What are we expecting between Baptists and Roman Catholics?

[Walter]

@Adonia , I want you to know that I do not hate Roman Catholics. I know I have been rather snarky in this and related threads. I happen to believe Roman Catholicism gets the Gospel wrong (among many other things). I have a two-fold purpose in responding to these threads. 1. To refute error. 2. To proclaim the truth. If I allowed my frustration to turn up the emotional temperature, I apologize for that. I am not an easy-going guy. I want nothing more than to see Roman Catholics leave their religious system and embrace Christ. But even more than that, I do not want my fellow Baptists to get cozy with any semblance of Roman Catholicism.

Your assumption that Catholics do not embrace Christ is ridiculous. I have watched evangelicals on this board attack Catholics at this time of year for observing the greatest gift God has ever given to humanity. You ask, 'why do we Catholics celebrate Jesus dying on the cross?' We don't...but it's important to understand that He stood in each one of our shoes as he stepped in front of the speeding bullet train of God's wrath. At our creation, God gave humanity the choice between being ego centered or altruistic. Human nature is totally ego-centric until each human's spirit awakens and decides to follow God's design of caring for, serving and benefitting others as our goal in this life. God got sick of humanity's choice of depraved behavior and wanted to wipe us off the earth as a sort of failed experiment. Jesus, His son, made the decision to agree to take our punishment in order that God, after exacting retribution on the human race, would reopen access to eternal life with Him in Heaven. Recognizing Jesus' gift to us, and becoming obedient to God's plan for us allows us to enter the incredible, eternal, loving life with God that He had in mind for us at the beginning of everything. Jesus created the new path to God for us to follow when He died, was buried and was RESURRECTED!!! Jesus actually walked, talked and shared food with His diciples to prove He was alive, in the flesh, after being dead. THAT is the path we aim to follow! THAT is what we celebrate at Easter!!! That is why we rejoice and say, "He is RISEN!"

 

[Reformed]

Your assumption that Catholics do not embrace Christ is ridiculous.

I stand by my words. Roman Catholic theology teaches that Jesus Christ is not enough. Roman Catholicism believes that saving grace is found in devotion to the church and the sacraments. Roman Catholicism teaches that scripture and tradition are co-equals in authority. Rome's theology betrays your statement of "He is risen!" by sacrificing Christ afresh during each mass. Additionally, it denies the imputed righteousness of Christ, venerates Mary, and inserts the priesthood between God and man. These things result in presenting a different Jesus -- a different gospel.

 

[Walter]

I stand by my words. Roman Catholic theology teaches that Jesus Christ is not enough. Roman Catholicism believes that saving grace is found in devotion to the church and the sacraments. Roman Catholicism teaches that scripture and tradition are co-equals in authority. Rome's theology betrays your statement of "He is risen!" by sacrificing Christ afresh during each mass. Additionally, it denies the imputed righteousness of Christ, venerates Mary, and inserts the priesthood between God and man. These things result in presenting a different Jesus -- a different gospel.

I don't have time to respond at length now but your statement regarding sacrificing Christ anew each day is a common evangelical misunderstanding. It tells me you were poorly catechised as a Catholic. There is no 're-sacrificing of Christ' but a re-presentation of the one oblation of Himself once offered, a full perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, for the sins of the whole world.

 

[37818]

Your assumption that Catholics do not embrace Christ is ridiculous.

Maybe. The issue is, do you or do you not actually believe Christ finished paying for all your sins on the cross or not. If He did, then the belief and practice of the Mass is a real denial of that fact.

 

[Walter]

Maybe. The issue is, do you or do you not actually believe Christ finished paying for all your sins on the cross or not. If He did, then the belief and practice of the Mass is a real denial of that fact.

 

[37818]

His arguement is it is not the older sacrifices. And argues that it is a sacrifice. Claiming it is the glorified Christ in Heaven is presenting Himself as an on going work.

That sounded like a denial of the finished work of Christ to me. By claiming an on going work.

It makes sense you, makes no sense to me.

So at what point do you know that you now possess eternal life, that is, eternal, therefore cannot be lost? You cannot.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and 1 Corinthians. None of the other books of the New Testament can be used in any way to teach what you think Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and 1 Corinthians to teach. Which they really do not.

 

[HankD]

This is the problem with Catholic Dogma. The same problem I had 50 plus years ago when I left the Church

Its like a chameleon changing hues depending upon whom is the addressee. "you really don't understand Catholic theology".


Well yes and no.
The sacrifice of the mass:

. . . The bread and wine, moreover, are offered ‘for a memorial (eis anamnasin) of the passion,’ a phrase which in view of his identification of them with the Lord’s body and blood implies much more than an act of purely spiritual recollection” (J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines [Full Reference], 196–7).

John Chrysostom
“When you see the Lord immolated and lying upon the altar, and the priest bent over that sacrifice praying, and all the people empurpled by that precious blood, can you think that you are still among men and on earth? Or are you not lifted up to heaven?” (The Priesthood 3:4:177 [A.D. 387]).

Irenaeus
“He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body.’ The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood. He taught the new sacrifice of the new covenant, of which Malachi, one of the twelve [minor] prophets, had signified beforehand: ‘You do not do my will, says the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept a sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is glorified among the Gentiles,


On the other hand:

Serapion
“Accept therewith our hallowing too, as we say, ‘Holy, holy, holy Lord Sabaoth, heaven and earth is full of your glory.’ Heaven is full, and full is the earth, with your magnificent glory, Lord of virtues. Full also is this sacrifice, with your strength and your communion; for to you we offer this living sacrifice, this unbloody oblation” (Prayer of the Eucharistic Sacrifice 13:12–16 [A.D. 350]).

It can't be both His real blood and unbloody at the same time.

The Sacrifice of the Mass

Is it no wonder the "separated brethren are confused with this Jesuit double think.
At least be honest enough to admit to the confusion your church teaches about the SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

Then and only then may a meaningful dialogue happen.