Communion "Host" in Dallas Church Grew Fungi, Bacteria Naturally

Texas Catholic ^ | 3-24-06 | Marty Perry

[vox_freedom]

Ditto's/

[Bainbridge]

By definition, God is Sovereign. The details are in how he chooses to exercise this unique attribute.

[tenn2005]

"The bible is a Catholic book..."

Really? How can scriptures written 300 years before there was a Catholic church be considered a "Catholic book?" Is the Old Testament, completed another four houndred years before that also a "Catholic book." Just because you compiled a group of writings which were written over a period of approximately 1600 years, plus added seven other "catholic only accepted documents" does not give credence to your claim.

Sorry. The Bible was written by God, not the Catholic church. Besides, you place the writings of your "church fathers" equal to and sometimes above the Bible.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"A satanic mass can be valid if an apostate priest says the correct words of consecration, using the correct matter, but I wouldn't assist at one."

Can you explain this?

(...when you've gotten some sleep!)

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your reply and for sharing your views!

I agree. I think our minds are too limited to comprehend how our free choices nonetheless serve God's plan. If someone argued that it was all up to our choices, I would sound like a Calvinist in pointing out God's control.

That doesn't usually happen here, so it's usually me arguing the role of free will against the Calvinist's obsession with God's sovereignity. The answer is in neither extreme.

At the risk of sounding picky, I would call neither view extreme - but both Truth. IOW, I assert that both free will and predestination are to be received as unequivocal Truth simply because God has authenticated both.

[Gamecock]

I didn"t know that. Thanks for pointing those out.

I was referring to these:

Did you see my pictures from Rome?

[P-Marlowe]

Did you see my pictures from Rome?

Did you cross the Tiber?

[Gamecock]

***Did you cross the Tiber?***

Twice. First time to look around. I saw there was nothing there for me and turned around and crossed back headed towards Geneva.

Here are a couple of pics:

The Tiber was quite a muddy mess. Not like the Mosel or even the any number of other European rivers.

St Peter's was an absolutely phenomenal piece of architecture:

All in all we had a good time. Lady Gamecock and I even tossed coins in the Trevi Fountain in the hope that we would return one day.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"A satanic mass can be valid if an apostate priest says the correct words of consecration, using the correct matter, but I wouldn't assist at one."


Donatist ping...

[Kolokotronis]

Well, PM, I suppose it all comes down to what is meant by "satanic mass" and "apostate priest". I doubt that a "satanic mass" could ever be in proper form. As for Donatists, well "contending" with them is easy:

"By 'Contentions,' he means, with heretics, in which he would not have us labor to no purpose, where nothing is to be gained, for they end in nothing. For when a man is perverted and predetermined not to change his mind, whatever may happen, why shouldest thou labor in vain, sowing upon a rock, when thou shouldest spend thy honorable toil upon thy own people, in discoursing with them upon almsgiving and every other virtue?

How then does he elsewhere say, "If God peradventure will give them repentance" (2 Tim. ii.25); but here, "A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth, being condemned of himself"? In the former passage he speaks of the correction of those of whom he had hope, and who had simply made opposition. But when he is known and manifest to all, why dost thou contend in vain? why dost thou beat the air? What means, "being condemned of himself"? Because he cannot say that no one has told him, no one admonished him; since therefore after admonition he continues the same, he is self-condemned." +John Chrysostomos, Homily VI on Titus

[Conservative til I die]

Evidentially there is some secret, mysterious recipe that must be adhered to under all circumstances, as discussed here on FREE REPUBLIC.

Would you mind explaining how something openly discussed on FR is a mysterious secret?

Will you retract and apologize for spreading this falsehood?

[Conservative til I die]

If you didn't actually worship the wafer, I think it would be harmless to think that there is some mystical transformation, but when you get to treating the wafer as if it were God himself, then I think you have crossed the line into idolatry.

Oh no, a Protestant calling a Catholic an idolater. Your ilk have abused the term so much that really, does anyone even care when you call us that anymore?

Talk about the little boy crying wolf.

[Conservative til I die]

Boy this thread has really degenerated from the previously lofty intellectual discussions of the miracle of the moldy vomit, huh?

On that note, I'd like to thank you for providing such a great Christian witness for not only us Catholics, but other interested parties that might be lurking.

Since you and your obnoxious friends apparently lack the ability to feel shame or humility, I'll do you a favor and feel ashamed and humiliated for you.

Really, you're behavior's been embarassing.

[Gamecock]

Do you have the recipe? I don't share it with me, please.

[Conservative til I die]

Clue us in; are you an obnoxious, annoying ultra-Trad Catholic? Or just the garden variety obnoxious, annoying Protestant?

[Conservative til I die]

That is one of the most astounding posts I have ever read on an online forum. It is the logical extension of the blasphemy of this doctrine.

You could have saved us all time by just dispensing with the 20 Questions games and just making your obnoxious, irritating, loudmouthed point about the Eucharist. As if you didn't know you were going to say this all along.

[Conservative til I die]

I've noticed that when discussing religious issues with RC's it's like talking with a lawyer. I guess it's all going to come down to how we define "is". I appreciate you taking time to respond.

Because words really do mean things. If one says you are an idolater, that word has a very specific meaning. If one says you are a heretic, that also means something very specific.

Likewise, if one says we honor a saint or pray for their intercession, those words mean just that, and mean something very different from worshipping them.

If we Catholics seem to get touchy or "act like lawyers" it's because we want to make sure we're all talking about the same thing.

[Religion Moderator]

Diss their arguments all you want, but knock off the personal attacks!

[Conservative til I die]

JESUS was very straight forward when he discussed salvation.

If so, then why do we have so many differences of opinion on His teachings, whether Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox Christian?

But yes, you are correct that Jesus was pretty straightforward. That isn't the issue. The issue is that everyone of us (all 1 billion+ Christians living today) have to take in those teachings and come to a conclusion about them. And as we all know, humans can come to wildly different conclusions even about the most straightforward and simple ideas.

The SCRIPTURES are very straight forward in most matters.

Most matters yes. Not all matters. Which simply brings me back to my first point above.

It was only when human "tradition" became equal to SCRIPTURE that we had to become so "precise".

Again, see my first point. But I think a lot of the problems *today* regarding doctrine also have to do with the fact that you and I are looking at the Scriptures from a 21st Century, English-speaking, American frame of reference. This is very different than approaching the Scriptures from the original language and the original historical context. That's why we defer to the Church, because she has been there since the beginning, without a break.