J
johnz123
Guest
Thank you I’ll check it out
- Status
T
TC3033
Guest
We do!?..
Emeraldlady
New member
That is the advice that I think would most benefit anti Catholics. I believe that a common theme with all of them is an inability to behold history in context. They are thoroughly anachronistic, looking only at history through their own individual interpretations. I would say that is one of the deficiencies that sola scriptura has created in them. This high esteem of their own personal interpretation and loss of appreciation for ‘the fathers’ in history and science and theology whose worldview is critical to a wholeness of understanding.
G
GKMotley
Guest
A sad state. Hence, as with all subjects, in-depth study is the thing.
A
AmericanPatriot
Guest
I’m a Christian and your friend’s assertion that Jesus Christ is re-crucified each mass simply is not true. Jesus is at “the right hand of the Father [e.g. God the Father].” Jesus is not coming down from heaven, taking physical form, and then being nailed to a wooden cross in many different places simultaneously wherever a Catholic mass is held.
Yes, there are legitimate doctrinal arguments in Christendom between those who identify as non-Catholic Christian and those who identify as Catholic which are irreconcilable but they are serious on-going theological and metaphysical arguments which deserve to be treated with integrity and not allowed to degenerate into such infantilism.
I would argue that historically most early church fathers accepted a literal interpretation of the Eucharist with Eusebius stating at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea (AD 325), “We have received a memorial of this offering… which we celebrate on a table by means of symbols of His Body and saving Blood according to the laws of the new covenant” (Demonstratio Evangelica). Other church fathers who used figurative language to describe the Eucharist included Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Cyril of Jerusalem.
Others took a different view; however, different interpretations never prevented early Christians from taking communion. Augustine strongly endorsed “judging no man, nor removing any from the right of communion if he entertain a different opinion” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists). For Augustine, the requirements for communion were simply baptism “consecrated with the words of the gospel” and love for one’s Christian brethren."
In any event, whichever of the two primary identifications one holds to their examples demonstrate that differences of opinion and personal conscience were not barriers to communion in the early Church. Though they are today as I would not be permitted to take communion in a Catholic mass, even though I’m baptized, unless there was a grave need with no other means and I asked for it.
But you can take communion with me at my mainline denominational assembly should the need arise, though you would not because it’s not consecrated by a Catholic priest.
Yes, there are legitimate doctrinal arguments in Christendom between those who identify as non-Catholic Christian and those who identify as Catholic which are irreconcilable but they are serious on-going theological and metaphysical arguments which deserve to be treated with integrity and not allowed to degenerate into such infantilism.
I would argue that historically most early church fathers accepted a literal interpretation of the Eucharist with Eusebius stating at the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea (AD 325), “We have received a memorial of this offering… which we celebrate on a table by means of symbols of His Body and saving Blood according to the laws of the new covenant” (Demonstratio Evangelica). Other church fathers who used figurative language to describe the Eucharist included Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Cyril of Jerusalem.
Others took a different view; however, different interpretations never prevented early Christians from taking communion. Augustine strongly endorsed “judging no man, nor removing any from the right of communion if he entertain a different opinion” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists). For Augustine, the requirements for communion were simply baptism “consecrated with the words of the gospel” and love for one’s Christian brethren."
In any event, whichever of the two primary identifications one holds to their examples demonstrate that differences of opinion and personal conscience were not barriers to communion in the early Church. Though they are today as I would not be permitted to take communion in a Catholic mass, even though I’m baptized, unless there was a grave need with no other means and I asked for it.
But you can take communion with me at my mainline denominational assembly should the need arise, though you would not because it’s not consecrated by a Catholic priest.
Last edited:
D
DeSales111
Guest
Growing up in Alabama dealing with anti Catholic Christians was a way of life. How can I ever forget a neighbor, a child, rushing out their door hooting and hollaring celebrating the death of a pope. What was that child being taught by his parents, or better yet what were the parents being taught by their preacher? Ex Catholics are usually angry at the Church, while many anti Catholic Christians are being fed by their misguided preachers. And I know this to be true from experience, when being away from my Catholic faith and attending many other Protestant denominations. Years later when told by a friend, an ex Catholic, that the Catholic Church chained down Bibles to keep the laity from reading, that was when I decided to not just shrug off the myths any more but to seek the truth. I must say, while there has been many bad Catholics over the years, there is not one doctrine that leads me away from the Lord. The Lord is my Shepard and I can find refuge, mercy, and receive God’s grace through the Catholic Church. Life is good no matter the trials and tribulations.
In honor of Katie Francis, I love you.
In honor of Katie Francis, I love you.
C
commenter
Guest
The thread has mostly referred to fundamentalist anti Catholic Christians. But real, genuine hard core fundamentalists are shrinking in the US.
Yes, you still have websites here, and small churches over there, and Jack Chick’s literature is still around.
But this thinking once dominated large colleges and denominations, and is mostly gone from them now, with exceptions. Most religious attacks on Catholicism come from the Left, often describing itself as Peace and Justice.
The Left is the more dangerous in the long run. I would rather deal with the man who thinks the pope is the Antichrist described in Scripture, than with the friendly, ecumenical minister (or nun) who preaches diversity but indirectly supports the killing of unborn children.
There is hope for the person with firm, wrong beliefs. She has the raw material for firm, right beliefs.
Yes, you still have websites here, and small churches over there, and Jack Chick’s literature is still around.
But this thinking once dominated large colleges and denominations, and is mostly gone from them now, with exceptions. Most religious attacks on Catholicism come from the Left, often describing itself as Peace and Justice.
The Left is the more dangerous in the long run. I would rather deal with the man who thinks the pope is the Antichrist described in Scripture, than with the friendly, ecumenical minister (or nun) who preaches diversity but indirectly supports the killing of unborn children.
There is hope for the person with firm, wrong beliefs. She has the raw material for firm, right beliefs.
J
johnz123
Guest
Yes I agree the Left is worse
A
adf417
Guest
We live with the exception in my town/campus ministry program. The sad thing is the less “hard core fundamentalist”, that accept Catholicism, spend zero time correcting the ones who don’t.
Peace!!!
C
commenter
Guest
I know the hard core survives. They refer to the moderates as “evanjellycals”.commenter:
We live with the exception in my town/campus ministry program. The sad thing is the less “hard core fundamentalist”, that accept Catholicism, spend zero time correcting the ones who don’t.
Peace!!!
But the hard core will never again swing a presidential election, like 1928.
Last edited:
- Status