Posted on 04/04/2008 11:01:22 AM PDT by Gamecock
You are insulting and niave to think otherwise.
You didn't say Bible belt initially! You said
I would say the Catholic Church bears a cultural hostility to rural and small-town America. Now your changing the terms!
Then don't read my posts
And you feel the need to jump on many Catholic threads to point fingers? It is hard to read your posts, but I think I must, in order to stand up to them. I sometimes think I should direct my anger more at those who mistreated you, but out of your mistreatment, your cause has become a self-perpetuating jihad.
This Top 10 list just not all that funny. But it was still funnier than anything Alex Murphy ever posted.
It must really bother that more people are even now converting to Catholicism than to any other faith. Green-eyed monster alert.
It is like a case of which is first the chicken or the egg.
Many Protestants are insulted when SOME Catholics demonstrate an air of superiority and call Protestants heretics and repeat the false church hogwash and insinuate that Protestants are divisive and not saved because they do not follow sacraments to the letter.
I cannot speak for Catholics but I feel they get the same displeasure out of SOME Protestants criticizing the traditions and dogma of the Church and attempt to cast a veil of evil on the RCC and belittle their belief in the praying to Saints and what not.
Either way it seem to be a perpetual cycle that will not get broken. Seems to me that if I want to not participate in confession nor pray to Saints why does it matter to Catholics as long as I do not try and stop them from their traditions. Some of the RCC traditions I find interesting and possibly beneficial but in my personal past I was discouraged because I did not want to take the whole Church style of things and was made to feel I was less a Christian than a Catholic which I know for certain I am not.
I think most of the numbers out of China and the ME do not quote a specific affiliation only Chritianity so where are you getting these numbers?
Ad hoc mumbo jumbo. Ano domino hocus pocus, dominocus
I've wondered that myself. I don't think it's exactly clear, although when you hear phrases like "Breaking of the Bread" you can bet that Communion was involved.
I tend to doubt it. These early churches were all about learning about Christ and His promised return. I do think the act of communion was passed down and should be performed but not on a daily basis and surely not be denied to a person because they are not in your church.
Ah! You touch on an important point. There's this funny theory nowadays that says that the 1st generation of Christians was expecting Our Lord to come back in their lifetime...but they were sadly disappointed. Problem is, there really isn't any indication of said disappointment in the Christian literature of the time. But there may be a clue in the Emmaeus narrative of Luke...where the disciples recognized Him "in the breaking of the bread". It could well be that the early Church recognized that Christ *had* indeed come right away in a Eucharistic sense, which was to be crowned by a eschatological appearance in the future.
I'm glad you see that communion was passed down. As for it being offered on a daily basis, perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. But if it were only once a year back then and the Church only later expanded on that, I don't think it's any skin off anyone's nose.
As for who receives it or not....it was always denied to manifest heretics. That's always been the case. But you have to realize that there wasn't different denominations in the Apostolic Age. Basically, if you were in a community connected by an Apostle or a bishop that was appointed by an Apostle, you were able to receive. I'm sure, however, that the Gnostics and other unauthorized Christian sects were denied communion though. St. John, Eusebius tells us, wouldn't even stay in the same building with them.
Prolong your embarrassment, help yourself.
Satan is the father of all lies.
Truth is truth.
And you are lying.
A whiff of bigotry in bold there.
Did an Irishman steal your milk money?
Nope. :)
"...that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word." Eph. 5:26
I agree that 1st century believers felt the return was imminent ( as every generation has ) and I too have not seen any signs of disappointment in the writing of the time.
During the “breaking of bread” I wonder what liturgy was performed ( if any ) or if it was an informal gesture of friendship between believers.
“I don’t think it’s any skin off anyone’s nose.” I see no harm if you want to perform it once a day or once a year. It is kind if like the simple act of prayer, you can do it once to many times a day, the more you do the better you are able to relate to the Father, but I do not think it harms you if your are infrequent except in the sense of making you more open to straying from your Christian walk.
It would be great if both RCC and Protestant Churches would take a firmer stance on refusing communion in regards to public persons who openly act against Church beliefs but expect to be welcomed as a faithful sheep. As an example some politicians come to mind that are pro-life.
Be careful there. You mock the words of Our Lord.
Hoc est enim corpus meum "For this is My Body."
According to the Septuagint, the Peshitta, the Masoretic text? What are we using here?
;)
Don't have this argument with ZC on this thread, because you'll expose me as a pro-evolution defender of Zionist Conspirator's staunch plank of Biblical inerrancy and literalism. I'm not sure that's good for anyone LOL
Serious question: why?
Some of Chick's stuff is just recycled, comic-book Alexander Hislop (etc.). Hislop's nonsense is an established part of at least the fundamentalist apologetic against Catholicism. (And the JW's, WWCOGs, etc., would embrace it as well.)
However, Chick has torched his credibility considerably with things like the Alberto Rivera affair, so maybe I can understand excluding him.
But Dave Hunt? Aside from the fact that Dave Hunt is not a Calvinist, what has he said that isn't an expansion on or explanation of stuff that the Reformers and their successors said?
Well good. Then somehow what Christ said about eating His Body and Blood has to be true, and what he said about His words being Spirit and Life have to be true.
And I believe both are fulfilled quite well in the doctrine of the Eucharist, which is as old as Christianity itself.
There isn't much attestation from the first century, but there's plenty from the second. See Justin Martyr and Hyppolytus of Rome, etc.
For the Lord GOD helps Me
Therefore, I am not disgraced;
Therefore, I have set My face like flint,
And I know that I will not be ashamed.
- Isaiah 50:7For this reason I also suffer these things, but I am not ashamed; for I know whom I have believed and I am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to Him until that day.
- 2 Timothy 1:12
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.