Friday, August 21, 2015

Errors Of An Opposing Catholic

Those who oppose the Way often cite us of teaching errors of the Catholic faith.  Yet, these are the kinds of Catholic teachings one opposing Catholic embraced.  According to an anonymous commenter who is not walking in the Way (the bold is mine):

Dear Diana, even St. Paul can be not right some time. Yes, it is possible. The only source of grace is the suffering and death of Jesus. Or, as Joane said, the "blood of the Lamb". Without Jesus dying on the cross, nothing would have been accomplished. But with His suffering and blood soaking death everything has been already accomplished, because of His blood. The voluntary shedding of His blood that He did brought us infinite amount of grace sufficient for saving the wide world!

It is not true that without resurrection there is no salvation. The opposite is the truth: resurrection is only possible because of salvation accomplished on the cross. The cross is everything, the empty tomb is only a bonus for the weak. Whatever St. Paul teaches and became part of the one and true Catholic teaching, would remain valid even if Jesus had never been risen! Why do you think resurrection was necessary if not by the mercy of God for the mankind? 

This same anonymous poster continued to say (the bold is mine): 

And now we get to one of the major problems with the errant teaching of the NCW. It is the death of Christ on the cross that brought us the grace to be saved. The resurrection is thew fruit of that death on the cross, and while it is true as St Paul said that our preaching would be in vain if there was no resurrection, it is not through the resurrection that we are saved. The resurrection is rather the sign of our salvatoin and our hope of eternal life in Christ.

The NCW teaches something different about the economy of salvation and the merits of Christ's death, emphasizing the resurrection to the detriment of the memory of the passion and death of Our Lord. This is why the Mass has become a banquet in the NCW, rather than the re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary. All of the NCW errors stem from this misjudgement.

This is my response: 

Dear Anonymous, YOU are the one who is in error.  I do not know where you got the idea that the resurrection of Jesus Christ should be downgraded and de-emphasized to the point where you can even say that His resurrection is not needed for our redemption.  You stated:  Dear Diana, even St. Paul can be not right some time. Yes, it is possible. 

St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians saying that his preaching and their faith would be in vain if there were no resurrection.  Every article of faith taught by St. Paul and the Apostles in the Holy Bible are INFALLIBLE because it came from the infallible Holy Spirit.  Therefore, St. Paul cannot make an error in regards to the teaching of faith because he and the Apostles are infallible.   

Easter is the most important event in Christianity because it signifies His resurrection.  You stated that it is not through the resurrection that we are saved?   It is through His death AND resurrection that we are saved.   The resurrection is just as important to our salvation as His death on the cross. After all, in order for Christ to rise from the dead, He had to die first.  But His resurrection is not to be underscored. This is why Sunday has become the Lord's Day for us, not Saturday the Sabbath.
Anonymous, you stated:  Whatever St. Paul teaches and became part of the one and true Catholic teaching, would remain valid even if Jesus had never been risen!  Without the resurrection, Christianity would not exist.  If Christ only died and did not resurrect from the dead, there would be no salvation for man because it is through His death AND resurrection that we are saved.  According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (bold is mine): 

CCC 991   Belief in the resurrection of the dead has been an essential element of the Christian faith from its beginnings. "The confidence of Christians is the resurrection of the dead; believing this we live." 

How can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. . . . But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep.
CCC 1167   Sunday is the pre-eminent day for the liturgical assembly, when the faithful gather "to listen to the word of God and take part in the Eucharist, thus calling to mind the Passion, Resurrection, and glory of the Lord Jesus, and giving thanks to God who 'has begotten them again, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead' unto a living hope":
When we ponder, O Christ, the marvels accomplished on this day, the Sunday of your holy resurrection, we say: "Blessed is Sunday, for on it began creation . . . the world's salvation . . . the renewal of the human race. . . . On Sunday heaven and earth rejoiced and the whole universe was filled with light. Blessed is Sunday, for on it were opened the gates of paradise so that Adam and all the exiles might enter it without fear.

You said that the NCW emphasized the resurrection to the detriment of the memory of His passion and death, which is why the Mass has become a banquet.  Anonymous, the NCW claims that the Mass is a sacrifice AND a banquet.  It is not one or the other.  It is BOTH, and we recognize it as both a sacrifice and a banquet.  I think the problem here is that you see it ONLY as a sacrifice, which is not what the Church teaches.  The Catholic Church never taught that the Mass is ONLY a sacrifice.  According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (bold is mine):  

CCC 1382   The Mass is at the same time, and inseparably, the sacrificial memorial in which the sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated and the sacred banquet of communion with the Lord's body and blood. But the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice is wholly directed toward the intimate union of the faithful with Christ through communion. To receive communion is to receive Christ himself who has offered himself for us.

Do you see what the Catechism says about the Mass?  It is both a sacrificial memorial and a sacred banquet.  Apparently, you have emphasized the death of our Lord to the point that His resurrection is no longer valid nor needed.   



  1. Dear Diana, I am the Anonymous poster of the second post, but I did not make the first comment. That was someone else. Yes, I know very well what the catechism teaches. I have also attended the catechesis of the NCW and I have read all the material I can find on the NCW. Additionally, I personally know and have spoken at great length to people who have been in the NCW for some thirty years.

    I know what I am talking about. The NCW de-emphasizes the Passion and Death of Jesus Christ - which is why Kiko says "today we no longer speak of the doctrine of Redemption but only the Paschal mystery". The actions in the NCW "Mass" illustrate" the teaching of the Way in this respect. The lack of kneeling, the (prior) removal of any reference to the "sacrifice" (the omission of the orates fratres and other prayers, the exclusive use of the secnd Eucharistic prayer etc) show that the NCW does not place due importance on the passion and death - the real sacrifice - made by Our Lord for our redemption. Instead there is this unbalanced fixation on the Resurrection side of the mystery, as though salvation is won through the resurrection. As I said, the resurrection is essential for our faith (here I differ from the first anonymous poster) but the resurrection is the fruit of the sacrifice made at Calvary, and in that sense, it is the sacrifice that leads to resurrection and hence it is the sacrifice which is our salvation.

    For true Catholics, the Mass is really and primarily the same sacrifice made at Calvary re-presented (made real again) each time it is celebrated. For the NCW the Mass is primarily a celebration of the resurrection. From this unbalanced position, the NCW is led into more and more error.

    1. Dear Anon 10:43 if you want this settled once and for all, please telephone or email the Vatican, specifically the Congrgation for the doctrine of the faith. They have a top notch, super qualified and well learned group of theologians and experts who have dissected, inspected, scrutinized and evaluated every single catechesis of every step In the neocatechumenal way. And guess what? They APPROVED it! They have even published approved the Directory of the NCW! And would you believe that even then Cardinal Ratzinger, aka Pope Benedict XVI, himself read all the catechesis! Golly gee good gosh! There is nothing heretical or wrong about it. It's kosher, as they say. So if you got a beef about some of the finer points of the catechesis, please do some research, check the congregation and study what the Vatican has ratified. Don't go to the jungle, they're not qualified, neither are they kosher.

    2. An offbeat message from the jungle master:

      Tim August 27, 2015 at 2:24 PM
      Stop talking and get off your ass and do it then. Can't wait to depose Apuron.

      What a fool! He wants to "depose" Apuron?! Who this guy thinks he is??

  2. For true Catholic's? Who is speaking on behalf of true Catholics?

    from this unbalanced positioned? Step out of the shadows and show us the bases of your wisdom

    You speak of many things but don't assume you speak for all true Catholics while hiding behind your anonymity.

    Diana quotes CCC 991; CCC 1167; CCC 1382.

    you quote your personal opinions; your interpretations and clearly show your true motivations; just another attack on the NCW.

    Move on with your journey towards your own salvation my friend. Attacking the NCW is not on the road to heaven....unless of course you are following a different course.

    1. Fine. (ende of part the first)

      The Mass as the perpetuation of the sacrifice at Calvary:

      1323 "At the Last Supper, on the night he was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic sacrifice of his Body and Blood. This he did in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until he should come again, and so to entrust to his beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of his death and resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a Paschal banquet 'in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.'"

      1330 .......The Holy Sacrifice, because it makes present the one sacrifice of Christ the Savior and includes the Church's offering. The terms holy sacrifice of the Mass, "sacrifice of praise," spiritual sacrifice, pure and holy sacrifice are also used,150 since it completes and surpasses all the sacrifices of the Old Covenant.

      The 22nd session of the Council of Trent:
      "Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, when he was about to offer himself once on the altar of the Cross to God the Father, making intercession by means of his death, so that he might gain there an eternal redemption, since his priesthood was not to be extinguished by death, at the last Supper, ‘on the night that he was handed over’, left to his beloved Spouse the Church a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, by which the bloody sacrifice achieved once upon the Cross might be represented and its memory endure until the end of the age, and its saving power be applied to the remission of those sins which are daily committed by us."

      Pope Leo XIII:

      "There is one thing amongst all others, the loss of which is more deplorable than words can express; We allude to the most holy Sacrifice in which Jesus Christ, both Priest and Victim, daily offers Himself to His Father, through the ministry of His priests on earth. By virtue of this Sacrifice the infinite merits of Christ, gained by His Precious Blood shed once upon the Cross for the salvation of men, are applied to our souls."

      Pope Pius XII:

      "The divine wisdom has devised a way in which our Redeemer’s sacrifice is marvellously shown forth by external signs symbolic of death. By the transubstantiation of bread unto the body of Christ and of wine unto his blood both his body and blood are rendered really present; but the Eucharistic species under which he is present symbolise the violent separation of his body and blood, and so a commemorative showing forth of the death which took place in reality on Calvary is repeated in each Mass, because by distinct representations, Christ Jesus is signified and shown forth in the state of victim."

      (ende of part the first)

    2. The Redemption by the Passion and Death of Our Lord:

      517 Christ's whole life is a mystery of redemption. Redemption comes to us above all through the blood of his cross

      613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the definitive redemption of men, through "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".440

      622 The redemption won by Christ consists in this, that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mt 20:28), that is, he "loved [his own] to the end" (Jn 13:1), so that they might be "ransomed from the futile ways inherited from [their] fathers" (I Pt 1:18).

      623 By his loving obedience to the Father, "unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil 2:8), Jesus fulfills the atoning mission (cf. Is 53:10) of the suffering Servant, who will "make many righteous; and he shall bear their iniquities" (Is 53:11; cf. Rom 5:19).
      The Resurrection
      658 Christ, "the first-born from the dead" (Col 1:18), is the principle of our own resurrection, even now by the justification of our souls (cf. Rom 6:4), and one day by the new life he will impart to our bodies (cf.: Rom 8:11).
      The Church teaches that by the Passion and Death of Christ our sins are remitted and we are reconciled with God. Through his resurrection, we are made adoptive sons and daughters and given the path to a new life. The resurrection is the “principle of our own resurrection” that gives the Christian hope. And this is good, of course, to remember. By all means, be happy about the hope you have in the resurrection, and thank God for it - but don't confuse this with what occurs in the Mass.
      I think that is about enough.

      But it should be said that the Church considers the "Sacrifice" of Jesus to be slightly different to the "Death" of Jesus. That is, in the Mass Jesus' Sacrifice is made anew, through the mystical immolation (the separating of the Body and Blood) but Jesus does not "die" again.

      And while the consecration re-presents this sacrifice, the same as made on the Cross, the Mass does not sacramentally make present the resurrection in the same way.

      (ende of part the second)

    3. Dear Anonymous at 12:10 pm,

      I stated that the Mass is both a sacrifice and a banquet, and I cited CCC 1382 to support what I say. And here you are citing the Catechism that the Mass is a sacrifice. Can you show me any Catechism saying that the Mass is ONLY a sacrifice, which is what you believe? You do not need to cite these catechisms telling me that the Mass is a sacrifice because I believe it is BOTH a sacrifice and a banquet. But show me where in the Church teaching does it show that the Mass is ONLY a sacrifice and NOT a banquet as you claim.

  3. Diana, are you not too selective in picking CCC paragraphs to justify yourself? Why do you ignore those teachings that tell you about the saving power of Jesus?

    1. Jesus came to expiate and take away our sins by His death.

    CCC 457: The Word became flesh for us in order to save us by reconciling us with God, who "loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins ": "the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world", and "he was revealed to take away sins".

    2. St. Paul teaches that Jesus died for our sins. Jesus is the Servant of God as He himself explained it!

    CCC 601: The Scriptures had foretold this divine plan of salvation through the putting to death of "the righteous one, my Servant" as a mystery of universal redemption, that is, as the ransom that would free men from the slavery of sin. Citing a confession of faith that he himself had "received", St. Paul professes that "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures." In particular Jesus' redemptive death fulfills Isaiah's prophecy of the suffering Servant. Indeed Jesus himself explained the meaning of his life and death in the light of God's suffering Servant. After his Resurrection he gave this interpretation of the Scriptures to the disciples at Emmaus, and then to the apostles.

    3. St. Peter, our first Pope appointed by Christ, declares clearly that our salvation and our escape from the power of death is originating from the precious blood of the Lamb.

    CCC 602: Consequently, St. Peter can formulate the apostolic faith in the divine plan of salvation in this way: " You were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers. . . with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was destined before the foundation of the world but was made manifest at the end of the times for your sake." Man's sins, following on original sin, are punishable by death. By sending his own Son in the form of a slave, in the form of a fallen humanity, on account of sin, God "made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."

    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:50 pm,

      See my response below at 11:29 pm.

  4. 4. Justification is only possible through the blood that has become the instrument of atonement for the sins.

    CCC 1992: Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:

    But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.

    5. The grace of Christ is flowing freely from the death of Christ as a gratuitous gift through the Holy Spirit.

    CCC 1999: The grace of Christ is the gratuitous gift that God makes to us of his own life, infused by the Holy Spirit into our soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it. It is the sanctifying or deifying grace received in Baptism. It is in us the source of the work of sanctification:

    Therefore if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself.

    Without the precious blood of Jesus there is no salvation. He had accomplished everything He came for, by His freely accepted suffering and death on the cross. Does this all make sense to you, dear Diana?

    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:51 pm,

      You stated: "Justification is only possible through the blood that has become the instrument of atonement for the sins."

      I you believe that justification is ONLY possible through the Blood of Christ. ONLY.....another ONLY?? So, you also emphasize our Lord's death to the point that His resurrection is not necessary? According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (capitalization is mine):

      CCC 519 All Christ's riches "are for every individual and are everybody's property." Christ did not live his life for himself but for us, from his Incarnation "for us men and for our salvation" TO HIS DEATH "FOR OUR SINS" AND RESURRECTION "FOR OUR JUSTIFICATION." He is still "our advocate with the Father", who "always lives to make intercession" for us. He remains ever "in the presence of God on our behalf, bringing before him all that he lived and suffered for us."

      Nowhere in the Catechism you have cited has it said that Justification is ONLY possible through His Blood. As I have been saying, salvation came through the death AND resurrection of Christ. What part of "AND" do you not comprehend? Who taught you that we should emphasize ONLY the death of Christ? That is not what the Catholic Church teaches.

    2. Dear Diana, CCC 1992 tells us that justification has been merited by the Passion of Christ. How would you explain this sentence? I would say justification and salvation is based on what had merited these things for is. If the passion merited these things for us, then we would not have them without this merit which is the passion: without crucifixion, without shedding His blood, without His dying for us we would have nothing!

      If we would not have salvation and justification without the passion, then the only way to obtain these things is through the passion. The blood of the Lamb is sufficient, because it provides atonement, redemption and expiation for sin. Our life in Christ was made possible once and for all by His death on the cross. Does this make sense to you, dear Diana?

      So you are right, we should not emphasize the death of Christ only, we also have to emphasize resurrection. However, it is not for justification and salvation, but for the hope that we as weak and frail human beings need every minutes of our earthly life.

    3. And the point is that the Mass is the re-presentation of the sacrifice of Christ. He is truly sacrifices on the altar at the Mass. Although we should be happy for the hope the resurrection gives us, we should not confuse this with what happens during the Mass

      The NCW do confuse this though. For the NCW the Mass is primarily a celebration of the resurrection and not the true sacrifice on the altar.

    4. I'm sorry but what you just stated shows your ignorance, in the ncw we NEVER believe that there is resurrection without passing first through the cross, And this applies also to our conception of the Eucharist which the Passover, passover!!! May be you are the one who confuse things because of what good is the death of Christ is he is not victorious over death and RISEN from death, why do you think EASTER is the most solemn feast we Catholics have?

    5. Dear Anon at 4.26 please show us where in the NCW Catechesis, the Mass of the NCW is described as the true sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the re-presentation of Calvary. If you can't I will stand by my previous comment.

    6. Dear Anonymous at 6:28 pm,

      Members of the NCW including myself have been telling you that we beleive that the Mass is BOTH a sacrifice and a banquet because that is what is taught to us in the NCW. This teaching is consistent with what is stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

      What baffles my mind is that some people who are not in the NCW believe that the Mass is ONLY a sacrifice and NOT a banquet. Some of these people also emphasize the death of Christ to the point that they are now saying that Jesus did not need to rise from the dead. I do not know where they were taught this, but it certainly did not come from the Catholic Church.

  5. There is no error, dear Diana. You said: "The Catholic Church teaches that the Holy Bible is the inerrant word of God. Those books were canonized by the Church because the Church believed that those books were God-breathed. "

    Biblical inerrancy means something different, not what you say. The 2nd Vatican Council claims: "Since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words." (Dei Verbum)

    There are 3 things here to emphasize:
    1. the words of the Bible came through men in human fashion;
    2. have to see what meaning the sacred writers really intended;
    3. need to discern what God wanted to manifest.

    "Therefore, when St. Paul said that if there is no resurrection, then his preaching is useless (see 1 Co. 15:12-19), it is the truth. "

    What St. Paul really intended to say is that we should believe in the resurrection. He wrote in human fashion, not expressing himself in exact terms. There is absolutely no reason to believe that his preaching about the power of salvation would be invalidated by any circumstances, even in the lack of resurrection.

    St. Paul has never intended to be canonized as "Scripture". In his time there was not Scripture at all apart from the old. All he intended by his letters was to keep contact with his converts in various churches around the region he had visited earlier. God wanted to manifest His love and the true Catholic teaching through the letters of St. Paul. That is why the emphasis in St. Paul's letter is on the saving power coming from the death of Jesus.

    "Everyone can die, but only Christ can resurrect from the dead." Are you serious, Diana? How about our faith? We believe Jesus will raise us on the last day. Jesus tells us: "This is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day." (John 6:39)

    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:56 pm,

      Are you saying that you agree with Anonymous 6:40 pm who says that the resurrection does not bring salvation??? Do you not know that the Catechism of the Catholic Church says that His death AND resurrection brought salvation to mankind?

      Everyone can die, but only Christ can resurrect from the dead because He is the life and the resurrection. Man is not the life and resurrection. Are you saying that you disagree with my statement when I said that everyone can die but only Christ resurrect from the dead?

    2. Diana, do you mean Jesus resurrected himself? That would be a strange idea!

      Luke 23: 43-44 says: “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” He replied, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

      Jesus said that on Good Friday before He died on the cross. He was already in heaven with His Father, if it is true what He says, the same day! Even the repenting criminal was there with Him, as He promised. You see dear Diana, in order to be with the Father, Jesus did not need His resurrection on Easter Sunday! He had already completed the job of salvation though His blood. His soul had never died, it was with the Father. It is us who need bodily resurrection so that we may believe in Him. God was merciful to raise Jesus from the death so He would be the hope and the light of the believer.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 11:15 am,

      Jesus did not say that He was already in Heaven on Good Friday. You misinterpret the sentence. The original Greek version did not have any commas. So, Jesus said, "Truly, I tell you today....." In other words He is saying, I am telling you NOW....."

      You asked: "Do you mean Jesus resurrected himself? That would be a strange idea!"

      Why do you find that strange? Did you not recall Jesus words? He told his accusers that if they destroy this temple, in 3 days He will raise it up." Christ was referring to His Body. He said that in 3 days, He will raise it up. God is the only one who can raise the dead because He is God. Do you believe that Jesus is God or not? Which one is it? Do you believe that Jesus is the life and the resurrection just as He stated?

      You stated that Jesus did not need His resurrection on Easter Sunday. The Catholic Church teaches that the soul of Christ descended into the land of the dead. It is in the Nicene Creed, which is said at every Mass. Who taught you that the resurrection is not needed? I already quoted the Catechism that the resurrection of Christ is essential to the Christian faith. By saying that His resurrection is not needed is only going against what the Catechism teaches.

    4. These statements are so juvenile;

      There are 3 things here to emphasize:
      1. the words of the Bible came through men in human fashion;
      2. have to see what meaning the sacred writers really intended;
      3. need to discern what God wanted to manifest.

      1. Nothing human about the divine Word of God
      2. only the Holy Spirit will allow you this grace
      3. we need to live what God wants to manifest.

      this writer may or may not be Catholic but he or she is not Christian

    5. Oh, come one... Do you call the official Vatican church document Dei Verbum juvenile? It is surprising, considering NCW is said to follow in the direction set by Vatican 2! Is this not true? So then is it just another legend NCW spreads about itself?

    6. Diana, please, show me a Bible translation that supports yours. I have checked 25 different translations, English and other languages and could not find any. All say "Today you will be with me in Paradise!" Could you please help me out? Thanks.

    7. Dear Anonymous at 7:32 pm,

      Jesus' soul is one with His Body. The soul separates from the body after death. A body without a soul is a dead body. Christ was still alive speaking to the good thief on the cross when he said those words. After He died, His soul went to the depths of the underworld, which is sometimes referred to as Hell. It is in the Nicene Creed.

    8. So.....AnonymousAugust 22, 2015 at 7:30 PM

      Oh, come one... Do you call the official Vatican church document Dei Verbum juvenile?

      do you go to church with this document? Dei Verbum?

      Before there were churches in the villages; before the bible and before priest...there was the WORD OF GOD.

      Must be hell to bring all those documents with you on Sunday.

    9. Come on, please, what are you talking about? We do not go to church with the Dei Verbum in our hands. But we use it as instruction how to understand what is written in the Scriptures. Please retract!

      You stated about the authors of one of the most important Vatican 2 documents that the author "may or may not be Catholic but he or she is not Christian". The authors of all Vatican 2 documents were more than 2000 cardinals and bishops from all over the world who convened for the Vatican synod.

      Are you truly calling these cardinals and bishops not Catholics and not Christians??

    10. Diana, I see what you try to say. But Jesus preexisted before the creation. He did not have an earthly body but He was with God and He was God, a pure spiritual being. Jesus got His earthly body from the Virgin Mary when He became incarnated and dwelt among us.

      Matthew 27:51-52 states about Jesus death: 'At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life." When Jesus descended into hell, or to the pit which is the place of the dead, like a lightening bolt, He instantly freed by His presence those in bondage. The power of death was broken in one single moment. This is in the Nicene Creed and the evidence was recorded by Matthew.

      Luke 23:43-44 confirms that the soul of Jesus went up to His Father immediately after His act of liberation from death and the soul of the good thief was also with Him. It all happened on the same day, during the night of Good Friday.

      I am still eagerly waiting for your reference to any single Gospel translation that supports your version of Luke, as you stated "Jesus said, "Truly, I tell you today....." In other words He is saying, I am telling you NOW....."" It is not feasible to assume that Jesus wanted to talk about the day when they were hanging on the cross. Why would he do that? Rather, we read in all existing Bible translations: Jesus emphasized to the good thief that he will be saved on the same day.

      Don't you agree? So, please, show me the Bible translation that supports yours. Thanks.

    11. you started by quoting Dei Verbum and made the assumption that the NCW is not following

      You now make the assumption that I was calling 2000 cardinals and bishops not Catholics and not Christians.

      lets make a few corrections;

      I called your statements.

      There are 3 things here to emphasize:
      1. the words of the Bible came through men in human fashion;
      2. have to see what meaning the sacred writers really intended;
      3. need to discern what God wanted to manifest.

      JUVENILE.....yes I did. Stay on subject.

    12. I am afraid Anonymous August 24, 2015 at 4:29 PM that you are engaged in a dialogue with a person who cannot stay on subject.

      if we were to ask a simple question you believe in God? 99.9999 will say yes.

      and if we were to ask.....if you were to read the Sermon of the Mount and ask yourself, how well you stand before God....we would expect 99.9999 to I cannot say that I really conform with what God expects of me.

      But this is Guam......we all believe in God but rather than confirm our weakness in saying that I do not really know God, I defend myself. The sin of pride. I have a listing of excuses ready to defend my pride. I cannot stay on subject because to do so would show the hypocrisy of my faith.

    13. The subject is that you call the official Vatican document titled Dei Verbum juvenile and its author not Christian. Based on what? You ridicule it saying that it must be hell to bring this documents to the mass on Sunday. What are you trying to say?

      Dei Verbum, translated as the Word of God, is not for bringing it to mass. You have the missalette for that. Dei Verbum is a fundamental guideline for Catholic believers to understand the Word of God. It is a most important outcome of the 2nd Vatican council. Please, explain what do you mean that that the Bible did not come to us in human fashion as Dei Verbum states.

      Human authors, sinful men, among them king David and the prophet Isaiah wrote the Bible. King David had adulterous relation with Bathsheba, he was a great sinner, still he wrote wonderful psalms for the Old testament. The prophet Isaiah says:"Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." (Isa 6:5) Isaiah was a sinner of unclean lips. Still he is the greatest prophet ever lived on earth and the Bible is full of his prophesies for God Almighty.

      There is nothing juvenile in the Bible written by men who were chosen by God to accomplish this wonderful task for the benefit of all believers, my friend.

    14. please read Anonymous August 24, 2015 at 4:29 PM

      you started by quoting Dei Verbum and made the assumption that the NCW is not following

    15. Where did I make that assumption? I asked some questions that you have never responded to. Is this your way to make arguments? ... ;(

    16. Is this your way to make arguments? ... ;(

      a rule, a this the basis of your juvenile faith? is this it?

    17. Thank you, dear Anonymous at 6:35 PM, you are a true gentleman. About my faith, well, it could be juvenile, or even toddler or infant... but why is this your business? As long as my Lord allows my faith to grow I will be happy to follow Him! Do you think everybody has juvenile faith outside of your faith group? Why do you think so? Is this not arrogant to talk about people, as you do, who view their Catholic faith in a different light from yours? Please, try to follow the consecutive sentences when you respond.

      You say you live out your faith in real life. That is awesome. But what does it mean? Are praying the Rosary daily and wearing the scapular? Are you attending the Blessed Sacrament exposed? Do you devote yourself to one of the saints of the Catholic Church? Are you attending the daily mass? Do you support your parish and diocese by time, talent and treasure? What is your talent? How do you live out your faith?

      You may have been offended by what was stated about the Bible in Dei Verbum. Well, all Scripture was written by sinful men. Its words should not be idolized. St. Paul, for one, had never idolized his letters. He wrote them to teach, instruct and give guidelines to the converted. Some other letter with anonymous author, the one to the Hebrews, contradicts in many regards the teachings of St. Paul. You have to come to terms of this fact in order to resolve the contradiction.

      When the different books of the Bible were canonized, the question the synod had to answer was this: Was this writing inspired by God or not? Many writings fell out, you find some of them in the Apocrypha. If a writing is inspired it still does not mean its words should be idolized. It means, you have to read very carefully to see what message was inspired in that writing by God. It is called hermeneutics.

      You may check for yourself if you don't believe me:

      Do not take offense at the messenger if, for whatever reason, you don't like the message.

    18. Anonymous August 26, 2015 at 11:53 AM

      I am not a gentlemen when it comes to the matter of faith. You will not find faith in jungle watch and certainly not in Diana's blog. I believe that if we are truly searching and praying for faith, that God somehow answers only to the person asking. I is not through our intellect but rather through the sincerity of a continuous dialogue with God that he...and only he can give us the grace..the gift of faith.

      I need to apologize if for my comment about juvenile faith. Saint Paul did not write to teach or instruct or provide guidance to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, Colossains, Ephesians...etc. It was not the word of Saint Paul that he proclaimed but the Word of God.

      Before the Bible, before Dei Verbum, there was the Word of God.

      And the manner of how he speaks to you is nothing I can explain. May the love of Jesus Christ be with you always Anonymous.

  6. Aug 23, 2015: After the archbishops letter on the marriage equality act, the jungle people are now attacking the archbishop for standing up against same sex unions. They are attacking the Archbishop for his stand against the gay lobby.

    It's obvious that rohr and ccog are really anti church since they are in favor of gay marriages, gay priests, the are in favor of disobedient priests, they are against any seminary, they are against obedience to the pope, and I'm sure the list can go on and on. Who's next, the Blessed Mother, the saints, or perhaps some of the sacraments??? These people are virtual "Protestants". And I put that in quotes because I personally know many Protestants who are more respectful of the true church than Rohr the so called ccog. They should be labelled the Concerned Heretics of Guam, the "chogs".


  7. Diana, eternal life is today when we live in the presence of God. I am already living in the eternal life with God today at this very moment drinking my coffee having breakfast. This is eternal life because I am with God. I already live in paradise because I am with God. So when I die I simple move house to a new in a new place. I may not be in my usual hangout places but those who lived in paradise will one day visit me. You must understand eternal life is today. I already live in heaven for I live every fraction of a second with God. Eternal life is today if we live with God.

    1. Dear Anon 10:32 am - St. Paul says that when we die we shall all appear before he judgement seat of Christ to be judged by what we did in the body whether good or evil. It is true that we can experience eternal life today by our communion with the body and blood of Christ. So, eternal life is both subjective because we live it today and it's objective because we shall be judged by what we did in our earthly life. For this reason St. Paul also says 'I work out my salvation trembling …" Peace!

  8. Biba archbishop anthony apuron happy belated anniversary archbishop anthony we love you