with Rome.

Those of you who have been on this site longer than I and are more savvy (probably just about everyone!) may be able to locate a beautiful post by Salvation which explains the brotherhood between the various rites of the Catholic Church, much better than I.

Pope John Paul II described the Eastern Rite Churches and the Western (known as Latin, or Roman) Rite Churches to be "the two lungs" of the Catholic Church. I can attend a Byzantine Rite, Maronite Rite, Melkite Rite, or any of the others in communion with Rome, and have all the fullness and beauty of my Catholic Faith, because we are brethren in the Church. Jesus is present there, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, just as He is in the Roman Rite, and I am privileged to be able to receive Him there if I choose.

Akathist Those of you who often quote Greek may know that Akathist refers to a prayer said while standing up. The prayers of the Eastern Rites are amazing: rich with beautiful detail, praise, thanks, and so much more.

Thank you, Kolokotronis, for the post introducing me to the Akathist prayers! I've had them bookmarked ever since!

The Eastern Catholic Churches This ought to answer some questions for fellow Catholics interested in learning more about our Eastern Brethren.

"We are One Body; One Body in Christ;

and we do not stand alone." - Dana Scallon

[caww]

Parents teaching their children and institutions such as catholicism , or our government schools, are two different things entirely.

Parents ‘choose’ where their children attend church...and who it is indoctrinating their children.

[metmom]

Presenting to WHOM?

GOD?

Christ’s death and resurrection are a done deal. Like He said, *It is FINISHED*.

Jesus is now seated at the right hand of God in heaven.

Why do Catholics feel the need to participate in the killing of Jesus over and over again?

And again, Jesus is not a sacrifice that we bring to God to offer for our sins, like the Jews did a lamb.

HE gave His life Himself. He did not come for us to present Him to God ourselves.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Eisogesis is taking the use of a word - here describing "priestly service" - and turning it into faux support for "priest" as a NT church office. There is no such thing. "So St Paul is acting as a priest of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles.. "

Well, no he is not acting as a priest to the Gentiles. He is portraying his ministry of the Gospel TO the Gentiles as a priestly service. He envisions offering up the Gentiles as a sacrifice to God - not in being a priest TO the Gentiles.

"16 to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. Romans 15:16

He is not claiming to hold the office of priest. Nor is he teaching that there is an office of priest in the NT. Nor is his offering of the Gentiles a mass, as you claimed.

Best.

[Bill Russell]

Ref: “>> “If we don’t get a chance to meet in person in this life, I hope we meet at St Peter’s Rally Point Yeshua’s Marriage Supper, on the Sea of Glass Mingled With Fire.” <<

. Peter has nothing to do with any of this.”

I consulted with St. Peter (Pope#1), St. Theresa of Lisieux, and St. JP. They all say those in Communion with the Almighty should be joyful — and have a sense of humor. Also, ref Yeshua’s Marriage Supper: I get to participate in its celebration every Sunday Mass through the Liturgy of the Eucharist. And that sea of glass mingled with fire, ever seen the Sunrise through stained glass at the Easter Mass?

[editor-surveyor]

The eucharist is the path to hellfire.

The Mass is of Satan in every way.

If you consulted with dead humans, you spoke with demons that speak in their stead. This is a spiritually devastating practice.

[Bill Russell]

Ref: “The eucharist is the path to hellfire.

The Mass is of Satan in every way.

If you consulted with dead humans, you spoke with demons that speak in their stead. This is a spiritually devastating practice.”

So, I guess you won’t be accepting an invitation to joint the Knights of Columbus?

[editor-surveyor]

LOL!

An engineer that I worked for 36 years ago was pushing me to join KoC and dragged me to some of their shindigs. I thought they were a great bunch just to schmooze with, and I didn’t find them to be ‘religious’ at all, more like Italian Masons is how they came off to me.

.

[Bill Russell]

There is always room for the fun & camaraderie after the business is done. But every meeting has a pre-meeting Rosary and the official meeting (members only) starts & ends with the Lord’s Prayer. There was one meeting where the fun part lasted for several hours and most of a keg after the official business was done. My wife called me at 1AM and wanted to know where I was. I had to tell her we were waiting for the snow to ease up (it really was snowing pretty heavily)..... She thought it was awful late and loud for a prayer meeting...It was just some of the guys hanging out in the Knights’ hall having a good time. The only thing she wasn’t mad about was she didn’t have to worry about fistfights or strippers.