My husband's principle difficulty with the Roman Catholic Church seems to be in the area of Sacramental Theology (I think this is the proper expression).
He cannot understand /believe that (for example) that one must have some "special power" ie: ordination/orders to consecrate, baptize hear confession offer absolution etc. He calls it a "magic act". Any answers or specific reading I can offer here? (Scriptural basis would really be helpful as he is an evangelical) Thanks again, M.

My initial reaction is to point to God's appointed order in under the Old Testament. Only the Levites could serve as priests and offer the sacrifices. Only the Davidic line was appointed to serve as kings. The evangelical response is often to say that the levitical priesthood was replaced by the priesthood of believers in the New Testament. But that's not true. The priesthood of believers existed in the Old Testament (see Ex. 19:6 for example) and carried on into the NT. Rather, the levitical priesthood was replaced by the apostolic priesthood. The sacrifices were replaced by the one sacrifice of the Mass.

This is essentially an issue of divine order. We are called to submit to this order. Protestant evangelicals refuse to believe this and set up various orders of their own making and then using various Scriptures to justify it. This is even true of worship. God has designed that we worship liturgically with sacrifice. Evangelicals have jettisoned this in favor of concerts and lecture series (known to them as praise and worship and preaching).

I'm sure there's more to it and some here will be better qualified to answer. But that offers a starting point I hope. You may also want to check out Scott Hahn's book, Reasons To Believe. There is a section on just this idea.

Hope that's helpful.

Dear M:
I only have a moment right now, so all I can do is offer you a suggestion for Bible study to challenge him with.
Ok, Evangelicals want the Word and only the Word, that’s your friend right now, not your enemy.

So, have him read all the passages about this Subject of Authority with a good interlinear Bible and something called Gramcords Parsings if you can get your hands on them.
You don't have to have this, but it does help.

The point is simply this, have him pay attention and mark all the first person and second person personal and plural pronouns in all the related passages of this subject matter.
If he reads his Bible "Honestly", then he will have a struggle.
The reason for the struggle is that his "opinion" will not match up with Scripture and his way of reading the Bible before.

All people who have the opinion your husband does, make the mistake of inserting "ourselves" in the Scriptures when we should recognize something about "them"-the Apostles.

The opening of Ephesians is a good study just to show that we do this and make this mistake.

In Ephesians 1:13 you see the phrase " and now you also".

Now that’s interesting! It indicates that what went before it was not about the ones being written to directly.

So, one goes back and studies well, and one comes to see that all the plural pronouns before verse 13 are about the Apostles. ( or the Apostolic College if you will.)
Then, after they had received these things, now the Ephesians (and all of us) receive these things "through them".
But all the first part, other than the salutation, is about what the Apostles received first, and now, because of that, the rest of us.

The problem is this, most of us read "us, ourselves", into all the "we, us" in those passages before verse 13.

When Paul wrote it, that was not his intention for his readers.

Ok, now, if you apply the principles learned from this study to the texts about the authority given to Peter and the Apostles, you learn many things, and we are confronted with knowing we have misread the Scriptures by not applying any rules of language to them except what we wanted to, or what we were taught wrongly.

Second person personal pronouns are very, very important when reading Jesus discussions with the Apostles and with Peter, as are second person plural pronouns.

When we help people to read their Bible properly, then the issues just melt away.
We do not have to teach them that Catholic Doctrine is right, they find what the Bible actually teaches, and then they come to the conclusion that the Church teaches the True Faith.
So many times we go about things backwards with Evangelicals, trying to prove to them that Catholic Doctrine and practice is correct and end up in endless debates.

The key, in my opinion, is to challenge them with properly understanding the Word of God, when they see these things themselves, then they will see that the Church is teaching what they have come to believe and see as true in their own studies.
With that, then, come the understanding that it has been The Church that was teaching them, through the Spirit, the truth.

After that, there is a desire to hear what The Church has to say on everything.

Trust has been established and now there is eagerness where there was conflict and distrust.

It’s all pretty easy from there.

Got to run, wish I had more time, perhaps later.

Pronouns are important, we need to read things correctly, when Jesus uses a singular case , second person, personal pronoun, pay attention, its about that particular person, and that person, then, gave something to all of us, something comes to all of us, through the office of that person.
Same thing with plural, second person, personal pronouns, something was given "to them".
And then "through them" to us.

I hope this makes sense, I am in to much of a hurry, but it is what it is.

My Love to you all,
Rusty+

Give a person the Bible correctly, and they will become Catholic.

LoC,

The objection your husband has is common. Sacramental theology is, in some ways, difficult for those raised in non-Catholic traditions to understand. I was raised evangelical and it took me awhile to think in terms of sacraments.

Here are a few basic ways I usually explain it:

1. Sacraments are physical signs of spiritual grace. If you think about it, physical things are involved in evangelical theology of grace too. For instance, think of the act of "accepting Jesus" in evangelical traditions: The physical pastor physically speaks a sermon, and the hearer physically hears the sermon, and physically walks to the prayer rail, and physically speaks a prayer. Now, I understand that God's free grace is operating here, but it was still mediated through the physical. Being physical creatures, I don't see how we could get grace without material signs. I don't see how the act of baptism is any more magic than the physical act of praying the sinner's prayer.

One example of free grace being mediated through the physical is in Titus 3: 4-7 (RSV): But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.

2. Many involved in American religion have a big problem with the idea of hierarchy and authority. Since we are basically an egalitarian society, the idea that one man would have faculties we don't seems troubling. However, Scripture speaks of a hierarchy. Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive or retain sins (John 20:23; Also see Matthew 16:15-20). Remember too that in an emergency anybody can validly confer baptism (even an atheist).

I wrote an article about sacraments, Sacraments: Meeting God in our own World. My brother wrote a few that might be helpful: Reconciliation: The Sacrament of Conversion and Are Catholics Born Again: Reclaiming the New Birth. I am not engaging in self-promotion here, simply trying to save time, since I don't have to type out the insights contained in the articles.

God bless,
David

Rusty,

I only eliminate most of your quote for space considerations. Its good to see you here again my friend! I miss the older days of discourse but that's probably because the "issues" have calmed themselves.

As always your input is excellent and I will try, as I can to involve myself in this way. Its great to hear from you,.. I hope all is well!



In Him

Roy

David,

As I learned this phrase, Sacraments are [COLOR=blue]outward[COLOR=blue] sign of [COLOR=blue]inner[COLOR=blue]physical Grace. This is a pretty good query which has brought out some our our learned friends,.. its good to see you both!


In Him

Roy

David,

As I learned this phrase, Sacraments are [COLOR=blue]outward[COLOR=blue] sign of [COLOR=blue]inner[COLOR=blue]physical Grace. This is a pretty good query which has brought out some our our learned friends,.. its good to see you both!


In Him

Roy

geez, I can't figure out this color thing :(

Thank you all for your answers and support. I would like to continue to recieve input re Sacraments.
Yesterday we attended a Mass at which some dear friends were received into the Catholic Church. (He was our former pastor) Afterward the discussion at our lunch table was largely concerned with the fact that "we" could not receive Communion.
I asked if they believed the Catholic Doctrine of the Eucharist, and the general answer went something like this:
--"Sure, I believe that Jesus is really present in the Eucharist in some way, I just don't believe in Transubstantiation." :blink:
This sounded like the answer I used to get from clergy when I was an Episcopalian -- a non-answer!! When I replied that of course one could not receive if one did not believe the Catholic Doctrine, I became rather unpopular -- (At least they weren't hissing and calling me a papist"!!) :(
How does one answer this kind of thing? The one woman has a theology degree, so these are not dummies, just misinformed.
Blessings to you All --Mary

Mary,

Your friend, degree or not, is simply wrong. A simple reading of the catechism will establish that. What baffles me is why they wanted to be received into the Catholic Church only to deny a critical belief of the Church. What is ironic is that today is the Feast of Corpus Christi- the celebration of the Eucharist- the Real Presence- Transubstantiation. On this day of all days to deny the doctrine just strikes me as ludicrous.

Remember Mary- Preach the word in season or out (2 Tim. 4:2). That means whether it's popular or not. Keep the Faith, Mary, and the Faith will keep you.

Blessings!

Patrick,
Sorry I guess I did not make myself clear -- the friends who were received into The Church were not the ones entering into the discussion. The comments at the lunch table were by some friends of the couple from their old church.
Most folks like the ones I am talking about will not take the trouble to read The catechism as they as they say that is just from a "Catholic view point".