Posted on 06/02/2013 11:49:33 AM PDT by NYer
Ping!
My Jesus isn’t a cracker.
The curse of the Reformation sprung tens of thousands of wild mushrooms around the great mustard tree. Many of them have withered and died. Others have no real doctrine to speak of of like the now defunct Episcopalian Church. Lutherans have now gay bishops fornicating with one another before the service. Still others are the hucksters like Rev. Jeremiah Wright; Rev. Jesse Jackson; Rev. Al Sharpton (well you get the picture) and then we have connivers like the Joel Osteens and Schullers of this world where religion become a “clappy-happy-foot-thumpin’ event with dollars pouring into their personal bank accounts. Add to this list, the Mormons, The Church of Scientology; Jehovah’s Witnesses and we have a “Christian Tower of Babel.”
Again this turbulent rage, there stands like the Rock of Gibraltar, the Church founded by Christ where His Real Presence: Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity is present in the Holy Eucharist. The focal point of every Catholic Church, and as Cardinal (Blessed) Henry Newman would say the perfect prayer, the Catholic Mass.
St. Thomas Aquinas, the great evangelical doctor calls the consecrated Host, the Bread of Angels: Pange Angelicus, and rightly so.
Neither is the Jesus that Catholics believe in. But the Eucharist found in Catholic Churches at the Holy Mass is, in fact, the Most Holy Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, really and truly present. We have it from Jesus' own lips in the Gospels, and from St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 11--not to mention 2000 years of unanimous Church teaching. That's good enough for me.
Hey, that monstrance looks just like the one Jesus used!
So Jesus ate Himself at The Last Supper. See how heresies sound really dumb when you really think about them?
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
LOL!!!!! And the RCC is as pure as the wind-driven snow.
Give thinking people a break!
Jesus also said he was a “vine,” a “door,” a “stone,” and a “lamb,” among many other things. Please elaborate.
Refresh my memory: which Scripture passage states that Jesus himself consumed the bread after he blessed it and gave it to his disciples?
Perhaps you should become more familiar with the Scriptures and Catholic teaching before you make such childishly embarrassing statements as if nobody in 2000 years ever thought about it before.
The curse of the Reformation . . . . Hmmmm.
///////////////////////////
Sola Scriptura.
Sola Deo Gloria.
Solo Christo.
Sola Gratia.
Sola Fide.
If this is a curse, then I thank God that this curse rescued me from the thrall of sin and, also, opened my eyes to a soteriology far superior to that of the Catholic faith in which I was reared.
By the way: Now a Protestant, I still have a fairly “high” view of the Eucharist, though I can no longer give assent to the Romanist view of Transubstantiation.
Also, let’s be honest, I actually agree with your characterization of the what you not-so-inaccurately term the “mushrooms” that sprang up around the base of the Reformation tree proper — from the Episcopalians to Osteen, et al.
Now, can you not be equally honest and admit publicly in this forum that a Roman Catholic priest or two here and there (or Pope, even!) during the past 1600 years has engaged in adultery, fornication, incest, and/or sodomy at one point or another — perhaps even in the hours immediately preceding the celebrating of the “sacrifice” of the Mass? Or, engaged in the sale of indulgences? Or, temporized with evil in the form of Adolph Hitler? Or, .... the list goes on. In sum, Rock of Gibraltar, Schmock of Gibraltar!
Finally, I greatly admire Aquinas, but his “Pange Angelicus” though very eloquent, seems a bit over the top. My suspicion is that the angels are not permitted to partake of the Eucharist. (And, perhaps, brilliant as he was, he knew that, but was simply trying to make a point.)
Let's think about this. If the "Eucharist" (the cracker) in the Catholic mass is the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ, it must have all the properties of Jesus Christ, who is God. It must have ALWAYS been Jesus Christ, not just after a priest says the magic words over it, as the RCC teaches. And it must NEVER CEASE to be Jesus Christ after we eat it, and even as it passes through our digestive systems and out of our alimentary canal. God is the same yesterday, today, and forevermore.
That the priest can somehow "produce God" where God wasn't at some prior period is absurd. This is nowhere taught in Scripture.
Fundamentalist writers who comment on John 6 also assert that one can show Christ was speaking only metaphorically by comparing verses like John 10:9 ("I am the door") and John 15:1 ("I am the true vine"). The problem is that there is not a connection to John 6:35, "I am the bread of life." "I am the door" and "I am the vine" make sense as metaphors because Christ is like a door—we go to heaven through him—and he is also like a vine—we get our spiritual sap through him. But Christ takes John 6:35 far beyond symbolism by saying, "For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed" (John 6:55).
He continues: "As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me" (John 6:57). The Greek word used for "eats" (trogon) is very blunt and has the sense of "chewing" or "gnawing." This is not the language of metaphor.
I’m under no obligation to answer your question until you answer mine. Changing the subject is for people who have no answer or cannot admit they are wrong.
I'm not asking you to answer a question I haven't asked. I'm just putting the truth out there for you to accept or reject.
Correction: you are putting out your OPINION of what the truth is based on YOUR personal interpretation of the Bible for me to accept or reject. And I reject your personal opinion.
That was easy. Been nice chatting with you.
Perhaps a bad analogy on your part - The Tower of Babylon was built by those who were 'unified and universal', and who followed one man, with one language, to the point of rebellion against the Most High...
When the tower fell, the language was confused and distributed to keep them from rebellion and doing evil. Are you suggesting that the evil is in that distribution, or that the evil tower should not have been destroyed?
Well, the OPINIONS of the Roman Catholic Church change all the time, a characteristic of OPINIONS.
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.