Also, I would highly recommend Catherine Palmer’s (person who responded above) pro-life blog: http://vitaproomni.blogspot.com/

Thank you for the clarification! We are on the same page.

Jason

However, I will say that I think that it is important to make sure that our gospel is God-centered and not man-centered. I would say that many historical presentations of the gospel are far too focused on man and make it really all about him. In the final analysis, the chief end is the glory of God. However, we can take great joy in the fact that the glory of God is most fully displayed in his grace towards us. So, happily, the two are inseparable.

Even passages RC’s reference in support of their view of the Eucharist proclaim this in unmistakable terms. In John 6 Jesus declares that those who eat his flesh and drink his blood will infallibly be raised to enjoy everlasting life (6:50-54 etc.). The entire passage is shot through with the language of necessity.

Nevertheless, the RC Mass is does not relieve those who come of the full penalty of sin. It does not guarantee them eternal life. It must be repeated endlessly and to only limited effect.

The reseason for this discrepancy is that John 6 is not speaking primarily of the Eucharist. (Though as a secondary, derivative referent it is possible and even likely insofar as the Supper pictures the gospel).

Rather a careful reading shows that Jesus is speaking of coming in true faith to the supreme sacrifice that is his death. Eating and drinking are manifestly metaphors for belief. He mixes the literal (belief) and figurative (eating/drinking) throughout so that we may discern the meaning of the vivid language – “He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never go thirsty” and so forth.

As Jesus said at the end of the discourse, “the words I have spoken are spirit and they are life.” His listeners made the fatal error of reducing what he said to something carnal and finite. We must not do the same. IYet, I submit for your consideration that this is precisely what the Roman doctrine does.

I also appreciate Ratzinger’s comparison of the gospel and the pseudo-gospels of men (i.e. all of the abortive attempts to bring about utopia on earth and created a new kind of man). One of the great ironies of history is that this dream of all men has to be given to us and cannot be built through our own social / political engineering. We’ve seen all too clearly how the experiments of men end. And yet we can’t seem to learn from our mistakes.

Sorry for not getting back to you for a while. I loved reading your response/answer. At times, it really sounded like poetry even! You wrote very beautifully. Thank you for your time in answering the question.

I am finding myself with less and less time to put forward a response. I hope that this summer I can be a little more involved with the discussion.

There is a quote by Joseph Ratzinger, I do not have it with me at the time, and he defines faith as such: a fundamental orientation of our being. Belief is a way of life. It is a trust that, though eschatological, transcends and transforms the present. (Note: I am not writing this as a disagreement to what you said, just wanted to share it.) I would love to type it up a bit more in full. Perhaps later I will try to leave a comment as such if the time proves right.

Thank you also for the quote by one of your favorite theologians.

I’m sorry I cannot write more and/or adequately respond. I do promise that in the future I will be more efficient with responses and so better contribute to the conversation!

Pax et gaudium tecum!

I hate to break this to you, but you are NOT Torah observant, because you do not have access to the sacerdotal and sacrificial system instituted by Moses. Most of the Torah cannot be fulfilled by you because the Temple was destroyed in accordance with God’s will and in fulfillment of Jesus Christ’s prophecy (Mt 24:34).

If the Torah is the most important set of religious instructions, why has God seen fit to abolish the Temple which is required for its obedience? If God wanted the Temple to stand, then it would stand i in Jerusalem. Instead, he has given us the Third Temple – the Holy Catholic Church – and the priesthood of Melchizedek – who was a priest greater than Aaron (who molded the golden calf and taught Israel to commit idolatry).

Thus, it is 100% impossible to be “Torah-observant” according to your interpretation. The Prophet Daniel prophesied this, as well.

Remember also that Moses, in Deuteronomy 18:15-18, said that another Prophet would come and that we should listen to Him. This is the true meaning of being “Torah observant.” We listen to the Messiah who is the Torah made flesh – the Wisdom of God in our midst.

Catholic Christians still claim to have the daily sacrifices and tabernacle of Moses. Moreover, in Isaiah 6619-22, it is prophesied that God will take Gentiles to be His priests and Levites. We have that, too!!!!

We actually do fulfill the Mosaic precepts as Catholic Christians – unlike “Rabbinical” Judaism and Protestantism.

Sincerely in JESUS Christ the Proverbial Wisdom of God and the High King and Priest of the Everlasting Covenant,

Taylor Marshall

PS: You’re purposefully misspelling of the Messiah’s name to evoke the name of a pagan god is highly offensive. I hope that you will avoid this grave sin in the future. Moreover, if you really want to avoid Anglicization – write in Hebrew characters…not ad hoc English.