What Is Better, Catholic or Protestant? Francis: “Both of Them Together”

Gloria TV ^ | Gloria TV

[ebb tide]

What Is Better, Catholic or Protestant? Francis: “Both of Them Together”

The Youth Pastoral Office of Magdeburg diocese, Germany, will organize an October 2020 “ecumenical pilgrimage” for young people to Rome.

The motto of the journey is “With Luther to the Pope”. A similar trip was already taken in 2016.

The pilgrimage is co-organized by the regional Protestant State church, although the Protestants repudiate pilgrimages.

On the trip's webpage Mit-Luther-zum-Papst.de, the tour operator, Hans Höffmann, remembers what Pope Francis said to the participants of the 2016 pilgrimage when asked by a youngster: "What is better, Catholic or Protestant? Francis answered in German: "Both of them together!”

Martin Luther attended school in Magdeburg as a boy. As a preacher, he led the city to defect from the Church. Magdeburg became the first major city to publish Luther’s writings.

[MHGinTN]

Don't take the Mark of The Beast when commanded to you, regardless of how deceptively it is presented. The Mother of Jesus, blessed be that woman, would not say something to detract even a mite from the Glory due ONLY to Jesus.

Your ability to deny the obvious speciousness of titling The Mother of Jesus exposes your vulnerability to the brilliant deceptions about to spew forth on the world following the sudden departure of ALL BELIEVERS making up the Bride of Christ, the Body of Christ since the fateful day of Pentecost.

Don't take the Mark when commanded to you, should you live through the death of 1/4 of humanity in that catastrophic start of the wrath of God upon the left behind earth dwellers.

[MHGinTN]

You asserted ‘nothing but the blood of Jesus’, but you failed to admit that you believe your hocus pocus priests feed the Blood of Jesus to you at your Catholic Mass. So you believe you can obtain Jesus via your belly. You believe it why not admit it, instead of playing word games aimed at deception?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Wait a minute. I have never in my life "failed to admit" that we Catholics receive the Blood of Christ at Mass. On the contrary, I state it clearly, and ---as Jesus does --- insist upon it: "My blood," said Jesus, "is real drink."

Thant is not, as you put it, a 'word game'. It's nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

[ebb tide]

At least your pope likes me; even if you and your brethren do not.

Ask me if I care. Jorge is a protestant:

But I don't hate him, I pray for his conversion every night, as do I pray for the conversion of all protestants.

[MHGinTN]

You so clever! But your cleverness will not and does not impress The Lord Christ. When GOD tells Israelites to not eat the blood and makes it a command through out ALL their generations, would that include the disciples attending the Last Passover Jesus commemorated? (I can almost hear the 'yes but' ratcheting around in the Catholic mind.)

[MHGinTN]

I do believe you do not hate the talking mule Francis. I have no doubt that you detest him and his appointment. He is an embarrassment to your religion just as Jimmy Swaggert and a sickening long list of charlatans infect Christianity. Jimmy Swaggert, Joel Osteen, Baker do more harm to Christianity than even a clever demon can do. And Francis is right up there in his harm to Christianity, even as he is not in a Christian religion, only a look-a-like, much like the Mormons.

[Mrs. Don-o]

We know that many of Jess' disciples turned away from Him and left Him,in John 6, when He said they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. "This is a hard saying, who can accept it?" Naurally -- with their natural-mindedness --- they would turn away. It is plainly unacceptable on natural terms. And more than, that, they were Jews and knew about blood being unkosher.

And what did Jesus do? He didn't run after them and shout, "Wait, stop! It's a metaphor, people! A met-a-phor!" No, he doubled down on the offensive theme, and He turned to His disciples and said, "Well? Do you want to go as well?"

But they stuck with him, though it seemed hard; and the early chekklesia continued: Paul tells the Corinthians this is the Flesh and Blood of Christ, repeating His words of consecration.

Everything written about the Eucharist by the early believers asserts that, as we know from Jesus' own words, we are dealing with the true Flesh and Blood of Christ; in fact, the whole and living Christ, just as He is at the right hand of the Father.

If you thouht we were eating bits of the dead slaughtered Christ, it would be just as awful as you think. BUt it's not. It not bit and pieces, it's the whole Christ. It's not a dead corpse, it's the Living One who will never die.

This is not the blood that renders one impure or defiled. It is exactly the opposite: the Blood that makes us clean. Jesus is not an unkosher slain animal. Jesus is God: Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, undivided, Living and True.

I hope, though unworthy,to model myself on the few who stayed, not the many who walked away.

[MHGinTN]

You make assumptions designed to support the heresy you so so much want to be fealty to earn eternal life. Your effort is of the father of lies who started the entire blasphemy of believing your hocus pocus priesthood can bring the real Jesus down from heaven and serve His flesh and Blood to you in a magic wafer. You eat this lie every time you partake in Catholic Mass, so you must support the blasphemy regardless of how you must twist the Scriptures to do it.

JEUSUS told His disciples that where two or more of them are gathered in His name, there is He in the midst of them. Your religion would have us swallow the great satanic lie that Jesus is there to feed you His flesh and Blood. Because you are so lost to Catholicism you cannot discern the blasphemy even as you reveal the seekers of signs turned away from Jesus because they did discern doing such a thing was blasphemous.

The disciples stayed with Him because He had THE WORDS OF LIFE, not the blood snack your heretical religion portrays. They even said they stayed because He had the WORDS OF LIFE. And when they replied that, do you know what Jesus had just told them, to clarify the spiritual saying to the seekers after signs unbelievers who could discern only on the carnal level like you? If you know it why don't you post it for us? ... It doesn't register with your dead soul, does it! Passage after passage JESUS said to you to believe and He will raise you up to eternal life. But that doesn't require a sacramental trail and fidelity to a blasphemous ritual which feeds not you spirit but your PRIDE!

John 6:It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
...
Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away? 68{69}And Simon Peter answered him: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.

PRIDE is at the heart of this fealty to the blasphemous ritual of Catholic Mass. It cannot occur to a dead soul that this eating of the Blood of Jesus would be a violation of a command GOD gave to last throughout ALL THE GENERATIONS, which includes the generation of the Apostles. GOD, THE GOD, is not double-minded as you would require to have GOD endorse a violation of HIS Cmmand and have that blasphemy become the central behavior of a mass of lost people.

Take you blasphemy to hell with you, if you refuse to hear what the Spirit says regarding this evil you support. It will not take much of a lie to get people of your ilk to take the Mark and 'enjoy' eternity with the father of lies, a murderer from the start.

[MHGinTN]

The Blood of Messiah was applied BY THE MESSIAH at the Mercy Seat in Heaven. It is not doled out for a pagan ritual which focuses upon the carnal flesh to feed the pride of the adherents.

Ask yourself: when your priests feed you this 'blood of Jesus', from which Jesus, the one hanging upon a cross, or the One Who is My High Priest in Heaven? Answer that woman.

[ealgeone]

We know that many of Jess' disciples turned away from Him and left Him,in John 6, when He said they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. "This is a hard saying, who can accept it?" Naurally -- with their natural-mindedness --- they would turn away. It is plainly unacceptable on natural terms. And more than, that, they were Jews and knew about blood being unkosher.

And the actual context of the passage indicates otherwise.

52Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57“As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58“This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”

59These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.

60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? 62“What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.

64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

66As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

[MHGinTN]

BTW, Paul said no such thing as you place in his mouth: “Paul tells the Corinthians this is the Flesh and Blood of Christ, repeating His words of consecration.”

[metmom]

Same as Trump supporters being *haters*>

It’s all rhetoric and accusations to discredit the messenger because they can’t deal with the message.

[metmom]

What you said was this, Bu you still get the extra deluxe feature of becoming a Catholic in the incipient sense, automatically, and having your baptism considered a sacrament, at no extra cost, smells and bells optional. It's kinda like getting married. You automatically acquire bunch of inlaws, cousins and kin as "family" whether you actually wanted them or not. It's a package deal.

and what I was referring to was not the *We're all family now* comment.

We are not all be default Catholics no matter how much Catholicism tries to claim it retroactively.

And my comment was not just about that one little thing, but the whole comment of yours.

So the innocent sounding comment of yours I don't understand you, metmom. It seems the friendliest thing in the world, to say and believe with all my heart that we are family. Brothers and Sisters in Christ, remember? does not come across as sincere because there was a whole lot more to your comment for you to figure what I meant.

I will accept your apology and you are forgiven, just so that's settled.

[Elsie]

It's nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

No; it's wine.

No amount of conjuring, wishful thinking, or any other earthly manipulation or heaven sent prayer is going to turn wine into blood.

[Elsie]

You are ‘protesting’ Jorge; so what does that make you?

[Elsie]

Naurally -- with their natural-mindedness --- they would turn away.

WOW!!

A lot of centuries have passed and you can STILL mind read the REASON that those folks left; naturally.

[Elsie]

BUt it's not. It not bit and pieces, it's the whole Christ.

that's a LOT to chew on!

It's no wonder we PROTs have a hard time choking this down!!

[Elsie]

...as we know from Jesus' own words,...

It appears you Catholics want to accept SOME of Jesus' words as literal; while dismissing others as optional: Call no man father.

[Elsie]

54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57“As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58“This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”

And yet; Jesus did NOT offer the disciples any little bits and pieces of flesh and flakes of blood that still were on His body when He appeared in their midst.

Don't worry; there's more where this came from.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

We know that many of Jess' disciples turned away from Him and left Him,in John 6, when He said they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. "This is a hard saying, who can accept it?" Naurally -- with their natural-mindedness --- they would turn away. It is plainly unacceptable on natural terms. And more than, that, they were Jews and knew about blood being unkosher.

...................

6:53–54 This is the fourth and last of Jesus’ strong prefaces in this discourse (cf. vv. 26, 32, 47).

It should be obvious to any readers of this discourse by now that Jesus was speaking metaphorically and not literally.

By referring to His flesh and blood He was figuratively referring to His whole person. This is a figure of speech called synecdoche in which one part stands for the whole.

Jesus was illustrating belief, what it means to appropriate Him by faith (v. 40).

He expressed the same truth negatively (v. 53) and then positively (v. 54a).

He referred again to resurrection because it is the inauguration of immortal eternal life (cf. vv. 39, 40, 44).

Jesus was again stressing His identity as the revealer of God with the title “Son of Man.” Blood in the Old Testament represented violent death primarily. Thus Jesus was hinting that He would die violently. He connected the importance of belief in Him with His atoning death.

The idea of eating blood was repulsive to the Jews (cf. Lev. 3:17; 17:10–14).

Jesus’ hearers should have understood that He was speaking metaphorically, but this reference offended many of them (vv. 60–61).

Many interpreters of these verses have seen allusions to the Lord’s Supper in what Jesus said. Sacramentalists among them find support here for their belief that participation in the eucharist is essential for salvation. However, Jesus had not yet said anything about the Christian communion service.

Moreover He was clearly speaking of belief metaphorically, not the communion elements.

Most important, the New Testament presents the Lord’s Supper as a commemoration of Jesus’ death, not a vehicle for obtaining eternal life.

Nevertheless these verses help us appreciate the symbolism of the eucharist.

“In short, John 6 does not directly speak of the eucharist; it does expose the true meaning of the Lord’s supper as clearly as any passage in Scripture.”261

Constable, T. (2003). Tom Constable’s Expository Notes on the Bible (Jn 6:53).