Posted on 06/17/2009 9:48:34 AM PDT by NYer
.- He grew up an evangelical Protestant in Oregon, suspicious of Marian theology. Now he’s a Catholic priest and a physicist. Dominican Father Raphael Mary Salzillo was ordained last month in San Francisco and will take up an assignment at the University of Washington Newman Center and Blessed Sacrament Parish in Seattle.
Born Wesley Salzillo in 1976, he grew up in Florence, a small coastal town. The family converted to Catholicism in the early 1990s.
"My family raised me with a strong Christian faith and a very clear sense that Christ should be the most important thing in my life," Father Raphael Mary recalls, explaining that his faith after conversion remained "generic."
"I was not fully open to the truth that the Catholic faith has to offer," he says.
But when he was 16, a spiritual experience at Mass gave him the strong feeling he was being called to priesthood or religious life. He was not open to it at the time, so tried to convince himself it was just his imagination.
A top graduate from Siuslaw High, he went on to Caltech, earning a bachelor’s degree in applied physics. He attended graduate school and there he felt his vocation being clarified. At the same time, this scientist wrestled with turning over his will so completely.
"I wanted to choose my own religion rather than accepting the Catholic one as a coherent whole," he says, aware that many people today pick and choose within a body of faith. "In a way, choice had become a God for me, as it has to so many in our society."
Through study of church history and theology and deepening prayer life, he discerned that his own intellect and judgment alone could not fulfill his deepest yearnings. He decided to trust Jesus and the Church fully.
"It was through submission of my power of choice in matters of faith, that I came to know Jesus Christ in a much deeper way," he says.
The last part of his faith to fall into place was an acceptance of Mary. That spiritual movement allowed him to love Jesus more, he explains.
"It was Mary who brought me to finally accept my vocation, and it has been her who has sustained me in this life," he says.
He chose the Dominicans for their emphasis on doctrinal preaching and study, as well as their strong community life with "a streak of monasticism."
He studied philosophy and theology in Berkeley, Calif. and also served at the University of Arizona Newman Center.
Please read my entire post. If you you can change that “choice” at the last minute to a selection which God was not aware of, then His foreknowledge is faulty. It did not happen as He foreknew. This puts Him in the position of not knowing what will occur tomorrow any more than you or I. After all, tomorrow is comprised of billions of “choices” by billions of people that, according to your view, must be unaffected by anything other than themselves at that moment.
If, OTOH, you cannot choose something He was unaware of, then that selection was “fixed” before you made your “choice” and you were not as “free” as it may have seemed. I don’t argue that you could “feel” this control, or that His management needs to make us “sense” a puppet-like control to be real. This is the great truth about God. He is transcendent, outside of the creation, AND sovereign bringing all things about in order to knit together a result He has pre-planned. That is why Paul can say with confidence, “all things work together for good for those that love God, for those that are called according to His purpose.” Rom. 8. Wonderful confidence. No contingencies.
And, incidentally, the view of the so-called “emerging church” holds a lot of this “contingent” future theology. We repudiate their heretical view of God learning about things along with humans. Their view is born of the attempt to avoid absolute foreknowledge.
Are you sure it is every Sunday? Why not every day? Why not every hour? Why not every minute?
When He said His children had to “eat His flesh and drink His blood” I don’t recall a time frame laid out. You better be fearful that if you didn’t get this right, you have no part with Him. And, you better hope that the guy in the fancy robe can really wave his hand over the top and “change it” (transubstantiation) to the correct thing. Very dangerous.
The believers in Christ, OTOH, know He has made us to partake of Him already, once for all time. We are baptized into Him, not some Roman monstrosity. We love Him, not the “Saints”. We don’t venerate Mary, we revere and honor Him, alone. Whew. You guys carry a lot of baggage. We, OTOH, simply rest in Jesus. His burden is easy and His load is light.
But, you better get back to that ceremony stuff, my FRiend. Otherwise...
Of course that is a criticism. It is an implicit statement that you cannot believe this is “effectual” to save. And, with that I agree.
If by Protestant you mean, I repudiate Rome, then I will wear that. I fully, clearly, unequivocally state the Church of the Vatican near Rome teaches heresy and is in need of repentence, God willing.
If by Protestant you mean, I embrace all form of alternate theology that disagrees with Rome, then I resist that. My “protestation” is that we, if we are believers in Christ owned by Jesus and rescued by His blood, were found by Him. We were dead in our trespasses and sin and were, like Paul, knocked to the ground and taught how blind we were. We were then made alive in Him.
None of this was done by prayer or words we said once, twice, every day or whatever. Our words of confession might reflect what we now know to be true or they might be fake words we use to fool ourselves and others. Words, even in prayer, are slippery things. They mean little. The fruit born in our lives is the evidence of being rescued, not the prayer spoken once or twice or five million times.
If you think prayer is something that endears you to God, then we have even more to disagree upon. Prayer is an expression of our gratefulness for rescue, our thanksgiving for not having to bear our true guilt, our joy at belonging to Him. If you are begging to be “saved” over and over at each mass, then let me invite you into the light of Jesus where His blood covers, once for all time. This is foreign to the false churches.
Feel anything you wish. The Scriptures speaks against the kind of errant doctrine, heresies of darkness peddled by a group that claims to control peoples access to Jesus Christ. You are by implication stating that this belongs to Rome. I by clear statement am denying that they are correct. They need, Lord willing, to fall on their faces and repent of such heinous claims.
You asked me for the scripture that explains the power of the priest, and I gave it to you.
You now raise another point, that it would be incorrect to conclude that Christ is re-sacrificed anew at every Mass. He is not, the Church does not teach that He is, and indeed, insofar as John O’Brien says “offered up again” and “not once but a thousand times”, he is either expressing himself with insufficient clarity or is teaching wrong theology, it is hard to say without the context. Since he also speaks of “eternal Victim”, chances are, he is just being a bit unclear.
The proper teaching is that the one sublime sacrifice at the Golgotha becomes present to us again and again at Mass, each time a priest consecrates the host.
Regarding anathemizing incorrect beliefs, that is wholly scriptural: “If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema” (Gal. 1:9).
No, that is not possible. I can change my mind at any time, of course, but God foreknows all these changes and predestines the ultimate choice.
If, OTOH, you cannot choose something He was unaware of, then that selection was “fixed” before you made your “choice”
No, that does not follow. I make my choice freely, because God allows me to make it freely -- He made me that way. His foreknowledge of my choice does not impede the choice. It is similar to how a good chess player often knows what move his partner will make next, without moving the pieces for him.
Well, we are making progress here. I certainly agree that you may “freely” choose when it comes time to choose. But, what was on the table was not whether is seemed “free” to you, but whether that choice is really, actually free and unknown by God. If it is known, then it is not truly free, since it can happen no other way. So if what God knows immutably, unchangeably, from long ago is the choice that you believe is “free”, then it is not as “free” as it may feel. And if He does know, it was not possible for you to anything differently than what He already knew, making the outcome foreordained.
So, no, it is not at all like playing chess. You only think you know what the other guy will do. Most of the time you are right, sometimes wrong. That is a very good guess, but not just quantitatively different, it is qualitatively different from God’s knowledge. His is absolute and inerrant. You don’t contend He is just a good guesser, do you?
He creates the myriads of facts, circumstances and inputs that bring you to choices. He knows this outcome even though you cannot feel this control operating upon you, yet the Scriptures tell us it is so. Thankfully, this is the case in reality.
Why isn't my choice objectively free? God only predestined it BECAUSE I made it.
Put them in order. Even if God “looked down the corridor of time” and saw your free choice, which comes first? His knowledge about your future choice or your choice?
If He knows prior, then it is a fixed outcome by the time He knows it. You then choose this later, much later, and it “feels” free to you, but is really the execution of His plan.
For God there is no time, so no particular order of events. He, being timeless and omniscient, knows my free choices eternally, before I actually make them.
Okay, we are slipping backward here, I fear. Lest we begin to speak Obamatalk, the words we use have got to mean something definite.
The term “foreknowledge” means: Knowledge about an event prior to its occurance. If this is so, then do you recognize that God’s foreknowledge could not be foreknowledge if it did not occur prior to your choice? Otherwise it would be current knowledge. Correct?
God’s knowledge is both before and after, because he exists outside of time. His knowledge is both based on my acting within the timeframe of my action, and precedes it.
Again, the analogy of a good chess player may be helpful. A player has knowledge (unlike God’s, imperfect) of the development of the game prior to the pieces are moved, and it takes into acccounts the moves freely taken by the partner. The obvious difference is that the chess-player knowledge is never absolute, but the paradox of time is resolved similarly for both chess player and divine predestination.
Well, my FRiend, you are stuck in a swirl. You have God knowing what you will choose, but not knowing if you will change that choice at the last second. That makes His foreknowledge imperfect OR it makes it a good guess like chess players. But, your model will not allow absolute foreknowledge as you claim He has.
If it were absolute, it would be absolute. You need it contingent or you recognize that you are stuck with a divine determinism that you just don’t like. This too has been determined by Him.
And, the old “God’s ways are not our ways” thing won’t work either. There are certainly things which we cannot understand (how far does up go?, etc.), but this is not one of them. Just as, “Can God both exist and not exist at the same time? Sure, because He is God He can do anything.” Bzzzzzzz. Wrong answer, but thanks for playing.
Gotta run.
Of course God knows if I should change my mind, because His foreknowledge, unlike a chessmaster's, is perfect. See the first paragraph of my 228.
I’ll be mostly off the Net till next Thursday, but if you have further comment, I’ll respond then.
“You asked me for the scripture that explains the power of the priest, and I gave it to you.”
Not at all, what you quoted was Jesus sending out 72 to spread the word and heal the sick, by his power not theirs. And this still does not explain how the RC’s teach that their priests get to be Alter Christos.
“it is hard to say without the context. Since he also speaks of “eternal Victim”, chances are, he is just being a bit unclear.”
Then why is it called the “sacrifice of the mass” ? The context is definitely clear, he is saying priests have the power to humble the son of God and render HIM present on the altar. This has to happen right ? Otherwise Jesus is not present in the bread.
“Council of Trent 1562
Canon 1. If anyone says that in the mass a TRUE and REAL sacrifice is not offered; or that to be offered is nothing else than that Christ is given to us to eat, let him be anathema”
“The proper teaching is that the one sublime sacrifice at the Golgotha becomes present to us again and again at Mass, each time a priest consecrates the host.”
Your church has taken “do this in memory of me” and created an entire unbiblical sacrificial ceremony that is offered up for sins, as if the death of Jesus on the cross was insufficient.
“Regarding anathemizing incorrect beliefs, that is wholly scriptural:”
But your church has included in that it’s church tradition that is by definition, not found in the gospel .
Where is “Alter Christos’ in scripture. The Bible does warn us about those who claim to be another Christ !
My dear fellow...the problem your view poses is that if God knows if I should change your mind just prior to choosing, then the alternate choice outcome was already known by Him. This fixes the outcome in God’s mind, whatever that choice might be. If this is the case, then your choice was not technically “free”. You must be able to do something that God does not already know for the behavior to be completely free. Otherwise, it is not free from His foreknowledge and is fixed as an outcome. I fear you are playing this and ignoring the logic. I would like to help but you are traveling in circles.
I meant, “If God knows that you should change your mind...” Sorry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.