How many deny Jesus Christ in the Eucharist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rinnie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t think anyone disputes the assembling of the canon. But what were the key points as to what to accept?

One was that the letters were read aloud in weekly assemblies.

The letters were already being read within the churches before the canon was assembled.

If they are so inspired, why not add them to the Catholic Bible versions?
**What were the key points as to what to accept? **

And who made those determinations Shawn? The farmer? The blacksmith? No! The CHURCH through its bishops,no way around it.

**One was that the letters were read aloud in weekly assemblies. **

Yes the ones that made that made the final canon,which by the way did not EXIST until 300+ years later. And what you fail to mention or acknowledge is that there were tons of other letters were being read as well. Precisely why a set canon was needed and it is the CHURCH who decided.

The letters were already being read within the churches before the canon was assembled

And that argument does not prove an iota of anything,because there was a time were NO letters existed. The above statement is used commonly by Bible-Only believers to prove as if the Bible were the sole authority before the canon,which is a false premise. Secondly, you only are referring to the ones in our current Bibles,but as stated,other letters existed as well,which do not exist in our current Bibles. Who decided what books belonged in the canon? The CHURCH through its bishops.

If they are so inspired, why not add them to the Catholic Bible versions

If I am correct,only one book ever make such a declaration of being inspired,the rest were determined by the CHURCH. Again Shawn,one can deny historical facts,but still will not change how we got our canon.
 
Which constitution does Transubstantiation fall under? A quarry reveals no “transubstantiation”. “Eucharist” can be found under constitutions 21 and 22, but neither deal with “transubstantian.”
  1. Chrism and the Eucharist to be kept under lock and key
  2. On yearly confession to one’s own priest, yearly communion, the confessional seal
Here’s the 71 constitutions to help you.

Confession of Faith
On the error of abbot Joachim
On Heretics
On the pride of the Greeks towards the Latins
The dignity of the patriarchal sees
On yearly provincial councils
The correction of offences and the reform of morals
On inquests
On different rites within the same faith
On appointing preachers
On schoolmasters for the poor
On general chapters of monks
A prohibition against new religious orders
Clerical incontinence
Clerical gluttony and drunkeness
Decorum in the dress and behaviour of clerics
Dissolute prelates
Clerics to dissociate from shedding-blood
That profane objects may not be stored in churches
Chrism and the Eucharist to be kept under lock and key
On yearly confession to one’s own priest, yearly communion, the confessional seal
Physicians of the body to advise patients to call physicians of the soul
Churches are to be without a prelate for no more than 3 months
Democratic election of pastors
Invalid elections
Nominees for prelatures to be carefully screened
Candidates for the priesthood to be carefully trained and scrutinized
Who asks to resign must resign
Multiple benefices require papal dispensation
Penalties for bestowing ecclesiatical benefices on the unworthy
Canons’ sons cannot be canons where their fathers are
Parish priests to have adequate incomes
Renumeration for visitations to be reasonable
Prelates forbidden to procure ecclesiastical services at a profit
On appeal procedures
On interlocutory sentences
On Summons by Apostolic Letter
Written records of trials to be kept
On knowingly receiving stolen goods
True owner is the true possessor even if not possessing the object for a year
No one is to knowingly prescribe an object to the wrong party
Clerics and laity are not to usurp each others rights
Clerics cannot be forced to take oaths of fealty to those from whom they hold no temporalities
Only clerics may dispose of church property
Penalties for patrons who steal church goods or physically harm their clerics
Taxes cannot be levied on the Church, but the Church can volunteer contributions for the common good
On unjust excommunication
Challenging an ecclesiastical judge
Penalties for excommunication out of avarice
Prohibition of marriage is now perpetually restricted to the fourth degree
Clandestine marriages forbidden
On rejecting evidence from hearsay at a matrimonial suit
On those who give their fields to others to be cultivated so as to avoid tithes
Tithes should be paid before taxes
Tithes are to be paid on lands acquired, notwithstanding privileges
A parish priest shall not lose a tithe on account of some people making a pact
Interpreting the words of privileges
On the same in favour of bishops
Religious cannot give surety without permission of his abbot and convent
Abbots not to encroach on episcopal office
Religious may not receive tithes from lay hands
Regarding saint’s relics
On simony
Simony with regards to monks and nuns
Simony and extortion
Simony and avarice in clerics
Jews and excessive Usury
Jews appearing in public
Jews not to hold public offices
Jewish converts may not retain their old rite
Crusade to recover the holy Land

Thanks,
And this is supposed do what?
 
Can you tell me, Shawn, how did these early Christians know what books/letters were inspired?
Unfortunately they were not as discerning and many false teachings crept in. But the apostles rebuked these false teachings. Corinthians addresses this well. Generally speaking though, they looked at the author.
 
And this is supposed do what?
You said:
Transubstantiantion was OFFICIALLY defined as a dogma by Pope Innocent III at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 A.D.
I just need clarity of the official doctrine. Lets not be reliant on copy and paste without verifying sources.

You said 1215 ad. Perhaps it was 1215 or you were wrong. The date does not change the belief, but we don’t need misinformation either.
 
You said:

I just need clarity of the official doctrine. Lets not be reliant on copy and paste without verifying sources.

You said 1215 ad. Perhaps it was 1215 or you were wrong. The date does not change the belief, but we don’t need misinformation either.
Actually you are incorrect Shawn. I did not mention the letters in bold,but simply used it to clarify the misunderstandings of Protestanism. Either you or Rev Kevin posted them and I simply highlighted them to clear something up.

As stated a few posts back,the fact it was made official in 1215 A.D. does not change anything. As stated before,the Trinity was made official in 325 A.D. and that does not rebuke the belief of the Trinity. It simply was not understood in its complex nature until Nicaea 325, when it was articulated and made official by being defined.
 
Unfortunately they were not as discerning and many false teachings crept in. But the apostles rebuked these false teachings. Corinthians addresses this well. Generally speaking though, they looked at the author.
Your reply still does not answer the question.

BTW: The Apostles were not the ones who determined the canon.
 
And who made those determinations Shawn? The farmer? The blacksmith? No! The CHURCH through its bishops,no way around it.
Most likely the elders. The elders oversaw the early church which were independent of one another.
And that argument does not prove an iota of anything,because there was a time were NO letters existed.
For a brief time there wasn’t any letters. After Christ ascended, it took about 15 years for all the gospels to be written. By about 67 ad, all were written except for Revelations. However that doesn’t mean that what was preached was any different then what was written down.

If they are so inspired, why not add them to the Catholic Bible versions
If I am correct,only one book ever make such a declaration of being inspired,the rest were determined by the CHURCH. Again Shawn,one can deny historical facts,but still will not change how we got our canon.
What were they determined to be? Inspired by God based on the date, author, and consistency of theme. I don’t argue how it the Bible was compiled, but they did not author it.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
And who made those determinations Shawn? The farmer? The blacksmith? No! The CHURCH through its bishops,no way around it.

**Most likely the elders. The elders oversaw the early church which were independent of one another. **

Yes elders and those elders were also bishops. The term elder and overseer were interchangable. The term was more fluid at the beginning. Each church was independent of each other? Are you making the claim they were "Protestant’ in nature? If so,it is false.They might have been apart due to distance,but each church was not out to teach their own thing. The early church was not set up like Protestanism. Read Corthinians and tell me if Paul accepts divisions? Read St.Clements (c.80 A.D.) letter to the same church during the same decade. Internal conflicts was not acceptable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
And that argument does not prove an iota of anything,because there was a time were NO letters existed.

**For a brief time there wasn’t any letters. After Christ ascended, it took about 15 years for all the gospels to be written. By about 67 ad, all were written except for Revelations. However that doesn’t mean that what was preached was any different then what was written down. **

Exactly! It is called ORAL Traditions. Scripture derived from the ORAL Tradition and by the way it is Apostolic. However,no where does Scripture teach or the Apostles that the written word would eradicate oral traditions.

If they are so inspired, why not add them to the Catholic Bible versions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
If I am correct,only one book ever make such a declaration of being inspired,the rest were determined by the CHURCH. Again Shawn,one can deny historical facts,but still will not change how we got our canon.

**What were they determined to be? Inspired by God based on the date, author, and consistency of theme. I don’t argue how it the Bible was compiled, but they did not author it. **

Inspired by the Holy Spirit. And who made that determination Shawn? THE CHURCH,not the laity or the Bible all by itself. The church had to determine which writings were in agreement with Apostolic teachings.

When has the RCC made the declaration that the Bishops at the 4th and 5th century councils wrote them?
 
Unfortunately they were not as discerning and many false teachings crept in. But the apostles rebuked these false teachings. Corinthians addresses this well. Generally speaking though, they looked at the author.
And what about the author told them it was inspired or not inspired, Shawn?

And who was it that decided? Was it the owner of the house which held the gathering?
 
Jesus IS in the Eucharist.

I was present during one session of exorcism. A 12 years old girl has assumed demonic face expression and started to talk with the man’s voice ONLY after the EUCHARIST has been turned towards her. The demon has recognised Christ and has begun to curse HIM.

Period. That’s my first- hand experience. And noone can erase the most dramatic experience of my life.
 
CONFUSED…incredible…

What non-Catholics are not grasping is that after Revelations, the Holy Spirit taught the Apostles many things, as Christ said He would. And the same Holy Spirit is at work with the successors of the Apostles to this very day.

You can only use the Bible so much. What you have to study, is not the controversies and the sins and failings of those members of the Church, but the life of the Church whose summit is the Eucharist. It is tremendous considering the history of believers going back 2,000 years and the effects of the Eucharist on the lives of believers.

There are sorcerers who can go to a chalice of wafers and know exactly which one is consecrated.
 
There are sorcerers who can go to a chalice of wafers and know exactly which one is consecrated.
Sorcers? Sorcers can realize if a wafer is consecrated or not?
I think you should consider Malachi 3,5: “‘Then I will draw near to you for judgment; and **I will be a swift witness against the **sorcerers ****and against the adulterers and against those who swear falsely, and against those who oppress the wage earner in his wages, the widow and the orphan, and those who turn aside the alien and do not fear Me,’ says the LORD of hosts.”

Why are you writing about sorcerers?

God may bless you,
Esdra
 
Jesus IS in the Eucharist.

I was present during one session of exorcism. A 12 years old girl has assumed demonic face expression and started to talk with the man’s voice ONLY after the EUCHARIST has been turned towards her. The demon has recognised Christ and has begun to curse HIM.

Period. That’s my first- hand experience. And noone can erase the most dramatic experience of my life.
Hello confused,

I too experienced something along these lines about two years ago. During a session of Eucharistic Adoration, a young man at a Catholic youth conference appeared “different”. Me and two other lay youth ministers came together with this 16 year old and began to pray with him. We knew immediately it was something that we were not ready to handle.

We sent for the Deacon, who was with us, he called for a priest once he saw what was going on. The priest came in and placed his stole over his neck and over this youngster’s shoulders and he began to “exorcise” the demon. After a few minutes the kid appeared to be back to normal.

The whole time this went on the only time he looked at the Eucharist was in the beginning when I lifted his chin and demanded he open his eyes and look at Jesus. The appearance of his face and eyes told me to call for help, which is what we did.

Thanks for sharing your story. I don’t often share this type of experience because not many will believe it.🙂

Thanks,
Gary
 
Sorcers? Sorcers can realize if a wafer is consecrated or not?
I think you should consider Malachi 3,5: “‘Then I will draw near to you for judgment; and **I will be a swift witness against the **sorcerers ****and against the adulterers and against those who swear falsely, and against those who oppress the wage earner in his wages, the widow and the orphan, and those who turn aside the alien and do not fear Me,’ says the LORD of hosts.”

Why are you writing about sorcerers?

God may bless you,
Esdra
To get you excited…you got us, caught us with the smoking gun!!!:rolleyes:
 
I can see how it would be boring if you didn’t understand.

Well!! Dear Esdra,* you are the very first ex-Catholic *that’s ever admitted that to me on the CAFs–and I’ve been on here a long time and had many many conversations with ex-Catholics.
To be accurate: I am not an ex-Catholic yet. I haven’t converter so far. But inofficially I have been an ex-Catholic for about 8 years!

So I applaud you for being honest and acknowledging that you were not well catechized.:tiphat:
Why should I lie, saying I was catechised, but wasn’t? In the Bible it says: “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” (Deut 5,20)
What you left, you never really knew.
And I think this is good. For what you don’t know, you won’t miss.
Acutally, I think I know the Baptist’s Doctrine even better in the mean time than the Catholic’s (In my Opinion the Baptist’s is much easier and less complicated! I think this is true for nearly all Protestant Churches).


It is quite frustrating to me to be told by a Protestant, “Well, I was a Catholic, and I went to Mass every day and I was educated by nuns and blah blah blah” only to find out they really really have no idea what Catholicism is. :mad:
**
Yeah, I believe you. This must be frustrating. In my eyes these people are not to be considered as Christians. I mean I love my Saviour Christ Jesus and I am doing all possible to obey His commandments - starting from the Ten Commandments to His commandments in the NT - for I love Him.**

Esdra
 
To get you excited…you got us, caught us with the smoking gun!!!:rolleyes:
Don’t be so sarcastic! 😉 g

Just wanted to know why a sorcer (You can’t be a sorcer AND a Christian btw. See Mal 3,5!) should be able to recognize a consecrated hostie…

Esdra
 
Esdra,

I am not clear…what I am saying is that even the Satanists can recognize the presence of God in the Eucharist…but then they use the host for nefarious means…sacrileges, blasphemies. A wiccan priest/ess that is involved in sacrifices can discern a consecrated host.

And the word is sorcerer…

I get the sense that your experience with Catholics was limited to a few parishes…in certain area of a diocese…you know, that different ethnic groups relate to the Mass in different ways.
 
Esdra,

The name is consecrated Host…don’t defame by using the word ‘hostie’…that affects my sensibility not of me, but of the sacred.

Shawn,

Can you let the Church be a Church??? I mean, if every other institution in the world can develop their own words and language, why can’t the Church? I am referring to your criticism of the name, Holy Trinity. Do you abbreviate??? Why can’t we??

I know that God is Father, God is Son, God is Holy Spirit, Three Persons in One…Try saying it all the time when referring to this understanding of God…Holy Trinity simplifies. There is no sin or evil or falsehood in condensing the Three Persons in One God by using the term, “Holy Trinity”.
 
The mass, whether one may feel good or uplifted during the service, remain to be that time in history where God becomes truly present in the bread and wine. That does not happen at your service.

The Baptist service is not how the early Christians celebrated the life, death and ressurection of Christ. The early Christians celebrated it with the Mass. As Scott Hahn said, when you come to mass, you go to heaven, for heaven is where Jesus .
No, Jesus doesn’t come into bread and wine truly present. But we also don’t believe in that!
Jesus is there “where two or three come together in His name.” (cf. Mt 18:20).
And I have always felt that Jesus is here during worship and the whole entire service in my Baptist Community and (maybe even a bit more) in Pentecostal Churches (I sometimes attend the Pentecostal Church “Every Nation”).

And services at Protestant Churches is not about ourselves, but about our Lord and Saviour! Just as it is in the Catholic Church!! If it would be about the people and not about god, we would be Satanists (I have read many books about Occultism!) (like the Teachings of Aleister Crowly!)
We have in the beginning a short reading out of the bible. Then the announces, then the worship - where we praise our Lord and Saviour for what He has done for us on the cross and that we love Him with (modern songs) and then everybody has time to thank Jesus or tell him whatever he has upon his heart in his own words. (Mt 7,9-11) Either aloud or in silence. If you haven’t been in a worship, you won’t understand. You won’t understand that feeling to feel Jesus standing right in front of you - this certainty that he is REALLY there. This feeling inside your heart when you sing for Him and then bring towards Him whatever
troubles you or just thank Him for what He has done for you on the Cross and/or in you life so far.
Then there is time to tell the Brothers and Sisters in Christ what you have experienced with Jesus last week and for prayer requests.
Then there is the preach. Some Verses of a Bible Chapter are read and the preacher will talk about it. One can take his own Bible or one of the Pew Bibles and read the Verses together with the preacher (cf. Acts 17,11 and 1 Thess 5,12).
Then the pastor gives the blessing and we are invited to stay for coffee and biscuites or cakes. Sometimes we even have lunch together (our Service is always from 10 to half past 12). We sit together then and have a talk- either about the world, how we are etc, or about Jesus and His Word. We also beg each other for prayer if there is something going on not so well. After that I always drive home happily- it is as if I took a piece of Christ’s love with me home.
Once a month we also celebrate the Last Supper in remembrance what Jesus did for us on the Cross (1 Kor 11,23-27).
So you see, we do believe in the Real Presence - but entirely differnt than you Catholics do!
This is what I understand under a service that will like God. This is a **lively **service to our most High Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

God bless you,
Esdra
 
No, Jesus doesn’t come into bread and wine truly present. But we also don’t believe in that!
Jesus is there “where two or three come together in His name.” (cf. Mt 18:20).

God bless you,
Esdra
You should be present during exorcism with THE EUCHARIST.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top