[Fury]

When you guys learn to read scripture and understand that a cup of 'my blood' that is still wine isn't actually blood.. you might get somewhere.

When given a choice to believe and follow Scripture according to Havoc versus what Christ and the Apostles directed in Scripture, I'll choose the latter.

[dangus]

You know, as a Catholic, I instinctively debate this issue from the point of view. But one needn't believe in transubstantiation to make the case.

Suppose Christ tells me that I must eat pronouns and drink llama snot. Then he holds up snickerdoodle pies and says, "these are pronouns. Take and eat!" and he holds up motor oil and says, "This is llama snot. Take and drink."

You know what? I'm not gonna ask questions. I'm not going to debate WHY he called it llama snot. I'm not gonna ask how someone can eat a pronoun. I'm gonna do as he says.

So the doctors wondering why I drank motor oil and snickerdoodle pies (or how I survived it) might be perplexed. And Havoc might say I'm taking Jesus too literally. But here's the thing: Jesus called the Church his body. He commanded his disciples to be one, and to not have schism. He appointed them with the power to declare what is bound (law), and what is loosed (freedom). He gave them authority to declare what sins are held against us, and what is forgiven.

Havoc wants to say my doctrine make me like the Pharisees and the fallen disciples who departed from Christ. But who walked out on the Church which Christ founded? Who departed the Church which Christ called his own body?