Do We Want Comfort or Do We Want Christ?

Do We Want Comfort or Do We Want Christ?

What comforts in our lives could lead us to deny Christ under the right circumstances? All of the Apostles fled from Jesus upon his arrest and crucifixion, except for Judas, who betrayed Him and St. John, who stayed with Him and Our Blessed Mother. These Apostles, who just hours prior sat with Him at the Last Supper where He instituted the Holy Eucharist and Holy Orders, abandoned Him.

His closest friends and followers. Those men were chosen to be the first bishops of His Church. The men chosen to follow Him on the Way of the Cross. The same men who repeatedly could not understand the fact that Jesus had to be crucified, die, and rise from the dead in order to bring about the work of redemption.

We can easily make the mistake of believing that we would never do any of these things; that we would never abandon Him, betray Him, or flee. Every time we sin, we do exactly that, and in a world marred by darkness, sin, temptation, power, and the lures of comfort, the danger for each one of us is that we will abandon Christ when our hour comes and we too must undergo the test.

St. Peter boldly proclaimed—through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit—that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that there is nowhere else to go except to follow Him. Later, when the time of testing came, St. Peter denied Jesus. Here’s what John’s Gospel says:

Simon Peter and another disciple followed Jesus. Now the
other disciple was known to the high priest, and he entered
the courtyard of the high priest with Jesus.

But Peter stood at the gate outside. So the other disciple, the acquaintance of the high priest, went out and spoke to the gatekeeper and brought Peter in.

Then the maid who was the gatekeeper said to Peter, “You are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?” He said, “I am not.”

Now the slaves and the guards were standing around a charcoal fire that they had made, because it was cold, and were warming themselves. Peter was also standing there keeping warm.

John 18:15-18

This is the first time St. Peter denies Jesus. Notice how he enters the courtyard through the help of another disciple. He isn’t completely alone. He is with a fellow follower of Christ. Rather than seek to stay close to Jesus, St. Peter stays at a safe distance, denies Jesus, and stays at a charcoal fire where others are warming themselves. St. Peter’s distance from Jesus is felt in the description of how cold it was that night. St. Peter chooses to warm himself by the fire in the things of this world, rather than embrace the cold, isolation, and persecution Jesus is experiencing at the hands of the high priest and his men.

St. Peter refuses to accept the path. He refuses in this moment to embrace and accept the Cross. While Jesus is being interrogated and struck inside, St. Peter continues to keep warm from the cold of the events taking place. This is not just a physical cold, but a spiritual cold. He chooses the false flame of a worldly fire over the fire of God’s love. He keeps Jesus at arm’s length, at a safe distance. This leads him to deny Jesus three times.

Now Simon Peter was standing there keeping warm. And they said to him, “You are not one of his disciples, are you?” He denied it and said, “I am not.” One of the slaves of the high priest, a relative of the one whose ear Peter had cut off, said, “Didn’t I see you in the garden with him?” Again Peter denied it. And immediately the cock crowed.*

John 18:25-27

One of the essential reasons why we should meditate on this passage of Sacred Scripture is because it is not only about St. Peter’s denial. It is about our own. Like St. Peter, we often want to be comfortable and secure in the world, warming ourselves by the fire, and keeping the company of those in power. If St. Peter defended his relationship with Jesus, the servants would report him to the high priest and the officials would have taken him into custody.

In our daily lives, we tend to betray or deny others for much less than to protect our lives. We participate in office or parish gossip, rather than defending innocent victims, because we’d rather not be called out for defending someone. We want our comfort and security. Certainly, we don’t want to be disliked or hated, so we warm ourselves by the fire of gossip or inaction. We betray those innocent people who are not present in order to be liked by people who would turn around and do the same thing to us under different circumstances. We don’t want to be weird, questioned, accused, or cast out by the group.

There will come a day very soon when we will have to give an account for our faith, even to the point of sacrificing our jobs, livelihoods, relationships, and our lives. That is how bad things are getting in our culture. Persecution is here and it will continue to grow in the years to come as our culture becomes more and more radically secular. How we live now will prepare us for when the Cross comes for us. If we cannot be trusted in small matters, how can we expect to be trusted when we are outright threatened for our faith? If we do not boldly live as disciples of Jesus in this life, we will give an account to Him when we die.

All of us have areas of our lives where we have placed comfort, security, and power ahead of Christ. We don’t want to faithfully live the truths of our Catholic faith, so we deny them or hide them. It may be in how we treat other people, our lack of focus on God, or maybe we are addicted to the comforts of food, pleasure, television, sex, social media, status, honor, money, possessions, reputation, and success. Clinging to these things makes us spiritually vulnerable and weak. In our human frailty, it does not take much for us to deny Christ when asked if we are one of His followers. Comfort is the enemy of holiness.

It is only through a life of prayer, the Sacraments, sacrifice, mortification, serving others, and the virtues that we can prepare for these moments in our lives. We must submit to the Cross and embrace it as the ultimate path to joy. If we flee or shirk the Cross, then we will be like St. Peter and deny Our Lord, or worse, we will become Judas and betray Him for thirty pieces of silver. This is why St. Francis of Assisi, whose feast day was this past Monday, taught the following about true joy:

Brother Leo wondered much within himself; and, questioning the saint, he said: “Father, I pray thee teach me wherein is perfect joy.” Saint Francis answered: “If, when we shall arrive at Saint Mary of the Angels, all drenched with rain and trembling with cold, all covered with mud and exhausted from hunger; if, when we knock at the convent-gate, the porter should come angrily and ask us who we are; if, after we have told him, “We are two of the brethren”, he should answer angrily, “What ye say is not the truth; ye are but two impostors going about to deceive the world, and take away the alms of the poor; begone I say”; if then he refuse to open to us, and leave us outside, exposed to the snow and rain, suffering from cold and hunger till nightfall – then, if we accept such injustice, such cruelty and such contempt with patience, without being ruffled and without murmuring, believing with humility and charity that the porter really knows us, and that it is God who maketh him to speak thus against us, write down, O Brother Leo, that this is perfect joy.

St. Francis of Assisi, “Perfect Joy” St. Francis goes on to describe this type of treatment occurring again and again, but that perfect joy is being able to overcome one’s self by God’s grace rather than falling into anger or despair. True freedom and joy rests in sharing in the Cross of Christ, not comfort and security:

But in the cross of tribulation and affliction we may glory,
because, as the Apostle says again, “I will not glory
save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

As Christians, our ultimate joy can only come from sharing in the Cross of Christ. If we flee from the Cross, avoid the Cross, or put our Cross down, then we will never find perfect joy. Instead, we will deny or betray Jesus. Thankfully, all of the Apostles who fled from Christ’s Cross eventually embraced it and were given martyrs’ crowns because they came to understand that they could not live in comfort. To be a disciple is to follow the Crucified One wherever He may lead.

What is this? Almost 1400 words vainly trying to justify listing Mary with the attempting to equate All of the Apostles...Judas...John...Our Blessed Mother" placed together without distinction, with "The twelve were with him, As well as some women" when the latter makes the distinction btwn the 12 (the limit) and is not part of the practice of exalting Mary far above that which is written. Thus there is no warrant for reproof of the latter, versus the former due to the intentional or unintentional exaltation of Mary, "Queen of the apostles" as she is lauded to be among multitude other extrapolative supererogatory.

"Should have been something like : …except for Judas, who betrayed Him and St. John, who stayed with Him and Our Blessed Mother, (who of course is not considered one of the 12 Apostles.)."

Simply, rather than "All of the Apostles fled from Jesus upon his arrest and crucifixion, except for Judas, who betrayed Him and St. John, who stayed with Him and Our Blessed Mother. These Apostles who just hours prior sat with Him at the Last Supper.., you simply focus on "All of the Apostles| without placing Mary along with them. As in "All of the Apostles fled from Jesus upon his arrest and crucifixion, except for Judas, who betrayed Him and St. John. These Apostles.."

" Connecting The Virgin Mary- Ark if the New Covenant."

Which Scripture nowhere does while Christ, embodying the Law and crowned, befits the typology.

"Are you gonna run around yelling everyone "I'm Saved!" Wher Paul painfully says the opposite...AND WRITES: I do not even judge myself. 4 I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time,"

You are just shooting yourself in the foot with your absurd wresting of Scripture, for contextually this is not about salvation, but flows from 1 Cor. 3 and is about Paul's workmanship in building the church, which shall be judged by Christ of what sort it is, with the gaining or loss of rewards at the judgment seat of Christ, after the first resurrection which precedes the final judgment which is for the lost. As shown here.

In contrast to Paul not claiming to be presently saved, he clearly state that he is, even if not perfect in character, and looks forward to his rewards, never stating any doubt as to that, but not that he could not fall away, which I myself warn believers of.

For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: (Philippians 1:21-23)

Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing. (2 Timothy 4:8)

" Going beyond what is written?"

That is exactly what you have done if you deny Paul claiming to be presently saved. But did you yourself even write the section in italics?

"But I've digressed. Lets stick with your sola Corinthian kill shot: 6 I have applied all this to myself and Apol′los for your benefit, brethren, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another. Now what is Paul referencing? The Old Testament scripture? No obviously problematic for Corinth. The NEW Testament written word? No...hasn't been written yet...His Epistles to the Church? Maybe.... but those are often his personal "I do not say this as a command" or"And in this matter I am giving my advice... and if he is writing " ...."beyond what has been written" how are we to know Paul is not being self referential with his factious, in-fighting Corinthians he spent time with? HOW in the world could you make this claim - INFERENCE- of using Paul to denigrate the Blessed Virgin-" Rather, how can you miss that this is stated as a principal, since God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 102:18; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15; by which the Lord Jesus established His messiahship and ministry and opened the minds of the disciples to, who did the same? (Luke 24:27.44,45; Acts 17:2; 1828, etc.)

" I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you. "..So aside from holding on to Tradition as a Binding requirement of Salvation, the transmission of what Paul IS "handing down" - while must NOT be of human tradition. (ie. The Eucharist)- THE word of mouth OR epistle could have easily been the written format not to be exceeded by the Corinthians.

Thank you, for it is actually somewhat refreshing when a Catholic implicitly affirms that tradition - and thus the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial veracity, based on itself - that is real source of her distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).

And to save my stiff arthritic finger another hour of typing, I will simply refuted it with this which was posted before on a thread you were active, but ignored of-course by the bot who simly posts more of the same refuted propaganda.

Questions as regards sola scriptura versus sola ecclesia

Some think that sola scriptura (SS) means we must dispense with the teaching office of the church, and conclusions of synods and commentaries, etc. but which opinion means that such are misled as to what SS means. But if instead they mean how can Scripture alone be the wholly inspired, sure, supreme and sufficient (in its formal and material senses) standard on faith and morals, when Paul referred to keeping oral tradition 2 Thessalonians 2:15, and the church as being the foundation of the Truth, then it is because,

1. Scripture was the standard by which even the veracity of of apostles was subject to testing by:

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)

2. Men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and provide new public revelation thereby, neither of which even Rome presumes its popes ans ecumenical councils do.

3. Under the alternative of sola ecclesia , one can only assume that what their church teaches as oral tradition includes the teachings Paul referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, and which assurance is being based upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, which itself is based upon so-called tradition (nowhere in Scripture is perpetual magisterial infallibility in univerally binding matters of faith and morals promised or seen, nor is that how God preserved faith, nor is it required for authority).

4. We can assume that what Paul referred to as tradition was subsequently written down, since God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 102:18; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;

5. And it is abundantly evidenced that as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture, (Acts 17:11) and not vice versa.

6. Rather than an infallible magisterium being required to for writings to be established as being from God, a body of authoritative wholly inspired writings had been manifestly established by the time of Christ, as being "Scripture ("in all the Scriptures:" Lk. 24:27), even the tripartite canon of the Law, the Prophets and The Writings, by which the Lord Jesus established His messiahship and ministry and opened the minds of the disciples to, who did the same . (Luke 24:27.44,45; Acts 17:2; 182 8, etc.)

7. None of the few Greek words in 1 Timothy 3:15 ("church living God pillar and ground the truth" teach that the magisterial office of the church is supreme over Scripture, and both words for “pillar” and “ground” of the truth denote support (apostles were called “pillars”). And Scripture itself and most of it came before the church, and was built upon its prophetic, doctrinal epistemological foundation. And thus the appeal to it in establishing the authority of teaching by the church.

Thus here are questions for those who argue for the alternative of sola scriptura, which is that of sola ecclesia:

1. What is God's manifest most reliable permanent means of preserving the word of God: oral transmission or writing?

2. What became the established supreme authoritative source for testing Truth claims: oral transmission or Scripture?

3. Which came first: an authoritative body of the written word of God, or the NT church, and that provided the prophetic and doctrinal and moral foundation for the NT church?

4. Did the establishment of a body of wholly inspired authoritative writings by the first century require an infallible magisterium?

5. Which transcendent sure source was so abundantly invoked by the Lord Jesus and NT church in substantiating Truth claims to a nation which was the historical instruments and stewards of express Divine revelation: oral transmission or writing?

6. Was the veracity of Scripture subject to testing by the oral words of men or vice versa?

7. Do Catholic popes and councils speak or write as wholly inspired of God in giving His word like as men such as apostles did, and also provide new public revelation thereby?

8. In the light of the above, do you deny that only Scripture is the supreme, wholly inspired-of-God substantive and authoritative word of God, and the most reliable record and supreme source on what the NT church believed?

9. Do you think sola scripture must mean that only the Bible is to be used in understanding what God says, and means that all believers will correctly understand what is necessary, and that it replaces the magisterial office as a judicial earthly authority on matters of dispute?

10. Do you think the sufficiency aspect of sola scripture must mean that the Bible formally provides everything needed for salvation and growth in grace, including reason, writing, ability to discern, teachers, synods, etc. or that this sufficiency refers to Scripture as regards it being express Divine revelation, and which formally and materially (combined) provides what is necessary for salvation and growth in grace?

11. What infallible oral magisterial source has spoken to man as the wholly God-inspired express and public word of God outside Scripture since the last book was penned?

12. Where in Scripture is a magisterium of men promised ensured perpetual infallibility of office whenever it defines as a body a matter of faith or morals for the whole church?

13. Does being the historical instruments, discerners and stewards of express Divine revelation mean that such possess that magisterial infallibility?

14. What is the basis for your assurance that your church is the one true apostolic church? The weight of evidence for it or because the church who declared it asserts she it cannot err in such a matter?

Meanwhile I had moved over to another thread in which Prots take issue with a post by one of their own.

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.