tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post1422118926371807576..comments2023-10-05T08:25:13.232-04:00Comments on Biblical Evidence for Catholicism: Comprehensive Response to Protestant Robin Phillips' Essay, "Why I am Not a Roman Catholic"Dave Armstronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-29752322212214105222012-02-10T12:57:03.188-05:002012-02-10T12:57:03.188-05:00Wow! That was a very good answer. Thanks!Wow! That was a very good answer. Thanks!Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17614253473344421094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-19414877362635902102012-02-10T10:47:48.320-05:002012-02-10T10:47:48.320-05:00From my book on eucharistic theology:
3. PRESBYTE...From my book on eucharistic theology:<br /><br />3. PRESBYTERIAN THEOLOGIAN CHARLES HODGE’S OBJECTION: IS THE CATHOLIC EUCHARIST ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR SALVATION?<br /><br />Charles Hodge writes, <br /><br />Romanists teach that spiritual life is as necessary to the experience of the benefits of the sacrament, as natural life is to the body’s being nourished by food [Catechismus Romanus, II. iv. 40]. They further teach that baptism, which precedes the eucharist, conveys all the saving benefits of Christ's redemption; they therefore cannot make the eucharist essential, and consequently they cannot, without contradicting Christ or themselves, interpret John 6:48-65 as referring to the Lord’s Supper.<br /><br />(Hodge, <i>Systematic Theology</i>, Vol. III, 682 ff.)<br /><br />Hodge is correct about Catholic sacramental beliefs, but wrong as to the alleged contradiction vis-a-vis John 6 and “Romanist” theology. Jesus said, “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you” (John 6:53). Hodge and other Protestants argue that if this is interpreted as a reference to the Lord’s Supper, then the Lord’s Supper is necessary for eternal life, but that this idea is inconsistent with the other Catholic beliefs. <br /><br />Also, Jesus said, “he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:54). It is argued that if this is taken as a reference to the Lord’s Supper, then absurd conclusions immediately follow: anyone who partakes of Holy Communion or the Eucharist has eternal life and Jesus will raise that person up at the last day. <br /><br />But Hodge and those who argue as he does are interpreting Jesus’ words in an improperly universal sense which allows of absolutely no exceptions, in any way, shape, or form. Biblical language rarely works in such a woodenly literalistic way. Jesus (especially) and other biblical writers often speak proverbially or hyperbolically. This was a Hebrew use of language utilized in order to express emphasis. Thus:<br /> <br />Matthew 5:22 . . . “whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire.”<br /><br />Matthew 5:30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away . . . <br /><br />Matthew 21:21-22 “. . . even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ it will be done. [22] And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith.”<br /><br />Luke 14:26 “If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.”<br /><br />1 John 3:9 No one born of God commits sin; for God's nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God.<br /><br />Even John 3:16 and 3:36 or Romans 10:9, if taken hyper-literally, would exclude Old Testament saints and all those who have never heard of Jesus or the gospel, through no fault of their own, from salvation. Thus, Hodge’s “difficulty” vanishes. On the other hand, Protestants are left with these forceful verses, and would be well advised to take them very seriously, as the biblical text warrants. <br /><br />The Eucharist does indeed cleanse us from sin (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1391-1395, especially #1393). However, it is more a “preventive measure,” so to speak. We receive grace for the avoidance of future sin. If one takes communion in mortal sin, it does not wipe out that serious sin, and in fact it is a further grave sin to partake in that state. <br /><br />A Catholic must confess a mortal sin to a priest and receive absolution before approaching the Lord’s Table. It contributes to our salvation insofar as it helps (by the supernatural grace imparted) to remove the sin that bars us from salvation and heaven and a right relationship with God.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-80938830849256245262012-02-10T09:01:27.539-05:002012-02-10T09:01:27.539-05:00Dave,
The comment above seems to be some spam.
A...Dave,<br /><br />The comment above seems to be some spam.<br /><br />Anyway I agree with what you wrote to Mr. Phillips about the need for the Eucharist even though his baptism is valid. What would you say to someone who points to Jesus's stament that if we don't eat his flesh and drink his blood we have no life in us. So how can Protestants or anybody else outside of the Catholic Church be saved without the Eucharist?Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17614253473344421094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-9627615646363621252012-02-05T16:43:42.563-05:002012-02-05T16:43:42.563-05:00I was under the impression that we are not to go t...I was under the impression that we are not to go to the EO Mass in part out of ecumenical <i>respect</i> for their particular laws.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-43895573378695807342012-02-05T16:39:29.925-05:002012-02-05T16:39:29.925-05:00Given the complexity of scripture, the necessity o...Given the <a href="http://prodigalnomore.wordpress.com/2012/02/04/in-ordinate-complexity/" rel="nofollow">complexity of scripture</a>, the necessity of apostolic truth in <a href="http://prodigalnomore.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/duck-impressions/" rel="nofollow">a real relationship with Christ</a>, and a necessary relationship between the two, how could we expect not to defer to some other authority of some preacher man somewhere? Catholics believe pretty much that God, who is Truth and knows everything, predicted this need.<br /><br />Money question: Given an omnipotent God who somehow manages to inspire an inerrant set of scripture, who is therefore clearly capable of the lesser miracle of preventing the Pope from teaching heresy, does the Church or does Protestantism require more mental contortion?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-84372778437867770542012-02-04T23:20:22.887-05:002012-02-04T23:20:22.887-05:00ROBIN WROTE:"As Peter Leithart wrote in the F...ROBIN WROTE:"As Peter Leithart wrote in the Foreword to Brad Littlejohn’s book The Mercersburg Theology and the Quest for Reformed Catholicity:<br />I teach my theology students to be ‘because of’ theologians rather than 'in spite of' theologians. God is immanent not in spite of His transcendence, but because of His transcendence. The Son became man not in spite of His sovereign Lordship, but because He is Lord, as the most dramatic expression of His absolute sovereignty. Creation does not contradict God’s nature, but expresses it.<br /><br />So too with Protestant Catholicism: Protestants must learn to be catholic because they are Protestants, and vice versa."<br /><br />CHAKA WROTE: Dave like you,I myself dont understand what Mr.Robin or Mr.Brad meant up there.Can anyone out there help out?Chakahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12900261170604083615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-51505703407598691062012-02-03T03:43:08.270-05:002012-02-03T03:43:08.270-05:00Hi Nicole,
Great comment. Well, I think where peo...Hi Nicole,<br /><br />Great comment. Well, I think where people will see a profound difference is to look at the saints, but Protestants don't want to do that!<br /><br />There are differences in Christian behavior. We could note, e.g., the much happier marriages of those who attend church every Sunday and pray every day.<br /><br />But there remains sin because we all struggle with the world, the flesh, and the devil. What I object to is using this as a pretext to reject Catholicism. It doesn't fly. We can always find sinful examples in any Christian tradition. It's easy as pie.<br /><br />But the Bible tells us that this will always be, anyway (Corinthians, Galatians, seven churches of Revelation; Judas, etc.).Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-30720866107682041792012-02-03T03:14:16.660-05:002012-02-03T03:14:16.660-05:00Hi, Dave. I read some of your earlier stuff years ...Hi, Dave. I read some of your earlier stuff years ago, and am glad to have discovered this blog via an OSV article by Mark Shea. I'm making my way through this entry and have only gotten through Mr. Phillips' objection that Catholics trivialize the sacraments i.e. by their lack of protection for the Eucharist. I just wanted to observe that while I agree with your logic entirely, I am sympathetic to his complaint (as you are). It seems to me to be akin to an accusation I have heard against Christians in general--if Christianity is true, that is if Christ makes such a difference, why is there not more evidence of that in Christians' lives? Why are they not more joyful, or more outspoken for Christ, or why do they not sin less? Why do they seem no better off than the rest of the world? There are answers to this objection, some of which are virtually identical to the answers you made about communion. Leaving aside the fact that Christ really does change lives, people are sinful and grace is not magic. The "abuses" of that grace do not negate what Christianity teaches about the need for salvation and the mission of Christ in coming to the world. Of course that does not stop Jesus, and Peter and Paul, from exhorting us to live our lives in a manner that points to God, and when we do otherwise we give scandal to our brothers in mankind, right?Nicole Stallworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15544837830167910477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-12620369609112668042012-02-01T11:40:05.519-05:002012-02-01T11:40:05.519-05:00Hi Nannykim,
You can comment on my pages here and...Hi Nannykim,<br /><br />You can comment on my pages here and I will get a notice in my e-mail. But I only have very limited time for questions and correspondence. I've covered almost every major aspect of Mariology in my papers (mostly from a strictly biblical perspective), and mostly would refer you to them.<br /><br />I designed my website in order to offer comprehensive answers to the areas where Catholic doctrine is distinctive and different from Protestantism: always with an eye to how Protestants think (as I used to be one myself!).Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-30384861368900768492012-02-01T11:11:58.977-05:002012-02-01T11:11:58.977-05:00I find it interesting and more than a little ironi...I find it interesting and more than a little ironic that the author charges that the Catholic Church trivializes the Sacraments when Reformed Churches only have two of the seven Sacraments.Athanasis Contra Mundumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02809651586349621296noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-11293990623984014972012-02-01T09:25:22.065-05:002012-02-01T09:25:22.065-05:00Thanks David, this has helped me again. My bigges...Thanks David, this has helped me again. My biggest struggle is with Marian things---I have read a lot of articles, listened to audio things, read books and I am still struggling. I am going to read your book on Mary next. If I still have a few questions after all of this , is there a way to ask you?nannykimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09904490730187017812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-34287390003222954152012-02-01T03:44:30.106-05:002012-02-01T03:44:30.106-05:00Sorry for the grammatical errors .
In one place i...Sorry for the grammatical errors . <br />In one place i meant to say do know that they cannot receive the Eucharist ( i wrote do not ) , and then a bit further i wrote you should blama the orthodox and (not) the Catholic Church ...<br />GBUMarounhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891800446559973689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-20332205673991348052012-02-01T03:39:21.395-05:002012-02-01T03:39:21.395-05:00Hi Robin .
First of all i congratulate you on the ...Hi Robin .<br />First of all i congratulate you on the way you address these issues , as ou said , not as someone who pretends to know everything or who pretends to be an expert . I wish that all protestants were as educated as you are .<br /><br />To speak about the blessed sacrament of the Eucharist . You are complaining about the fact , that even though , the Catholic Church admits that most protestants are indeed Christians and most of them also have valid baptism , but yet you say that the Catholic Church should admit and permit them to have communion with us . I disagree and for many reasons , but i will only say a few of them .<br />First of all , htere is a huge contradiction when the protestants dont want to have communion with the Catholic Church but again they pretend to have the right to have communion with us . Why you may ask? well simply because if they do believe everything the Catholic Church teaches , then there is no reason whatsoever for them not to be Catholics , but if they dont believe then how could the Church permit them to have communion when there is no communion?that would be a lie .<br />Second , you also have to understand that to receive worthily the blessed sacrament of the eucharist , we must be in grace , which means that we must confess our venial and especially our mortal sins to a priest before we can receive Holy Communion , otherwise (1 cor.11:27-29) Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.<br />28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.<br />29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. <br />So as you can see and as you yourself complained that people should not have Holy communion unworthily , so the Church cannot permit our separated brothers to eat and drink damnation to themselves . So also in not permitting them to have communion is an act of love and not of hate as you think .<br />Now let me also speak about those Catholics which receive Holy communion unworthily,why does the Church permit them to do so you asked? well the Catholics do not that they cannot receive the Eucharist unworthily and that they should confess their sins before they do . So the priest is not working as a police , each time someone is coming to have communion , the priest should investigate if that person is in a state of grace or not . the individual himself or herself must know .You see , people will always complain , some will complain that the Church is too soft and others will complain that the Church is too harsh . They did the same thing with our Lord and they are doing it with His Church .<br />Now , about what you said concerning the relation between the orthodox and the Catholic Church . I completly agree with Dave , you should blame the orthodox and the Catholic Church , in fact , i dont get your point , why did you complain about the Catholic Church and then everything you said and rightly so concerns the orthodox?<br />Then you said this : In light of Galatians 2 (which I discuss here), I wonder what would Paul say about a group of Christians who excluded from the Eucharist all other believers simply because they do not believe in doctrines like the immaculate conception or the assumption of Mary or papal infallibility – doctrines which I am quite certain Paul himself never heard of.<br />I could also ask you , what did the Church do when they heard Paul speaking about not circumcising the gentiles?something unheard of?The Church my friend received it`s authority from God , it`s authority is Divine , so the Church can loose and bound , and as obedient sons of our heavenly Father and of our mother the Church , we obey .Marounhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891800446559973689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-51857710051606421112012-02-01T01:13:00.450-05:002012-02-01T01:13:00.450-05:00This was an excellent start to a "back and fo...This was an excellent start to a "back and forth." Charitable and very interesting. <br /><br />I had very similar reactions to the line of argumentation made, btw. <br /><br />Peace.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-33500717158740429412012-02-01T00:31:30.222-05:002012-02-01T00:31:30.222-05:00Hi Dave. Thanks for this feedback which I hope to ...Hi Dave. Thanks for this feedback which I hope to digest later. In the meantime, a more updated biography of me can be found at http://liturgicalinstitute.wordpress.com/2011/10/01/new-co-director-of-the-institute/Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09254115748657338424noreply@blogger.com