Posted on 07/13/2007 11:13:07 AM PDT by JZelle
Nothing stirs the blood like talking about religion. That's why it's taboo to talk about it in casual social conversations. Better to ask the boss's wife whether she ever considered a face-lift.
But Pope Benedict XVI is a man of firm conviction and blunt talk. Not for this pontiff the Vatican II tradition of warm and fuzzy, as the message of Vatican II, which put a friendly expression on the stern countenance of the church of Rome, has been widely interpreted in the circles of those addicted to warm and fuzzy. This week he authorized a statement of "clarification" of Vatican II, and to the consternation of some Roman Catholics here, the secular press interpreted the message to Protestants as no more Mr. Nice Guy.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
You believe that Jesus Christ founded and leads the Congregational Church? Because that's what you said.
“Because that’s what you said.”
No Johnny, that’s how you took it but that’s ok too. God bless you and have a nice day.
“Protestants simply wouldn’t have the lack of class and tact, the extreme arrogancy .... The Catholics by and large have no problem in this area.”
“I believe that Jesus loves all of his children. Not just the Catholic ones.”
Kudos for being the most prejudiced, Christian-hating poster on this thread. The Pope states Catholic doctrine and you personally attack Catholics and make snide comments about your brothers and sisters in Christ.
“Kudos for being the most prejudiced, Christian-hating poster on this thread. The Pope states Catholic doctrine and you personally attack Catholics and make snide comments about your brothers and sisters in Christ.”
Oh johnny, (sigh) I haven’t personally attacked anyone except for a couple of times pointing out some rather arrogant statements made on this thread.
If you feel personally slighted by me, I strongly suggest that we carry this no further because my dear soul, I have not even begun to ATTEMPT to insult you. Imagine the pitiful state that you might be left in were I to truly cut loose.
tsk, tsk.
I found it very informative. :)
Is there else in your repertoire you might recommend?
Roman Catholics believe that the bread and the wine turn into the body and blood of Christ - a full physical transformation.
Lutherans believe that the bread and wine change into the body and blood, but also retain the physical properties of bread and wine (in, with and under).
The Reformed view is that Christ is spiritually, but not physically, present in the elements.
And the remaining view is that the bread and grape juice is merely symbolic, and Christ is not present.
(And then, there are the liberals, for whom it has no real meaning any more, but that’s a different issue.)
So a Catholic would not believe that they were getting spiritual nourishment from the elements at a Baptist church, while a Baptist would not believe that he was eating the real body of Christ at the Catholic church.
There is no reason for either to take the elements at the church of the other. It wouldn’t be taken as intended. In many cases, the elements would be open to one who holds the adjacent belief, but to avoid causing offense, it is safer to take the elements only with those who share your beliefs.
On another level, you would not want to share the elements with one who holds false beliefs.
The denomination to which I belong fences the table - it is open only to “all those who profess the true religion, and are communicants in good standing in any evangelical church”
And finally, why would you take communion from someone whose ordination you don’t recognize (unless you are from a church with a symbolic view where anyone in the congregation can pass out grape juice and bread). Would it be a valid sacrament?
It is true.
Reading some of these aggrieved whining about Catholics makes me want to pound my head on my desk to drive out the memory of such petulant banalities.
The irony is rich, though, when non-Catholics attack the Pope for what they imagine is an attack on them.
Lutherans, and to some extent, Presbyterians would disagree with that. Lutherans believe in a form of a real, physical, presence; Reformed view is of a real, spiritual, presence.
Your 64 is well put. Of course, I’d come at it from the other side, but the core explanation is valid.
No actually, there are going to be some surprised Protestants that they are welcomed by us.
"It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church."[12]
From the actual document from the Vatican
I'm not sure "full physical transformation" is the best way of putting that, although pretty much any explanation of transubstantiation will confuse people, especially those who aren't familiar with Catholicism.
I won't disagree with you. I was trying to be as neutral as possible, while distinguishing among the 4 major views, particularly between the Catholic and Lutheran views.
“In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation”
That is truly interesting especially as I read in a post upthread that the Catholic Church views itself as the ONLY way to Salvation.
A Catholic who intentionally breaks communion with the Catholic Church is an apostate.
Someone who is raised in a church other than the Catholic is not therefore an apostate.
A non-Catholic Church is not an apostate organization - but Catholics who join it become apostates.
Well, the quote I posted is truly from the horse’s mouth.
Here is the link...
http://www.zenit.org/article-20090?l=english
Zenit give actual documents for the English speaking world.
From the article;
“The pope, the Associated Press said, “reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches ... AND CATHOLICISM PROVIDES THE ONLY TRUE PATH TO SALVATION.” Reuters reported that “the Vatican said Christian denominations outside Roman Catholicism were not full churches of Christ.”
Well, you can believe what AP writes,
you can believe what Reuters writes,
Or you can do the smart thing and go to the Vatican document and read what was actually writen by them.
http://www.zenit.org/article-20090?l=english
We’re not CBS, no need to fake documents.
>>A non-Catholic Church is not an apostate organization - but Catholics who join it become apostates<<
Yup.
Wheat versus rice is precisely a matter of "faith and submission". Unleavened wheat bread was what God commanded for the Passover. Jesus, in obedience to his own commandment, used wheat. Therefore we use wheat.
As you correctly said, "faith" and "submission".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.