This is a funny post. You want to detail some of the RCC teachings that they deny? You want to really delve into what they say about the Eucharist to find out that what your church teaches is nothing like what the early church taught?All you have to do is read the writings of Ignatius, Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Clement, Polycarp, Cyprian, Tertullian, Irenæus and several others of that time frame, and you will not find any of the doctrines established by the RCC after them. They all taught the New Testament as it is written and I have read nothing they wrote that was not in it. As Christ said when He was here, there will come false teachers teaching doctrines of men…
Code:Originally Posted by **NotWorthy** [forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=3986698#post3986698) *Believe me, Mormons do not have a monopoly on the "Great Apostasy". Its become such a convenient alibi, that numerous other faiths have latched onto it, such as the Church of Christ. Its sort of like the "Trail of Blood" theory, if it implicates the falsity of the Catholic Church, then its got to be true, even if there's no proof to verify it!*
OK, none of this addresses this post.Actually there is no proof of most of the RCC claims…at least no Biblical proof. History proves what I have said about the beginning of the RCC, the pope and his claims. I don’t have to prove that. Any library will refute those claims in its history section.
You/ve proven once again that you don’t know what you’re talking about.In most RCC churches, only the priests drink from the cup. The laity only gets the bread…
This is incorrect in its accidents as well as in the Sacrament.In most RCC churches, only the priests drink from the cup. The laity only gets the bread…
Even though I really wasn’t alive during that time period (born in 1978), I definitely see so many changes from the 1980s until today…This is even more apparent in the religious world…It seems no longer is it, for the most part, about the way the Lord wants to be worshipped and seeking for truth. In so many Protestant denominations, it is about which church has the best daycare center, the sort of people I want to be involved with (social and economic structuring), what church makes me feel good, etc. Is it any wonder there are tens of thousands of denominations and as the Protestant denominations continue to increase, it is becoming increasingly obvious that they care less about objective truth from the Word of God and more about what is “true for me.” This is heresy at its most vile.post 168 Old Scholar
well, i was in high school from 1966-1970 so i grew up from 1952 thru 1970. i remember very well what life was like back then.
those were days of innocence, but everything began changing in the mid-60’s. everything was exploding from the viet nam war protests to the civil rights protests, the lies that the women’s lib movement was pushing on young women coming of age in the late 60’s, early 70’s. and roe v. wade, the rising of the divorce rate. there was a definite revolution away from what is good, from God, from the Bible. we became a culture of “do whatever makes you feel good.”
for all of this we have been suffering in our private lives i feel as well as a nation. we have paid a heavy price for the sins we committed personally and as a nation.
,… and you will not find any of the doctrines established by the RCC after them. They all taught the New Testament as it is written and I have read nothing they wrote that was not in it. Oh really? Let’s check that out and see what the New Testament and Ignatius say and compare them to see if what you assert is true.All you have to do is read the writings of Ignatius
Precisely! Exactly what happened about 500 years ago IMO.As Christ said when He was here, there will come false teachers teaching doctrines of men…
My lineage is the same as yours and just as provable. The difference is that my church would not accept the false doctrines.Exactly … if he will read history with an open mind, history will make the case.
History will show his church is devoid of legitimate lineage … except thru early roots of Catholicism.
Yes, heretical sects with early roots exist … but, they had major problems with sacred scripture and often wrote their own canon.
Don’t accuse me of abandoning Sola Scriptura. I couldn’t as it is the only accurate way to define doctrine and apostolic teaching. It is provable, not like the so-called sacred tradition which you can’t even recite, much less prove it exists.Old Scholar is becoming more and more Catholic. He has abandoned *sola scriptura *and is now looking to the Church Fathers. Many a protestant has started their journey to the Catholic faith in this way.
It is because of the magesterium that there are so many different parishes of the RCC that don’t believe what the others believe. I suppose that there are as many, or more, than Protestant groups. At least all the Protestants believe Scripture is the truth and don’t rely on what some man has made up as doctrine.You have now recognized the need for the Magisterium of the Church. Look at what has happened to the protestant sects without it, fracturing into 33,000 little pieces. It’s the Catholic Church, founded by Jesus Christ, that has kept the faith these 2,000 years. That’s why, in 1 Timothy 3:15, St. Paul calls the Church the “pillar and bulwark of the truth.” He nowhere makes that claim for the Bible (which didn’t exist then).
**The great apostasy began when Rome took over the church and started allowing a mere man to control it. The problem is that one pope would declare one thing and another pope would come along and say he was wrong and change it. Council after council had to be called to attempt to reconcile it but in most cases, they just made it worse.What is your date for the Great Apostasy?
Also, which churches still teach as the apostles did without changes by man?
Sorry but I don’t know who Dan Brown is. Is it someone I should be reading???OS, you must stop reading Dan Brown’s fiction! You are beginning to sound like a conspiracy theorist. You just stated as fact something that you cannot possibly know! If you “know” that the bones are of animal origin, why are you the only one? What’s next? Black Opus Dei helicopters circling overhead? Good grief…
Have yu ever watched the masses on holidays from the Vatican? They only give the bread and the priests drink the wine. I think that sets the standard and Christ commanded us to do both, eat the bread and drink the wine.And you have statistics to support this statement?
I think you are dead wrong on this one. I know you are so far as my parish is concerned. Most of us take the Precious Blood from a chalice.
I don’t think you can provide any stats to support your remark.
I know hundreds of Catholics and have been with them when they went to mass i at least 12 different states. In fact I let them off work in order to go. They all were only offered the bread and not the cup, so I now most churches do not offer it. That differs from Christ’s commands.You/ve proven once again that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I don’t know of any church that doesn’t believe in the true presence of the Lord during communion. However, most do not believe the bread and wine turn into his body and blood. Have you never looked into the cup? He said he is the vine and he is the dooor, does he turn into those things too? transubstantion is false. You do not drink Christ’s blood except in a symbolic way. Besides we are commanded not to drink blook.Oh really? Let’s check that out and see what the New Testament and Ignatius say and compare them to see if what you assert is true.
1st Corinthians 10:16-17
“16 The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread.”
1st Corinthians 11:23-30
"23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.
26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep. "
If there is no real presence in the Eucharist, then how can St.Paul warn us not to take it unworthily lest we become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord? That “spiritualization” makes complete nonsense not only of the 6th chapter of John, but of 1st Corinthians 10:16-17 “16 The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread.”
Now, how can one become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord IF THAT BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD IS NOT REALLY THERE? Now if I make a symbol of a person and then I decide to do bad things to that symbol. I may indeed be guilty of abusing that symbol of the person, but am I guilty of his body and blood? Silly question…of course not! Why? BECAUSE THAT PERSON IS NOT REALLY PRESENT IN THAT SYMBOL is he?
There is the the whole case for why the Eucharist really is the presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ…body and blood, soul and divinity.
In addition to these passages of the New Testament I would also like to add this very clear quote from St. Ignatius of Antioch, who was a close friend and disciple of St. John the evangelist , the bishop of Antioch and a martyr for the faith.
CHAP. VII.–LET US STAND ALOOF FROM SUCH HERETICS.
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death(11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,(13) that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of(15) them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved.(16) But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
LINK
Precisely! Exactly what happened about 500 years ago IMO.
**The bread is unleavened bread and the cup holds real wine. There are some pentecostals who use grape juice but wine should be used. And most churches do it each week. Not once a year. Someone who is not right in their feelings with Christ should not partake of it either. One must be right with God.this is a reply to Old Scholar. at your protestant church how often do you have communion? do you see the small cracker and the grape juice as a symbol of the body and blood of Jesus?
i have attended protestant communions before and it is really missing the reverence it deserves. to me, it has no meaning whatsoever.
Have you ever been to any of the 100’s or 1000’s of the Masses throughout the United States. A vast majority distribute the Eucharist under both species.Have yu ever watched the masses on holidays from the Vatican? They only give the bread and the priests drink the wine. I think that sets the standard and Christ commanded us to do both, eat the bread and drink the wine.
****The bread is unleavened bread and the cup holds real wine. There are some pentecostals who use grape juice but wine should be used. And most churches do it each week. Not once a year. Someone who is not right in their feelings with Christ should not partake of it either. One must be right with God.**The Church has taught from the beginning that Jesus is truly Present in the Eucharist, not in some symbolic way that many faiths profess.
**I know of no Church that forbids this, and doesn’t practice it. You may be going back several decades my friend, but everywhere I go, it’s offered under both species.I am sure there are some churches who do not hold it in the proper reverence just as there are RCC churches who forbid the taking of wine by the laity. That is just as bad.
Thru Adam/Eve for sure … and hopefully Christ & the New Eve ??My lineage is the same as yours and just as provable. The difference is that my church would not accept the false doctrines.