I believe I have done so already in my missive to Daniel1212. He was saying that the powers attributed to Mary are un-scriptural, while I have proved that they are very much in keeping with the scriptures. No one has been able to refute Mary’s power after I wrote this. They cannot.
I guess I could ask you to prove where our traditions are not scriptural?
However, for the purposes of an FR response, I’ll try to explain how we DO keep the traditions as they were intended, while other churches (excepting the Orthodox) do not.
I am going to try to do this first through scripture, and then follow-up with a modern proof of what I am trying to say by way of illustration and hopefully, illumination.
I have read some of your stuff, CB, so it looks like your up-to-speed on Catholic explanations on many of its beliefs. I hope that I am correct in my assumption here, because I am not going to go through an exhaustive explanation of the Eucharist. If I am incorrect, forgive me.
The part I’m going to gloss over is the disagreement of what the Lord said at the Last Supper, wherein Catholics say that He said “This is My Body”, whereas Protestants disagree and posit that what He really said was “This represents My Body”.
I want to begin with 1 Corinthians 11:23 as context, but 11:27 is where I want to begin this brief focus—
“For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.
In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.
11:27
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep [have died].”
The tack I wish to take hear is that in what I have witnessed in Protestant (or evangelical, or Christian, or any description you prefer) is that yes, they are doing something that ‘represents’ what happened at the Last Supper. So, the bread that is passed around —Wonder Bread, King’s Hawaiian Bread, Matzo crackers, whatever, with grape juice, is merely that — bread and juice. Nothing more.
The thing is, NONE of this is going to make a believer sick, much less kill him. You might consume this worthily or unworthily, it does not matter. This scripture DOES NOT apply to what you consume in this type of service. As P’s hold, it is a mere representation, more akin to a stage play than an actual sacrifice. In fact, you could take this bread home with you and feed it to a pigeon, a duck, or your goldfish and it would neither disrespect the Lord nor cause you to be ill.
I think you know this already, and without thinking about this scripture, a brother could approach another in his Protestant church and say, “You’ve been committing adultery, if you eat that bread , you’re going to get sick and you may even die!”
Laughable, right?
Now, of course Catholics hold to the belief that it IS actually Christ’s body and blood, hold it in the greatest of reverence. I think you know this already. You know the belief, but you do not, of course, hold it to be true.
So here I come to my ‘modern-day’ proof of the validity of the Catholic claim, and it comes from a most unlikely source.
The devil is the enemy of God and man, and he is a liar and a blasphemer. Now I don’t know how long it’s been around, but the Satanic Bible sets itself up as a blasphemy of the true Word of God. I have never read it and never intend to, but it does exist to serve as text for evil.
You have perhaps also heard of Satanic rites wherein animal and human sacrifice occur. This is done in order to obtain demonic power which Satanists can wield here on earth. Particularly in the case of child or infant sacrifice, the most innocent of creatures are slaughtered in bloody rights.
These people know how to obtain power through demons. And the greatest of their rites is ... The Satanic Mass.
Perhaps you recall hearing about a Satanic Mass that was conducted in Oklahoma City last summer. Now again bear in mind that Satanism attacks what God treasures most, his Bible and the innocence of children.
But what is the most powerful thing that Satanists seek to attack and which is indispensable to a Satanic Mass?
A Eucharistic host. It is the most direct way that they can attack God, because they, the servants of the enemy, better than many Christians, KNOW THAT THIS THE ACTUAL BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST.
They enter a Catholic Church and steal away hosts that they will later desecrate. Now a reminder here, they will not even bother with your crumbs. That stuff is nothing but a joke to them.
My point is, if you can dither about trying to explain what is exactly meant about getting sick or even dying eating the body and blood of the Lord, even though you don’t believe it is that, what then, causes the sickness?
So both by Holy Scripture and by the attacks made by the enemy, I hope to have shown you that the Catholic Church has truly held to the traditions of the Apostles, whereas other churches have strayed far from the truth.
The last thing I want to leave you with is this:
You may wish to think about the company you are keeping. Are you one of those who attack The Church, Mary, the Sacraments, Catholic traditions, the Pope, and all things Catholic?
So do the Satanists.
THINK ABOUT IT.
In keeping with translation: Rome found some disparate things in scripture and decided to make them REALLY impostant to it's members.
NONE of the 'in keeping' TITLES is actually FOUND in Scripture.
Just how does one 'refute' a negative?
Mary is DEAD: she HAS no powers at all.
You have chosen to fawn all over a made up creature; one that is NOT found it Scripture.
Hope all you want; but you've shown nothing.
No apostle ever PRAYED to Mary; no apostle ever had a STATUE of Mary, no apostle is recorded as being PRAYED to, no apostle is seen exclaiming "The body and blood of Jesus".
No, you didn't. You made claims unsubstantiated by the writings of the apostles. No where in scripture is "apostolic succession" taught. It's and ASSUMPTION the Catholic Church used to force control over the people. Judas was replaced to complete the 12 apostles. There is no evidence in scripture that any of the apostles appointed successors.
You use 2 Thessolonians 2:15 to try to prove "tradition" as valid. Yet you cannot prove that what the Catholic Church teaches as "tradition" is what the apostles taught that they called "tradition".
>>No one has been able to refute Mary’s power after I wrote this. They cannot.<<
Who do you think your kidding? Your polemic on Mary was simply conjecture. No where in scripture is Mary given the power and position the Catholic Church has ascribed to her.
Catholic claim Jesus sinned and caused others to sin by eating blood. If Jesus and the apostles had actually eaten human flesh and drank blood they would have been sinning against the law. That would make Jesus ineligible to be the sinless sacrifice.That makes the Catholic concept of Jesus ineligible.
Paul wrote that anyone who teaches something they didn't should be considered accursed.
Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
Now, please show where the apostles preached or taught that assumption of Mary and it's belief to be a requirement like the Catholic Church does.