1124 The Church’s faith precedes the faith of the believer who is invited to adhere to it. When the Church celebrates the sacraments, she confesses the faith received from the apostles - whence the ancient saying: lex orandi, lex credendi (or: legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi according to Prosper of Aquitaine [5th cent.]).45 The law of prayer is the law of faith: the Church believes as she prays. Liturgy is a constitutive element of the holy and living Tradition.46
How do the N.T. epistles teach this doctrine? Can you give me an example taught?
Paul on the Eucharist, James on the anointing of the sick, Peter on Baptism
Hasnt that been the whole point of this thread, with Scriptural references to the invitation to the Sacraments ???
I just got on this thread yesterday and have not seen it. If you don’t want to answer, no worries.
Oh… I missed this post. Okay… great.
I am not asking for an example of what Paul or James, or Peter did. I am asking an example of how it was taught and explained. Can you provide this?
Its not that i dont want to answer. Its that your question is exactly what the thread is about. So hopefully you can read some of my (and other’s) who have referenced relative Scriptures.
Okay, I’ll do that.
I see that you entered into this thread long before i did!
Let me ask you this…
Do you believe prayer is a means to ask God for grace?
I’m sure you’ve read 2 Cor. 8:7, “But as you excel in everything, in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all earnestness, and in our love for you, see that you excel also in this grace.” “… God is able to make all grace abound toward you that you always having all sufficiency in all things may abound to every good work.” 2 Cor. 9:8.
Also… “… where sin abounded, grace abounded much more.” Ro. 5:20.
exceling in grace may include prayer to ask, but these verses imply that it is already ours to receive.
Of course its ours to receive. We dont claim that God became a zebra to give grace to all zebras!
The issue is how does the Church recognize Baptism, Laying on Hands (for Comfirmation), the Lord’s Supper, Reconciliation, Matrimony, Ordination (as administers), and Annointing of the Sick?
The Catholic Church has recognized, professed, and practiced from the very beginning these as distinct forms of liturgical institutions from Jesus Himself. They are a common means for Jesus to establish the relative graces which they each impart. Prayer and faith are necessary elements to produce fruits of these graces in the recipient of these Rites and celebrations. Nevertheless, without proper disposition of the recipient, God’s grace is called on and offered personally, since our disposition is not the source or merit of grace. Therefore rejection of the grace received through these will incur greater judgment on account that more has been given!
How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?
Where do we see the blood of the covenant in the Scriptures??? And how can a person be sanctified by the blood of the Covenant, yet incur judgment and outrage the Spirit of grace???
And likewise the cup after supper, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."
1 Cor. 11
Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
No… just His own zebras. I agree with your post here. Grace is the means to these things and more.
As to the blood of the covenant we know the writer to the Hebrews spoke of the blood when he said in Hebrews 9:13-15
"For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh,
14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant."
Our new covenant is based solely on the blood of Christ who purchased us. We now can “… have boldness to enter the sanctuary through the blood of Jesus.” Heb. 10:19.
Why do you ask?
Wow! How much more clearly can Scripture be at explaining the means for us to participate in this Sacrifice, is by the memorial which Jesus calls the Cup of the Covenant in His blood? And Paul makes the real connection of the once and for all sacrifice to the Cup which we bless and the bread which we break!
You are now trying desperately to ignore these realities of our faith!
The question in the thread, and by yourself was to provide Scriptural evidence for our faith. I have done so to the best of my ability in participation here.
What part of “I agree” did you not understand? I said I agree with your post.
[quote=“tgGodsway, post:275, topic:463850, full:true”]
No… just His own zebras. I agree with your post here. Grace is the means to these things and more. [/quote]
“grace is favour, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life”. Grace is a participation in the life of God, which is poured unearned into human beings, whom it heals of sin and sanctifies. The means by which God grants his grace are many. They include the entirety of revealed truth, the sacraments and the hierarchical ministry. Among the principal means of grace are the sacraments (especially the Eucharist), prayers and good works. The sacramentals also are means of grace. The sacraments themselves, not the persons who administer or those who receive them, are "the means of grace", although lack of the required dispositions on the part of the recipient will block the effectiveness of the sacrament.
The Catholic Church holds that "by grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works." Both the Council of Orange (529) and the Council of Trent affirmed that we are “justified gratuitously, because none of the things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification”.
The Council of Trent declared that the free will of man, moved and excited by God, can by its consent co-operate with God, Who excites and invites its action; and that it can thereby dispose and prepare itself to obtain the grace of justification. The will can resist grace if it chooses. It is not like a lifeless thing, which remains purely passive. Weakened and diminished by Adam’s fall, free will is yet not destroyed in the race (Sess. VI, cap. i and v).
I think part of the confusion is that grace does not simply mean God decides this person or that person is saved and chooses a moment to enforce His will. He convicts man of who he is, and his dependence on God to give him life, while God respects man’s will to freely consent and cooperate with His Grace. We do this in a “feminine” manner, and God in a “masculine” manner.
God, by His Spirit, through His Son’s merit, penetrates the heart in order to draw man to His life. This in itself is on account of His grace, because man on his own is unable to deserve God’s Spirit Whom he disobeyed from pur first parents. And even then, it was His grace to create and bestow himself and His gifts on man.
Man is dependent on grace to live in God’s creation!
I am unaware of any confusion. rcwitness, if you are confused about grace perhaps I can help. But you sound like you want to carry this all by yourself. As far as man’s will is concerned, I don’t think it is violated. Man can decide according to what he understands. But only through the holy Spirit can man respond at all. In that sense God is the actor not the re-actor.
The confusion is not that i dont understand Church Teaching, but u r not understanding what we have presented. If you disagree, thats one thing. But i think its different than that
Ultimately the theological debate rests on authority. I am not disappointed to be found riding on the coattails of the Apostles (if indeed there is such a thing). We will both agree that the scriptures are authorative. The difference is that you interpret them in the light of Reformed tradition that emerged during the Reformation 1500 years after the NT was written, where Catholics interpret the NT through the lens of the faith that authored it. Naturally there will be differences.
Are you referring to the Church believes as she prays? Many of the prayers in the NT came out of early liturgy, which predated the texts. The liturgies have been practiced since the Apostolic times, and contain the enacted faith of the Apostles.
You have a need to extract your doctrines from the text, but we do not have this need, since the doctrine is what produced the texts.
Liturgy and prayer is the way that Paul, James, Peter and the other Apostles taught and explained the faith. It is an enactment, much like the Passover was an enacted way of passing on the faith.