Posted on 08/06/2017 5:10:42 PM PDT by ebb tide
I have no obsession with anything except to point out you are wrong from a biblical, historical, and common sense stand point.
To say that Jesus said to perform the eucharist and then God gave the apostles the gilt of tongues on Pentecost is not related is absurd. Was Jesus speaking Latin or Greek at the last supper to the apostles who spoke a different language? Even the first Eucharist was not in latin. So they went to the various countries and said the mass in Greek and then latin and then spoke the local language (which you acknowledges last night) it’s laughable to even propose that. What purpose did God have to have them do bi-lingual preaching to monolingual people in various places? Didn’t God want the word spread to many lands and people? Are you still defending the Greek-Latin scenario? What your defending is without foundation.
You are obsessed with supporting the Latin mass, which i don’t midd. but to pretend or ignore biblical and historical fact to make your point is either grossly ignorant or total denial. And after three explanations i must move on.
Amazing!
I agree. I think that the real issue is what is happening at mass. Are we being led by the priest to reach toward God or are we having a meeting between the priest and the congregation. The former is the true orientation, the latter is the dangerous deviation
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.