Fun with the Catechism

  • Thread starter Deleted member 149
  • Start date

theophilus

Active Member
Admin said:
theophilus said:
No I don't, that doesn't relate so much to the Blessed Trinity and is not a matter defined relating to the same. A hint really big hint would be - around with -.
I found it! Circumincession:

The mutual immanence of the three distinct persons of the Holy Trinity. The Father is entirely in the Son, likewise in the Holy Spirit; and so is the Son in the Father and the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit in the Father and the Son. Circuminsession also identifies the mutual immanence of the two distinct natures in the one Person of Jesus Christ.

It is amazing what we're finding out.
Correct!

Not so hard eh? More literally the word means walking around with and is described simply thus; all exterior actions of the Blessed Trinity (creating, sanctifying, etc.) are performed by all the persons of the Blessed Trinity.
 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Admin said:
Machabees said:
Q. How many titles does Christ have as a King over us? In other words, how many rights or crowns does He have over us?
I can think of three.

King of Kings
Lord of Lords
King of the Jews
As those above three titles do apply to our Lord, they are actually effects from the particular rights that our Lord has over us individually and over all nations as a King.

A. There are three rights that our Lord has over us as a King:

<ol style="list-style-type: decimal;">[*] He is a natural King by right of Royal blood through St. Joseph and his mother Mary in direct lineage from King David. "...and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. And of his kingdom there shall be no end." (Luke 1).
[*] He is a King by right of conquest in defeating sin and the devil by His act of redemption for which all nations and all peoples owe to Him homage.
[*] He is also a King by Divine right, as He is God, all nations and all peoples owe Him adoration.</ol>


It is thus that He also has those above titles the Angels rejoice: "He is King of Kings and Lord of Lords".


 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
ambrose said:
Thanks Machabees, trying now to work out son of Jacob yet son of Heli. :)
Yes, as our Lord was the legal son of St. Joseph, and St. Joseph was the legal son of Heli, and the biological son of Jacob.

Here is the Bible's commentary explaining this:

"... St. Joseph, who by nature was the son of Jacob, (St. Matt. 1. 16,) in the account of the law, was son of Heli. For Heli and Jacob were brothers, by the same mother; and Heli, who was the elder, dying without issue, Jacob, as the law directed, married his widow: in consequence of such marriage, his son Joseph was reputed in the law the son of Heli. (Luke #). www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&amp;bk=49&amp;ch=3&amp;l=23#x ]

As the two brothers Heli and Jacob were in the same blood line to King David and St. Joseph was born biologically to Jacob, St. Joseph was also the first born in the Law as the first son of Heli, St. Joseph therefore was the direct heir to the throne of King David. By the decree of God the Father who sent the Holy Ghost to over shadow Mary, the miraculous birth of Jesus was effected to where St. Joseph became the legal foster father to Jesus. As such, Jesus received the royal blood line of the flesh through Mary, who was also a decedent to King David, and Jesus received legally through St. Joseph the direct heir to the throne of King David for which there will be no end to His reigning over us.

Which is why it was also important that St. Joseph would die before our Lord had died on His cross. Thereby effecting the natural right of our Lord ascending the throne of King David that St. Joseph had and thus crowned the natural King of the Jews; and by doing battle on His cross, our Lord as King, had also conquered sin and the devil which gives Him the right as a King by conquest; and by right of His divinity, He is King over all creation...

Viva Christo Rey...long live Christ the King!


P.S.
[If you type in some search terms of St. Joseph and his lineage, there is a lot of other commentary regarding this.]

I hope this helps.

 

Admin

Administrator
Machabees said:
theophilus said:
It must be final perseverance then.
Yes it is.

Considering, out of all of the gifts one may receive from God, they all mean nothing if one does not persevere to the end and God gives to the one the gift of the last grace at end of life called Final Perseverance. "He that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved." (Matthew 10:22).

Here are a few search term links on Final Perseverance that is sourced in Holy Scripture, Council of Trent, writings of the Saints, etc...:

www.newadvent.org/cathen/11711a.htm

phatcatholic.blogspot.com/2014/10/what-is-grace-of-final-perseverance.html

www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=35538

newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/09/final-perseverance-you-cant-get-to.html
Thank you for the links Machabees....well worth following up.
 

Admin

Administrator
Machabees said:
Admin said:
I really wanted to think about all the above...so want to clarify if my understanding is in line with what you have said Macchabees.

I have always thought that when Jesus suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane that, his moral suffering - greater than his physical suffering, was because he was suffering the pains of hell for each one of us. When that was done, he was ready to carry out the visible/physical suffering that came after. It has been said that the price for man's individual and collective sin/s required infinite compensation. Does that mean He had to suffer the penalty of hell in order to redeem me from it...and he had to pay the penalty of hell for each one of the elect, and only an infinite power could possibly do that. It had to be done to undo the injustice that was done by each one of us to the Father with our personal sins, and Adam's original personal sin (thereby freeing us from the inherited state - through Baptism/Sacraments etc.)

Christ indeed suffered morally and spiritually in the Garden of Olives, but as life continues in body and soul until that separation happens in death<font color="1979e6">, </font><font color="1979e6">and as the <font color="1979e6">mysteries of the <font color="1979e6">Rosary show, </font></font></font><font color="1979e6">Jesus <font color="1979e6">therefore had suffered even more morally and spiritually throughout in </font>order to redeem the human race from our already past and future sins. The moral and spiritual suffering Jesus suffered from the abandonment of His Father on the Cross [1] was the most painful punishment He endure for us because it was the greatest suffering that any human can suffer. St. Thomas Aquinas sa<font color="1979e6">ys that the punishment of Hell is the absence of God. So <font color="1979e6">Jesus suffered that absence of God His <font color="1979e6">Father in one of His moments within the 3-hour<font color="1979e6">s hanging on the painful and humiliating Cross.

<font color="1979e6">Remembering also that when we <font color="1979e6">have a cut<font color="1979e6">, or other, the nerve endings send an electrical signal to our material brain that effects our soul
's response of pain. As like when through our senses we hear of something sad, our soul responds <font color="1979e6">with a <font color="1979e6">proportional measure. So too, when our Lord suffered all of His physical pain, <font color="1979e6">He suffered those in His s<font color="1979e6">oul<font color="1979e6"> and all of the moral and spiritual sins against His Father to effect an <font color="1979e6">infinite measure of satisfaction against an infinite God who was offended.

[1] “And at the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying: Eloi, Eloi, lamma sabacthani? Which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (St. Mark 15).

</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font>As mentioned above, Mary as a decedent in the human race coming after the punishment of Adam and Eve's sin and needed to die as a human under the pains of sin like all of us, but because God had preserved her as immaculate from her conception, she was not under the punishment of Adam and Eve nor did she merit the punishment to die, but like her Son, the Christ, who was also immaculate in His conception had voluntarily taken on Himself the punishment in our steed, and Mary who was asked to participate as a co-redemptorist with the sufferings of her Son, had also believed in her life (not knowing that she is immaculate the way we know it in future history) that by her own will lived her life in fidelity and prepared to die. As we know, God had other plans for His daughter, who would not see corruption, like Elias foreshadowed, had only slept. “I will put enmities between thee and the woman…” (Genesis 3).

Again, I am asking if I have the right understanding when putting things in my own words. I believe that Mary slept Yes, that is correct. (as Jesus said when raising a person from the dead that 'she is only sleeping'.) Of course He alone could do that since he would have given that woman the benefits of his coming Sacrifice for her sins...unlike our Lady, however, who could not sin. Apart from the Incarnation - Mary was redeemed because if she had been the first Eve, she would not have sinned unlike the rest of us. Eve is not guilty of the personal sins of each one of us.

Death is the wages of sin...Mary did not sin...therefore she did not have the kind of death that I have nor the kind of death that Our Lord submitted to...because, laden with sins, he went to hell as a mortal sinner would go to hell. Having already paid the price in the Garden of Gethsamane He finalised the situation in Gehenna, rescuing the purgatorial souls from eternal hell, and damning the remainder to eternal punishment. He then rose out of Hell (bodies were seen rising after Calvary) taking with him those who were in the Bosom of Abraham..prophets etc. - probably Adam and Eve also because they would have done their purgatory on earth (even St. Joseph?)

It is this total submission and what it actually entailed that shows how he totally identified with sinners. In submitting to the Father, he proved that he was dying like I die...it is as if he had no say in it at all. As God he suffered unbearably the separation from His Father; (what a soul experiences when he is damned). If the Father had sent him to hell, he would submit. Which is really what His Father did decree for his Son. As Man, he proved his humanity totally in that he would not save Himself, would not abandon us as we die; would not leave without us. He did that so that when I die He accompanies me, having been there first. I will not suffer the loss of heaven as he suffered in my place when abandoned by His Father. And, having died for each one of us, he died not only once, but as many times as there are souls to be saved (infinite). In short, he gave up His soul totally and completely that I might be rescued and snatched for Satan's grasp when weak and dying - when I, a sinner, would go straight to hell.

There is nothing truer than Hell is my destiny without the Advocacy of Our Lord Jesus Christ; without the shocking price He paid in Body and Soul, not to mention the humiliation he willingly endured. Words cannot express the depth of humility, nor can the mind comprehend, that God would humiliate Himself to save my soul.


My comments are in blue above.
Thank you for this beautiful elaboration.

Jesus suffered from the abandonment of His Father on the Cross [1] was the most painful punishment He endure for us because it was the greatest suffering that any human can suffer
Referring to this particular section of the above post...the thought came that The Father too gave up his Son when Our Lord became Son of Man emptying himself of his equality with God taking on our weakness. That means that the Father gave up His Son for love us us, and the Son gave up his Father for the love of us.



 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Admin said:
Machabees said:
My comments are in blue above.
Thank you for this beautiful elaboration.

Jesus suffered from the abandonment of His Father on the Cross [1] was the most painful punishment He endure for us because it was the greatest suffering that any human can suffer
Referring to this particular section of the above post...the thought came that The Father too gave up his Son when Our Lord became Son of Man emptying himself of his equality with God taking on our weakness. That means that the Father gave up His Son for love us us, and the Son gave up his Father for the love of us.
As we know in the two natures of the incarnation, that the Son of God is always united to His Father in the Blessed Trinity, by their Godhead, and they are always in equality, that in that scriptural reference, yes the Father in that moment had also felt that abandonment of being away from Jesus, as man, who was the most faithful human ever created by God and thus more loved in virtue of that faithfulness by the Father than Adam. As such, the Father too had endured a strong pain of separation.

If God had grieved to Moses on Mount Sinai about His people, and our Lord had grieved over Lazarus in loss, being united with the Son of God, and God the Father had created in us with sense of compassion and pain, then too the Father had suffered this loss over His Son Jesus Christ.

In addition, that in another sense as the Son of God has taken on the incarnation, He is forever and eternally participated with that incarnation, so that the Father and the Son have taken on another relationship, not less in equality as God in the Blessed Trinity, but that the Son of God in His incarnation is united with greater glory to His Father with His act of infinite sacrifice and infinite adoration as Jesus Christ to His Father.

As that is much to meditate on, we know that Jesus had said many times that the Father is in Him and He is in the Father, and that He does the work of His Father, and as the Blessed Trinity is united in Godhead, that the Holy Spirit and the Father were united in Jesus, with the Son, on the cross suffering together for a united act of redemption for the human race. Yet, it was Jesus in His humanity and His soul that was the instrument that was used in the ultimate sacrifice to God -as the lamb on the altar- that is the glory of Jesus as man and the glory of God effecting that infinite pardon.

Deo Gratias...

 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Q. Can a Catholic in sanctifying grace commit a mortal sin out of the blue all by itself?

 

theophilus

Active Member
Machabees said:
Q. Can a Catholic in sanctifying grace commit a mortal sin out of the blue all by itself?

Phillip Neri said "Keep Thy hand over Philip this day oh Lord, for if Thou dost not, Philip will betray Thee."

I would say yes possible, but I assume your answer is no?
 

Admin

Administrator
Machabees said:
Q. Can a Catholic in sanctifying grace commit a mortal sin out of the blue all by itself?
I don't understand the question. What does, 'out of the blue all by itself' mean? I thouht anyone in a state of sanctifying grace could still commit a mortal sin.
 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
A. In regards to the answers above, Phillip Neri's expression is one of the omnipotence of God. If God chooses himself to "blink" us out for one millisecond, we would not exist in friendship nor being.

Yes anyone in a state of sanctifying grace can commit a mortal sin. I tried to pose the question as a unique and separate cause of existence.

So the answer to the original question, is no, a Catholic in sanctifying grace cannot commit a mortal sin out of the blue all by itself; it is impossible. Mortal sin is fundamentally ordered by being preluded by one or many venial sins before it.

First, the distinctions of the question is provided whether one is a catholic versus a non-catholic. Second, the distinction between a catholic in sanctifying grace as opposed to a catholic that is not. The results of subtleness will follow.

First, when a soul is not catholic, it is true that they are already in mortal sin. However, as mortal sin is easy to partake with no love of God in such a soul, lesser sins (venial) still needs to prelude the mortal sin. The same applies to a catholic whether in sanctifying grace or not.

The subtleness is based on the love of God in the soul and its sensitivity to grace and sin.

For the non-catholic, there is no to little sensitivity and venial sin is a constant habit so is followed by mortal sin(s). A soul in sanctifying grace fights some, many, or all temptations and the results would be many to little venial sins committed. The degree of venial sin, or its habit, like a hole in a water dam, is proportional to how much sin is allowed to enter and confuse the other faculties of the soul if not checked and brought to contrition.

The reason why the blatancy of mortal sin cannot be committed by itself without one or many venial sins before it is because, first, it is in the mercy of God as an aid to recognize our weaknesses and small falls so to strengthen us in seeing our fallibleness and thus lean on him in life.

Secondly, man's end in bodily nature is to acquire all temporal goods that he may have some perfection and excellence. However, that nature through original sin is misguided with ignorance of mind and malice of will. In brief, all sins do have the origin of good in it whereby the bodily nature of man wants to attain it even without discernment. A child wants to eat a delicious ice cream, that is good, but he must not let it harbor in further temptations, suspicions, and cunning to want to eat a whole gallon of it and right before supper. This example started with a desire of good to fill the stomach; a need that is strong in nature and a requirement on life. However, the movement of venial sins became evident with failure to pray, failure to try to control things, entertaining thoughts against right reason, indifference or ingratitude towards God for what needs to be done, arriving lukewarm on the threshold of gluttony, then pride set in to accomplish want one wants in its selfish desire without God's approval, then unfortunately came the vice and deadly (mortal) sin of gluttony being attained and realized.

So it started with a good desire, without watching at the gate, venial sins are allowed, if not checked, mortal sins follow in a door that was opened by venial sins.

St. Thomas Aquinas treats this in many places within his Summa. Here is one denoting the nature of selfishness and pride:

It is written (Ecclus. 10:15): "Pride is the beginning of all sin."

I answer that, Some say pride is to be taken in three ways. First, as denoting inordinate desire to excel; and thus it is a special sin. Secondly, as denoting actual contempt of God, to the effect of not being subject to His commandment; and thus, they say, it is a generic sin. Thirdly, as denoting an inclination to this contempt, owing to the corruption of nature; and in this sense they say that it is the beginning of every sin, and that it differs from covetousness, because covetousness regards sin as turning towards the mutable good by which sin is, as it were, nourished and fostered, for which reason covetousness is called the "root"; whereas pride regards sin as turning away from God, to Whose commandment man refuses to be subject, for which reason it is called the "beginning," because the beginning of evil consists in turning away from God.

Now though all this is true, nevertheless it does not explain the mind of the wise man who said (Ecclus. 10:15): "Pride is the beginning of all sin." For it is evident that he is speaking of pride as denoting inordinate desire to excel, as is clear from what follows (verse 17): "God hath overturned the thrones of proud princes"; indeed this is the point of nearly the whole chapter. We must therefore say that pride, even as denoting a special sin, is the beginning of every sin. For we must take note that, in voluntary actions, such as sins, there is a twofold order, of intention, and of execution. In the former order, the principle is the end, as we have stated many times before (Q[1], A[1], ad 1; Q[18], A[7], ad 2; Q[15], A[1], ad 2; Q[25], A[2]). Now man's end in acquiring all temporal goods is that, through their means, he may have some perfection and excellence. Therefore, from this point of view, pride, which is the desire to excel, is said to be the "beginning" of every sin. On the other hand, in the order of execution, the first place belongs to that which by furnishing the opportunity of fulfilling all desires of sin, has the character of a root, and such are riches; so that, from this point of view, covetousness is said to be the "root" of all evils, as stated above (A[1]).

www.sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum221.htm
 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Q. In the Apostle's Creed, there is this one phrase: He descended into hell; On the third day He rose again from the dead.

What does the word "again" mean in that sentence; he rose again.

 

Admin

Administrator
Machabees said:
Q. In the Apostle's Creed, there is this one phrase: He descended into hell; On the third day He rose again from the dead.

What does the word "again" mean in that sentence; he rose again.
It means he rose 'anew'. I found this analogy on another website. It is like a boy falls off his bike and gets up again. That “again” doesn’t mean that he repeatedly gets up before riding off. That “again” means “anew”. Definition of 'again':

adverb
once more; another time; anew; in addition:
 
D

Deleted member 149

Guest
Yes, it is in the English translation. It means he rose 'anew'. Jesus was alive. Then he died. Then he was alive again. The Apostles’ Creed affirms Jesus’ Resurrection. The word resurrect means to bring to life again.

Here is a good explanation derived from the original Greek -he rose 'anew".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is the Meaning of ‘Again’ in the Creed? He Arose Again

In the Apostles Creed, as we have it in English, we profess that Jesus rose “again” from the dead. The Latin verb resurgere means to “rise again.” In Greek, in which language the Creed was originally written, the compound word anastasis (resurrection) literally comes from ana/histemi which means “to stand again” or “rise again.”

There was, of course, only one Resurrection of Our Lord. So, what does “again” mean?

To explain, I must refer to Greek, the language of inspiration. There are two words in Greek that can each mean “again.” The more common is palin. The other word is kainos. Although the Apostles Creed does not use either word, as the “again” is in the prefix of the Greek verb anastemi (to rise again), Our Lord does use an Aramaic word, which is translated under divine inspiration as the Greek adverb kainos, in His address to the Apostles at the Last Supper: “And I say to you, I will not drink from henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I shall drink it with you new (kainon) in the kingdom of my Father” (Matt. 26:29). And, thusly, too, is the same word used in many other verses such as in “And he that sat on the throne, said: Behold, I make all things new (kaina)” (Apoc. 21:5).

It is in this sense that the word “again” can be understood in the Apostles Creed. “And on the third day He arose anew from the dead.” “Anew,” as in glorified. So, too, did He promise the Apostles that in the kingdom of His Father they would drink the “fruit of the vine” anew, in the state of glory, after the resurrection of the body at the Last Day.

Could this be a reference to a Holy Communion for the blessed in heaven after the resurrection? A Communion that would last forever? — Not as a sacrament, because the sacraments are only for this mortal life, but as a Reality, in Vision, of an everlasting Communion in the Body of Christ. Could this Holy Communion be the Principle, as Cause, of the glorification of the body after the resurrection?

Could this be the meaning, as well, of the promise regarding the Tree of Life that the Alpha and the Omega gave to those of the Church of Ephesus who overcome temptation and trials: “To him, that overcometh, I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of my God” (Apoc. 2: 7)?

catholicism.org/what-is-the-meaning-of-again-in-the-creed-he-arose-again.html

 

Deus Vult

Well-Known Member
Well now, this may help me to pay more attention to the words I'm saying.
Thank you for these Catechisms.
We took it for granted so long ago when there were nuns connected with every parish, who were always there to teach and give us a love for our Faith by simply knowing it through the Catechism.
 

Admin

Administrator
Q. 459. How many kinds of grace are there?

&gt; If more than one what are their names?
&gt; What is the difference between them?


 

Deus Vult

Well-Known Member
There are two kinds of grace, actual grace and sanctifying grace.

Actual grace is a kind of helping grace, for example if we commit a sin, it is with the help of actual grace that gives us the strength to admit the sin and to confess it.

Sanctifying grace is the life of God within us. We can only have sanctifying grace, that is God living in our souls, if we are free of mortal sin.
 

Admin

Administrator
deus vult said:
There are two kinds of grace, actual grace and sanctifying grace.

Actual grace is a kind of helping grace, for example if we commit a sin, it is with the help of actual grace that gives us the strength to admit the sin and to confess it.

Sanctifying grace is the life of God within us. We can only have sanctifying grace, that is God living in our souls, if we are free of mortal sin.
Correct.

A. Sanctifying grace is that grace which makes the soul holy and pleasing to God.
Sanctifying grace is banished when a soul commits a mortal sin. The soul has to be in a 'state of grace' for it to receive the continuing flow of sanctifying grace to guide it to perfection.


A. Actual grace is that help of God which enlightens our mind and moves our will to shun evil and do good.
It can be given to a soul who is not in a state of sanctifying grace. It was not sanctifying grace that knocked St. Paul off his horse. If God chooses he can bring heretics/others into the Catholic faith&gt; sanctifying grace. Why the sudden conversion of abortionists for example? It is why we have the obligation to pray for the conversion/salvation of souls who are not in a state of sanctifying grace.

[...] Finally, I promise Thee * O glorious Mother of God * and loving Mother of men * to devote myself (ourselves) whole-heartedly to the service of Thy blessed cult * in order to hasten and assure * through the sovereignty of Thine Immaculate Heart * the coming of the kindom of The Sacred Heart * of Thine adorable Son * in my own heart and in those of all men * in my country and in all the world. Amen
(Final verse of Act of Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary)

When members of the Mystical Body of Christ pray for those outside the Church, i.e. those NOT in a state of sanctifying grace, heretics, abortionists etc. can receive actual grace to become Catholic where they receive sanctifying grace.

Full Course on Grace : HERE

[12] - we shall find nothing more noble, more sublime, or more divine than the expression "the Mystical Body of Christ" - an expression which springs from and is, as it were, the fair flowering of the repeated teaching of the Sacred Scriptures and the Holy Fathers.

14. That the Church is a body is frequently asserted in the Sacred Scriptures. "Christ," says the Apostle, "is the Head of the Body of the Church."[13] If the Church is a body, it must be an unbroken unity, according to those words of Paul: "Though many we are one body in Christ."[14] But it is not enough that the Body of the Church should be an unbroken unity; it must also be something definite and perceptible to the senses as Our predecessor of happy memory, Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Satis Cognitum asserts: "the Church is visible because she is a body.[15] Hence they err in a matter of divine truth, who imagine the Church to be invisible, intangible, a something merely "pneumatological" as they say, by which many Christian communities, though they differ from each other in their profession of faith, are untied by an invisible bond.

15. But a body calls also for a multiplicity of members, which are linked together in such a way as to help one another. And as in the body when one member suffers, all the other members share its pain, and the healthy members come to the assistance of the ailing, so in the Church the individual members do not live for themselves alone, but also help their fellows, and all work in mutual collaboration for the common comfort and for the more perfect building up of the whole Body.

16. Again, as in nature a body is not formed by any haphazard grouping of members but must be constituted of organs, that is of members, that have not the same function and are arranged in due order; so for this reason above all the Church is called a body, that it is constituted by the coalescence of structurally untied parts, and that it has a variety of members reciprocally dependent. It is thus the Apostle describes the Church when he writes: "As in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office: so we being many are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of another.
Extract from Mystical Body of Christ




 

Deus Vult

Well-Known Member
This question has gotten the wheels turning quite freely now and I feel like I'm on a roll toward understanding something I've always taken for granted. We first receive sanctifying grace at baptism and without it, the life of God in us, we cannot enter heaven.
Thinking about it, actual grace we need on a daily and constant basis. So, I have a question to ask. How do we get actual grace?
 
Top