Monday, October 17, 2022

While Campbellites are Young Earth Creationists, Young Earth Creationists Can Also be Catholic (and Should)

At least, Campbellites are not Calvinists!

What is the Church of Christ?
11 Sept. 2022 | Ready to Harvest

1:35 What a misreading of Acts 2:47!

The verse says:

Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord increased daily together such as should be saved.

It is clear from the context, continued into the first half of the verse, that the thing they quote is referring to an outer, visible adhesion to the Church that preached on Pentecost, and that this outer visible adhesion was interpreted as God adding the people to the Church that God intended to save back then.

3:09 On the seventh sacrament, namely marriage, St. Paul calls it "mega musterion, to esti en Xristô" (need to look up so my Greek is not too rusty along with my memory).

And what is the standard Greek word for sacrament, used all over the Orthodox Church? Musterion. The same word used by St. Paul. However, this means that the standard Latin for the word musterion is ... sacramentum.

Indeed, the Vulgate for Ephesians 5:32 uses precisely sacramentum, as this is the standard Latin translation about the Christian musteria.

3:56 "Baptism is simply a condition of God's grace, not a sacramental work that merits salvation"

Catholic theology doesn't state that sacraments "merit" salvation, that Christ did for us on the Cross.

Catholic theology states that sacraments give us the graces of salvation, they are the channel from Calvary to me. Not as a juridic condition, but as the actual purveyance, when the grace of God physically transforms the soul from lost to holy or from less holy to more holy.

WPBCOC is basically attacking a strawman.

However, it is a meritorious work to receive the sacraments well - here I distinguish : in the case of someone not saved at all, not in the state of grace before the very moment of the sacrament, the sacrament is quasi gratuitously given as a big addition to the merits that will accrue from thence on. But in the case of someone who was already in the state of grace, the longing for the sacrament had saved him before the actual reception, and in that case, the actual reception can be a meritorious act.

Giving a sacrement, like baptising or giving absolution, usually implies you are already in a state of grace as a priest or in the case of baptism deacon, and if so, giving someone else the means for his salvation actually is a meritorious work of the servant of the sacrament. However, should he be in a state of mortal sin, it doesn't cleanse him, but also doesn't make the sacrament invalid, the sacrament still saves as a work of the Church.

4:45 I looked up Col. 2:11 - 13, and while I am tired, I can see no objection against Baptism sometimes adding the Baptismal character to a state of grace already existing, as God forgave the man while he was longing for an as yet upcoming baptism.

In such a case, God knows He forgave the man His sins so many days or hours or minutes before Baptism, but as with Absolution, the man knows he is forgiven, when he is baptised.

Btw, good for them they say Baptism actually saves.

5:04 The only thing we learn from Acts 19 in the context is, the Baptism of John is not the sacrament of Baptism.

As a Catholic, I already knew that.

Whether verse 5 means that on Christ's command they were baptised with the formula "in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" or whether it means that in the formula itself these words were replaced by "in the name of Jesus" - but only the Apostles had authority to so replace the formula - diverse Catholic authors differ between them. Either way, they certainly did receive sacramental Baptism in this event.

5:28 "early Christian writers understood that it was symbolic"

Oooops, getting ready for a fake quote, a quotemine or a non-quote, we are supposed to believe these Nebraskans really studied the matter ... and they don't even have to show a quote for it.

5:35 Looking up the Haydock comment to Matthew 26:29

// Ver. 29. I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine. In S. Luke, (xxii. 15, 16,) Christ said to his disciples; I earnestly desired to eat this Pasch with you before I suffer; (or this paschal sacrifice) for I say to you, that, from this time I will not eat thereof, till it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. These expressions seem to import no more, than that it was the last time he would eat and drink with them in a mortal body. And if, as some expound it, Christ, by the generation of the vine, understood the consecrated cup of his blood, he might call it wine, or the fruit of the vine; because he gave them his blood under the appearance of wine; as S. Paul calls the body of Christ bread, because given under the appearance of bread. 1 Cor. xi. 26. Wi. //

Wi. = Bishop Witham, on whom wiki:
// George Witham (16 May 1655 – 16 April 1725) was an English Roman Catholic bishop who served as the Vicar Apostolic of the Midland District, and, later, as the Vicar Apostolic of the Northern District. //

Before that, to verse 26, the Haydock Comment has a review of first, second, third, fourth and fifth century authors, starding with St. Ignatius of Antioch.

// S. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, who was a disciple and contemporary with some of the apostles, and died a martyr, at Rome, in a very advanced age, An. 107, speaking of certain heretics of those times, says: "They abstain from the Eucharist and from oblations, because they do not confess the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who suffered for our sins." See epis. genuin. ad Smyrnæos. — He calls the Eucharist the medicine of immortality, the antidote against death, by which we always live in Christ. — In another part he writes: "I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, and for drink, his blood." Again: "use one Eucharist; for the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ is one, and the cup is one in the unity of his blood. There is one altar, as there is one bishop with the college of the priesthood," &c. //

But apart from the arguments they think they have to the matter, they will apparently not also quote an argument they purported to have, namely early Christian writers?

5:54 Have I got it correct that the Nebraskans you quote use unfermented grape juice?

That would make the Eucharist not just sinful but even invalid, even if otherwise it were done by a Catholic priest in Catholic intentions.

Raised or unleavened, the Catholic Church allows both. In the proper rites.

7:00 Hybrid Judeo-Christian canon. 27 books of NT, fine, that's Christian canon. 39 books only (according to modern division of books) in the OT canon? That's Jewish canon, canon of those who decided to reject Christ ... not so fine.

8:13 The Roman Martyrology makes it roughly 7200 years old.

Christ is born 5199 after Creation. Yes, that is a Scriptural or Biblical Chronology. It is based on a LXX text without the second Cainan. Hence only 942 and not 1070 years from Flood to Birth of Abraham, the latter being what a standard LXX would give.

8:36 Ooops ... turning around from Reformers to Pelagius ...

For behold I was conceived in iniquities; and in sins did my mother conceive me.
[Psalms 50:7]

King David is not saying that his mother was living an especially bad life, compared to other married women. He's just saying what it means to transmit original sin, precisely.

See the discussion in the Haydock comment:

// Ver. 7. Sins. Heb. "iniquity,...and in sin did my mother warm or conceive me." Original sin has a manifold deformity, and is the fatal root of other transgressions. See S. Aug. Ench. S. Tho. i. 2. q. 82. a. 2. est multiplex virtute. H. --- The prophet speaks here undoubtedly of original sin. Amama. --- No text could be more express, as the Fathers and the Jews agree. Yet Grotius, whose opinions are almost always singular, and dangerous, maintains, that the expression is hyperbolical, and only implies, that David had been long subject to sin, even from his infancy, as Job was naturally of a merciful disposition. Job xxxi. 18. --- Thus free-thinkers abuse the Scripture, and setting aside all authority, will only see what they think proper. C. --- The weakness of man is a motive for pity: (M.) David pleads for it, yet allows, that the fault was entirely his own, and that he had grace sufficient to have avoided it. C. --- The consideration of our sinful origin, ought to move us to beg, that we may be washed still more, and that we may not yield to our evil propensities. W. --- We may resist them, and therefore David would not make vain excuses in sin, as God love the truth, and a sincere confession. M. //

H = Haydock
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849) was a priest, pastor and Bible scholar from an ancient English Catholic Recusant family. His edition of the Douay Bible with extended commentary, originally published in 1811, became the most popular English Catholic Bible of the 19th century on both sides of the Atlantic. It remains in print and is still regarded for its apologetic value.
C = Challoner
Richard Challoner (29 September 1691 – 12 January 1781) was an English Roman Catholic bishop, a leading figure of English Catholicism during the greater part of the 18th century. The titular Bishop of Doberus, he is perhaps most famous for his revision of the Douay–Rheims translation of the Bible.
M = Menochius
Giovanni Stefano Menochio, 9 December 1575 - 4 February 1655 (aged 79), was an Italian Jesuit biblical scholar.

For Amama, it seems GLH was quoting:
Sixtinus Amama (also Sextinus) (13 October 1593 – 9 November 1629) was a Dutch Reformed theologian and orientalist. Amama was among the first to advocate a thorough knowledge of the original languages of the Bible as indispensable to theologians.

I am not sure if "W" might be an alternative spelling for "Wi" = Witham.

8:48 For the wages of sin is death. But the grace of God, life everlasting, in Christ Jesus our Lord.
[Romans 6:23]

Do babies die, sometimes?

10:36 "It is not faith alone, but faith working in harmony with working obedience."

Congratulations to the Nebraskans to at least get this one right. Here they overturned the Reformers, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Beza ... fine.

Before we welcome them back into the real Church that Christ founded well before Campbell, they need some overhaul about the sacraments.

11:35 And good for them too, that they are against TULIP T or any other letters of that TULIP ...

14:50 They are wrong to state that the gifts of miracles have passed.

The holy Curate of Ars and probably also Padre Pio prophetically knew and warned people who were hiding something, usually a sin, in confession.

15:26 Too bad ... Catholics have sometimes (St. Justin and J. R. R. Tolkien) been premillennialist, we are usually post-millennialist, that is we take battle of Armageddon as identic to the battle in the last verses of chapter 20. We also believe the rapture is post-tribulation, not pre-tribulation.

Apart from that, I'd give more points to Darby than to Buford COC.

16:51 Here I would like to ask if Fort Logan stands with the Catholic Tradition : a man of homosexual inclination may marry, obviously a woman, not another man, even without the inclination being first mentally or psychologically eradicated, unless it is about men who (those being the object of De horrendo scelere, 1568, Pope St. Pius V) were already otherwise obliged to celibacy. This is also the position of the former bishop Chaput of Philadelphia.

Or, does he instead stand with a "Catholic" and "Conservative" modernity saying a man of homosexual disposition cannot marry a woman. The kind of people the modernist James Martin SJ considers as wrong, but only to use them as a foil to promote his own more or less pro-gay-marriage agenda.

Obviously, if you take the conservative neo-Catholic view, you can easily deprive someone of marriage and first of courtship by pretending he is homosexual and therefore saying he's incapable of marriage ... so actual homosexuals are not the only victims.

17:34 Are the guys using "fornication" as a synonym for "adultery"?

The Catholic truth is, the words "except for fornication" involve the case when a just apparent marriage is in fact fornication, like one is under perpetual vows or they are siblings, or one of them hasn't told the other he's already married ...

18:47 The Orthodox would usually be a cappella. Dito Eastern Rite Catholics.

However, while the Catholics of Latin rite allow instruments, the main issue is, we don't agree that some item of worship needs to be explicitly mentioned in the New Testament to be legitimate for Christian use. No book of the New Testament includes the Missale Romanum or the Pontificale Romanum (the latter is for acts reserved for bishops). Liturgy belongs to Tradition more than explicit Scripture.

20:30 The word wine is always used for a beverage with naturally occurring alcohol percentate between 9 and 13 / 14 %.

This exact same beverage is intoxicating or non-intoxicating according to quantity. The appropriate quantity at which to set the limit is up to each man to know. Noah was not committing a mortal sin, he did not know his limits, but if he had drunk the same quantity next day, he would have committed a sin.

C. S. Lewis considered (I hope he was right) that outside Lent he could take more than three pints of beer. My own upper limit in younger and stronger days was three pints, unless I drank very slow. Now it is less, I am less used to drinking more than a pint, but one pint is no problem.

Documentation from Quora (click image to enlarge)

Kelton Schleyer
Agreed, this no-alcohol position is rare and in very conservative CoC's in my experience. I chalk it up to American Prohibition sentiments rather than actual Biblical exegesis.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@Kelton Schleyer Ah, yes.

Some conservative Christians are conserving other things than Christianity, like the American Prohibition sentiments or progressive era hightened ages for marriage.

21:01 The guy just made the mistake that St. Paul was warning against.

From all appearance of evil refrain yourselves.
[1 Thessalonians 5:22]

Now, if his children had already been monks or nuns, he would have been right, either to tell them to decide no drink at all, or to tell them the rule of St. Benedict allows for what I think is one pint of wine per day, arguably divided between lunch and evening meal and arguably you take a sleep after each of these meals.

But as he was speaking to laymen, he was giving them the appearance of, though not the substance of, wine being an evil. That is, of being Muslims instead of Christians.

Even with Salvation Army it is not quite as bad, since they are "on a mission" precisely among alcoholics, and are trying to make abstinence easier for those who would need abstinence for medical reasons (case opposite my own, by the way).

21:52 So, they believe, contrary to the example of St. Paul, that when a new local congregation is formed, it needs to vote elders or other leaders and the vote = ordination?

Well, they don't have been following the lawful transmission of Apostolic Succession anyway, and they have no "presbuteroi" in the Biblical sense - as also no Eucharist.

23:43 In fact Titus 1:6 does not make being a married husband a requirement - it means being married to more than one wife is a disqualification.

After Abraham had been with Hagar as well as Sarah and after he had remarried after Sarah's death, marrying Keturah, he would not have been in mortal sin, but he would not have fulfilled the requirement. However, St. Paul was married to no one and not only would have been eligible, but actually was a Church leader.

No comments: