Why are the sacraments so important to Catholics?

[Melanie]

Goodness me ClaudiaT, a post that I actually agree with, my o my.....

yes the Sacraments are an external sign of our desire to change our lives to learn to love and live our lives more closely with our dear Lord.

The Grace is entirely without merit on our part, it is a free gift by God, nothing we as frail humans can earn or deserve such, but it is okay to show my desire to love God by little deeds that we do.:love2:

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

BG -- Don't you find it amazing that the first people to answer questions about Catholics are the non-Catholics??

Though we differ on the transubstatiation issue (we would say that Christ is spritually present), we would also agree that the sacraments are a means of grace.

 

[Rufus_1611]

BG -- Don't you find it amazing that the first people to answer questions about Catholics are the non-Catholics??

Though we differ on the transubstatiation issue (we would say that Christ is spritually present), we would also agree that the sacraments are a means of grace.

What does that expression mean "sacraments are a means of grace"? My means of grace is the blood of Jesus Christ, do I need to seek another means of grace?

If I don't believe in sacraments and am considered anathema and if no one is saved outside of the Roman Catholic church, aren't I going to hell for my beliefs according to the church?

Council of Trent 7th Session March 3, 1527

"Canon VII – If any one saith, that grace, as far as God’s part is concerned, is not given through the said sacraments, always, and to all men, even though they receive them rightly, but (only) sometimes, and to some persons; let him be anathema."​

 

[Chemnitz]

Rufus, I think that you misunderstand the term means of grace. At least according to us Lutherans means of grace refers to the things that God has promised to use to deliver His grace to us. The blood of Christ is the sole merit of grace and its only source, the means of grace are the what is used to connect us to the grace merited by the Blood of Christ. The RCC believes this occurs because of the act, whereas Lutherans believe that it occurs because of the promise of God.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

Rufus, I think that you misunderstand the term means of grace. At least according to us Lutherans means of grace refers to the things that God has promised to use to deliver His grace to us. The blood of Christ is the sole merit of grace and its only source, the means of grace are the what is used to connect us to the grace merited by the Blood of Christ. The RCC believes this occurs because of the act, whereas Lutherans believe that it occurs because of the promise of God.

Well said. Thanks.

 

[Rufus_1611]

Rufus, I think that you misunderstand the term means of grace. At least according to us Lutherans means of grace refers to the things that God has promised to use to deliver His grace to us. The blood of Christ is the sole merit of grace and its only source, the means of grace are the what is used to connect us to the grace merited by the Blood of Christ. The RCC believes this occurs because of the act, whereas Lutherans believe that it occurs because of the promise of God.

You're correct in that I do not understand the term "means of grace". The means of grace are the sacraments that God promised to deliver His grace to us? Where was this promise provided in scripture? If you are saying that according to Lutherans and Catholics they are saved by faith in the blood of Jesus Christ then I am completely on board with that. However, can one who does not believe in the sacraments be saved according to your respective faiths? Also, if I say that grace is not given through sacraments then am I considered damned? Thanks for your response and future reply.

 

[El_Guero]

You are taking anthropomorphism to the extreme.

In human logic it might be possible to believe that "if you were omnipotent than you could do anything even lie". That is human logic. Applying human logical constraints to God is usually an over stepping of anthropomorphism.

However, with God we can merely see dimly and then we can only see what He wants us to. Since He clearly tells us that he cannot (does not) sin, lie, murder, etc., we can choose to believe Him, or we can call Him a liar.

I choose to believe God.

DHK, by your own words you make God out to be a liar



The idea that God cannot do something is a purely human notion. There is a big difference between "cannot" and "does not." God is capable of doing all things. God does not lie because he has chosen not to and in his perfection he succeeds where we men fail.

Where in Romans 6 does it ever give any hint that Paul is talking figuratively? If you are going to claim a symbolic meaning you are going to have to prove it.

Thura literally means entry way (BDAG). And so yes Jesus is literally the way into heaven as the only way in is through him.

In response, to your snide remarks no I do not get a warm fuzzy or any of the other things you mention. I do not base my faith on something as flimsy and fallilbe as human emotions or reason. My faith is created and based upon the objective promises of God.

Now back to the text at hand if God does not lie and all things are possible for God then Romans 6 must be understood as a description of the work God is doing in Baptism, because to claim any other is to make God a liar.

 

[El_Guero]

Back to sacramental impartation of Grace.

It is interesting to note, that sacramental impartation of Grace is a fancy form of works based salvation.

 

[DHK]

Back to sacramental impartation of Grace.

It is interesting to note, that sacramental impartation of Grace is a fancy form of works based salvation.

Your right.
Grace is God's free unmerited favor.
One person defined it this way: God's Riches At Christ's Expense.

The only means that we have of gaining grace is through our Lord Jesus Christ who freely dispenses it to all those who ask (concerning salvation)--
"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men."
God freely bestows his grace upon all: whether we deserve it or not.
The rain falls on the just and the unjust alike. The unsaved are able to grow their crops just as well as the saved are. God's grace enables them to do so.

In reference to salvation it is only through the grace of God that one can be saved. Salvation is by grace through faith--and faith alone. It is not of works
Being justified by faith we have peace with God.

Marvelous grace of our loving Lord,
Grace that exceeds our sin and our guilt!
Yonder on Calvary’s mount outpoured,
There where the blood of the Lamb was spilled.
Refrain
Grace, grace, God’s grace,
Grace that will pardon and cleanse within;
Grace, grace, God’s grace,
Grace that is greater than all our sin.
http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/g/g/ggreater.htm

The only means of grace is Christ. There is no such thing as a sacrament. That is purely a Catholic invention, Luther, Knox, Calvin (all former Catholics) not withstanding. Isn't it disappointing when the leader of your "religion" brings part of Catholicism with him?
DHK

 

[Claudia_T]

If grace occurs because of the "act" of the Sacrament, then that makes us dependent upon someone dispensing it to us, not a good thing...

Like the "Indulgences"

and they can kick you out of church if you dont do as they want you too and make you believe you are up the creek without a paddle... like with the Eucharist

but in truth, it doesnt depend on some church leader deciding we are worthy to receive it

Jn:16:2: They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.


good thing it doesnt depend on whether or not the Pope likes us


Claudia

 

[Melanie]

......sigh!!!...... it is good that God can see into the Hearts and Minds of His children because we can talk until spotty in the face and get nowhere at all.

I shall continue receiving the sacraments as a sign of my desire to be closer to God and continue in "my works" for as a child will make a cruddy mud pie or a messy pastel picture to show his mother that he loves her, I too will endeavour to do the same. God knows I love Him, but I want to show Him even though my offerings are spoiled and pathetic.:wavey:

 

[David Michael Harris]

As you can guess I am pretty much against the RCC but I will say this, living in the South of France, every village has at it's entrance a large cross, mostly with Jesus nailed to it, it's a great witness to Christianity. I think one day there might be a great awakening in France.

I hope so.

Lord please be gracious.

David

 

[David Michael Harris]

Ahhh.....yes that is an oldie and a goodie, because the Faithful support the Church and the Servants of the Church do not draw a salary as such! Oh........ and because it has been in existance since Christ founded it.:godisgood:

I do not understand the peace bit....it does give great good peace being in the bosom of my dear Saviour

What I mean is that so many people think they are Christian and they are not, you must be born again and not just attend mass.

David

 

[BobRyan]

The RCC "claims" for the MASS are "so different" from What Protestants are doing the communion service that even RCC's own well accepted authors admit that this "is idolatry" worshipping a "piece of bread as though it were God" -- IF in fact the Protestant understanding of scripture and the mass is correct!!

The RCC claims that "Christ IN you" and the "New Covenant" and receiving GRACE is tied up with this bread being eaten -- so they have published the fact that they do not consider non-CAtholics to be saved under the New Covenant -- SAVED but not by the New Covenant since it is LIMITED to the bread being eaten in Catholic Mass!!

To simply gloss over all of this and say "well we are just being close to God in worship like everyone else" is to misspeak or mislead.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

......sigh!!!...... it is good that God can see into the Hearts and Minds of His children because we can talk until spotty in the face and get nowhere at all.

Why? What has that got to do with anything? God give grace to all--the saved and unsaved alike--whether we deserve it or not. He gave grace to Hitler (a RC BTW), Stalin, Marx, Osama, Saddam Hussein, etc. He has given grace to all of them. How so. There is no part of this world where God has withheld His rain and His sunshine. He gives it to all--the unjust and just alike. We all are partakers of his grace though we don't deserve it. In fact the only thing that we ALL deserve is a place in Hell.

I shall continue receiving the sacraments as a sign of my desire to be closer to God and continue in "my works" for as a child will make a cruddy mud pie or a messy pastel picture to show his mother that he loves her, I too will endeavour to do the same. God knows I love Him, but I want to show Him even though my offerings are spoiled and pathetic.:wavey:

There is no such thing as a sacrament. Show me the word in the Bible. Works don't get a person to heaven. The Bible explicitly says (and in more than one place), "not of works." Salvation is not of works. If you are trying to get to heaven by works it is fruitless, and you deny that Christ died on the cross, that His blood was sufficient to pay for your sins. What an insult to Christ!
What an insult to Christ it is to show his "earthly mother" who is now dead and in the grave, "works" when Christ alone is risen from the dead. That is blasphemy! Why pray to the dead! Do you also practice necromancy and involve yourself in the occult? What other paranormal things do you partake of? DHK

 

[BobRyan]

That "once for all" thing about Christ's sacrifice in Heb 10 "putting a stop to sacrifices and offerings" is what keeps illuding the RCC.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

There is no such thing as a sacrament. Show me the word in the Bible.

Well DHK, the same can be said about the term “Trinity”, which was first used in writing around 180 AD by Theophilus of Antioch; which is not found in the Bible either, but we all use the term as a way of expressing the triune nature of the one God revealed in Scripture.

Therefore, the term “Sacrament” isn’t found in the Bible either, but classical Christian theology has simply defined sacrament as any rite or act instituted by Christ for the good of the Church. The Early Church Father Tertullian introduced the term during the second century.

So, through studying early Church history we see that through Sacred Tradition the deity of Jesus was a belief most all Christians held, but the doctrine of the “Trinity” and the term itself was laid out due to the response to Arianism.

The same is said concerning “sacraments” through Sacred Tradition we see that the Early Church practiced these sacraments and St. Augustine identified these practices as “signs” and later Tertullian coined the term “Sacrament”.

Even your Baptist father Zwingli used the term “Sacrament” as did Luther and Calvin. Although it wasn’t until the Reformation did the meaning of sacraments begin to differ and still protestants use the term and only those sects that are romaphobic don’t and that makes me very weary of them…

 

[BobRyan]

Is it your position that the deity of Christ is not a fact that can be established "Sola scriptura"?? Are you saying that we need tradition to defend it as fact?

 

[DHK]

Well DHK, the same can be said about the term “Trinity”, which was first used in writing around 180 AD by Theophilus of Antioch; which is not found in the Bible either, but we all use the term as a way of expressing the triune nature of the one God revealed in Scripture.

I figured someone would come up with that lame argument.

Neither is theology, Christology, Angeology, Ecclesiology, Eschatology, Soteriology, neither any of the names of the great doctrines of the Bible. We still study theology, the study of God, even though the term isn't found in the Bible. But not only the term sacrament isn't in the Bible, the concept isn't in the Bible. Forget the church fathers, and history. Where in the Bible is sacramental grace taught. It isn't the only means of grace is Christ. God alone dispenses grace. The grace of God brings salvation to all men (Titus 2:11). That is what the Bible says. I didn't say it; God did. Take up your argument with Him. God gives grace, not man, not superstitious water such as the Hindus do, not the saints in heaven--the occult practice of necromancy.
The Catholic, anti-Biblical definition of "means of grace" is not only anti-Biblical, it is blasphemous. It smacks of working one's way to heaven--taking away from the sufficiency of the blood of Christ, in effect saying that the sacrifice on the cross wasn't good enough for you. What an insult!!
DHK

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Is it your position that the deity of Christ is not a fact that can be established "Sola scriptura"?? Are you saying that we need tradition to defend it as fact?

First, I don't adhere to this theory of Sola Scriptura it's not taught in the bible or the Early Church. Yes, the deity of Christ can be found within the pages of Scripture, but that wasn't debated in the Early Church...

Second, the Early Church has always believed in the deity of Christ, long before the NT Canon was confirmed. The Early Church taught that God is a single nature or being in which there are three (3) persons. Jesus is God, as is the Holy Spirit and both are God as the Father and that was through Sacred Tradition. The problem in the Early Church History was that it wasn’t always exactly clear how the three persons of the Trinity existed together as one God. Hence the ecumenical councils were organized to defend and define the Trinity.