Baptist worship.

[thephilosopher6]

Before I returned to Catholic faith I was heavily involved in Protestantism. I never considered myself to be apart of any particular denomination but I attended mostly Episcopal and Lutheran churches. There was a time when I attended a Baptist church for a while. It was a nice place, and the people there were generous. The services mostly consisted of singing hymns along with the congregation, and then listening to the Pastor give long sermons/Bible commentary. For the most part that was it, though once a month we would have communion/Lord’s supper. Typically a tray with little pieces of cut up bread and grape juice would be passed around. That was really it.

I always felt like there was something missing while I was there. Even as a liberal Protestant who didn’t believe in the real presence in the first place, I was always use to partaking the Eucharist every week. The Eucharist was always at the center of worship for me. The Eucharist not being at the center of worship, but rather the sermon takes so much away from worship itself! I eventually left the church, mainly because I was moving and I settled back into a local Episcopal Church. I of course returned back to the Catholic faith after about 15 years away from it. The way Baptist churches view worship is just so… wrong. That is all I can say. Christians have seen the Eucharist at the center of worship since the first century. Sure, singing and giving sermons is an important part of worship. But worship itself can be found in the Eucharist. In the Eucharist we offer up something to God. Nothing like it can be experienced in any other religion, yet Baptist tradition has throw out the Eucharist in favor of a sermon…

Baptist tradition totally undermines the Eucharist and reduces it to a occasional ordinance that is only to be viewed symbolically. This is a damaging result Protestantism. I just can’t believe something at the center of Christian worship for centuries could just be totally thrown away like that. Not even Luther or Calvin would go as far as the Baptist do.

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, 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 in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of 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. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.” - Ignatius of Antioch [105 A.D]

 

[lantheria]

Is there an actual point to this thread, some discussion you’re trying to spark? Or are you just enjoying trashing our churches?

Stop basing your judgment of our style of worship on your misconceptions.

 

[susanlo]

Baptist tradition totally undermines the Eucharist and reduces it to a occasional ordinance that is only to be viewed symbolically. This is a damaging result Protestantism. I just can’t believe something at the center of Christian worship for centuries could just be totally thrown away like that. Not even Luther or Calvin would go as far as the Baptist do.

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, 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 in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of 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. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.” - Ignatius of Antioch [105 A.D]

This quote from Ignatius of Antioch is about a group of Gnostics called Docetists who denied that Christ had a body while he was on earth. They were teaching people that he was only a phantom-like being and did not actually suffer on the cross and shed blood for the salvation of mankind. Ignatius is warning them about their heresy. I am not sure how this relates to whether a group has communion monthly, weekly or daily.
newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Is there an actual point to this thread, some discussion you’re trying to spark? Or are you just enjoying trashing our churches?

Stop basing your judgment of our style of worship on your misconceptions.

What would be the baptist rationale for their reducing the importance of the Eucharist compared to the rest of Christendom?

 

[thephilosopher6]

This quote from Ignatius of Antioch is about a group of Gnostics called Docetists who denied that Christ had a body while he was on earth. They were teaching people that he was only a phantom-like being and did not actually suffer on the cross and shed blood for the salvation of mankind. Ignatius is warning them about their heresy. I am not sure how this relates to whether a group has communion monthly, weekly or daily.
newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm

Yes, exactly. It’s context also gives a lot of support to John 6 being literal as well since John was written around the same times, and evidence shows it was created to combat Gnostics. Ignatius in this quote clearly sees the Eucharist as literal. “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, 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.**” There are loads and loads and loads of quotes from the early Church that shows in a literal Eucharist. It is fact that the early Church believed in the real presence. There is no indication other wise. Sorry, but history is just not on your side.

 

[Wannano]

Before I returned to Catholic faith I was heavily involved in Protestantism. I never considered myself to be apart of any particular denomination but I attended mostly Episcopal and Lutheran churches. There was a time when I attended a Baptist church for a while. It was a nice place, and the people there were generous. The services mostly consisted of singing hymns along with the congregation, and then listening to the Pastor give long sermons/Bible commentary. For the most part that was it, though once a month we would have communion/Lord’s supper. Typically a tray with little pieces of cut up bread and grape juice would be passed around. That was really it.

I always felt like there was something missing while I was there. Even as a liberal Protestant who didn’t believe in the real presence in the first place, I was always use to partaking the Eucharist every week. The Eucharist was always at the center of worship for me. The Eucharist not being at the center of worship, but rather the sermon takes so much away from worship itself! I eventually left the church, mainly because I was moving and I settled back into a local Episcopal Church. I of course returned back to the Catholic faith after about 15 years away from it. The way Baptist churches view worship is just so… wrong. That is all I can say. Christians have seen the Eucharist at the center of worship since the first century. Sure, singing and giving sermons is an important part of worship. But worship itself can be found in the Eucharist. In the Eucharist we offer up something to God. Nothing like it can be experienced in any other religion, yet Baptist tradition has throw out the Eucharist in favor of a sermon…

Baptist tradition totally undermines the Eucharist and reduces it to a occasional ordinance that is only to be viewed symbolically. This is a damaging result Protestantism. I just can’t believe something at the center of Christian worship for centuries could just be totally thrown away like that. Not even Luther or Calvin would go as far as the Baptist do.

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, 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 in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of 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. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.” - Ignatius of Antioch [105 A.D]

Why don’t you follow the advice of Ignatius and keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them in private or in public? If you are going to quote someone to justify your position why not show them some respect and listen to what they say in their statement?

 

[susanlo]

Yes, exactly. It’s context also gives a lot of support to John 6 being literal as well since John was written around the same times, and evidence shows it was created to combat Gnostics. Ignatius in this quote clearly sees the Eucharist as literal. “They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, 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.**” There are loads and loads and loads of quotes from the early Church that shows in a literal Eucharist. It is fact that the early Church believed in the real presence. There is no indication other wise. Sorry, but history is just not on your side.

The quote doesn’t clarify whether Ignatius thought that the bread and wine changed in substance to become the actual flesh and blood of Jesus, or whether he thought it was a meaningful representation of the flesh that was wounded and the blood that was shed when Jesus was crucified. The Docetists claimed that Jesus didn’t have a body that was crucified and that the crucifixion was just a mere physical appearance or illusion. If one were to believe that, then celebrating the Eucharist in any form would be completely meaningless.

Augustine: “24. If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share [communicandem] in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory [in memoria] of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.” - newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm

 

[Alex_H]

Yeah, the sermons are a lot longer in the Baptist faith. The pastor at the church I attended would usually speak for about forty five minutes. Communion was served about four times a year.

 

[thephilosopher6]

The quote doesn’t clarify whether Ignatius thought that the bread and wine changed in substance to become the actual flesh and blood of Jesus, or whether he thought it was a meaningful representation of the flesh that was wounded and the blood that was shed when Jesus was crucified. The Docetists claimed that Jesus didn’t have a body that was crucified and that the crucifixion was just a mere physical appearance or illusion. If one were to believe that, then celebrating the Eucharist in any form would be completely meaningless.

Augustine: “24. If the sentence is one of command, either forbidding a crime or vice, or enjoining an act of prudence or benevolence, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to enjoin a crime or vice, or to forbid an act of prudence or benevolence, it is figurative. “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man,” says Christ, “and drink His blood, you have no life in you.” John 6:53 This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share [communicandem] in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory [in memoria] of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.” - newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm

You do not understand what Augustine is saying in that quote. He is saying that we don’t literally eat Christ flesh and blood in the sense that is transforms into Christ flesh and blood, but rather we eat it spiritually in the sense that its substance becomes the same at Christ flesh and blood. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and the Church of the East all believe in the same thing about the Eucharist. Baptist are heretics and blasphemers. They deny the very reality of the Eucharist, something with all Christians for centuries agreed on.

Also, I love it when Protestants use that silly excuse. Well, how more clear could you get!? Ignatius couldn’t be any clearer. Your interpretation is ridiculous.

Now, read Augustine’s Tractate on John here, proving his belief in the real presence.: newadvent.org/fathers/1701026.htm

Furthermore, read these various Augustine quotes.

“Christ is both the Priest, OFFERING Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the SACRAMENTAL SIGN of this should be the daily Sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to OFFER herself through Him.” (City of God 10:20)

“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that THE BREAD IS THE BODY OF CHRIST AND THE CHALICE [WINE] THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.” (Sermons 272)

“…I turn to Christ, because it is He whom I seek here; and I discover how the earth is adored without impiety, how without impiety the footstool of His feet is adored. For He received earth from earth; because flesh is from the earth, and He took flesh from the flesh of Mary. He walked here in the same flesh, AND GAVE US THE SAME FLESH TO BE EATEN UNTO SALVATION. BUT NO ONE EATS THAT FLESH UNLESS FIRST HE ADORES IT; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord’s feet is adored; AND NOT ONLY DO WE NOT SIN BY ADORING, WE DO SIN BY NOT ADORING.” (Psalms 98:9)

“Was not Christ IMMOLATED only once in His very Person? In the Sacrament, nevertheless, He is IMMOLATED for the people not only on every Easter Solemnity but on every day; and a man would not be lying if, when asked, he were to reply that Christ is being IMMOLATED.” (Letters 98:9)

Augustine would be horrified to see heretics like you twist his words.

 

[thephilosopher6]

You do not understand what Augustine is saying in that quote. He is saying that we don’t literally eat Christ flesh and blood in the sense that is transforms into Christ flesh and blood, but rather we eat it spiritually in the sense that its substance becomes the same at Christ flesh and blood. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and the Church of the East all believe in the same thing about the Eucharist. Baptist are heretics and blasphemers. They deny the very reality of the Eucharist, something with all Christians for centuries agreed on.

Also, I love it when Protestants use that silly excuse. Well, how more clear could you get!? Ignatius couldn’t be any clearer. Your interpretation is ridiculous.

Now, read Augustine’s Tractate on John here, proving his belief in the real presence.: newadvent.org/fathers/1701026.htm

Furthermore, read these various Augustine quotes.

“Christ is both the Priest, OFFERING Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the SACRAMENTAL SIGN of this should be the daily Sacrifice of the Church, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to OFFER herself through Him.” (City of God 10:20)

“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that THE BREAD IS THE BODY OF CHRIST AND THE CHALICE [WINE] THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.” (Sermons 272)

“…I turn to Christ, because it is He whom I seek here; and I discover how the earth is adored without impiety, how without impiety the footstool of His feet is adored. For He received earth from earth; because flesh is from the earth, and He took flesh from the flesh of Mary. He walked here in the same flesh, AND GAVE US THE SAME FLESH TO BE EATEN UNTO SALVATION. BUT NO ONE EATS THAT FLESH UNLESS FIRST HE ADORES IT; and thus it is discovered how such a footstool of the Lord’s feet is adored; AND NOT ONLY DO WE NOT SIN BY ADORING, WE DO SIN BY NOT ADORING.” (Psalms 98:9)

“Was not Christ IMMOLATED only once in His very Person? In the Sacrament, nevertheless, He is IMMOLATED for the people not only on every Easter Solemnity but on every day; and a man would not be lying if, when asked, he were to reply that Christ is being IMMOLATED.” (Letters 98:9)

Augustine would be horrified to see heretics like you twist his words.

Also, if we go by your silly logic, we ought to become Arians. for, the New Testament no where specifies the Trinity in a clear and exact manner. The New Testament no where says “God is one being but three persons.” In fact, Jesus no where directly says “I am God.” You arguments are similar to how all heretics argue. We know the New Testament teaches the Trinity. We know it teaches the Eucharist. We know the Fathers taught the literal Eucharist. Honestly, your argument for Ignatius is silly. Really, I don’t know how much clearer you can get than Ignatius does right there. There is absolutely nothing in the early Church to suggest they did not believe in the real presence. Only later heretics brought forth such a damaging doctrines. History is not on yours side.

 

[lantheria]

Baptist are heretics and blasphemers.

Augustine would be horrified to see heretics like you twist his words.

Honestly, I appreciate these sorts of comments, in a Matthew 5:11 sort of way. It’s a breath of fresh air to see Catholics drop the “separated brethren” front and confirm what they really think of us.

SDG

 

[thephilosopher6]

Honestly, I appreciate these sorts of comments, in a Matthew 5:11 sort of way. It’s a breath of fresh air to see Catholics drop the “separated brethren” front and confirm what they really think of us.

SDG

It is true, you are heretics. Though, only material heretics and not formal, unless you actually left the Catholic Church then you would be formal heretics. But you are material heretics. Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox are not heretics either, but rather schismatics. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox are non-heretical Christian groups. All other groups are. Protestantism, particularly your kind of tradition, is heretical. I am of course not insulting you, but rather telling the truth. In a blunt way, yes, but the truth. Jesus could be very blunt himself.

“You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?” - Matthew 23:33

 

[lantheria]

It is true, you are heretics.

Protestantism, particularly your kind of tradition, is heretical.

More Catholic anti-Christian garbage.

I am of course not insulting you,

Yes you are.

but rather telling the truth.

No you’re not.

We are not heretics, whether “material” or “formal”. We are Christians. Christ-worshipping, Gospel-following, Bible-believing CHRISTIANS.

For the sake of Christian unity (real unity, not the forced assimilation that Catholics would shove down our throats), you need to stop thinking your denomination is the sun around which all Christianity revolves.

 

[johnnyc176]

For the sake of Christian unity (real unity, not the forced assimilation that Catholics would shove down our throats), you need to stop thinking your denomination is the sun around which all Christianity revolves.

For the sake of Christian unity you need to come Home to the Church that Jesus founded, the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is not a denomination but the One True Church. Because you can not see that may not be your fault but it would be a good idea to check your prideful ways. Nobody is shoving the Truth down your throat but we as Catholics are called to proclaim the Truth of Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church. It does no good to anyone to compromise the Truth in the name of false ecumenism.

 

[thephilosopher6]

More Catholic anti-Christian garbage.

I am simply espousing the orthodox faith.

Yes you are.

No, I’m not.

No you’re not.

Yes, I am.

We are not heretics, whether “material” or “formal”. We are Christians. Christ-worshipping, Gospel-following, Bible-believing CHRISTIANS.

For the sake of Christian unity (real unity, not the forced assimilation that Catholics would shove down our throats), you need to stop thinking your denomination is the sun around which all Christianity revolves

You are heretics because you don’t believe in the original faith taught by Christ, given to the apostles, handed down through 2,000 years of Church history. You are Christians, as you have valid baptism, but your faith is unorthodox and against the original teachings of the Church. The Catholic Church is the first Church set up by Jesus Christ. My “denomination” is not just a denomination but rather the one true Church which you refuse to submit to and therefore refuse to submit to Jesus Christ, our Lord and savior, who came into the world to die for our sins and to offer the free gift of salvation to all. Your group is just a denomination, your group is just a sect. We are not a sect, we are the Church.

“There are many other things which most properly can keep me in bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave the charge of feeding his sheep [John 21:15–17], up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And last, the very name Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called ‘Catholic,’ when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house” - Saint Augustine of Hippo (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” 4:5 [397 A.D.]).

“Peter, who had confessed Him as the Son of God, and in that confession had been called the rock upon which the Church should be built.” - Augustine of Hippo In Psalms, 69:4[PL 36, 869] (A.D. 418), in Butler, 251

 

[Fauken]

Prayed a decade of the rosary for the people that have posted thus far, and that they maintain a spirit of charity during their discussions. In my personal experience as a convert, you don’t win converts or convince people to be open minded by repeatedly calling them and their beliefs heretical.

 

[thephilosopher6]

Prayed a decade of the rosary for the people that have posted thus far, and that they maintain a spirit of charity during their discussions. In my personal experience as a convert, you don’t win converts or convince people to be open minded by repeatedly calling them and their beliefs heretical.

I am not insulting, but telling the truth. I was once a heretic too, a formal one, probably condemned to hell. But I came back to Christ. Now, I feel as if it is my duty to combat heresy! God has given me a mission, and I shall take it.