Does God call people to be separate from Catholic Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter rcwitness
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
…he could have; just read the heading that he has qualified that ‘hell no, there’s no hell.’ (paraphrased)

Maran atha!

Angel
 
jcrichton said:
40.png
Wannano:
I challenge you to go see the movie about Paul and see if you are smacked in the face with a teaching of Christ that the early church taught but the Catholic Church let go of early on and no longer teaches. “If we know Him, we know what He teaches.” True.
Click to expand...
But movies are representations of what men deem the “truth.”

I’ve just scanned through a movie title “God is not dead” (or something like that)… do you know what I noticed? Not a single person represented the Catholic Church (it’s like those sci-fi movies where multitudes of gods is OK but don’t make reference to Yahweh/Yeshua because that demeans and offends). So according to this movie’s interpretation only non-Catholics believe in a Living God; is that the truth?

Maran atha!

Angel
Click to expand...
Come to think of it, I really enjoyed Catholic Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion but I don’t think there was any person there representing Protestantism. It never occurred to me that it means only Catholics believe in a Living God.
 
Im talking about the film Paul: Apostle of Christ.

I have NOT watched it, but the actor is a devout Catholic.
 
Wannano said:
40.png
jcrichton:
40.png
Wannano:
I challenge you to go see the movie about Paul and see if you are smacked in the face with a teaching of Christ that the early church taught but the Catholic Church let go of early on and no longer teaches. “If we know Him, we know what He teaches.” True.
Click to expand...
But movies are representations of what men deem the “truth.”

I’ve just scanned through a movie title “God is not dead” (or something like that)… do you know what I noticed? Not a single person represented the Catholic Church (it’s like those sci-fi movies where multitudes of gods is OK but don’t make reference to Yahweh/Yeshua because that demeans and offends). So according to this movie’s interpretation only non-Catholics believe in a Living God; is that the truth?

Maran atha!

Angel
Click to expand...
Come to think of it, I really enjoyed Catholic Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion but I don’t think there was any person there representing Protestantism. It never occurred to me that it means only Catholics believe in a Living God.
Click to expand...
Right. And i do want to watch the film about Paul! Not for a “Catholic” or “Protestant” agenda, but to admire Paul’s trials and ministry.

Btw, even demons believe in a living God.
 
Well then quit pounding non-Catholics on the head…you just might get to the place where you find you need us yet.
 
I did not know that the actor in Paul is a devout Catholic but I will say that I felt the movie did a tremendous job of presenting what the early Catholic Church was like in all probability.
 
Really, the Passion of the Christ was made in a contemporary platform?

Wow, go figure, I thought that it was representative of Jesus’ timeframe.

…there goes my pedestrian training leading me awry, again. 😖😖😖

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…sorry, I thought your reference was to the ‘God is not dead’ film.

…my mistake!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
I never said non-Catholics were not needed… yet, if the Pope continues to teach (if that news clip is correct) through personal opinion, I strongly believe that myriads of more schisms will join the 30,000 plus that exists as eager-beavers would jump at the chance of becoming their own authority…

Still, if this were to happen, the Holy Spirit is able to Keep the Body of Christ from succumbing to the gates of hades–regardless of the exile (mass or faction) from the Body.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
Wannano said:
I did not know that the actor in Paul is a devout Catholic but I will say that I felt the movie did a tremendous job of presenting what the early Catholic Church was like in all probability.
Click to expand...
Apparently Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are making a film about St Paul with Hugh Jackman as Paul.
 
guanophore said:
Calvin was not the first to believe in a "dynamic’’ view of communion(Origen, Eusebius of Caesarea, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzen)
Click to expand...
Do you really believe that Eusebius taught a concept that would later be called “transubstantiation?”

"And the words, “He will wash his garments in wine, and in the blood of the grape his girdle,” will shew you surely how as in a secret way He suggests His mystic Passion, in which He washed His garment and vesture with the washing wherewith He is revealed to wash away the old stains of them that believe in Him. For with the wine which was indeed the symbol of His blood, He cleanses them that are baptized into His death, and believe on His blood, of their old sins, washing them away and purifying their old garments and vesture, so that they, ransomed by the precious blood of the divine spiritual grapes, and with the wine from this vine, “put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man which is renewed into knowledge in the image of Him that created him.”

The words, “His eyes are cheerful from wine, and his teeth white as milk,” again I think secretly reveal the mysteries of the new Covenant of our Saviour. “His eyes are cheerful from wine,” seems to me to shew the gladness of the mystic wine which He gave to His disciples, when He said, “Take, drink; this is my blood that is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do in remembrance of me.” And, “His teeth are white as milk,” shew the brightness and purity of the sacramental food. For again, He gave Himself the symbols of His divine dispensation to His disciples, when He bade them make the likeness of His own Body…"
Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica Book 8 (end of Chapter 1)
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_de_10_book8.htm

Why is it such a big deal if Eusebius, Augustine, and others taught something that isn’t transubstantiation? I really puzzle as to why people go through such extreme measures to discount what the early writers wrote and take small quotes out of context to make it sound like a literal view. Couldn’t it just be said that Eusebius, Augustine, etc. were wrong? Catholics say that Augustine was wrong on Mary’s Immaculate Conception. Couldn’t Catholics just say that transubstantiation is true because of the councils even if individuals over the centuries have taught differently? Why is it such a big deal?

The Catholic Encyclopedia: "for even Augustine was deprived of a clear conception of Transubstantiation, so long as he was held in the bonds of Platonism."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm

Do you agree with the Catholic Encyclopedia? Do you know of any scholars (not random bloggers) who truly express that Augustine and Eusebius believed in the concept of transubstantiation? What do they base it on?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
40.png
Wannano:
I did not know that the actor in Paul is a devout Catholic but I will say that I felt the movie did a tremendous job of presenting what the early Catholic Church was like in all probability.
Click to expand...
Apparently Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are making a film about St Paul with Hugh Jackman as Paul.
Click to expand...
Go see the current one and look for what I suggested earlier. Then pm me if you want.
 
jcrichton said:
Actually, as a child–it was Jesus’ warning!

Maran atha!

Angel
Click to expand...
I have a hard time trying to understand what it is you are saying so much of the time. I feel your intellect must be so profound that a commoner like me will likely never really be able to grasp it all. I will have no ill feelings if you chose to not respond to me anymore. Peace.
 
I was trying to make sense of your reply; the only connection was that as a pedestrian I am but a novice (a child) and Jesus Called us to be as children–He further warned that we cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven less we become as children (Trusting God, Obeying God, eager to Follow God’s Guidance and Lead).

I apologize for being enigmatic; it is not my intention to confound.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
But not if one were to Obey Christ’s direct Command!

…remember Peter?

He wanted to convince himself that it was not an apparition but Christ Himself Coming to them on the water… Jesus Commanded and Peter walked on water because he Obeyed; yet, the second that Peter allowed the precipitation of the weather to determine his point of reference… he dropped, even forgetting that, as a professional fisherman, he could swim.

Jesus says ‘chew…’ I have no problems with it!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
mcq72 said:
40.png
jcrichton:
So Jesus Commanded that His Followers chew/gnaw on His symbolic flesh?
Click to expand...
Yet it would almost seem sacreligious to gnaw on the Host as if it were a leg of lamb and I a ravenous wolf
Click to expand...
What would be religious to gnaw at like a ravenous wolf? His word?

I dont think it is appropriate to call either of our disposition as “ravenous”.

Though maybe the figurative language of “gnawing His flesh” describing those who contemptuously (ravenously) crucified Him is appropriate.

Still, how does this relate to His Supper, and asking us to eat His body and drink His blood?

Perhaps its a profession that our sins are an attack on His body and blood, yet we eat as an act of gratitude that He willingly gave Himself for us to kill/eat!

And in participating in this meal, we are joined in flesh with Him through Spiritual belief and worship.
 
Last edited:
jcrichton said:
If everything were to remain a mystery then there would be no need for the Lord’s Supper to Call for “do this” and it would be superfluous for Jesus’ Followers to Break Bread.
Click to expand...
I agree, and clearly, most doctrines of the faith are quite clear. But in the East, they have not had the scholastic influence in which everything must be resolved to suit the rational mind. They celebrate the Holy Mysteries (sacraments) that are recognized as valid by the Latin Church. Clearly their appreciation for leaving things in the form of a Mystery is not equivalent to their lack of value! I would urge every Latin Catholic who has not done so to attend Divine Liturgy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top